Disciples! Form a single file line, s'il vous pait
Found a series of books representing mainstream mysticism. Among which are the collected works of Rumi (whom I had never read, but now am enjoying), the "essential" (?) Kabbalah (which looks quite promising), The Tibetan Book of the Dead, The Tao te Ching, The Way of the Pilgrim and The Bhagavad-Gita.
I realized yesterday that what I have been writing about, not only in my delirious frenzies, but also in whatever philosophy I have been preaching (if there is such a coherent entity), that I am moving towards a type of atheist, nominalist, postivist, materialist, et ceteraist mysticism. Or at least when I try to superimpose those characteristics (a big push towards "nonduality" with the Divine - in my case the Other, some steps along the way including a transcendence of the Self - in my case the denial of a metaphysical Self, that the Divine that we would like to become cannot be expressed - e.g. the Tao that cannot be spoken, there are no qualities that we can express that are the qualities of God - in my case it amounts to my push towards a silent philosopher, the philosopher who denies the legitimacy of metaphysical questions and emphasizes their worthlessness (Nietzsche to some extent) and meaninglessness (Wittgenstein strongly), however we accept (in keeping with a little twist on Kabbalistic teachings) that any attempt to speak about or pretending to know any area outside of sterile metaphysics is essentially untrue, and condemned to failure (the original teaching is something akin to any attempt to speak about God or the way God is must end in failure) essentially we are in a shadow world...I know that may inspire Plato's allegory, only for me I deny, in keeping with my materialist, nominalist leanings, that there is nothing outside of the shadow, to quote Derrida, "Il n'y a pas hors-de texte" (I believe to mean "there is nothing outside of text" only my translation into French may be innacurate and I'm too lazy to run upstairs and find the book).
So in language and the Other have replaced prayer, communion with the Divine and the Divine itself. The divine, as I had come to formulate over the summer, is that to which we cannot relate directly, hence the use of the Other. So philosophy has always been a kind of mysticism, only with bullshitish airs and, the innocent (?) progenator of much mendacity.
This is still buzzing around, so forgive any incompleteness for now.
I realized yesterday that what I have been writing about, not only in my delirious frenzies, but also in whatever philosophy I have been preaching (if there is such a coherent entity), that I am moving towards a type of atheist, nominalist, postivist, materialist, et ceteraist mysticism. Or at least when I try to superimpose those characteristics (a big push towards "nonduality" with the Divine - in my case the Other, some steps along the way including a transcendence of the Self - in my case the denial of a metaphysical Self, that the Divine that we would like to become cannot be expressed - e.g. the Tao that cannot be spoken, there are no qualities that we can express that are the qualities of God - in my case it amounts to my push towards a silent philosopher, the philosopher who denies the legitimacy of metaphysical questions and emphasizes their worthlessness (Nietzsche to some extent) and meaninglessness (Wittgenstein strongly), however we accept (in keeping with a little twist on Kabbalistic teachings) that any attempt to speak about or pretending to know any area outside of sterile metaphysics is essentially untrue, and condemned to failure (the original teaching is something akin to any attempt to speak about God or the way God is must end in failure) essentially we are in a shadow world...I know that may inspire Plato's allegory, only for me I deny, in keeping with my materialist, nominalist leanings, that there is nothing outside of the shadow, to quote Derrida, "Il n'y a pas hors-de texte" (I believe to mean "there is nothing outside of text" only my translation into French may be innacurate and I'm too lazy to run upstairs and find the book).
So in language and the Other have replaced prayer, communion with the Divine and the Divine itself. The divine, as I had come to formulate over the summer, is that to which we cannot relate directly, hence the use of the Other. So philosophy has always been a kind of mysticism, only with bullshitish airs and, the innocent (?) progenator of much mendacity.
This is still buzzing around, so forgive any incompleteness for now.