There’s nothing Real to be gained by studying anything human. Maybe that’s why I never take the Stoics seriously. Much of what they say is about being a better human. But if you’re still wholly human when you die, have you failed?
After the mystic experience of Reality, the adage, “Those who live by the sword die by the sword” can be translated as, “Those who are in but not of the world never die.”
This is only a surmise or intuition about the purpose of mystics arising from my personal experiences of MER.
But mystics, who have had that mystical experience, while seeming to be in development like ordinary humans, are on a different level of evolutionary development that does not include the survival of the human species as we know it today.
Are mystics a different species, as Bucke and Sinetar have already noted in their books written about 100 years apart?
Can we speculate that the human condition is the equivelant of a nursery garden designed by Reality to evolve all species into just one species, mystics, and that non mystics at death are in the process of entropy? After all, scientists say 99% of all earth’s species have already become extinct.
Certainly mystics are of a higher consciousness, if my experiences of the mystical experience of Reality are anything to go by …
I heard that a doctor of psychology told a friend I am hundred of years ahead of the human race. (I presume she meant all mystics).
Except for my consciousness, which is very definitely different and far ahead of most humans to the extent I can’t take humans seriously, I can’t say one way or the other what the good doctor said about me is true. But is it?
All Is Well.
Some time ago I pondered aloud in these pages about whether the natural time had come to stop writing the Blog after several hundred posts. Though persuaded otherwise I was inclined to say yes, stop.
But now with a feeling of finality from publishing a book, I recently put the same question to Reality and as usual awaited a reply. Just as usual, the reply was swift and silent, enveloping me with the reminder my real reason for starting the Blog was the need to steep myself continuously in the revelations I had been given, not by retreating from daily distractions by joining ashrams, monasteries or hermitages that disqualified themselves by their idealogical, anthropological shallowness.
Also, sadly, having been initiated into a wisdom school for some time (where I learned that my experiences of Ultimate Reality did not signify dementia but a unique, what humans call, high ‘spiritual’ calling), I have now come to the realisation there is no further sustenance in that School’s comparatively limited experiences either.
So I shrugged (as it were) and got on with the Blog and was much encouraged by the response until I realised most of the Followers were ‘Muggles’ from social media like LinkedIn, Facebook and suchlike, eager to express their egos and unrealisations – who the older eastern Teachers unkindly dismissed as “Sleepwalkers”.
Coincidentally to my realising this, the Master of my School had advised me to avoid social media as spiritually unproductive. So I decided it was time to severe all such connections.
I like to think the remaining and new Followers of this Blog are what marketing experts would call, ‘qualified’, what I think the Master might agree are in their diverse ways, Seekers or even Experiencers like me. (Such fellow Experiencers quietly seek refuge, solace, from the loneliness of being marooned in humanity).
So I shall keep the Blog going as a personal practice, keeping it as pure as I can for those who are lead to it, as well as for myself, for my need to keep myself continually soaked in Reality without being diverted by everyday taboos, myths and delusions that ravage humanity so … Reality is enough.
All Is Well.
His article begs the question, Are Dr Fields’ views an example of the conclusion science has come to about the source of all human experience in general and, from our point of view, mysticism in particular? Is he saying science can’t explain MER so shouldn’t bother?
DR FIELDS: “The ‘hard problem of consciousness’ (HPC) as originally stated by David Chalmers in The Conscious Mind (1996) is the problem of explaining how experience is possible. How is any experience, anywhere in the universe, possible? From the perspective of the HPC, a single experience of a flash of light is as mysterious as a full human experience of a summer’s day or the most profound mystical experience of the most enlightened monk.” (Our italics).
Dr Fields says there are three responses to the hard problem that reflect different ideas about experience. He asks if the hard problem of consciousness can be solved by either approach:
“The possibility of experience (i.e. consciousness) is derived or emergent from something else … it could be fundamental rather than derived (man made) with only some having it sometimes; all entities have it in different kinds.
He says assuming response #1 we could take either of two tactics. One is to define consciousness as some other property but this does not explain how experience is possible. He says it “dodges the HPC instead of solving it. In short, the hard problem of consciousness seems unsolvable using response #1. It can be dodged, but not solved.”
In response #2 the problem is to explain how or why some systems have experiences but others do not. What is the basis for explaining this? What facts could possibly be relevant?
(So far no one has discovered a single common qualification for having the mystical experience of Reality, (MER). (Our italics).
Dr Fields says without such “independent criteria” the question is unsolvable. “If a system is conscious, it is conscious by its very nature, not for some other reason.”
He says response #3 says that all entities – everything that exists – has experiences. “There is no reason why or how. They just have them. End of story.
“The hard problem of consciousness (MER?) is therefore either unsolvable or unstatable. Knowing this, how should we respond? In my view, we should quit worrying about it. It is irrelevant to any possible science of consciousness.”
Can you help?
Every day Academia.edu send me notification of up to seven mentions a day of my name being cited in academic papers by universities around the world since ‘Mystic Experiences of Reality’ was published in December.
Academia.net is a website claiming membership of over 15,000 universities, including Oxford, Berkeley, New York University, MIT.
They claim over 15,000 scholarly papers and books are submitted to their site every day and urge me to “Track your growing reputation,
see what academics are saying about you.”
They also claim over 70 million followers.
But when I enquire about details of the citations using my name the only reply I get is a standardised automatic reply that I can find the answer by paying a membership fee of over $112 a year. I see some scholars have criticised this marketing device. Apparently Academia.net used to sell reviews of scholarly works too.
In the meantime I am also getting almost daily notifications from them of recently published scholarly papers and books on my interest – mysticism, philosophy, metaphysics, psychology, (but so far none on physics’ dynamic contribution to the subject). I have downloaded some of these papers but on reading have deleted them as being the usual academic/scholarly cannibalisation of ancient and modern skirmishes on the mystery of the mystic phenomenon, nothing that takes the subject forward significantly. None of the scholars seem to have had the experience of MER.
My blog, on the other hand, mysticexperiences.net, seems to be uniquely outstanding for giving a significantly new mystic message that has nothing to do with the collective human condition. Is this a new development in the historic phenomenon of the mystic experience?
So what I’m asking you is if you know anything about the legitimacy of Academia.edu? Is it worth engaging? Thank you.
By Saeed Zarrabizadeh, University of Erfurt, Germany
Since the beginning of the modern studies about mysticism in the second half of the nineteenth century, defining the term !mysticism” has remained one of the controversial issues in this field, and different authors have been using the term to refer to different subjects.
Studying some major effective sources in the field of mysticism, this article surveys the modern definitions of mysticism and evaluates them according to their comprehensiveness. It also tries to clarify the different classifications of mysticism by using the dimensional definition of the term.
No word in our language, not even ‘Socialism’, has been employed more loosely than ‘Mysticism.’
Sometimes it is used as an equivalent for symbolism or allegorism, sometimes for theosophy or occult science; and sometimes it merely suggests the mental state of a dreamer, or vague and fantastic opinions about God and the world:
(William Ralph Inge, 1899)
There are almost as many definitions of the term ‘mysticism’ as there are writers on the subject.
(Gershom G. Scholem, 1941)
Mysticism continues to elude easy definition, and its nature and significance remain the subject of intense debate. The terms ‘mysticm’, ‘mystical, and ‘mysticism’ have been used in an astonishing variety of ways by different authors in different eras.
(Steven Payne, 1998)
Even if we suppose Scholem’s statement about the quantity of definitions of ‘mysticism’ as an exaggeration, we can’t disagree with the fact that mysticism continues to escape a definition unanimously accepted by at least the majority of scholars.
Read full paper at www.Academia.edu
If you have realised that through no fault or effort of your own you are a Seeker in the grip of a passion to know the truth you may have experienced phenomena that come with the condition.
This can be sphincter-movingly frightening or at least alarming and disruptive. They can awaken you from sleep or appear in your pensive or meditational states and cause thunder in your heart, or calm indifference if like me you have been alerted to the possibilities of such disruptions and how to deal with them.
My eldest son gave up all further attempts at meditation after his first encounter with the giant eye that regarded him with a calm but powerful examination. Regrettably, on still seeing his frightened apprehension when he told me about it long afterwards I broke into bent-over explosions of laughter, the tears running down my face. It felt good to be so alive in every fibre of my being as I shook with uncontrollable mirth. Mystics have a reputation for anarchical appreciation of the tragi-comic nature of the human condition.
But seriously, the Eye revealed my son was obviously not ready so I did not pursue the subject.
My experiences of phenomena
Compared to some of the phenomena I have read or been told about, my experiences were mild and nowadays less frequent. I am beginning to suspect they happen whenever I approach any aspect of MER’s diverse human or non human nature with an extra intensity or concentration, whether emotional or intellectual, of my own volition or not.
My experiences of phenomena include, among other less urgently dramatic examples, elderly, apparently mentally disturbed males or females, even couples, rushing anxiously into my space and being equally ruthlessly stopped in some instances by tall white, characterless apparitions behind them that make them suddenly disappear. The question still arises in me about whether the phenomena disappeared into my space or were stopped in time.
Later on, the phenomena of strangers appearing right in my face disappear in the disruptively awakening nano second I become aware of them. None of them are threatening. Some are as astonished as I am, even bewildered or, in one case, tearfully turning his back to hide his very agitated and unwanted nakedness.
So my phenomena are relatively benign. Other people have far more dramatic, frightening phenomena that threaten them. Mine never threaten me, despite their alarming suddenness.
I was taught that whatever stage I got to I was never to stop my seeking for the ultimate truth of existence, no matter how overwhelmed I was with the certainty, majesty, power, or benign attributes and assurances I have reached my ultimate goal. I was to assure myself I had not. I was to be respectful, but carry on; the phenomena would disappear. They would have no effect on me.
I have not experienced phenomena of that level, and hopefully never will. I’m hoping I have by passed them somehow. They seem totally irrelevant to my experiences of Reality (MER).
My experiences were devoid of personality, mine or anyone else’s, devoid of any matter, materiality, human taint, prior experience, expectation or emotion.
The journey continues. The fruits are abundant though not always immediately evident.
If you are a Seeker I hope this is helpful. All is well.
A contemplation: We are forever, over and over again.
We were discussing my mystical experiences of Reality (MER) in the Mexican sunshine when my friend said:
“So after all that, where are we in this conversation now? I mean, do you know who you are any more?”
I said, “I’m not a Who, I’m a What.”
This is the kind of enigmatic reply you get from gurus (not that I’m a guru) that so exasperated me in the early days. It annoyed my friend too, I could hear his eyeballs click as his eyes rolled. But now I understood why the elucidations of so many gurus were and are so enigmatic.
Why? Because if the gurus give a full explanation all the questioner gets is the guru’s definition. But if the questioner is left to work the answer out from the guru’s deliberately enigmatic clue, the questioner finally owns the answer as a personal experience. Some would say that’s why humans are humans – here to record their experiences. (George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, used to say: “I know what the gospels and the prophets say, but Friend, what sayest thou …? ).
Personal experience is the beginning of wisdom,it is knowing rather than second hand description, like having to work out how to shell the peanut before making the experience of eating the peanut uniquely yours. It’s like seeds sown yourself making you understand the results in all weathers and climates.
This is just a material explanation of the importance of experience. As the true experience of Reality is indescribable but undeniable, you can see how important experience is compared to second hand reportage which is hearsay. It’s the difference between being an “awakened one” or “a sleepwalker”.
A paper menu for instance does not contain the nourishment of the actual experience of the food the menu is describing, however accurately.
From this you will see why Jesus’ disciple who was nicknamed “Doubting Thomas” was an exemplar of truth seeking.
Truth is hidden in experience. That’s why scientists experiment to get at materialistic truths but the mystics don’t have to because their experience has given them a completely different, macro perspective of existence …
My friend laughed, “So are going to tell me what a What is?”
I said, “You’re a friend. I would do you no favours by feeding you my answers. Feed yourself. You already know. The answer also comes with a lot of extras, all for you. Remove your veils…”
“As a human being I’d say the search for meaning doesn’t usually reveal itself.” — Dr. Seth Lloyd
Comment: Precisely what my MERs brought to me. — KH, Publisher, Mystical Experiences of Reality
Dr Lloyd is a professor of mechanical engineering and physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He refers to himself as a “quantum mechanic”. (Wikipedia)
The mystical experience of Reality is not a human science. It isn’t reproducible, as science demands. It does reproduce, but not by human will or experimentation.
For some as yet unknown reason the phenomena is guarded by a ‘key’ made only available to some humans throughout human history who seem not to have any discernible qualification to experience this increasingly scientifically studied phenomena. (Eg., over six thousand case histories were archived by Oxford University and are now archived under a Templeton grant at Wales University). This ‘key’ is: The Mystical Experience of Reality (MER), the EXPERIENCE being the ‘key’
The Experience seems to be fully guarded by the absolute necessity to experience It. Clever.
Everything else but this personal experience is a distraction, a contaminant, I.e.: Conjecture, experiment, logic, reason, books, courses, lectures, studies, practices, religions, foolishness, mythomania, charlatanry and dogma, even being sincere though sincerely wrong.
There is much confusion between understanding the difference between the human spirit and the Ultimate Spirit of Reality. Each are entirely different in my mystical experiences. In many ways the human spirit spins the veils between the two.
Some think that on the growing evidence, the human condition is getting more spiritually evolved as intended. So will science eventually join the exterminated by then anyway?
“How can humans bear life without detachment? I weep for them.”
This reblog from the blog of a Follower of Mystic Experiences has come to a crossroads in his life – to live secondhand, or at last to experience, feel his own, real, individual, personal reactions, instincts, thoughts and senses, know his own authentic voice …
As usual, the layout and illustration accompanying this posting glide potently into his writing.
A highly recommended reading experience:
“Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.” – Carl Jung
Carl Gustav Jung was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded analytical psychology. His work has been influential not only in psychiatry but also in anthropology, archaeology, literature, philosophy, and religious studies. – Wikipedia
Died: June 6, 1961, Küsnacht, Switzerland