MichaelEmeryArt

"The Mystic"

10/5/2018

In modern times, "mysticism" has acquired a limited definition, with broad applications, as meaning the aim at the "union with the Absolute, the Infinite, or God".[web 1] This limited definition has been applied to a wide range of religious traditions and practices,[web 1] valuing "mystical experience" as a key element of mysticism.

Broadly defined, mysticism can be found in all religious traditions, from indigenous religions and folk religions like shamanism, to organised religions like the Abrahamic faiths and Indian religions, and modern spirituality, New Age and New Religious Movements.-wikipedia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transiency.—Mystical states cannot be sustained for long. Except in rare instances, half an hour, or at most an hour or two, seems to be the limit beyond which they fade into the light of common day. Often, when faded, their quality can but imperfectly be reproduced in memory; but when they recur it is recognized; and from one recurrence to another it is susceptible of continuous development in what is felt as inner richness and importance.- by William James

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reading a bit of Emerson today I read this; For Emerson, God was neither the stern judge of the Calvinists nor the distant clockmaker of the Deists. Emerson believed that God was revealed through nature. Like his British Romantic contemporaries, Emerson saw a direct connection between man, nature and God. Historian Grant Wacker describes Emerson's belief: "God was best understood as a spirit, an ideal, a breath of life; everywhere and always filling the world with the inexhaustible power of the divine presence. God was as close as the atmosphere, as intimate as the 'blowing clover and the falling rain.'"


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

excerpt from ; Derrida and Nonduality


                     

Jacques Derrida emerges as probably the most rigorous, original, prolific, and broadly influential theorist.

Therefore, Derrida and the deconstruction of all things metaphysical may figure importantly for those interested in the health and viability of spiritual life and practice. Some commentators on Derrida's work have argued for close association between deconstruction and certain strains of mysticism, including Hindu theology (Harold Coward), Buddhist theology (David Loy), neoplatonist theology (Stephen Gersh), and negative (or apophatic) theology (Coward and Gersh). Nevertheless, Derrida himself has consistently attempted to put distance between his views and varieties of mystical theology and forms of “received revelation” often associated with them.

                      
                                              The unique position that Derrida attempts to work out for himself between metaphysics and mysticism may therefore be of interest to readers at the Integral World web site—where, in the wake of Ken Wilber's thinking, questions of postmodernism and spirituality are very much in play. In this article I provide a brief summary of Derrida's and some of his commentators' confrontations with spiritual traditions associated with negative theology. This discussion also addresses the question of Derrida's place in the recent exchange on Open Integral (under the Integral Metatheory category) concerning forms of nonduality. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought this Interesting;   The 'Mystic Writing Pad': What Would Freud Make of Today's Tablets?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Democracy To Come: Notes on the Thought of Jacques Derrida

excerpt from The first issue involves the relation between democracy and sovereignty. Derrida suggests that in order for democracy, understood quite literally as the rule (cratos) of the people (demos), to have any discernable effect in ruling it must rely on some form of sovereignty. Sovereignty and democracy are inseparable but contradictory partners. The efficacy of democracy relies on sovereignty: without sovereignty, the demos would be usurped by some other power and an effective rule of the demos would never be achieved. In striving to protect itself and guarantee its dominance through a co-option of sovereignty, democracy suffers from an autoimmune self-destruction. In an attempt to immunise and protect itself from destruction, democracy destroys itself by closing off, unifying and essentialising the multiplicity that enables the formation of democracy in the first place. The plurality of the demos must be contained and restrained in a sovereign community: “the people” or “a nation”. In this move there are inevitable exclusions and elisions that morph a heterogeneous collectivity into a homogonous unit. These omissions always return to haunt the supposed sovereignty of any political community, destroying the community’s immunity from difference and otherness. Democracy and sovereignty are bound in a destructive clasp that means democracy as such (that is, a democracy without sovereignty) remains an impossibility.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

latest news 10/4/2018;  Poll: Nearly half of millennial Democrats identify as socialist or democratic socialist

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      

I wrote this today thinking of ; "Profile of a Anonymity"
  " My dog George ,I know is not a  Anonymity , as we walk along, he looks around, I can see he isn't worrying of who he is, To me his breed is hound dog, and his actions show me this, always followings his nose as it leads him, through the fields and woods, only stopping now and then, turning looking about, to see where he is,where he has been, and what is ahead.Even as he lifts his leg to mark a spot that he stands, he doesn't seem to care if seen or not, when he does poopie, often he gets in the bushs, seeming as though being shy or maybe it's simply to hide and blend in,so as not to be seen, at such a vulnerable of a time. Yet he knows himself.
  verse the true "Anonymity", the one who never has known really whom they really are, so they Blend in, try not to be discovered, they join clubs, groups, the ones that are full of "Anonymities " like their selves, cause they gotta make it through this Life without being known, The Anonymity's dreaded question is,  some one might ask them who they really are, Oh My, to that what will they Reply? " me 10/5/2018


I think the United States has become a  true "Anonymity"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like what Van Morrison says;  ." He also said it is important to distinguish spirituality from religion: "Spirituality is one thing, religion... can mean anything from soup to nuts, you know? But it generally means an organisation, so I don't really like to use the word, because that's what it really means. It really means this church or that church... but spirituality is different, because that's the individual."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------Need for Roots------------------------------------------------------------------------------Simone Weil---------------------



     Simone Weil -Taking a path that was unusual among twentieth-century left-leaning intellectuals, she became more religious and inclined towards mysticism as her life progressed. Weil wrote throughout her life, though most of her writings did not attract much attention until after her death. In the 1950s and 1960s, her work became famous in continental Europe and throughout the English-speaking world. Her thought has continued to be the subject of extensive scholarship across a wide range of fields.[13] A meta study from the University of Calgary found that between 1995 and 2012 over 2,500 new scholarly works had been published about her.[14] Albert Camus described her as "the only great spirit of our times".



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

George Ivanovich Gurdjieff was one of the most influential spiritual teachers of the twentieth century. In his early years, he participated in expeditions that went in search of ancient teachings, partly documented in his book Meetings with Remarkable Men. His quest led him to a secret brotherhood,  from which he seemed to have returned in possession of a unique system.

"Now I go hence into Paradise." His thought has since influenced major figures in philosophy, especially German Romantics such as Hegel, Baader, and Schelling. Indirectly, his influence can be traced to the work of Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Hartmann, Bergson, and Heidegger. Paul Tillich and Martin Buber drew heavily from his work -- as did the psychologist, Carl Jung, who made numerous references to Boehme in his writings.