[VMN]⇒ Download Free Mystics William Harmless 9780195300390 Books

Mystics William Harmless 9780195300390 Books

Download As PDF : Mystics William Harmless 9780195300390 Books

Mystics William Harmless 9780195300390 Books

This book is an instructive introduction into several important mystics. But it also seemed to me a book flawed in its methodology which proposes general conclusions about the nature of mysticism on the basis of a very narrow spectrum of case studies. First to the instructive part: Instead of giving a general survey of mysticism, Harmless concentrates on eight case studies (six Christian mystics, one Sufi and one Zen mystic). His approach works very well and I have learned a lot, particularly from his treatment of the Christian mystics that are closest to his scholarly expertise (the early church fathers). This is his primary focus and in this he succeeds.

In addition, however, H. uses these case studies to set off modern scholarship on mysticism from older approaches, especially the approach that William James popularized 100 years ago. James becomes H.'s permanent boogieman, and the endless, repetitious stabs against him seem increasingly tedious and often rather unfair. What H. wants to emphasize is that mystical experiences are never purely individualistic achievements by solitary religious geniuses but are always firmly grounded in coherent religious traditions, clearly circumscribed communities and texts, ritualistic performances, linguistic contexts etc. True enough for the cases he presents us with. But let's also acknowledge that H. makes it very easy for himself to deduce these conclusions by choosing his case studies from a conveniently narrow spectrum: Six of the eight mystics were monks and one was a nun, and seven of the eight lived before 1328. Are these cases really representative enough to come to such general conclusions? Thomas Merton, the one mystic of today discussed by H. (more individualistic, more eclectic across several mystical traditions) clearly shows the first cracks in H.'s self-assured claims. H. regrets that he did not have time and space to include Protestant mystics. That's a real pity. What would the inclusion of a man like the Quaker George Fox or of William Blake or Emanuel Swedenborg, or of the German cobbler Jacob Boehme or the French intellectual Simone Weil have done to his views? There is no doubt that coherent religious traditions, religious communities, and ritualistic performances play less of a role in modern mystical experiences. H.'s view of mysticism might very likely have to be substantially modified once he allows a fuller spectrum to be considered.


Tags : Mystics [William Harmless] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Mystics are path-breaking religious practitioners who claim to have experience the infinite, word-defying Mystery that is God. Many have been gifted writers with an uncanny ability to communicate the great realities of life with both a theologian's precision and a poet's lyricism. They use words to jolt us into recognizing ineffable mysteries surging beneath the surface of our lives and within the depths of our hearts and,William Harmless,Mystics,Oxford University Press,0195300394,Mysticism.,Mystics,Mystics.,Christian Theology - History,Language Arts & Disciplines : Linguistics - General,Language Arts & DisciplinesLinguistics - General,Linguistics - General,Mysticism,Non-Fiction,RELIGION Christian Theology History,RELIGION Mysticism,Religion,Religion & Theology | Mysticism,Religion - InspirationalSpirituality,Religion : Christian Theology - History,ReligionChristian Theology - History,ReligionEthics,ScholarlyUndergraduate,UNIVERSITY PRESS,United States,LAN009000,REL047000

Mystics William Harmless 9780195300390 Books Reviews

I picked this book for its title, I never really understood what was meant by "Mystic" it always conjured up some kind of mysterious happening by an individual with magic powers. So, here I am, better informed and glad about it. This may not be for everyone, but if you are not sure about the phrase "Mystics" this is an eye opening read.
I've been teaching college-level courses on mysticism for a lot of years, and I've used lots of different secondary commentaries to try to help students (and myself!) better appreciate the writings of the mystics we read. But I've never quite been satisfied with any of them.

Now, Jesuit scholar William Harmless (what a wonderful name!) has published a book on mysticism (which he modestly calls an introduction) that overwhelms me with its insight and method. Harmless adopts what he calls a case study approach. Instead of talking in general terms about mysticism and then illustrating the general analysis with specific references to individual mystics--an enterprise that has obvious procrustean dangers--he prefers to focus on individual mystics, fulling exploring their biographies and historical contexts as well as their writings, and letting the case studies guide the general discussion. His concern not to "impose some predefined, extrinsic framework" (p. 225) on the mystics he explores--Merton, Bernard of Clairvaux, Hildegard of Bingen, Eckhart, Evagrius Ponticus, Rumi, and Dogen--really does invite the reader to experience the richness of their words and experiences, rather than too quickly tucking them into neat conceptual pigeonholes.

Harmless' final chapter, in which he explores the question of how best to define mysticism, is the single best short analysis I've ever read. Consistent with his fondness for the case study method, Harmless argues for an understanding of mysticism that recognizes both religious pluralism and changing historical concepts--that recognizes, in other words, mysticism as a "macro-concept" that avoids the "bloating" that comes either from seeing it as the experiential foundation of religion in general or from insisting that all mystical experiences are cut from the same cloth. He also has some interesting things to say about the boundaries of mystical experience--that is, whether a nonreligious one is possible.

Harmless ends his book by reminding us of Rahner's claim that mystics, extraordinary hearers of the Word who they are, remind the rest of us that we likewise are called to be hearers. "For Rahner," writes Harmless, "mystics matter because they are paradigms of the human condition. They make clear a God who reveals God's self" (p. 268).

This book, I'm confident, will be THE text on mysticism for some years to come. We're all greatly in Harmless' debt.
The research is excellent. But it is limited to the Christian experiences, except for the fine chapter on William James.
This book is an instructive introduction into several important mystics. But it also seemed to me a book flawed in its methodology which proposes general conclusions about the nature of mysticism on the basis of a very narrow spectrum of case studies. First to the instructive part Instead of giving a general survey of mysticism, Harmless concentrates on eight case studies (six Christian mystics, one Sufi and one Zen mystic). His approach works very well and I have learned a lot, particularly from his treatment of the Christian mystics that are closest to his scholarly expertise (the early church fathers). This is his primary focus and in this he succeeds.

In addition, however, H. uses these case studies to set off modern scholarship on mysticism from older approaches, especially the approach that William James popularized 100 years ago. James becomes H.'s permanent boogieman, and the endless, repetitious stabs against him seem increasingly tedious and often rather unfair. What H. wants to emphasize is that mystical experiences are never purely individualistic achievements by solitary religious geniuses but are always firmly grounded in coherent religious traditions, clearly circumscribed communities and texts, ritualistic performances, linguistic contexts etc. True enough for the cases he presents us with. But let's also acknowledge that H. makes it very easy for himself to deduce these conclusions by choosing his case studies from a conveniently narrow spectrum Six of the eight mystics were monks and one was a nun, and seven of the eight lived before 1328. Are these cases really representative enough to come to such general conclusions? Thomas Merton, the one mystic of today discussed by H. (more individualistic, more eclectic across several mystical traditions) clearly shows the first cracks in H.'s self-assured claims. H. regrets that he did not have time and space to include Protestant mystics. That's a real pity. What would the inclusion of a man like the Quaker George Fox or of William Blake or Emanuel Swedenborg, or of the German cobbler Jacob Boehme or the French intellectual Simone Weil have done to his views? There is no doubt that coherent religious traditions, religious communities, and ritualistic performances play less of a role in modern mystical experiences. H.'s view of mysticism might very likely have to be substantially modified once he allows a fuller spectrum to be considered.