If by "mysticism" you mean things like mantra prayer and meditation and direct experience of God's energy, then I'd say it's always been integral to Christianity, and is perhaps Christianity's greatest influence on religion worldwide.
>>616733 Actually, “mantra” and “japa” (mantra meditation) just meant a regular prayer in Eastern religions until a while after Christians started using constant repetitions. The earliest Buddhist canon, which is the Pali canon, dates from 29 BC and make no mention of mantra meditation. Christian meditation dates back to the OT (Genesis 24:63). Joshua 1:8 says to keep the Law constantly on your lips, to meditate on it day and night. The word translated as “meditate” here, means to mutter or growl quietly. Paul says to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thessalonians 5:17) The earliest extensive written instructions on Christian mantra meditation, were authored by Saint John Cassian, in 420 AD, at the behest of Bishop Castor of Apt. The earliest account of Buddha as we think of him now was written by Buddhaghosa, and dates from around the same time Saint John Cassian was writing (earlier accounts of Buddha are closer to something out of Homer). The Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa’s extensive meditation manual, makes no mention of mantras; here meditation is focusing on something (or focusing on precisely nothing), but none of the instruction says anything about use of mantras in meditation. The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, from the 4th Century AD, mention mantras, but here they have nothing to do with mediation, they’re invocations used to gain power over things, probably the identical sense to what they were for Brahmin priests. As for Hinduism, their most famous mantra, the Hare Krishna, was not used for constant repetition or meditation until 16th Century AD, when it was popularized by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
>>616692 Every religion is grounded on: - Doctrines about the world (epistemic aspect) - Practical instructions (moral aspect)
So, we all know they suck at describing how the world is. However, thanks to the exploitation of ideology and cognitive fallacies, at the macro-level they are very good at spreading morals and either taming or igniting the people, which is mostly deprived of critical tools to argue against religious bullshit.
However, among the practical aspects, there is one that, in my opinion, is the most interesting. Religions are not just good at mind control when it comes to ignorant masses. They have also developed mind-control techniques for your own self. Why? E.g. because you want to avoid sin. Or because you want to reach enlightenment, etc.
So these techniques are very refined. Religious doctrines overload them with explanatory bullshit, but they are mostly repetitive rituals and practices that have the power to bring emotions under control and relieve you of pressure. Of course, if you follow the instructions to the letter.
What I am talking about is basic breathing exercises, meditations, prayers, and the like.
One thing is to show up at church every Sunday and try to shovel a couple of Pater Noster and Ave Maria... but instead try to do as you are supposed to. Show up ever day and spend half an hour reciting the same words (e.g. 100 Ave Maria + 1 Pater Noster every 10 Ave). You'll come out of the church refreshed even if you don't believe in God. Why so? Fucking mindfulness. That's the answer. Anxiety relief. Time you don't spend thinking your problems, etc.
All these things are now studied in psychology. Some people get this psychological relief in sports. All that bullshit called Scientology is based on this. Etc.
Why? Because it works. You're at peace. Institutional religion emerges when these people come over and claim you're at peace because of your connection with some supernatural being, while in fact you're at peace just because our brain is wired and designed to find relief in those mindfulness exercises and repetition. The bullshit comes when they try to market this as their own. But indeed this is a pathway to salvation and relief from earthly pain. Except that... no afterlife. Just joy and calm and peace in your own day. It's not bad, if you think of that... but I just hate the fact they market it as extraordinary.
Same goes for eastern religions, which are even better at this. Unfortunately, most of these practices are just for those who want to follow them. Religious institutions are just content to rule and they do not care, but I think they should enforce practices a bit more than they enforce preaching and reading of books and beliefs.
So, now we have arrived at mysticism. Mysticism derives from the state of ecstasy when you meditate, recite and repeat.
Then there is all the cultural construction "around" mysticism that is overly extended mystical and supernatural bullshit that completely violates Ockham's razor and streches language to explain emotions you cannot understand without trying them on your skin.
So what happens is that there are some people in each religion that get a bit carried away and start doing it not just as standard practice, but as a goal of life. They get carried away and become monks, mystics, etc.
St. Cathrine felt orgasms while meditating. Woa... nothing new says the Buddhist monks. But these are the "radicals" of mysticism. The extremists. And their full dedication makes them discover stuff but puts people off because the layman thinks either you become a monk and meditate or you'd better forget mysticism.
>>616866 Are you say my posts are wishful thinking? I am surprised. I am just trying to explain that mysticism *emerged* as a doctrine from the *wishful thinking* of those who enjoyed well-known and documented cognitive activity deriving from the engagement in meditation practice.
Or do you mean what I say is wishful thinking? I mean, bro, open a book of psychology for fucks sake. The wishful thinking is what I am pointing at in those posts.
>>616887 I mean that your too far up your own arse to see anything that doesn't conform to your skewed view of reality. Your claims are just as baseless and anti-intellectual as they get, but you get off on the idea that you are somehow smarter and more enlightened than those "silly easily manipulated sheeple" >I mean, bro, open a book of psychology for fucks sake sigh
>>616902 Now, asshole. I can see you're a troll and want to start a thread. In my life I praise some aspects of religion and I really like it.
But you cannot deny there is mass control. Or an attempt at this. There are also traditions and other stuff.
Frankly, I think we all agree that some things are unfalsifiable until you die. Once you die, either you retain sufficient consciousness to perceive something (with your soul etc. or I have no idea) or your consciousness just disappears and you can kiss goodbye to afterlife.
So, frankly, I don't think I am up my arse if I came to believe that actually there is a core of good stuff within religion (e.g. I praised all the practices and the well-being, etc., which is something many atheists nowadays do not even acknowledge and they go: "muh duh all religion is bullshit").
However I said that epistemically speaking 80% or more of what is contained in religious books is irrelevant. Yes, I am saying that is irrelevant as a *description* but not irrelevant because of the mental states such narratives produce.
So you can go into religion as a path of discovery. Or you can just accept what they teach you. In particular, I argue against excessive indoctrination of kids, which focuses too much on the learning of precepts and too little on all the aspects of mysticism that could bring peace to their souls, psyches, etc.
But you... Haha.
So I'm on 4chan and when I write I disseminate my lines with "fucks", "bullshits", etc.
I was praising an aspect of religion, but you chose to see only the negative parts of my discourse, which were mostly due to the argumentative flavour of 4chan boards (e.g. I'm used to /k/ and /pol/). You're arguing against the icing on my cake... and call me wishful thinker.
Instead, let's try to find common grounds and be constructive... shan't we?
E.g. let's agree that praying (the mere act of reciting prayers) is beneficial regardless of the existence of God. Then we'll move to the next step.
>>616902 >>I mean, bro, open a book of psychology for fucks sake >sigh
No. Sigh you mother fucker. You call me wishful thinker but basically your arse burns because I argued against things in a way you dislike.
So who is the true wishful thinker? The one who goes around reasoning and quoting or the one who goes around calling people "wishful thinker" just because they disagree with him?
>Pic related. Ha yeah. Of course some religions developed this idea that you shouldn't be necessarily happy in your own life. Of course. How could I forget this?
So somebody comes to me and says: "you're doomed to suffer". And I say: "Fuck you and your theory." But then they call me wishful thinker... just because I have different values.
OMG this one is pure gold. So basically you're trying to tell me that you don't follow religion to be happier? I mean, even happier in the afterlife?
Do you hate yourself so much? I mean. Your life your choices.
At least -- hold on to the chair -- I'm not the kind of dude who will force you to shut up in the classroom just because you disagree with me. I mean, much differently to all my teachers of religion, I am more than glad to let you live in your wishfully thought mental world in which you hate yourself and do not engage in activities for the sake of your own wellbeing but for other reasons. Differently from supporters of institutionalized religion, I will never campaign to prevent you from living your life as you prefer.
And I think this's a point for me. And this is also the reason why I scorn institutionalized religions: because they force people to do stuff.
And I am not talking of fucking witch hunts. I am talking of my youth and priests that wanted details on how I touched myself and Rohani that goes around Europe asking Greek statues to be covered and wine removed from the table.
If you're gonna argue institutionalized religion is not about the political control, well... you'd better show me some leader who doesn't do politics.
>Interior Castle >Cloud of Unknowing >Philokalia >Ladder of Divine Ascent >Story of a Soul >Dark Night of the Soul >The Imitation of Christ >New Seeds of Contemplation >Spiritual Theology >True Devotion to Mary
>>619960 >How are we supposed to know? I'm a different anon, but if you don't know if he's in hell or not, how do you know if the saints are actually in heaven?
Also, extra question why do the Orthodox believe Mary never sinned? I feel like that kinda takes away from the miracle that is Christ. Like to me the whole point of Christ was that he experienced every human desire, but never fell into sin. But Mary did the same thing according to the Orthodox. Wouldn't that make her just as glorious as God?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.