p25 Rumble

Mystic Rumble in the Jungle

The other night I read the Forum section's exchange of opinions about mysticism in the latest issue of World Order. It was an interesting read but I was tired and went to bed. Then I had a dream.

I dreamed that Mooj was the undisputed champion of the world. He walked into the center of the ring to receive the accolades of his adoring fans. Out of the crowd bursts a scrawny fellow in boxing gloves and boxing shorts, name of Mac. Mac's arms are a blur as he swings blows everywhere. Mooj steps back, expecting security guards to drag Mac away, but none come. The crowd is expectant to witness the champ dispatch this doughty challenger. Mac's flailing hay makers come hot and heavy, but they are powder puffs that mostly hit the air. The champ is nonplussed and steps back once more.

 Is Mooj adopting the "rope-a-dope" tactic that Ali used to beat Frazier in their rematch? If so, he will have a hard time of it because there are no ropes around this ring, just a giant painted circle. Mooj takes another step back and decides he has no option but to fight back. He lays a bone crushing blow to Mac's jaw but Mac does not go down. The lights are on but nobody is home. Mooj then thuds a solid blow to Mac's midsection, and he drops like a ton of bricks at his feet.

 The crowd goes wild!

 But then to Mooj's surprise, the officials come, pick up the unconscious Mack and declare him to be the new champion. Then Mooj looks down and sees that he has stepped out of the circle. No wonder there are no ropes, this is a Sumo wrestling ring! Mooj the heavyweight boxing champion has been pushed out of the Sumo circle by a much smaller man.

 When I woke, I mused on how meaningless and irrelevant my dreams are. Every evening I pray that my dreams will teach me something new to prepare me for what I will write the next day, but they never do. A stupid boxing\Sumo match. This is the kind of dumb dream I get ...

 Anyway, I was going to review the debate about mysticism between Jack McLean and Moojan Momen in World Order Magazine (2006, volume 38, number 1). Throwing aside the polite preludes, McLean opens up his assault by saying,

 "After rereading Dr. Momen's paper carefully, I am still haunted by this question: did Baha'u'llah intend to create a worldwide mystical community at all?  His writings advocate, rather, the manifestation of essential spiritual virtues, not essential mystical virtues such as self abstraction, absorption and the divine, the death of self, ecstasy, and so on. This is not mere semantical hairsplitting. While certain elements of mysticism, such as universal divine love, prayer, and meditation help to constitute faith and spirituality, it does not follow that mysticism is at the heart of Baha'i community experience." (p. 12)

 Did I see that right? Did he just lay out a solid right to the jaw -- to his own jaw, that is? I will have to hit the rewind button to be sure. Let me see. If "mysticism helps constitute faith and spirituality," how then can it not be at the heart of Baha'i community experience? Is there something other than faith and spirituality at the heart? Oh, let it pass. He continues,

 "By definition, mysticism is a type of peak experience. It is not a steady state, whereas faith and spirituality may, and should be, lived as constants. In this sense, practical spirituality trumps rarefied mysticism, whether one refers to the individual or the community."

 Here comes an effective left uppercut that might be more effective were it applied to his opponent's jaw. Since this is a mystic talking about mysticism, I can only assume that McLean is practicing a sort of exercise in self-immolation. Oh wait, I remember my dream now. Maybe it did mean something. McLean won this match and his goal, I can see it now, it is not to land effective blows but to distract his opponent from the real rules of the game. Crazy, like a fox.

 Next, McLean, perhaps wishing to taunt Momen by pointing to his chin with both gloves, lands two solid blows to both of his own cheeks. He does this by quoting the Guardian's definition of mysticism.

 "For the core of religious faith is that mystical feeling which unites man with God. This state of spiritual communion can be brought about and maintained by means of meditation and prayer.  And this is the reason why Baha'u'llah has so much stressed the importance of worship. It is not sufficient for a believer merely to accept and observe the teachings. He should, in addition, cultivate the sense of spirituality, which you can acquire chiefly by means of prayer." (Letter written on behalf of shall be a fan date to a body, December 8, 9035, in Compilation of Compilations, no. 1704).

 McLean then tells us what "of course" the Guardian means by saying this.

 "The passage is, of course, a definition of faith, not of mysticism. And it needs to be stressed the mention of mystical feeling refers to the individual's spiritual life, not to collective worship. It points to mysticism, more exactly, mystical feeling along with prayer and meditation, as being at the heart of religious faith. Thus mysticism has to be seen within the larger context of both faith and spirituality."

 Why is the Guardian's statement not a definition of mysticism? Adding "of course" to a proposition does not constitute an argument. If mysticism is not a tie between a believer and God, then what is it? A flash-in-the-pan? A Kodak moment? A one night stand?

 Jack McLean then cites the Guardian's very important statement that slams the door on virtually every branch of mystic and occult thinking in our time,

 "If we are going to have some deeply spiritual experience, we can rest assured that God will vouchsafe it to us without our having to look for it." (Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to a Baha'i, October 25, 1942, in compilation of compilations.  No. 1742)

 Thus, you cannot force or encourage mystical experiences, you have to let God himself roll up your sleeve and mainline the hit for you. As if that is not enough, next comes a below-the-belt blow that would be illegal if the attacker had used it on anybody but himself. He says,

 "Baha'u'llah has made his readers/believers, aware that this largely uncharted, inner universe of the heart does exist and that the Arif (mystic knower) is capable of attaining Irfan (mystic knowledge) directly, rather than through a process of rational discourse. But it is understood that today, in view of the dire straits in which a divided humanity finds itself, the Baha'is should not make the experience of this private, inner universe of the heart the whole quest of spiritual life. The Baha'i writings, and the guidance of Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice, have established other priorities."

 I do not think so. Remember Ahmad, he was a mystic, and Baha'u'llah wrote a major prayer for him that I, for one, use every day; Ahmad followed the mission to convert the Babis to Baha'u'llah's Faith, but nobody knows what happened to his body. He disappeared on the road somewhere, perhaps translated directly to the next life. Then there was Thomas Breakwell, he did little outwardly other than die of TB, but his quest was so intimate that the Master was moved to trumpet his mystical victory. Same thing with Mirza Abu'l-Fadl. When he was pioneering in Washington he refused to eat and was found in his room, immobile, his jaws locked together, so ardent had been his prayers the night before. When he died, the Master's tribute was not exactly disapproving.

 In the Guardian's time there were Mathew Kazab, who died alone in a room, with only the book "Dawnbreakers" as his companion. Then there were the many mystics who answered the call to "Arise!" and gave up home and culture and everything to pioneer to the ends of the earth. And even today Baha'is in Iran, Egypt and other such places have the "priority" of giving up home, educations, identity cards, and life itself. With the full approval of the UHJ. If that is not mystical, what is? Sitting alone in a rich man's room in a rich man's country and congratulating yourself on how close to God you are?

 A mystic experience that is not followed by spiritual expression is sterile, useless, even, dare I say it, harmful and deceptive. The sun shines on all, but a stone just warms itself in the heat while a plant photosynthesizes the energy. If you are a plant and you just warm yourself without photosynthesis, you are in deep trouble. After all, was it not Baha'u'llah who, addressing the monks, said,

 "He that secludeth himself in his house is indeed as one dead. It behoveth man to show forth that which will benefit mankind. He that bringeth forth no fruit is fit for the fire." (Summons, 70)

 The problem, from a proud mystic's point of view, with expressing your mystical experience in a group is that you are less exclusive. You are not so special, your insight becomes that of a group and is no longer yours. You object to anybody who would, in McLean's words "democratize so to speak the mystical experience." This hints at what prompted this fervent assault in the first place.

 Let us turn to Momen's response. As my dream implied, he backs away from the stand he took in the original paper, called "The Baha'is as a Mystical Community." Obviously taken aback, Momen defends himself by saying that he was not talking about mysticism in individuals, he was talking about group mysticism.

 "It is here, in the social organization of mystical communities, that Baha'u'llah differs radically from the mystics of the past ... and it is the delineation of the features of this aspect on which I have concentrated in my article. The fact that I have concentrated on this innovative aspect of the Baha'i Faith in this article in no way diminishes the importance of individual aspect of mysticism (and I referred to this individual aspect at the beginning and end of the paper) but it is simply not the subject of the article."

 For this concession he loses the Sumo match, in my opinion. The fact is that Baha'u'llah has abrogated mysticism as known before His revelation, as the "secluded in his house" quote above implies. In fact, mysticism had already been partially excluded by Islam, Baha'u'llah just takes it a step further. I do not want to develop a whole thesis here, but Mirza Abu'l-Fazl, a mystic himself, was very explicit in blaming mystics, monastics and Sufis for the corruption and dismemberment of both Christianity and Islam. Abdu'l-Baha backed him up on this too.

 Let there be no mistake, mysticism left to fester on its own is a pernicious, destructive force that bolsters the ego far easier than the higher self. Like any physical passion, left on its own, it can ruin your life and the lives of all around you. But if you sublimate it and use it to galvanize yourself in service to others, it becomes a good thing.

 Which brings me to the next story in the book "Mother's Stories." Coincidentally, when I found this story I had been reading about a very similar experience of the Muslim philosopher Al Ghazzali, who was struck dumb in front of a class of students when he realized that he was doing what he was doing for egotistical reasons. He fell ill and took a ten year hiatus from his teaching, then directed the rest of his career in an unsuccessful attempt to defend Islam from Sufis and agnostic philosophers. Remember, Abu'l-Fazl is among that small number of people the Master called "perfect." So clearly, the mystic struggles of a Baha'i are mainly an antidote to pride, as Fazl applied it.

 Abu'l Fazl's story, told by Ali Kuli Khan in 1934

  "In the early days (1901 to '05), Abdu'l-Baha sent to the United States the beloved and most radiant Abu'l-Fadl. The purpose was to travel and teach and Ali Kuli Khan was asked to accompany Abu'l-Fadl as interpreter. This was arranged and the two gentlemen started off. The trip was a wonderful success. It was during the period when teachers (Hindu, Zoroastrian or Buddhist) were greeted eagerly all over the country and these Baha'i teachers shared the wave of popularity. It was in one of the middle western cities that this experience occurred.
  The local Opera House had been rented for Abu'l-Fadl's talks and it was packed. Probably more than a thousand people had come. And, before this crowd Abu'l-Fadl rose to speak. For a moment, he stood there, his eyes roving over all the lifted, waiting faces, and suddenly he thought 'This trip is proving very successful! I am doing very well, this is a cause for great pride and satisfaction and when I return to Acca the Master will be well pleased with me. Truly I am doing well.' And, with this thought, the mind of Abu'l-Fadl went completely blank.
  He did not know who he was or why he was standing on this platform with all these people looking at him or what he was supposed to say. Then, instantly he realized what had happened. He had taken it upon himself to feel that it was HE who had accomplished this success; it was HIS words that would reach the hearts; it was HE - HE - HE - who had been proud. And, as he realized this he turned, in abject shame, to Baha'u'llah, imploring His forgiveness and begging Him to fill his heart once more with His Light to move his lips again with His Word. And immediately Abu'l-Fadl's prayer was answered, and the talk went forward.
  Later, Abu'l-Fadl asked Dr. Khan how long it had been that he stood there tongue-tied and blank - for it had seemed to Abu'l-Fadl that he must have disgraced himself before that great audience. But Khan assured him that it had been no time at all that there had been no break in the discourse. But it is to be noted that - many years afterward - Abdu'l-Baha particularly praised Abu'l-Fadl for being one of the very rare souls who never used the pronouns 'I' or 'me' or 'mine'.