MISTICA. – A term that today generally designates either the state of mind of one who immerses himself in spiritual reality through religious contemplation (often called mysticism) or the doctrine relating to it (also called mystical theology).
SUMMARY:
I. Various meanings of the term
II. Christian M. Its nature. –III. The principles of M
IV. Vocation to the mystical life
V. Different degrees
VI. M. outside the Church.I. DIVERSE MEANINGS OF THE TERM. — Derived from the verb μύειν, “to close,” especially “to close the eyes,” the adjective μυστικός in the mystery-language was used among the Greeks to signify not so much a doctrine (a meaning that is specifically Christian) as the secret itself that made that type of religiosity possible.
Like many others, the word mystikós passed into Christian language, though without any dependence, as regards doctrine or the new realities it came to signify, as Bouver has clearly demonstrated on the basis of a very careful semantic investigation (Mystique. Essai sur l'histoire d'un mot, in La vie spirituelle, Supplément, May 1949).
The Fathers subsequently used the word in three different though related senses (cf. ibid., and J. de Guibert, Etudes de théol. myst., Toulouse 1930, chap. 1, § 1). At first, beginning especially with Clement of Alexandria and Origen, the mystical meaning of the Bible, particularly of the Old Testament, was called mystical with reference to Jesus Christ, whose “mystery,” according to St. Paul himself, is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets; this interpretation is called by Clement ἡ μυστικὴ ἐμμενεία (Stromata, V, 6: PG 9, 64). Then the meaning shifts toward that of a “sacramental” reality, of what is present but hidden beneath the veils of the Sacraments—for example, Baptism, called by Eusebius “mystical regeneration” (C. Marcellum: ibid., 24, 728), and above all the Eucharist, called “mystical Passover” (Hesychius of Jerusalem, Quaest. Evang. 34: ibid., 93, 14, 1), “mystical sacrifice of his body and his blood” (Const. Apost., VI, 23, 4: ibid., 1, 974), while the body of Christ present therein is to be called “the Mystical Body.”
Finally, already prefigured by Origen but expressed more explicitly in Pseudo-Dionysius, there is the concept of an experiential or quasi-experiential knowledge of divine realities, which proceeds from an intimate ἕνωσις, or “union,” with God; such was the “m. theology” of Isroteus, who was “non solum discens sed et patiens divina,” according to the formula frequently cited thereafter (De Div. Nominib., 2, 9: PG 3, 648 B; cf. Sum. Theol., 1ᵃ-2ᵃᵉ, q. 68, a. 2); this knowledge, moreover, is realized predominantly, according to Pseudo-Dionysius, through the Eucharistic liturgy, as the culmination of the “Mystery of Christ” of which St. Paul speaks (Eph. 3, 4), thereby revealing its essential connections with the meanings indicated above. This third meaning, which prevailed throughout the Middle Ages, is the only one in use today in Christianity.
II. CHRISTIAN MYSTICISM. ITS NATURE. — M., in the precise theological sense intended here, is a higher state of spiritual life in which the soul, enriched by sanctifying Grace, usually already purified not only from grave sins but also, to a large extent, from vicious tendencies and natural inclinations, and trained in the practice of the Christian virtues, attains an intimate union with God. This union is not the fruit of its own supernatural activity, but an infused gift of God, often accompanied by spiritual delights. Enlightened by the Holy Spirit, the soul contemplates therein the truths of faith, no longer through discursive meditation, but with a simple and steadfast gaze full of love, with a sense of savourous experience and often of contact with God.
Jesus promised his own this intimate manifestation of God to the soul, always, however, within the obscurity of faith: « If anyone loves me, he will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him » (Jo. 14:21). St. Augustine spoke of it when commenting on the evangelical beatitudes in relation to the gifts of the Holy Spirit; on reaching the last, he says: « The 7th is wisdom, that is, the contemplation of truth, which pacifies the whole person and gives him the divine likeness » (cf. DSp, fasc. IV, col. 1113). St. Augustine refers to this infused wisdom his contemplation at Ostia with St. Monica, in which, with all created things falling silent, « only he who made them speaks ... so that we hear his word, expressed neither by a bodily tongue nor by the voice of an angel, but in such a way that we hear him himself whom we love in these things ... reaching eternal wisdom in the swift flight of thought »: a fleeting anticipation of eternal life « which snatches the beholder away to intimate joys, absorbs him in them, and raises him up » (Confess., IX, 10: PL 32, 774).
A full description of this mystical wisdom is found in Pseudo-Dionysius, and, among many others, in St. Gregory the Great and St. Bernard. With the school of St. Victor, especially with Hugh and Richard, a more systematic exposition of m. begins, later continued by St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas, by St. Bonaventure and the Franciscan school. But it was reserved for the Carmelite Order to give mystical doctrine both a more detailed and orderly description and a more methodical interpretation, in the writings of St. Teresa of Jesus (Cast. Inter., IV Mans., chap. 2) and St. John of the Cross (Living Flame, stanza 3).
The characteristics of the mystical life are deduced from this doctrine of the saints. Every operation, prayer, knowledge, or form of union with God that does not proceed from our activity, aided by common Grace, but is the fruit of a divine initiative, of a « special » Grace that renders one passive under the movement of the Holy Spirit, will be mystical. The twofold characteristic of the mystical life is therefore passivity and simplicity.
1. Passivity. — Mystical operations, although proceeding from the human vital faculties divinized by Grace and being free and meritorious, are produced in the soul by a special intervention of the Holy Spirit. Whereas pre-mystical supernatural activity depends on human deliberation through the infused virtues (Sum. Theol., 1ᵃ-2ᵃᵉ, q. 68, a. 2), mystical activity proceeds from the gifts of the Holy Spirit, through which he takes possession of the soul with strength and gentleness and reduces it to a blessed passivity, superior in merit and efficacy to every human activity.
St. Teresa calls « supernatural », in the restrictive sense of the word, that state of being passive under the hand of God: « This prayer is already something supernatural, and we could not procure it for ourselves, despite all our diligence » (Way of Perfection, X, 31).
What does this mystical passivity consist in? Negatively, in the fact that « it is not in our power to produce such an act whenever we wish, as an ordinary act of faith »
(R. Garrigou-Lagrange, Perfection, cited in the bibliography, chap. 4, art. 11, 1). Human activity, even when aided by ordinary Grace, cannot rise to such a height. Positively, the passivity of mystics proceeds from a special Grace of God, which takes direction of human action, takes possession of the soul, and governs its activity, so as to realize visibly the Apostle’s words: « Quicunque Spiritu Dei aguntur ii sunt filii Dei » (Rom. 8:17).
Intimately connected with God’s dominating action, which renders the soul passive, there is, as a preliminary element to divine union, the complete and painful stripping away of whatever is natural and imperfect in the soul, which authors call the passive purifications (v.).
2. Simplicity. — It consists in the exclusion of the discursive process involving successive multiple acts, which is proper to natural reason and the infused virtues, and in its replacement by an almost single, instinctive, spontaneous, and direct act (St. John of the Cross, Dark Night, bk. I, chap. 9).
This is a characteristic difference that St. Thomas designates by the terms human mode, proper to the virtues, and superhuman mode or divine mode, specific to the gifts of the Holy Spirit (III Scut., dist. XXXIV, q. 1, a. 3; Sum. Theol., 1ᵃ-2ᵃ, q. 68, a. 2). Simplicity is found both in mystical prayer called contemplation (v.) and in mystical exterior action. Treating of the former, St. Thomas defines contemplation as: « Simplex intuitus veritatis » (ibid., 2ᵃ-2ᵃ, q. 180, a. 3, ad 1); a simple and loving gaze of faith which, under the movement of the gift of wisdom, fixes upon its divine object and savours its sweetness (ibid., q. 45, a. 2). If, on the other hand, it is considered in exterior activity, which too can be mystical, passive, and infused, simplicity will be that instinctive judgment of the gift of counsel which shortens the many inquiries and necessary deliberations of the virtue of prudence and immediately discerns, under God’s light, what must be done in the most delicate situations. Examples of this abound in the lives of the saints, which often disconcert ordinary prudence.
From this twofold characteristic of m. there often arises that vivid sense of God’s presence which, by its dominating action invading the soul beyond its normal psychology, makes it experience and, as it were, touch his beneficial presence. Often, but not always, as is seen in certain forms of arid and painful contemplation; consequently, it does not seem possible to regard that sense of God’s presence, or that awareness of his infused supernatural reality, as a characteristic and universal criterion of m., as some have thought (cf. J. de Guibert, op. cit. in the bibliography, chap. 2).
III. THE PRINCIPLES OF M
Although produced in the soul by God himself, apart from human initiative, mystical life in the proper sense is not to be conceived as a charismatic or miraculous phenomenon, such as prophecy, levitation, etc., which are graces gratis datæ. “It is difficult to imagine a greater confusion than that which has led certain Catholic authors to make the word m. synonymous with miracle. Let the two concepts be compared, and it will immediately become clear that they are the contradiction of one another” (S. Luismet, Miracle et mystique, chap. 2).M. is a gratum faciens Grace, ordained by God for the personal good of the one who receives it, and tending toward the full development of that supernatural life whose promising seed was placed in man by Baptism. It is the mature fruit of the principles infused at that time. Now these principles are sanctifying Grace, with the corresponding habits, the theological virtues and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. All have as their immediate or remote purpose the union of the soul with God, its progressive transformation into God, which perfectly realizes that condition of being “divinae consortes naturae” of s. Peter (II Pt. 1:4). The radical principle of this union and transformation is sanctifying Grace itself, which, besides formally sanctifying the soul and making it deiform, procures for it the substantial presence of the Most Holy Trinity, as the Angelic Doctor teaches, following s. Paul (I Cor. 3:16; II Cor. 6:16): “Above the common presence of God in all things, there is a special presence proper to the rational creature, in which God is said to be present as the known in the knower and the beloved in the lover. And since, by knowing and loving, the rational creature through its activity reaches God himself, in this way God is not only said to be in the rational creature, but also to dwell there, as in his temple (Sum. Theol., 1ᵃ, q. 43, a. 3). One should note this difference between ‘being’ in a place and ‘dwelling’ there. The latter adds to the former relations of companionship or friendship, which simple presence does not imply. God is present in every created being—in the flower, in the animal, and also in man—infusing existence and life as their efficient cause. But he dwells only in the sanctified soul, as its ‘sweetest guest,’ fostering there that friendly exchange of mutual knowledge and love which proceeds initially from faith and charity (cf. A. Cardell, Structure de l'âme, part 3ᵃ; R. Garrigou-Lagrange, L'habitation de la Ste Trinité et l'expérience mystique, in Revue thomiste, 33 [1928], pp. 439–74). Yet for this purpose the obscure knowledge of faith is not sufficient; hence the gifts of the Holy Spirit—or rather, with s. Thomas, the Holy Spirit himself—come into play, moving and directing, through his gifts, the Christian soul toward a knowledge and love less disproportionate to their divine object. The gifts differ from the virtues, according to the Angelic Doctor (Sum. Theol., 1ᵃ-2ᵃ, q. 68, a. 1), in that the virtues are primarily ‘active,’ causing one to act according to the direction of reason elevated by Grace, whereas the gifts are primarily ‘passive’ dispositions that render one docile to the impulse of the Holy Spirit. This is the ‘passivity’ proper to mystics, who feel themselves to be, as it were, invaded by the Spirit of God.
These gifts intervene now one, now another, according to the field in which the divine influence is applied. In mystical prayer or contemplation, the gift of wisdom predominates; by utilizing the effect of filial love that it produces in us” (s. Thomas, In Rom., VIII, 16), it produces in the soul an almost-experience of God.
S. Giovanni della Croce often establishes a causal connection between contemplation and love (Notte osc., bk. II, chap. 17). The profound reason for this lies in the fact that love creates a “connaturality,” or sympathy, between the soul and divine things (Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃ, q. 45, a. 2), which makes it judge of them as if by a spontaneous instinct. The gift of wisdom, founded upon this divine sympathy, reveals God’s perfections to the soul through a special illumination, often with an intimate sense of his friendly presence. Love becomes, as it were, the medium obiectivum of the Scholastics for knowing God himself with a sapid knowledge from which “wisdom” takes its name. At other times, in mystical prayer, the gift of understanding intervenes, causing the soul to penetrate the divine mysteries so as to perceive their marvellous connections and appropriateness (ibid., q. 8), or the gift of knowledge, which judges created things rightly in relation to God (ibid., q. 9, a. 2). There is also an external activity of a mystical nature, as is revealed, for example, in the ven. Maria dell'Incarnazione, the first Ursuline missionary of Canada, whose apostolic activity often proceeded from a mystical impulse of God: this activity depends especially on the gift of counsel, which is far superior to the suggestions of prudence, even infused prudence. “He who directs them inwardly puts into their minds in an instant what they must say or do” (Maria dell'Incarnazione, Letter of September 1666). In other cases, in the exercise of charity, the gift of piety will intervene, as appears in the life of s. Elisabetta di Ungheria or of s. Vincenzo de' Paoli. There is also a mystical suffering, participation in the sufferings of the divine Redeemer, with the soul suffering, as s. Paolo della Croce says, “the pain of her Spouse infused into her” (cf. J. Lebreton, Tu solus Sanctus, Paris 1948, p. 222). Here the gift of fortitude is seen in an eminent manner; by uniting the soul to Christ in his work of redemption, it enables the soul to sustain courageously the arduous struggle against sin and hell.
An essential principle of every true m. in the present order of Providence is union with Christ, recourse to Christ’s mediation. Jesus’ saying has universal validity: “No one comes to the Father except through me” (Io. 14:6). He is the way; the Incarnate Word is the necessary mediator of union with God, just as he is of salvation.
S. Teresa’s insistence on the necessity of never departing from contemplation of Christ’s most holy humanity is well known (Vita, chap. 22; Castello int., VI Man., chap. 7). No less explicit is s. Giovanni della Croce when he cites Christ’s words: “Ego sum ostium” (Io. 10:9; Salita d. C., bk. II, chap. 6). In Christ alone is found, in its fullness, the revelation of God, the object of faith and the principle of mystical union.
IV. VOCATION TO THE MYSTICAL LIFE
From the principles underlying the origin of m. the much-debated question must be resolved whether m. is a privilege of the few, an extraordinary Grace, or whether it should be regarded as the normal term of Christian life. First, it should be observed with R. Garrigou-Lagrange (op. cit., cap. 1, art. 11; cf. also J. Arintero, Cuestiones misticas, Salamanca 1927, p. 45; J. de Guibert, op. cit. in bibl., p. 37), that «ordinary» may be understood in two senses: «in fact», for something common to all or to most of those concerned, and «in law», for what lies along the normal path of a given activity, in no way miraculous or charismatic, although for various reasons it may in reality occur only in the minority of cases. That the seeds of a plant grow into new plants is ordinary and normal, yet how many of all the fruits that ripen each year will never be placed in suitable soil in which to grow? Likewise, the mystical life will be regarded as ordinary «in law», even though many Christians either do not live in Grace, or, possessing it, do not cultivate it, or, while taking some care of their interior life, do not advance it with the necessary seriousness, above all by failing to achieve that mortification and purification of the soul which is an indispensable precondition for the divine operation of the mystical order.The mystical life is to be considered ordinary because it proceeds not from elements foreign to our supernatural life, but from those same principles infused into every baptized soul, namely sanctifying Grace, the theological virtues, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The proper function of the gifts is that receptivity to the impulses of the Holy Spirit which renders the soul passive (cf. R. Garrigou-Lagrange, op. cit., cap. 5). Now this passivity, together with the simplicity proper to movements that come through the gifts, constitutes the mystical state; yet at the outset, since the influence of the gifts is mingled with the activity of the infused virtues «in the human manner», it is not perceived and does not yet constitute a mystical «state», but rather mystical «acts» of greater or lesser frequency. It is normal, however, for the soul, attentive not to obstruct the action of Grace, to arrive, through an ever-increasing intervention of the gifts, at a lasting state that is properly mystical. J. de Guibert reaches the same conclusion by a different route, admitting the «normal» character of m., except for that of a miraculous order (op. cit., cap. 4, § 111). Nor does anything else follow from the teaching of the masters, s. Teresa, s. Giovanni della Croce, and s. Francesco di Sales. And if some passages seem to have a different meaning, they can easily be explained by what was said above concerning mystical Grace which, although it lies along the normal path, encounters in its realization numerous obstacles, some of them not imputable, because they depend on temperament or on necessary external circumstances. «Think», writes s. Teresa, «that the Lord invites everyone (to the spring of water that is contemplation).
He is truth itself and his word is unquestionable. If his banquet were not general, he would not call us all, and even if he invited us, he would not say to us: «I will give you drink». He could have said: «Come all; in the end you will lose nothing, and I will give drink to whomever I wish». But since he set no limit and said «all», I hold it certain that this living water will not be lacking to any who do not stop along the way. May the Lord who promises it to us give us the Grace to seek it as we ought» (Cammino di perf., cap. 19, alla fine). At the beginning of the following chapter she insists even more strongly, despite the apparent contradiction discernible there with what she said in cap. 17, where she sought to «console the souls who in fact did not attain contemplation». Likewise S. Giovanni della Croce (Fiamma viva, 2 strofa, 5).
Summarizing the doctrine of the later mystical authors of the reformed Carmel, p. Gabriele di S. Maria Maddalena says: «The Carmelite school taken as a whole has always recognized that the mystical life is the complete development of the supernatural life. Therefore all its more notable authors teach that all interior souls can and indeed ought to desire infused contemplation» (Lettera al p. Garrigou-Lagrange, in Garrigou-Lagrange, op. cit., cap. 6, art. v).
V. DIFFERENT DEGREES
Since m. is that « pati divina » of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, its essential degrees are determined according to whether the dominating action of the Spirit of God is more or less complete. There have been complete (or perfect) mystics and others incomplete (or imperfect), according as mystical passivity extends to all the faculties, or only to some or to one alone.1. Incomplete mystical states: these are those which s. Teresa describes in the Fourth Mansions of her Interior Castle (cf. also Way of Perfection, chs. 29–32): supernatural recollection, in which the faculties are gently drawn into the soul’s inner chamber so as to occupy themselves with God; and, above all, the prayer of quiet, in which a spark of love rises from the centre of the soul, inflaming the will with profound calm and sweetness, while the intellect and, still more, the imagination may wander, distracting the soul in its repose of love.
Often this mystical union of quiet, especially at its beginnings, passes unnoticed by the very soul that is favoured by it, as s. John of the Cross observes (Ascent of Mount Carmel, bk. II, p. 12). This manner of mystical prayer can easily be discerned, for example, in the life of s. Thérèse of the Child Jesus, both in her Autobiography and in her Letters, where her infused wisdom is wondrously revealed on every page, although the Saint generally gives no explicit descriptions of mystical states, as her seraphic Mother does. Moreover, there exist mixed forms of contemplative prayer, in which infused elements are intermingled with the soul’s own activity and which may therefore be called mixed contemplation (Gabriele di S. M. Maddalena, loc. cit.).
2. Complete mystical states
These are those which s. Teresa describes in the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Mansions, namely, the sleep of the faculties, in which God already takes possession of all the faculties of the soul in holy intoxication, « manifest union of the whole soul with God » (Fifth Mansion, ch. 1); the more perfect prayer of union, in which the intellect, will and imagination are rapt in God, and in which even the exterior senses are suspended and deprived of all contact with the world, ecstasy (v.), which so impresses the profane, is a secondary and purely accidental phenomenon, a consequence of human weakness before the intense operation of God. Finally, there is transforming union, the summit of mystical ascents, after which the soul has only to sigh for the consummation of the beatific union of the Homeland, the specific goal ofthe whole of Christian life and the natural fulfilment of every mystical life.
VI. M. OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. — A difficult problem is what R. Garrigou-Lagrange calls that of the “mystics from outside” (Il Salvatore e il suo amore per noi, Turin 1948, p. 372 ff.). Do such authentic mystics exist? The documents brought to light especially in recent years do not permit an invariably negative answer. Prudence is necessary, lest anything be asserted beyond the requirements of verified facts, as well as care in determining their origin and meaning. In addition to the problem in general, it is appropriate to examine several specific cases: Plotinus among the ancient philosophers; Sufism, and especially al-Hallāg, among Muslims; and Hinduism.
Here it is necessary to recall what was said to be the essence of m.: an experience of God present in the soul as an object of enjoyment: this is the «pati divina» of Pseudo-Dionysius or the «frui divina Persona» of St. Thomas (Sinn. Theol., 1ᵃ, q. 43, a. 3). Now, such experience or enjoyment presupposes God’s presence through a presence of Grace, superior to the common presence of immensity, and reached through supernatural charity and the gift of wisdom, as guest and friend of the soul. This in itself excludes from the purely natural order any possibility of a mystical experience of God.
Although m. properly so called is not possible apart from Grace, there can nevertheless exist what R. Garrigou-Lagrange calls a natural pre-m., which, without attaining an experience of God in the sense explained, can rise to a profound philosophical contemplation of the Creator—a contemplation which, as Ps. Albert the Great observes (De adhaerendo Deo, chap. 9), «sistit in intellectu», unlike mystical contemplation, which «is through love» and proceeds from love. «Such natural contemplation — notes R. Garrigou-Lagrange — prepared and tested by an appropriate asceticism (as was the case, for example, with Plotinus), and brought by means of a well-conceived method and training to an exceptional degree of intensity, can entail psychic consequences and, when temperament intervenes, especially if imagination and emotionality play a part, bodily consequences materially similar to certain secondary mystical phenomena.»
But once the possibility of a true mystical experience apart from Christian Grace has been excluded, a second question arises: does there exist, or can there at least exist, a supernatural m. outside the one Church of Christ, and even more so among unbelievers? The problem is connected with the more general question of the possibility of salvation outside the Church. Now, it is agreed among theologians that all human beings, including non-Christians, are granted at least sufficient Grace to obtain justification, and that the Lord also gives those who do whatever they can with the help of this actual Grace the Grace to love him effectively with true charity: this implies the Baptism of desire, together with habitual Grace and the right to beatitude. All this, however, cannot occur without at least a minimal knowledge of revealed truths. Such knowledge is readily available in the separated Christian confessions, but it is not excluded even from the pagan world, through various channels of saving Providence. Yet if the attainment of Grace outside the Church is possible, it will be more difficult to reach that summit of Christian life marked by the mystical gifts. Transitory influences or touches of mystical Grace, called minor mystical Graces by Fr. Lemonnier (La vie spirituelle, Suppl., May 1933), may more readily be admitted, in order to make up for the deficiency of spiritual aids in the surrounding environment. Even enduring mystical states «are possible outside the visible Church, since the Grace of the virtues and gifts can develop there, although with greater difficulty. But it is highly probable a priori that such mystical Graces properly so called, rare in the visible Church itself, are exceedingly rare in such environments» (R. Garrigou-Lagrange, op. cit., p. 400).
Among the specific cases, Plotinus presents himself first. His neo-Platonic philosophy, expounded in the Enneads, attained a highly elevated abstractive knowledge of God, marking the apex of what human reason could achieve, although it was not free from pantheistic tendencies. Moreover, he added to his theoretical knowledge an ascetic discipline aimed at that purification, or καθάγας, which resembles what the Christian mystics teach concerning the purification preceding union with God. Finally, he describes several times that “ecstasy” to which he was permitted, on rare occasions, to rise—a privileged union with the One, source of ineffable joys: «When I awaken to myself, coming out of what is not the self in order to re-enter myself, I see a marvelous beauty, convinced that then above all I participate in a higher nature living an excellent life and become one and the same thing with the divinity (τὸ θεῖο)... When, after this rest in the divinity, I descend again from the νός to reasoning, I do not know how I can descend, nor how a soul can remain within the body, being in itself what has appeared to me» (Enn., IV, 8, 1; ed. E. Bréhier, Paris 1924–38). What is the nature of this ecstasy? Examination of Plotinus’s entire work shows that he is completely unfamiliar with the concept of God’s personal love, because of the determinism he attributes to the supreme “One,” which allows neither Providence nor friendly relations with the impersonal God. He does speak of the ἐγώ, but this is a love that is the soul’s natural inclination toward the divine Good, σύμψος, “consubstantial” with the soul, as Bréhier translates it; on this subject, see also more fully Fr. R. Arnou (Le désir de Dieu dans la philosophie de Plotin, Paris n.d.). Consequently, a true mystical experience of God, founded on charity and corresponding to the principles described above, cannot be admitted in Plotinus. His case can be reduced to the possibilities of natural philosophical contemplation.
The radical pantheism of Hindu philosophies, and of the Vedānta themselves, or the religious books that inspire them, is well known: Brahma, or God, is not only the efficient cause of the world but also its material cause, the universe and therefore individual souls being nothing more than an evolution of God (cf. P. Johanns, Vers le Christ par le Vedānta, Louvain 1932). This original pantheism corrupted every order of relations between the soul and God. It was a singular merit of Greek philosophy, and above all of Aristotle, to analyze with inspired acumen the profound roots of being and to safeguard the absolute transcendence of God, the Pure Act. Within such a system of metaphysical notions, the order of supernatural relations with God through faith and charity in the first place, and then through the mystical activity that completes them, is clearly distinguished from the purely natural rational process of religious psychology. The same is not true, however, of religious life inspired by pantheism, in which the logic of the system requires philosophy and religion, the natural and supernatural orders, ordinary religious piety and m. to become confused. For so-called Hindu m. (cf. J. Lacombe, L'absolu selon le Vedānta, Paris 1937; G. Dandoy, L'Ontologie du Vedānta, there 1932).
Much has been said in recent years about Muslim mystics, the so-called sūfī (cf. H. Asin Palacios, El Islam cristianizado estudio del «sufismo», Madrid 1931; G. Fausti, Asceti e mistici nell'Islam, in Civ. Catt., 1932, IV, pp. 344–52, 440–55), among whom the most typical case is that of al-Hallāg (cf. L. Massignon, La Passion d'al-Hoayni-Im-Mansour al-Hallaj, 2 vols., Paris 1932). He was martyred at Baghdad by his own people in 922 for his dissident interpretation of the Koran, which placed Jesus, the «Saint» par excellence, above Muhammad and recognized him as the judge who would return to earth at the universal Resurrection. Extraordinary was the life of al-Hallāg, as Massignon describes it on the basis of the documents: there we see him, after years of ascetic life permeated by frequent mystical experiences, undertaking preaching journeys through India and Turkestan, in order to communicate, orally and in writing, the fruit of his interior life. al-Hallāg himself writes: «At the summit of holiness, at the consummation of divine union, the saint is more than a prophet with an external mission to fulfill, with a law to be enforced. The saint, having perfectly united his own will to that of God, is in a position directly to interpret everywhere and in everything the essential will of God, to participate in the nature of God, transformed into God» (op. cit., pp. 115–16). And he bursts forth in this invocation: «O guide of those who have gone astray, I know that you transcend... all the concepts of those who conceived you! O my God, you know me incapable of offering you the thanksgiving that is your due. Deign to come into me and thank yourself. This is the true thanksgiving; there is no other» (op. cit., p. 116). Characteristic is this statement concerning the path toward divine union: «When no carnal bond remains in him (in man), then the Spirit of God descends upon him, the Spirit from whom Jesus, son of Mary, was born» (op. cit., p. 515). These and many other texts are impressive for their sincere and profound spirituality. With al-Hallâf one finds oneself far above the pantheistic aspirations of Hinduism and the philosophical ecstasies of Plotinus. Two elements above all are found here that create a favorable presumption of authentic m.: 1st, faith, although incomplete, and recourse to Christ the mediator, who will not have rejected a soul that approached him with such generosity. Then, a pure love of God, which, precisely when it proceeds from a supernatural motive, is that principle of connaturality with God which lies at the root of mystical union. It therefore seems that here we are confronted with one of those privileged cases whose possibility R. Garrigou-Lagrange admitted, while considering them extremely rare.