The ineffable

That there is a mystic tradition in most religions in which the religious adept directly connects or yokes with an ineffable state of being—pointing above all to the undying—certainly begs the consideration that the mystic has connected with something very much universal which can’t even be called “God”.  Indeed, ‘ineffability’ is the key here, so that the speakable cannot apply which includes “God”.  

As we might judge, the so-called mystical experience even goes beyond language which is to say that while the finger can point to the moon, or we can write the word “moon” on a piece of paper, neither the finger nor the word we write can stand for the moon.  In this sense the finger or the word’s only purpose is to get our attention to look beyond.  

So far we might draw from this that God for the mystic is not God, nor is Tathagata the Tathagata for the Buddhist mystic.  Still, both the Christian mystic and the Buddhist mystic might have yoked with the very same thing.  Those who would argue against this do so from an effable or speakable difference but certainly not from the mystical experience itself.

Comments

[Capt.Knuckle&Flapjack]

Flapjack wanted to comment his motto is

"F-ing the ineffable since 1968"

...but Capt. K'nuckle says that isnt topical to discussing metaphysics.