lectures16+17- 第12部分

mysticism；　it　now　must　be　confessed；　is　only　a　〃privileged　case。〃







　　



It　is　an　EXTRACT；　kept　true　to　type　by　the　selection　of　the



fittest　specimens　and　their　preservation　in　〃schools。〃　It　is



carved　out　from　a　much　larger　mass；　and　if　we　take　the　larger



mass　as　seriously　as　religious　mysticism　has　historically　taken



itself；　we　find　that　the　supposed　unanimity　largely　disappears。　



To　begin　with；　even　religious　mysticism　itself；　the　kind　that



accumulates　traditions　and　makes　schools；　is　much　less　unanimous



than　I　have　allowed。　　It　has　been　both　ascetic　and　antinomianly



self…indulgent　within　the　Christian　church。＇283＇　It　is　dualistic



in　Sankhya；　and　monistic　in　Vedanta　philosophy。　　I　called　it



pantheistic；　but　the　great　Spanish　mystics　are　anything　but



pantheists。　　They　are　with　few　exceptions　non…metaphysical　minds；



for　whom　〃the　category　of　personality〃　is　absolute。　　The　〃union〃



of　man　with　God　is　for　them　much　more　like　an　occasional　miracle



than　like　an　original　identity。＇284＇　　How　different　again；　apart



from　the　happiness　common　to　all；　is　the　mysticism　of　Walt



Whitman；　Edward　Carpenter；　Richard　Jefferies；　and　other



naturalistic　pantheists；　from　the　more　distinctively　Christian



sort。＇285＇　　The　fact　is　that　the　mystical　feeling　of　enlargement；



union；　and　emancipation　has　no　specific　intellectual　content



whatever　of　its　own。　　It　is　capable　of　forming　matrimonial



alliances　with　material　furnished　by　the　most　diverse



philosophies　and　theologies；　provided　only　they　can　find　a　place



in　their　framework　for　its　peculiar　emotional　mood。　　We　have　no



right；　therefore；　to　invoke　its　prestige　as　distinctively　in



favor　of　any　special　belief；　such　as　that　in　absolute　idealism；



or　in　the　absolute　monistic　identity；　or　in　the　absolute



goodness；　of　the　world。　　It　is　only　relatively　in　favor　of　all



these　thingsit　passes　out　of　common　human　consciousness　in　the



direction　in　which　they　lie。







＇283＇　Ruysbroeck；　in　the　work　which　Maeterlinck　has　translated；



has　a　chapter　against　the　antinomianism　of　disciples。　　H。



Delacroix's　book　（Essai　sur　le　mysticisme　speculatif　en　Allemagne



au　XIVme　Siecle；　Paris；　1900）　is　full　of　antinomian　material。



compare　also　A。　Jundt：　　Les　Amis　de　Dieu　au　XIV　Siecle；　These　de



Strasbourg；　1879。







＇284＇　Compare　Paul　Rousselot：　　Les　Mystiques　Espagnols；　Paris；



1869；　ch。　xii。







＇285＇　see　Carpenter's　Towards　Democracy；　especially　the　latter



parts；　and　Jefferies's　wonderful　and　splendid　mystic　rhapsody；



The　Story　of　my　Heart。















So　much　for　religious　mysticism　proper。　　But　more　remains　to　be



told；　for　religious　mysticism　is　only　one　half　of　mysticism。　　The



other　half　has　no　accumulated　traditions　except　those　which　the



text…books　on　insanity　supply。　　Open　any　one　of　these；　and　you



will　find　abundant　cases　in　which　〃mystical　ideas〃　are　cited　as



characteristic　symptoms　of　enfeebled　or　deluded　states　of　mind。　



In　delusional　insanity；　paranoia；　as　they　sometimes　call　it；　we



may　have　a　DIABOLICAL　mysticism；　a　sort　of　religious　mysticism



turned　upside　down。　The　same　sense　of　ineffable　importance　in　the



smallest　events；　the　same　texts　and　words　coming　with　new



meanings；　the　same　voices　and　visions　and　leadings　and　missions；



the　same　controlling　by　extraneous　powers；　only　this　time　the



emotion　is　pessimistic：　　instead　of　consolations　we　have



desolations；　the　meanings　are　dreadful；　and　the　powers　are



enemies　to　life。　　It　is　evident　that　from　the　point　of　view　of



their　psychological　mechanism；　the　classic　mysticism　and　these



lower　mysticisms　spring　from　the　same　mental　level；　from　that



great　subliminal　or　transmarginal　region　of　which　science　is



beginning　to　admit　the　existence；　but　of　which　so　little　is



really　known。　　That　region　contains　every　kind　of　matter：　



〃seraph　and　snake〃　abide　there　side　by　side。　　To　come　from　thence



is　no　infallible　credential。　　What　comes　must　be　sifted　and



tested；　and　run　the　gauntlet　of　confrontation　with　the　total



context　of　experience；　just　like　what　comes　from　the　outer　world



of　sense。　　Its　value　must　be　ascertained　by　empirical　methods；　so



long　as　we　are　not　mystics　ourselves。







Once　more；　then；　I　repeat　that　non…mystics　are　under　no



obligation　to　acknowledge　in　mystical　states　a　superior　authority



conferred　on　them　by　their　intrinsic　nature。＇286＇







＇286＇　In　chapter　i。　of　book　ii。　of　his　work　Degeneration；　〃Max



Nordau〃　seeks　to　undermine　all　mysticism　by　exposing　the　weakness



of　the　lower　kinds。　　Mysticism　for　him　means　any　sudden



perception　of　hidden　significance　in　things。　　He　explains　such



perception　by　the　abundant　uncompleted　associations　which



experiences　may　arouse　in　a　degenerate　brain。　　These　give　to　him



who　has　the　experience　a　vague　and　vast　sense　of　its　leading



further；　yet　they　awaken　no　definite　or　useful　consequent　in　his



thought。　　The　explanation　is　a　plausible　one　for　certain　sorts　of



feeling　of　significance；　and　other　alienists　（Wernicke；　for



example；　in　his　Grundriss　der　Psychiatrie；　Theil　ii。；　Leipzig；



1896）　have　explained　〃paranoiac〃　conditions　by　a　laming　of　the



association…organ。　　But　the　higher　mystical　flights；　with　their



positiveness　and　abruptness；　are　surely　products　of　no　such



merely　negative　condition。　　It　seems　far　more　reasonable　to



ascribe　them　to　inroads　from　the　subconscious　life；　of　the



cerebral　activity　correlative　to　which　we　as　yet　know　nothing。











　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　3。



Yet；　I　repeat　once　more；　the　existence　of　mystical　states



absolutely　overthrows　the　pretension　of　non…mystical　states　to　be



the　sole　and　ultimate　dictators　of　what　we　may　believe。　As　a



rule；　mystical　states　merely　add　a　supersensuous　meaning　to　the



ordinary　outward　data　of　consciousness。　　They　are　excitements



like　the　emotions　of　love　or　ambition；　gifts　to　our　spirit　by



means　of　which　facts　already　objectively　before　us　fall　into　a



new　expressiveness　and　make　a　new　connection　with　our　active



life。　　They　do　not　contradict　these　facts　as　such；　or　deny



anything　that　our　senses　have　immediately　seized。＇287＇　It　is　the



rationalistic　critic　rather　who　plays　the　part　of　denier　in　the



controversy；　and　his　denials　have　no　strength；　for　there　never



can　be　a　state　of　facts　to　which　new　meaning　may　not　truthfully



be　added；　provided　the　mind　ascend　to　a　more　enveloping　point　of



view。　　It　must　always　remain　an　open　question　whether　mystical



states　may　not　possibly　be　such　superior　points　of　view；　windows



through　which　the　mind　looks　out　upon　a　more　extensive　and



inclusive　world。　　The　difference　of　the　views　seen　from　the



different　mystical　windows　need　not　prevent　us　from　entertaining



this　supposition。　　The　wider　world　would　in　that　case　prove　to



have　a　mixed　constitution　like　that　of　this　world；　that　is　all。　



It　would　have　its　celestial　and　its　infernal　regions；　its



tempting　and　its　saving　moments；　its　valid　experiences　and　its



counterfeit　ones；　just　as　our　world　has　them；　but　it　would　be　a



wider　world　all　the　same。　　We　should　have　to　use　its　experiences



by　selecting　and　subordinating　and　substituting　just　as　is　our



custom　in　this　ordinary　naturalistic　world；　we　should　be　liable



to　error　just　as　we　are　now；　yet　the　counting　in　of　that　wider



world　of　meanings；　and　the　serious　dealing　with　it；　might；　in



spite　of　all　the　perplexity；　be　indispensable　stages　in　our



approach　to　the　final　fullness　of　the　truth。　







＇287＇　They　sometimes　add　subjective　audita　et　visa　to　the　facts；



but　as　these　are　usually　interpreted　as　transmundane；　they　oblige



no　alteration　in　the　facts　of　sense。















In　this　shape；　I　think；　we　have　to　leave　the　subject。　　Mystical



states　indeed　wield　no　authority　due　simply　to　their　being



mystical　states。　　But　the　higher　ones　among　them　point　in



directions　to　which　the　religious　sentiments　even　of　non…



mystical　men　incline。　　They　tell　of　the　supremacy　of　the　ideal；



of　vastness；　of　union；　of　safety；　and　of　rest。　　They　offer　us



HYPOTHESES；　hypotheses　which　we　may　voluntarily　ignore；　but　which



as　thinkers　we　cannot　possibly　upset。　　The　supernaturalism　and



optimism　to　which　they　would　persuade　us　may；　interpreted　in　one



way　or　another；　be　after　all　the　truest　of　insights　into　the



meaning　of　this　life。







〃Oh；　the　little　more；　and　how　much　it　is；　and　the　little　less；



and　what　worlds　away！〃　　It　may　be　that　possibility　and　permission



of　this　sort　are　all　that　are　religious　consciousness　requires　to



live　on。　　In　my　last　lecture　I　shall　have　to　try　to　persuade　you



that　this　is　the　case。　　Meanwhile；　however；　I　am　sure　that　for



many　of　my　readers　this　diet　is　too　slender。　If　supernaturalism



and　inner　union　with　the　divine　are　true；　you　think；　then　not　so



much　permission；　as　compulsion　to　believe；　ought　to　be　found。　



Philosophy　has　always　professed　to　prove　religious　truth　by



coercive　argument；　and　the　construction　of　philosophies　of　this



kind　has　always　been　one　favorite　function　of　the　religious　life；



if　we　use　this　term　in　the　large　historic　sense。　　But　religious



philosophy　is　an　enormous　subject；　and　in　my　next　lecture　I　can



only　give　that　brief　glance　at　it　which　my　limits　will　allow。