[Buddha-l] RE: Article of possible interest--correction

[curt]

Joy Vriens wrote:

>> (2) Mystical experiences not only reinforce already existing spiritual  
>> frameworks - they also provide raw material for new frameworks.  
>> Sometimes these new frameworks are simply incremental modifications of  
>> what was already there - but they might also lead to significantly new  
>> "frameworks" (although, at least in my opinion, that often turns out, in  
>> actual practice, to be a bad idea). 
>>     
>
>
> Something like becoming dharma, getting the stamp of dharma apposed onto what one is or onto that as which one appears. The personal stuff is "transcended" (relativised), without disappearing. The dharma is coloured and gets a new coat. Something like that?

If I understand what you are saying, "dharma" would have to refer to 
something very far down in that muck of "other subconscious material" - 
assuming that if you go down far enough you can find something that is 
completely free from the taint of personal opinion. Something like this 
appears, at least to me, to be axiomatic for any philosophy that insists 
that "the truth lies within" or words to that effect (words such as 
"gnothi seauton" or "chi-hsin chi-fo"). This is in opposition to the 
X-Files approach: "the truth is out there".

>  
>  
>   
>> Delacroix's explanation of mystical experiences, in my opinion, is quite  
>> useful as long as one avoids using the words "just" and "only". Jung was  
>> insistent that psychological explanations of spiritual phenomena were  
>> grossly misrepresented whenever the words "just" or "only" were placed  
>> in front of the word "psychological". 
>>     
>
> Your apprehension may be due to my way of summarizing and reformulating his view. I tend to caricature and stiffen up things a bit. :-) Although I didn't say "just" and "only". Delacroix is more prudent in expressing his views.
>
>
>   
I didn't mean to attribute the "just" or "only" to you - in fact I 
thought your summary of Delacroix was very objective - to the point of 
selflessness. I only feared that what you had presented could then be 
seized upon by others who might say: "Aha! You see, it's just psychology 
- it's all in your head. Mystics are just self-deluded navel-gazers."

- Curt