Mysticism in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

Luke Timothy Johnson has an excellent article (Commonweal Feb 26), Dry Bones: Why Religion Needs Mysticism in which he explores the tension between external aspects of faith (public ritual, working for social justice etc.) and the internal aspects of inner experience and devotion of the heart that “seeks an experience of the divine more intense, more personal, and more immediate than any made available by law or by formal ritual.”

Johnson recognizes that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are best known for focusing on the external, but maintains that each has contained a strong element of mysticism. A central theme of the article is that external and mystical religious impulses “coexist in tension with one another: the mystic’s tendency to derogate the visible can lead to neglect of external forms in the name of purity of heart, while the lawyer's concern for common standards can encourage the suspicion and even suppression of private devotion [here referring among other things to the attempt to root out heresy].”

Johnson believes that mysticism has been underappreciated in these three religious traditions (though best accommodated in the Jewish tradition), but he also believes that both external and mystical elements are vital. In a passage that is reminiscent of a point made by Patrick O’ Donnell made here the other day, Johnson says: ‘Kabbalism of the sort favored by Madonna and other celebrities is unrecognizable as an expression of the wisdom of the Torah, and indeed is almost completely removed from the convictions and practices specific to Judaism.” It, and some forms of Sufism and the “New Gnosticism” are superficial precisely because they “draw no nourishment” from the great religious traditions from which they have broken.

The article is well worth reading, and is on the web here, but is only available to subscribers.

Comments

[Minneapolis Lawyers]

internal aspects of inner experience and devotion of the heart that seeks an experience of the divine more intense, more personal, and more immediate than any made available by law or by formal ritual.

[horse riding boots]

Johnson recognizes that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are best known for focusing on the external, but maintains that each has contained a strong element of mysticism.

[generic viagra]

Some Inca buildings were constructed using mortar, but by Inca standards this was quick, shoddy construction, and was not used in the building of important structures. Peru is a highly seismic land, and mortar-free construction was more earthquake-resistant than using mortar. The stones of the dry-stone walls built by the Incas can move slightly and resettle without the walls collapsing.
Inca walls show numerous design details that also help protect them from collapsing in an earthquake. Doors and windows are trapezoidal and tilt inward from bottom to top; corners usually are rounded; inside corners often incline slightly into the rooms; and "L"-shaped blocks often were used to tie outside corners of the structure together. These walls do not rise straight from bottom to top but are offset slightly from row to row.

[Steve Shiffrin]

Patrick, so true. I changed ODonnell to Johnson.
Thanks
Steve

[Patrick S. O'Donnell]

I wholeheartedly agree Steve (presumably this is a typo: "O'Donnell takes....").

[Steve Shiffrin]

Patrick, good stuff as always. There is one thing I forgot to mention. Johnson takes a swipe at liberation theology for privileging the external (or exoteric) over the mystical. I think those people who risk their lives or risk going to jail in accordance with a religious tradition frequently have the kind of deep prayer lives Johnson associates with the mystical tradition (which I think he uses in a broader way than you and others do). Those prayer lives give them strength to keep going. I see this in the Catholic Workers I know and I believe it has to be true of those who followed the path of liberation theology.
Steve

[Patrick S. O'Donnell]

BTW: The linked work without subscription!

First, the tension between the exoteric and esoteric, at least with respect to God, was well captured in an apparent (historical and theological) paradox formulated by Iris Murdoch, one which seems common to the monotheistic traditions:

"We yearn for the transcendent, for God, for something divine and good and pure, but in picturing the transcendent we transform it into idols which we then realise to be contingent particulars, just things among others here below. If we destroy these idols in order to reach something untainted and pure, what we really need, the thing itself, we render the Divine ineffable, and as such in peril of being judged non-existent. Then the sense of the Divine vanishes in the attempt to preserve it."

There's much I find congenial in Johnson's essay, save a few of the generalizations and, it seems to me at least, the exaggerated dualism between the exoteric and esoteric which is purchased at the expense of the former. Inner piety, devotion, love, faith and so forth are not the exclusive prerogative of the mystical traditions and I think there is not only a tension between the exoteric and esoteric here but much overlap as well, even if mysticism as such is confined to comparatively few (a spiritual elite) in all three traditions (it's still an open question as to who might one day become a member of this elite).

And I think it is rather arguable that "Judaism has proved most successful at harmonizing exoteric and esoteric expression," indeed, I think Islam does just as well if not better in this respect.

Johnson is right to see Islam as a necessary and sufficient condition for Sufism and thus it makes no sense whatsoever to speak of Sufis or Sufism outside of the Islamic tradition, even if one finds much in Sufi spirituality akin, say, to Christian mysticism or even some forms of Hindu mysticism (Schimmmel has discussed this at some length).

The ascetic exercises (used here in a generous sense) that are typically a necessary but not sufficient condition for mystical experience are not found among most religious devotees for good reason: they are rather time-consuming and presuppose a form of association (be it monastic orders or Sufi tariqas) not conducive to forms of daily life found in the general populace. And related to these specific forms of religious association are literary traditions which are difficult to master (even with ample time and attention) as part and parcel of one's arduous spiritual regimen. As Cottingham has written: "the world of the mystic is a rarefied world, perhaps like the heights of Machu Pichu suited for habitation only by those whose blood has become specially adapted for such altitudes. If religion is not to be confined to a spiritual elite, it must be able to speak a language suitable for ordinary humanity--indeed, to close off that possibility would be a denial of the compassion and universalism that is the hallmark of the great religions."

And a comment on the following statement:

"No longer would the esoteric, mystical reading of the Qur’an taught by the Shaykhs dominate Islam, but instead the “original” exoteric, political program of the prophet. Thus, the frequently stated axiom that one can be truly Muslim only in an Islamic state—a conviction utterly at odds with the spirit of the Sufi."

An esoteric, mystical reading of the Qur'an never dominated Islam and non-Sufi Muslims throughout the world, both in theory and praxis, often demonstrate the fact that one can be a true Muslim outside of any putative Islamic state (as to what that would be in any case, opinions vary widely, and there is certainly no 'pure' Islamic state anywhere on the planet). And it is possible that some Sufis might endorse the idea of an Islamic state, although I agree it's contrary to at least the spirit of Sufism. Historically, there have been rather political Sufis at different times and places throughout the Islamic world, contrary to the impression one might glean from the article.

While it may be true that religion cannot live without mysticism, most religious devotees will never be mystics, and their spirituality will be no less authentic or true for all that.