Honorentheos Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: The question of replication is central, IMO. If science is an adequate means to study spiritual experiences, then the results should be verifiable and replicable. Otherwise, it is merely observation and reporting. I personally feel there are countless topics which science is more than adequately equipped to study but is entirely inadequate to produce 100% replicable results based on the information studied while being able to produce a comparable and meaningful result that sheds light on the brain's role in our subjective sense of self and other. Science can, for example, study and conduct experiments aimed at better understanding our sense of the aesthetic. Those experiments, such as this rather famous animal study of the peak-shift effect, which are suggestive of a biological explanation for our sense of beauty, ( https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200907/unlocking-the-mysteries-the-artistic-mind ) can help inform and refine other experiments. A person could be given something like DMT and put in situations where they experience a real feeling of love and awe that is no more artificial than could be said of any other subjective experience. That a person can't be induced into an appreciation of a particular piece that exactly mirrors what an informed affectionado might experience when viewing a piece isn't worthy of concern as it speaks to too much capacity to control the multiple and infinite variable involved. I shrug. Where I take some issue is in the understanding of what it even means to have a spiritual experience. In Mormon culture, spiritual experiences have epistemic value - they are the pinnacle of the various means of discovering and having truth confirmed. This is so embedded in the concept of spiritual experiences that time is set aside monthly for people to stand up in front of one another and, using the language of knowledge, attest to the things they learned, had confirmed or otherwise experienced and none of need be supported by any other cause than spirit. Suppose, then, that the purpose of the scientific experiments was to test how reliable so-called spiritual experiences might be in determining the truth value of postulates. What do you think would be the result? I have my ideas, and predictably they are that the results would undermine this belief. Whether induced with psychedelic aids or believed to be genuine, I suspect there would be similar results with both and those results would not out perform reasoned, logical approaches to determining the truth value of a postulate. OTOH, I don't think one can reason one's self into a state of transcendence. One can meditate, one can medicate, one can be moved into such a sense, and I think all of that is valuable perspective changing or enhancing for those who experience it. In that sense, I'm both opposed to the misuse of subjective experiences as means of attempting to determine the truth of otherwise obtainable and meaningful postulates. But also very much in favor of transcendence-type experiences. Personally, I'm in a place where I'm at peace with the universe being absolutely absurd and cosmically indifferent to mine or any other human's existence while indulging in the meaning of a life well lived if meaningless to everyone else and impermanent. So I'm not too concerned about transcendence. But I get the "why?" for those who are seeking them and exploring what they have to offer. 3
Kenngo1969 Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Bobbieaware said: Now that's funny!!! I know a guy with no shame who'll engage in the most outrageous behavior in public just to see how the people who witness his bizarre antics will react. It's not unusual for his friends to have to cover for him (just as Kirk covered for Spock) by a apologizing to the "victims," saying they should be charitable and cut him some slack because he suffers from Turrets Syndrome. No joke... They may not be so extreme, but all of us face situations when we must depend on the understanding, the charity, and the longsuffering of others that our relationships with them will not be harmed in spite of any untoward things we may occasionally do. We're all givers and receivers of such qualities at different points. 2
Bobbieaware Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: They may not be so extreme, but all of us face situations when we must depend on the understanding, the charity, and the longsuffering of others that our relationships with them will not be harmed in spite of any untoward things we may occasionally do. We're all givers and receivers of such qualities at different points. Who'da thunk it? Fallen mortals have the capacity to act like jerks. 1
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 6 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Uhhh, who's Nan? Is she related to Abogadissimo and to the rest of your brood? Sorry. Couldn't resist! I hate auto-fill. 2
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 6 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Oh no, taking chemicals does not always result in profound experience. It has much to do with the intentions of the person taking them and the situation they are in. Timothy Leary and company called this set and setting. Set = your mental set, and setting = the environment you are in. So, a Native American Church ceremony, for example, creates a set and setting that creates an opening for profound experience. Popping a tab of acid and wandering around the streets with your friends laughing at the world, maybe not so much so. What I was trying to point out with the Biblical reference to Elijah was that the psychedelic experience is strong and powerful. For example, when I am out hiking, I often sense a quiet peace and connection to my surroundings, especially if I am alone. I can sense how I am a part of the earth. But this subtle and gentle. It is not like the time when I was sitting on the ground in the desert while on LSD and seeing/sensing my fingers become roots and grow deep into the earth and having a strong sense of how the earth nourishes me like she nourishes a tree. From there I saw how the earth nourishes us all, the plants around me, the bugs crawling by, my dog sitting next to me, the people living in the town down in the valley, all life. I deeply felt how we were all connected through the earth. This experience was strong and powerful and not anything like when I go hiking. I mean, I felt like I was turning into a tree! Could seem silly to someone reading it now, but the effect of it was powerful. It's useful to realize how close we are to everything around us, despite our perception that everything is separate and walled off. I am not just some sack of skin walking around -- I am a part of everything and everything is a part of me and it is God who resides at that intersection as the ultimate reality and ground of all being. As far as catastrophic experiences, I mentioned in a post that some of the most insightful psychedelic experiences were the most difficult, the so-called bad trips. These were useful because I had to figure out how to work through them. We learn more about ourselves in difficult times than in pleasurable times. It was also like practice in a way. For example, if I had to deal with intense feelings of fear (which is common in difficult trips), there was really nothing to be afraid of. I was perfectly safe, even though I didn't feel that way. So I got to practice how to manage fear, very intense strong fear, in a safe setting. There were also times when I forced to look at things about myself that maybe weren't the most pleasant and that I liked to hide from myself. I had to face this and figure out how to constructively deal with it. Usually the answer in these difficult sessions would come down to "let go." Stop fighting whatever it is and let it wash over. Now I would word that insight as: Let God be the one in control and surrender to Him. I'm reminded of Paul Muad'Dib's experiences with the Gom Jabbar, the spice, and Water of Life in Dune. Fortunately, he had Lady Jessica's Bene Gesserit genes and training to see him through. Do you think those results could have been achieved by non-drugs means? I have experienced some of the awareness you describe through an extended battle with clinical depression several years ago. 2
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 6 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: I'm not sure it's either-or. While I question the premise that use of illicit drugs can be a gateway to spiritual experience, "higher" states of consciousness, and so on (although even that, in my mind, is not necessarily "hard and fast": see Bobbieaware's post from earlier in the thread), If "the spirit and the body are the soul of man," (Doctrine & Covenants 88:15), and if the "fruit of the Spirit" is "love, joy, peace," and so on (Galatians 5:22), I think there's a high likelihood (in fact, I'm virtually certain of it) that part of how God manifests himself to His children is through physiological states and physical sensations. Interesting. If we can discover how God manifests himself to us through physical means and replicate it, what need would there be for the Holy Spirit? Seems like he would be out of a job.
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 5 hours ago, longview said: Definitely not. Some say that the human brain is the most complex computer in this world (don't know how whale brains would compare). But the human brain is merely a terminal interfacing with the spirit mind/consciousness (your real self or inner being). The spirit mind is orders of magnitude greater in complexity than the human brain. It contains sentience which the human brain is incapable of approaching. I consider bird species capable of having sentience only because they have spirit side to their souls. No. Most chemical processes (hormones) affect the human brain but some might cause indirect addictions on the spirit mind. Spiritual feelings come from the spirit side and are quite different from chemical euphoria/depression/whatever moods. But I would agree that some (not all) can influence one side from the other. Is our real self the Spirit entity that was created by God or the uncreated intelligence from which it was created? What of the data collected by our human brains will be retained by resurrected beings? Are you saying God does not use chemical/electronic means of communication, but communicates only with the spirit?
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: As I understand it, science does demand that all experiments be replicated. The Holy Spirit does not avail itself of scientific scrutiny. Only to the extent that Alma 32 partakes of the experimental method, is there any sort of isomorphic relation to science. As to drug induced states, or even to specific types of meditative states (even if induced by biofeedback machines), they have more to do with recreational drug use and magical conjuring than true religious experience -- that is, toying with brain chemistry or brain mechanics. God cannot be Deus ex machina. Anyhow, that is my opinion. Thank you for the explanation. The Alma 32 experiment proposes a test for the truth and goodness of a proposition. What would constitute such a true religious experience?
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 5 hours ago, cacheman said: I know this was directed towards Miserere, but I'd like to offer my thoughts. I use psychadelics on occasion for therapeutic and spiritual purposes. Sometimes the experiences are sublime and creative, sometimes they are difficult and painful. However, they are most often invigorating after the fact. Cacti in particular has the ability to lift me out of a depressive state with the effects being evident for weeks or even months afterwards. This benefit seems to occur whether the experience was difficult or not. That is one reason why I value these plants so much. The 'spiritual' benefits typically come in the form of allowing me to view things, people, ideas, in my life from perspectives that I hadn't thought of yet. Sometimes the perspective make no sense, but sometimes they are able to solidify, clarify, or change my course of action. Sometimes the difficult journeys are due to me grappling with myself over something internal or external in my life.... facing my demons I suppose. For example, I've had moments of realizations of how I am impacting others. I feel that it's been good for improving relationships in my life. In the more sublime experiences, I feel strong connections with others, the world, the universe, etc. I feel that these experiences have helped me become more empathetic and connected. I know some people discount these practices or view them solely in a recreational context.... but I think we need to remember that the spiritual and therapeutic uses of entheogens have been an important component of many different cultures across the globe for longer than many (most?) religions. Many have and still see the value in these plants. cacheman Interesting. I don't know about your belief in God, but most people, I think, would agree that he is a benevolent being. In my view, I see him as a father who would not give his child a serpent when the child asks for bread. Some, however, may think he does precisely that when we have trials. Is there any sense that the mechanisms of drug-induced experiences are malevolent, benevolent, or neutral? What would convince you to trust knowledge gained from them?
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) 19 hours ago, mapman said: I've certainly felt God's spirit in spontaneous moments, but my experience has been that I've had my most powerful spiritual experiences after fervent prayer, or meditation. It seems like a lot of scriptural accounts of more dramatic or mystical religious experiences include altered states, however. I don't recall off the top of my head where it's at, but I think there is a scripture that talks about how you can't see some things with your natural eyes, but you need to be transfigured first? Anyways, I agree with you that it's a good idea to stay away from mind-altering substances. I agree that some degree of sincere preparation can precede and result in revelatory experiences. I was simply pointing out that one does not necessarily have to be in an altered state to have them. I suppose flashbacks from drug use could be considered un-sought for experiences, but to me they are not the same thing. Can one feel roots growing into the earth from fingers and toes spontaneously when not under the influence of drugs? Edited July 10, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 5 hours ago, CV75 said: I think each test will need to define that as part of the parameters of the test, and of course that definition is bound to vary between experimenters. How would you define it?
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, Honorentheos said: I personally feel there are countless topics which science is more than adequately equipped to study but is entirely inadequate to produce 100% replicable results based on the information studied while being able to produce a comparable and meaningful result that sheds light on the brain's role in our subjective sense of self and other. Science can, for example, study and conduct experiments aimed at better understanding our sense of the aesthetic. Those experiments, such as this rather famous animal study of the peak-shift effect, which are suggestive of a biological explanation for our sense of beauty, ( https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200907/unlocking-the-mysteries-the-artistic-mind ) can help inform and refine other experiments. A person could be given something like DMT and put in situations where they experience a real feeling of love and awe that is no more artificial than could be said of any other subjective experience. That a person can't be induced into an appreciation of a particular piece that exactly mirrors what an informed affectionado might experience when viewing a piece isn't worthy of concern as it speaks to too much capacity to control the multiple and infinite variable involved. I shrug. Where I take some issue is in the understanding of what it even means to have a spiritual experience. In Mormon culture, spiritual experiences have epistemic value - they are the pinnacle of the various means of discovering and having truth confirmed. This is so embedded in the concept of spiritual experiences that time is set aside monthly for people to stand up in front of one another and, using the language of knowledge, attest to the things they learned, had confirmed or otherwise experienced and none of need be supported by any other cause than spirit. Suppose, then, that the purpose of the scientific experiments was to test how reliable so-called spiritual experiences might be in determining the truth value of postulates. What do you think would be the result? I have my ideas, and predictably they are that the results would undermine this belief. Whether induced with psychedelic aids or believed to be genuine, I suspect there would be similar results with both and those results would not out perform reasoned, logical approaches to determining the truth value of a postulate. OTOH, I don't think one can reason one's self into a state of transcendence. One can meditate, one can medicate, one can be moved into such a sense, and I think all of that is valuable perspective changing or enhancing for those who experience it. In that sense, I'm both opposed to the misuse of subjective experiences as means of attempting to determine the truth of otherwise obtainable and meaningful postulates. But also very much in favor of transcendence-type experiences. Personally, I'm in a place where I'm at peace with the universe being absolutely absurd and cosmically indifferent to mine or any other human's existence while indulging in the meaning of a life well lived if meaningless to everyone else and impermanent. So I'm not too concerned about transcendence. But I get the "why?" for those who are seeking them and exploring what they have to offer. The article reminds me of John Keating ripping out the J. Evans Pritchard, PhD, instructions on how to determine the greatness of a poem. Carpe diem? Quote But Ramachandran is seeking to define it from the perspective of the brain, and he's in the midst of a brain-imaging experiment he believes will help. Subjects lie in an fMRI machine and view examples of kitsch—art objects ridiculed for their shallowness or sentimentality—as well as fine art, like the canvases that hang in museums. A Christmas lawn ornament of Santa Claus might be juxtaposed with a Michelangelo sculpture; an image from a Hallmark card might be compared to a Rembrandt painting. By measuring brain activity, Ramachandran hopes to find out why visual stimuli that seem so superficially similar can generate such different aesthetic reactions. How could such scientific techniques be applied to measuring spiritual experiences? Quote Suppose, then, that the purpose of the scientific experiments was to test how reliable so-called spiritual experiences might be in determining the truth value of postulates. What do you think would be the result? I have my ideas, and predictably they are that the results would undermine this belief. Whether induced with psychedelic aids or believed to be genuine, I suspect there would be similar results with both and those results would not out perform reasoned, logical approaches to determining the truth value of a postulate. Here's a postulate... A marriage between Benifacio and Belissima will last for time and eternity. A spiritual experience confirms it to them and it is done. How can a scientific test determine its reliability? Edited July 10, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 Anyone have a useable definition of "spiritual experience"?
cacheman Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Interesting. I don't know about your belief in God, but most people, I think, would agree that he is a benevolent being. In my view, I see him as a father who would not give his child a serpent when the child asks for bread. Some, however, may think he does precisely that when we have trials. Is there any sense that the mechanisms of drug-induced experiences are malevolent, benevolent, or neutral? What would convince you to trust knowledge gained from them? Hi Bernard, I have a more pantheistic view of the universe. I don't believe that an entity is communicating with me during these experiences. Rather, I imagine that the plants open me up to thinking about things in new ways. After an experience, I take time to process it and think. If I feel that a worthwhile idea or concept came from the experience, then I test it like I would any idea. I view it somewhat like fasting, prayer, and meditation. In fact, I fast and meditate prior to an experience. As with any other spiritual experience, I don't automatically trust insights I receive, but it has worked better for me than prayer.
snowflake Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 13 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Oh no, taking chemicals does not always result in profound experience. It has much to do with the intentions of the person taking them and the situation they are in. Timothy Leary and company called this set and setting. Set = your mental set, and setting = the environment you are in. So, a Native American Church ceremony, for example, creates a set and setting that creates an opening for profound experience. Popping a tab of acid and wandering around the streets with your friends laughing at the world, maybe not so much so. What I was trying to point out with the Biblical reference to Elijah was that the psychedelic experience is strong and powerful. For example, when I am out hiking, I often sense a quiet peace and connection to my surroundings, especially if I am alone. I can sense how I am a part of the earth. But this subtle and gentle. It is not like the time when I was sitting on the ground in the desert while on LSD and seeing/sensing my fingers become roots and grow deep into the earth and having a strong sense of how the earth nourishes me like she nourishes a tree. From there I saw how the earth nourishes us all, the plants around me, the bugs crawling by, my dog sitting next to me, the people living in the town down in the valley, all life. I deeply felt how we were all connected through the earth. This experience was strong and powerful and not anything like when I go hiking. I mean, I felt like I was turning into a tree! Could seem silly to someone reading it now, but the effect of it was powerful. It's useful to realize how close we are to everything around us, despite our perception that everything is separate and walled off. I am not just some sack of skin walking around -- I am a part of everything and everything is a part of me and it is God who resides at that intersection as the ultimate reality and ground of all being. As far as catastrophic experiences, I mentioned in a post that some of the most insightful psychedelic experiences were the most difficult, the so-called bad trips. These were useful because I had to figure out how to work through them. We learn more about ourselves in difficult times than in pleasurable times. It was also like practice in a way. For example, if I had to deal with intense feelings of fear (which is common in difficult trips), there was really nothing to be afraid of. I was perfectly safe, even though I didn't feel that way. So I got to practice how to manage fear, very intense strong fear, in a safe setting. There were also times when I forced to look at things about myself that maybe weren't the most pleasant and that I liked to hide from myself. I had to face this and figure out how to constructively deal with it. Usually the answer in these difficult sessions would come down to "let go." Stop fighting whatever it is and let it wash over. Now I would word that insight as: Let God be the one in control and surrender to Him. No doubt that psychedelic experiences are strong and powerful. Your description above is excellent and I'm sure your experience was beyond description. The "visions" and "feelings" one sees when on psychadelics are truly indescribable. I think that they can best be described as being able to "look into another dimension". There are several examples of this in the Bible. For example in 2 Kings chapter 6: 15 And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, an host compassed the city both with horses and chariots. And his servant said unto him, Alas, my master! how shall we do? 16 And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them. 17 And Elisha prayed, and said, Lord, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha. So "behind the scene" Elisha is able to see the spiritual warfare going on that is invisible to everyone except Elisha, and God opens the eyes of the young man so he too can see what is going on in the "spiritual dimension". The description Ezekiel gives of the vision of God in Ezekiel chapter 1 is pretty amazing as well, he is trying to describe something that is indescribable. 1 Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the river of Chebar, that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. 2 In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's captivity, 3 The word of the Lord came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the Lord was there upon him. 4 And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire. 5 Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man. My point is that the bible points us to the fact that there is a "spiritual world" going on behind what we see with our natural eyes, or another dimension. I truly believe that sometimes we are able to get a peek into this other dimension and that psychedelics somehow help people see into this dimension. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Interesting. If we can discover how God manifests himself to us through physical means and replicate it, what need would there be for the Holy Spirit? Seems like he would be out of a job. I'm not sure we can replicate spiritual experience. My point was simply that, while mortals may dichotomize, compartmentalize, and so on, God does not: "All things unto me are spiritual." So it makes sense to me that even physical sensation(s) might be part of spiritual experiences. 1
Gray Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Well, I would think you can't have it both ways. Either what we experienced is replicable or it is not. Please give me an idea of what those conditions and information would be in order for us or anyone else to repeat the experience. It would require knowledge of all the processes and the chemical state of your brains at the time of your experience, and the technology with which to replicate them. Given the right technology and information, it should be possible to replicate. But, we don't have the information in your case, and probably not the technology yet.
hope_for_things Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 21 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: While I understand this, I do want to point out that one of the problems is that since you haven't had a psychedelic experience, you don't know what it is like. I'm not saying people have to try them in order to have an opinion, but I am saying without the experience, the opinion doesn't hold too much weight. As an example, you mention a morphine pump and gas. Psychedelics are nothing like those drugs. Thanks for sharing your experiences in such a thoughtful way. I personally haven't experimented with any drugs, but from what I've read about others who have, these experiences like yours sound very similar to religious spiritual experience. I think for many believers, they find the idea of a similar experience being replicated to be threatening to their faith system and they tend to use words like counterfeit and downplay the experiences. I would ask a question to the believers is, if they believe that spiritual experiences are communications from a deity, how would they expect God to communicate to them? What mechanisms would God use to send this communication?
boblloyd91 Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: The alternative is that there is a part of our being that is not controlled by chemicals and electronic pulses, the soul, for a better word. Is this the part of us with which God interacts, or does He simply manipulate our chemistry? I think I'd need more knowledge to definitively answer that, but the second part is what I believe
MiserereNobis Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Do you think those results could have been achieved by non-drugs means? I have experienced some of the awareness you describe through an extended battle with clinical depression several years ago. Absolutely. And for most people, the non-drug route is probably the best way and the way that God wants them to go. In my case, I think God knew that to reach me, He had to use some unusual methods 1
MiserereNobis Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: I agree that some degree of sincere preparation can preceed and result in revelatory experiences. I was simply pointing out that one does not necessarily have to be in an altered state to have them. I suppose flashbacks from drug use could be considered un-sought for experiences, but to me they are not the same thing. Can one feel roots growing into the earth from fingers and toes spontaneously when not under the influence of drugs? I would say that religious experience is an altered state. You are perceiving and experiencing things that you normally do not. When I am an a hike and feel the peace of God and a connection to all life around me, I am perceiving something that is there but that I do not normally perceive, so I am in an altered state of consciousness. It is not a huge change, but it is a change nonetheless. Sometimes religious experiences are huge changes. Reading about the visions of the prophets, for example, shows a very altered state of consciousness. Altered state for me means perceiving something that we do not normally perceive. Chemicals are just one way for that to happen. Prayer, meditation, fasting, and other religious practices are another. And sometimes God decides to just show it to us without us doing anything in preparation, too. 1
MiserereNobis Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 8 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Anyone have a useable definition of "spiritual experience"? This is where Mormons and Catholics might slightly diverge, partly because of our definition and understand of God. Mormons tend to link spiritual experience to epistemology -- a spiritual experience confirms the truth of some idea. This is what you are getting at when you ask about a spiritual experience confirming whether or not someone should marry someone else, or whether or not this or that church is true. For Catholics, spiritual experience is much more mystical. It is not necessarily about confirming the truth of a specific proposition. It is more about direct experience of that which is spiritual, of God. My spiritual experiences have taught me about my true self and its relation to God. Here is a quote from the first chapter of Thomas Merton's (a Trappipst monk) book New Seeds of Contemplation. Please note that the word contemplation is Catholicism does not mean to sit and rationally think about something (the current/common use of the word contemplate). It is a technical term that means meditation leading to mystical spiritual experience. I'm typing this from the book, so please excuse any typos Quote Contemplation is the highest expression of man's intellectual and spiritual life. It is that life itself, fully awake, fully active, fully aware that it is alive. It is spiritual wonder. It is spontaneous awe at the sacredness of life, of being. It is gratitude for life, for awareness and for being It is a vivid realization of the fact that life and being in us proceed from an invisible, transcendent, and infinitely abundant Source Contemplation is, above all, awareness of the reality of that Source. It knows the Source, obscurely, inexplicably, but with a certitude that goes both beyond reason and beyond simple faith. ... In other words, then, contemplation reaches out to the knowledge and even to the experience of the transcendent and inexpressible God. It knows God by seeming to touch Him. Or rather it knows Him as if it had been invisibly touched by Him, touched by Him Who has no hands, but Who is pure Reality and the source of all that is real! Hence contemplation is a sudden gift of awareness, an awakening to the Real within all that is real. A vivid awareness of infinite Being at the roots of our own limited being An awareness of our contingent reality as received, as a present from God, as a free gift of love. This is the existential contact of which we speak when we use the metaphor of being "touched by God." So in the Catholic tradition, spiritual experience aspires to this. It doesn't mean that all spiritual experience has to be this ego-shattering existential experience, but they are linked. When I sense that all things are connected, it is through God that they are connected. There are times in Mass when I have received communion and have experienced that God is dwelling in me and I in Him. All of these are in the category of spiritual experience that is called contemplation.
Robert F. Smith Posted July 10, 2017 Posted July 10, 2017 11 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Thank you for the explanation. The Alma 32 experiment proposes a test for the truth and goodness of a proposition. What would constitute such a true religious experience? Implementing a program designed to test out the claims made -- actual practice of the principles being tested, along with prayer, fasting, Scripture reading, participation in liturgy, compassionate service -- the sorts of things the Brethren usually recommend. My research reveals that this approach is efficacious regardless of one's religious tradition: Indeed, it can result in a completely unexpected vision or experience -- one which is personal and non-transferrable. It also leads to deeper insights as well as to stronger empathy. Some people even speak of it in the context of the stages of spiritual growth. However we define it, it is essential to true faith. 1
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 8 hours ago, cacheman said: Hi Bernard, I have a more pantheistic view of the universe. I don't believe that an entity is communicating with me during these experiences. Rather, I imagine that the plants open me up to thinking about things in new ways. After an experience, I take time to process it and think. If I feel that a worthwhile idea or concept came from the experience, then I test it like I would any idea. I view it somewhat like fasting, prayer, and meditation. In fact, I fast and meditate prior to an experience. As with any other spiritual experience, I don't automatically trust insights I receive, but it has worked better for me than prayer. Thank you. Is something always learned or are there duds? Have you ever received bad information?
Bernard Gui Posted July 10, 2017 Author Posted July 10, 2017 7 hours ago, snowflake said: No doubt that psychedelic experiences are strong and powerful. Your description above is excellent and I'm sure your experience was beyond description. The "visions" and "feelings" one sees when on psychadelics are truly indescribable. I think that they can best be described as being able to "look into another dimension". I had a similar experience the first time I took the medication prescribed for clinical depression. It was very interesting, but not something I would ever want to experience again.
Recommended Posts