/lit/ - Literature

Mysticism for atheists would basically be a pragmatic mysticism. Just take the methods of any mystical tradition, even theistic ones, and use them without believing in God.

>>13728681
No dummy. Atheists do not believe in a transcendent God or the metaphysics that supports him. They can't be mystics if they reject the possibility of the supernatural world of forms, and grace, and providence.

If they do then they are x-tier retards with no notion of what they are talking about.

>>13728681
>I quite liked psychology of possible evolution from ouspensky

I would follow up with Ouspensky’s “In Search of the Miraculous”, which gives an account of the teacher he got these ideas from (Gurdjieff). If you’ll remember, in his “Psychology of Man’s Possible Evolution”, Ouspensky mentions Sufis as a source of some of these ideas. In “Search of the Miraculous”, Gurdjieff is reported as mentioning staying in Central Asian dervish/Sufi monasteries. There’s thus a link between Gurdjieff/Ouspensky and Sufism, and you can follow this up with the works of Idries Shah. Shah has actually been criticizing for presenting Sufism in modern humanistic/psychological frameworks, removing Muslim religious trappings from it, so it should be on your beat. Also, you will start believing in God sooner or later.

>>13728701
If the methods work at procuring certain experiences then they work. Attaching labels to these experiences such as "grace", "God", "forms" is an ex post facto exercise that is basically superfluous and adds nothing to the experience itself.

>>13728681
Buddhism

>>13728712
Then it's not mysticism. It's self-delusion, or merely history of religion, or at worst demonic possession. Ouspensky and Gurdjieff are mental defectives according to Jung, btw.

>>13728726
I'm not the Gurdjieff poster, I think he was full of shit. But if it's delusion in one case then it's delusion also in the other. If I have the same experiences what difference does it make what I label it. If I call what you experience as "God" something else, it's still the same experience.

>>13728681
>modern mysticism that are suited for atheist
Just read your fellow brainlet Sam Harris.

I have but i fear they might cause indigestion if you're an atheist.

>>13728731
Then like other anon said, you will begin to believe in God sooner or later. Or you will continue to reject the notion and fail as a mystic and move on to something easier to understand.

>>13728681
Schopenhauer was an atheist mystic

>>13728748
It does not follow that you would believe in God. I've already explained why that is. Do you have any counter-arguments? I would genuinely like to consider them if you have any

>>13728755
>it does not follow
Evidently you have much more reading to do. And prayer.

>>13728762
>No arguments
k

Capital A Atheism?
>No

Agnosticism?
>Pandeism

>>13728736
>rent free

>>13728726
>>13728726
Oh? Who said Jung was the authority on these matters? I like Jung, too, by the way, but it’s not like he had an infallible intuition. He was afraid to meet Ramana Maharshi, for instance. I guess something in him knew that full-blown God-realization was beyond his (admittedly brilliant) dabbling in the archetypes and psychological integration and all that.

>>13728731
I mean, I’m not here to be a Gurdjieff-fanboy/cultist, I’m (I hope) beyond that, but you’re wrong. He was one teacher amongst others, not a messiah or anything, but he’s definitely worth respectfully studying, if nothing else.

>>13728766
Not my fault you're not smart enough to recognize the several philosophical proofs of God or even familiar with the centuries old well-known list of charlatan swindlers who profess a psychology-based mysticism absent of metaphysics.

Go stare at a crystal until you figure it out.

>>13728794
>was one teacher amongst others
But he was a bad teacher as evidenced by his students. His teaching did absolutely nothing for them. Look at his top students, they were entirely unremarkable. Ouspensky ended his life in depression and anxiety. Bennett turned into a desperate quack. Madame de Salzmann turned into an uninteresting mediocrity. I don't doubt that Gurdjieff himself had remarkable qualities, but he was obviously some kind of spiritual prankster who was just fucking with a bunch of credulous Europeans and Russians.

>>13728681
Chaos Magick

>>13728821
Who said I don't believe in God? It has nothing to do with my argument regarding mystical methods. Belief in God is entirely unnecessary. Kindly bring some arguments or stfu

>>13728681
read anton lavey maybe get into chaos magic and or discordianism until you grow out of your atheism

>>13728829
>Belief in God is entirely unnecessary [for mysticism]
Wew. Sorry, I'll stfu now. I didn't realize the magnitude of brainletism I was dealing with.

>>13728823
Oh? Ouspensky having telepathic communion with Gurdjieff was just “nothing”? And that he ended his life in depression and anxiety is only one interpretation based on a narrow range of literature; other disciples and people around him near the end of his life claim interesting spiritual and psychological phenomena happening around his presence, and a sense of vast benediction on his very deathbed.

De Salzmann an “uninteresting mediocrity”? Spiritual success means your development is interesting and recognizable to everyone? I’d also apply this to Bennett. Behind the facade of being a “desperate quack” (a lot of genuine spiritual endeavor and grouping can seem like cults or insanity, admittedly), how do you know he hadn’t developed remarkable faculties?

Again, I’m not quite here to be a Gurdjieff cultist, but I feel obliged to point out he’s being underrated. I’ll be one of the first to admit many failings in him — yes, his students did not become ultimately enlightened. Yes, he was a heavy drinker and philanderer. Yes, his attempts to set up a foundation/organization to carry on his teachings degenerated into a shallow cult without the actual force of his own personality. Things aren’t black and white in spiritual development. There’s evidence that he completely turned around a lot of students’ lives, pushed them on to great inner development (which isn’t immediately recognizable on the surface), had a great love for mankind, besides plenty of sexy siddhis. I’ll have a pint with Gurdjieff before I’ll have a pint with an average man on the street (if he let me, of course).

>>13728856
>empirical evidence suggests it is theists, who discard their beliefs, once sufficient maturity has been reached

>>13728874
this is probably the case in the 18-22 year old social milieu in which you find yourself, but as you get older you will see that atheist identity was itself also a phase. Then again you could just stay a teenager forever, in which case I recommend getting into the insane clown posse

>>13728681
Try this,

http://www.simply-this.com/videos

I'm not OP and not an atheist but is there a chart for reading about mysticism and esotericism? I have read some basic Buddhist texts, Bhagavad Gita, and the Tao te Ching and have some basic experience with meditation. I feel a bit lost as to what to do or look for next

>>13728949
What are you looking for?

>>13728681
OP, you should read Robert Anton Wilson, specially Prometheus Rising

>>13729025
I'm not sure exactly. I suppose I'm looking for the truth of our existence and enlightenment. I have never read a book or text which has changed me profoundly.

>>13728681

>>13729074
try this:

https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>>13728857
No, you're the brainlet here. You can be atheist (not in the colloquial that is a denial of any and all spiritual belief) and practice mysticism. Buddhism, Taoism, and Jainism are all obviously atheistic religions (again, not colloquial) that have their own mystic practices. That anon is right that a belief in any gods are not a requirement. The question is, do you believe there is anything higher, transcendent, or more real than material existence? Also, OP and everybody else in this thread did a sloppy job in defining what they meant by atheism.

Georges Bataille is sometimes qualified as an atheist mystic.

>>13729358
No, sorry, you're actually the brainlet. Here's why:

>higher, transcendent, more real than material
What the heck do you think God *means*, if not this?

>>13729532
Not him, but there’s a lot more connotations to God than that.

>>13728697
This. If you’re an atheist and don’t want to be a degenerate then just live as if there was a God. You can exclude the fasting and prayer since your life is secular, for now, but just don’t be a faggot.

Masons , but asking for it is an oximoron

>>13729532
>being this mentally cucked by Abrahamism

>>13728681

Bataille's Summa Atheologica

>>13728681
Sailor moon lore

Unless I misunderstand your question and it is in fact a mundane one rather than one of interesting possibilities, which is possible, I suggest the works of Carl Jung.

>>13728681
>that are suited for atheist
all of them. you can entertain ideas without believing them. you can also benefit from expanding your horizons.

>>13728681
As soon as you admit the paranormal, what is the basis for Atheism?

>>13728681
How is mysticism compatible with atheism? Just stop being a faggot atheist and embrace theism.

>>13728868
not who you replied to but.

Thank you for your insight.
A small question, I'm getting really bad vibes from any modern Gurdjieff institution, as I am worried how diluted it has become with modern psycholigy and new-age bs.
I did hear some interesting things about the dances from people who participated.

>>13730031
>you can entertain ideas without believing them
that's philosophy. this is mysticism. your statement is not true under mysticism, as it is not merely stepping through logic to understand an idea. but rather a personal experience founded in truth. you can't willingly believe an untruth and find mystical experience there, unless God has mercy on you and gathers you back into the flock.

>>13728681
some Earth-based shit, unironically. read Native American literature and philosophy, but make sure it's written by actual Natives and not white pretendians.

>>13730160
proof?

>>13730160
ok fine, have the experience and see how your worldview holds up, no?

>>13730275
not me

>>13728681
sam harris

>>13728712
lol, if Gnostic or Hindu or whatever methods 'work' what does that mean? You get some kind of physical sensation or something? You see strange apparitions? Okay, cool, so you've cracked the egg and realized the spirit and the supernatural are real, but at the exact same time, you've laid your soul and intellect bare and wide-legged for rape by demons. Be careful. If you abandon the throne of the Living God, the throne does not remain empty long

>>13728681
https://discord.gg/zvhahty

ist juts wierd pcsychology

>>13730376
lol if you think the abrahamic god isn’t just an arch-uberdemon

>>13728681
Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra
William Blake's prophetic poems

atheism is too mystical for theists

atheism is too mystical for theists

>atheism is too mystical for theists
>666