Taken from Letters To Gail Vol.1 :
January 31, 1963
Dear Gail,
In this letter i will attempt to explain the difference between mysticism and magic.
Mysticism is perhaps the most misunderstood and misused word of all those in the English language. In modern popular usage,mysticism is used as a term of reproach and disapproval by the practical man. If he does not identify it with the unthinkable queerness of asceticism, it tends to become something to him that is altogether too misty and vague, something uncomfortably mysterious and intangible: Huxley punned, "misty schism." This misuse may result from the fact that mystical has always beenused loosely to indicate anything that has depth beyond a surface meaning, as emblematic of something not stated, but suggested.
Hence, all poetry – in fact , all art that embodies moments of profound insight -has been termed, in this wildest and too vague sense of the word, mystical!
Another modern misconception is to confuse mysticism with ancient mysteries and secret rites which were semi-magical in character. As a result, mysticism becomes erroneously associated with magical practices in general. This is the most dangerous misunderstanding.
The dictionary rather cautiously defines mysticism as follows: "The doctrine that ultimate reality is revealed through a special mode of knowledge, which is distinct from perceptual and ideational cognition and is superior to them. Popular usage – tends to view certain events as supernatural, i.e., that they occur in violation of the known principles of the working of nature."
This is all right so far as it goes. It does not make clear, however, that what the mystic desires above all is to be united with God after a period of discipline that frees him as much as possible from the limitations of natural causation. "God", "unity", and " discipline" are the key words in a definition of mysticism in it's precise sense, and should only be used in this strict sense, as there
are other words to cover what people mean when they use the word, mystic, loose or incorrectly.
The factor of a personal God cannot be over-emphasized in this relation of man to ultimate reality which we call mysticism.Many writers have gone astray in thinking that discipline and the desire to be united with some invisible force-be it abstract Beauty,the Good, or the Soul of the world – constituted a fair definition of mysticism. But such a definition would cover alchemy or magic, and magic is anti-ethical to mysticism. Such a definition is still too wide.
To underline the contrast between mysticism and magic, and at the same time define mysticism correctly, i can do no better than to quote Nicholas Berdyaev, Russian, 20th century philosopher :
" Above all we must make radical distinction between mysticism and magic. These spheres are totally different, but are easily confused, for while the nature of mysticism is spiritual, that of magic is naturalistic. Mysticism is union with God, magic with the spirits of nature and it's elemental forces. Mysticism is the sphere of liberty, magic of necessity. Mysticism is detached and contemplative, magic is active and militant; it reveals the secret forces of humanity and of the world without being able to reach the depths of their divine origin. Mystical experience constitutes precisely a spiritual deliverance from the magic of the natural world,
for we are fettered to this magic without always recognizing it. Mysticism is compared to magic because of the existence of a pseudo-mysticism. There are two types of such false mysticism, one naturalistic, and the other psychological. But neither of them are effective means of reaching the real depths of the world of nature and of the soul. The only true mysticism is that of the spirit,
in which a false magic and a false psychologism are both avoided. It is only in the depths of spiritual experience that man attains toGod and passes beyond the limits of the natural and physical world." -N. Berdyaev, " Freedom and Spirit " p. 241
The nature of magic may be deduced from this quotation, but just to make sure, i quote the staid authority of Webster:
" Magic – the art or body of arts which pretends, or is believed to produce effects by the assistance of supernatural beings or departed spirits or by a mastery of secret forces in nature. Magical practices depended on the discovery and the interpretation of correspondences which were occult or hidden from the popular ken. By the exercise of the will, by the careful observation of minute
ceremonial rules, by the solemn enunciation of formulas, by a host of similar performances, the sorcerer tries to interpret the past and influence the future to control the forces of nature. Magic grows out of the theory of causation. "
The prophet is, more specially, one inspired or instructed by God to speak in His name, announcing future events. He differs fromthe mystic only in emphasis, and not in kind. He is in just as violent an opposition to the magician. He, too, may follow the mystic discipline of the spirit, learning to fasten first his imagination, then his intellect, then his affections, and finally his will upon God, not so much to become one with God as to be a fit earthly vehicle for God's Word. The Word is revealed to him in apocalyptic vision. The Apocalyptic is the prophet writ large. After the Book of Revelation the Christian apocalyptic tradition lost it's intensity, althoughit bursts out vividly like a flame in isolated spots throughout the centuries. It is a very highly specialized form of prophecy, having traditional machinery such as the angel commentator, the symbolic beasts, and the four square city of Jerusalem. As orthodoxy will not easily accept a mystic, so again it is at first hesitant to accept the prophet who, by the very nature of revelation, brings something new to challenge the established. And there are indeed false prophets.
A saint is not the same as the mystic. It is a wider term than mystic, since the essence of mysticism is the conscious cultivation of the inner life. Mysticism is the introverted way of being holy. The Hindu would say that the first implies the second. The Christian would not. There is an introverted and an extroverted way of holiness. Sainthood covers both, while mystic refers to the former. Some saintsare mystics, others are not. The introverted saint treads the mystical way.
Very often revealed truth comes to prophets, mystics, and saints in the form of visions. Frequently these chosen men are of the psychological type known as visionary. However, it must be understood that a visionary is merely a person that belongs to a special psychological type and that the capacity to see visions does not make one a prophet or mystic. Nor is it absolutely necessary that all mystics and prophets be visionaries. In fact, the mystic who sees only in terms of strong visual images may be one who is only on the lowest rung of the mystical ladder, where images crowd the psyche and the would be mystic has not yet learned to fasten his imagination on God. On the other hand, the disciplined mystic may, at the end, like St. Theresa, receive the revelation of truth in the form of vivid images.
One who is a visionary is, then, no more than one whose psychological makeup causes him to think in terms of images which seemmore clear than objective reality. With it usually goes the tendency to read symbolical meanings into these visions.
Lastly, let me put it this way, a poet may be vague, but a mystic hates vagueness. A poet is a man who mixes up heaven and earthunconsciously. A mystic is a man who separates heaven and earth even if he enjoys them both.
More later,
Sincerely,
Paul
From the book, Letters to Gail Vol.1 © 1981 Eckankar – Sri Paul Twitchell
Mysticsm vs Magic
There are two types of such false mysticism, one naturalistic, and the other psychological. But neither of them are effective means of reaching the real depths of the world of nature and of the soul. The only true mysticism is that of the spirit, in which a false magic and a false psychologism are both avoided. It is only in the depths of spiritual experience that man attains to God and passes beyond the limits of the natural and physical world." -N. Berdyaev, " Freedom and Spirit " p. 241
This Letter to Gail by PT should be required reading. I need not explain why …
The “Ah!” moment
Well, you have spurned some interest for me here with regards to Paul Twitchell. This of course catches my eye…
"A saint is not the same as the mystic. It is a wider term than mystic, since the essence of mysticism is the conscious cultivation of the inner life. Mysticism is the introverted way of being holy. The Hindu would say that the first implies the second. The Christian would not. There is an introverted and an extroverted way of holiness. Sainthood covers both, while mystic refers to the former. Some saints are mystics, others are not. The introverted saint treads the mystical way."
I tend to agree.
Fine posting friend!
Familiar
" … the mystic desires above all is to be united with God." This to me is the key point. Thank you for the presentation Shabda.