Angel Holmes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ladytetra777) wrote2024-05-22 10:27 am
ladytetra777) wrote2024-05-22 10:27 am
Entry tags:
The Varieties of Religious Experience, Lectures VI and VII
["The Sick Soul" is spread across two lectures, but combined in one chapter in the CLC edition of the text.]
These two lectures examine religious experiences of dis-ease, as James says, "Here is the real core of the religious problem: "Help! help!" (162). As there is a positive religious joy which affirms a sense of being greater than physical waking life, there is a negative religious melancholia which detracts from the momentary physical being when the incalculable vastness of the divine tugs one away from physical life. James quotes Tolstoy during a bout of spiritual sickness, "It cannot be said exactly that I wished to kill myself, for the force which drew me away form life was fuller, more powerful, more general, than any mere desire," (153). In "The Sick Soul," James discusses an impairment between body and spirit manifesting as an imbalance that manifests as symptoms ranging from long-term depression to suicide.
What is the soul sick of? The world, as James states this "...mark[s] the conclusion of the once-born period, and... leave[s] of an unreconciled contradiction and seek[s] no higher unity" (144). Therefore, we can say the sick soul is subject to more than imbalance; it is straying from a path in pursuit of greater divine union and self-reflection. It is here I am reminded of what Hill says in "Outwitting the Devil" about drifters, that people who veer off their purpose are subject to their own devil and subject to the negativity inherent under a dualistic paradigm of existence as spiritual beings in physical bodies.
James has further commentary on negativity formulated as the problem of evil in these lectures, critiquing a monistic approach to reality. He examines the duality present in the works of Hegel, stating that for Hegel reality is a totality, that evil is an irrational entity negated as waste by the rational process of this totality in its efforts to perfect an ideal (130-133). The problem here becomes a contrast of this ideal from what is actual, which I suspect is another way to say Hegel's reasoning is flawed in trying to ignore the parts of reality that do not fit neatly within his system. Hegel's theory is one of a process that modifies itself after each progressive step, but this process fails to encompass all there is.
For James, it is not about good and evil, it is about nonjudgment (144). A footnote offered on this page states that the wiseman is content, suggesting balance is the check to religious happiness and religious melancholy. As someone once heavily devoted to Hegelian studies, this chapter sheds light on his philosophy that I had not previously considered: the entire dialectical motion falls apart in a state of non-judgement. The negation cannot operation without a negativity to be overcome; contentment thus sublating both the positive and negative and ceasing movement for it is no longer necessary upon achieving that contentment.
Further, I am questioning my own monolithic paradigm here. If James is suggesting differentiation over totality, that different states of spirit "are" rather than "are part of," there is a peace in seeing one can strive for contentment rather than accomplishing some alchemical Great Work as if its success or failure is a direct imperative of the soul. My thoughts are that this is moving past duality in a way that can be discussed; a limited natural theology that, as I previously discussed, brings to mind the writings of Scotus.
There is an irony in reflecting upon these two lectures for me personally. I am not seeking "enlightenment" in that I don't think such a term practically exists, but reframing it as "contentment" seems to point toward a non-dualistic state. Maybe this is like, but not analogous to, the Garden of Eden. If "good" and "evil" are poles, then contentment collapses them. There is no judgment, but acknowledgement, of the flux of human experience.
These two lectures examine religious experiences of dis-ease, as James says, "Here is the real core of the religious problem: "Help! help!" (162). As there is a positive religious joy which affirms a sense of being greater than physical waking life, there is a negative religious melancholia which detracts from the momentary physical being when the incalculable vastness of the divine tugs one away from physical life. James quotes Tolstoy during a bout of spiritual sickness, "It cannot be said exactly that I wished to kill myself, for the force which drew me away form life was fuller, more powerful, more general, than any mere desire," (153). In "The Sick Soul," James discusses an impairment between body and spirit manifesting as an imbalance that manifests as symptoms ranging from long-term depression to suicide.
What is the soul sick of? The world, as James states this "...mark[s] the conclusion of the once-born period, and... leave[s] of an unreconciled contradiction and seek[s] no higher unity" (144). Therefore, we can say the sick soul is subject to more than imbalance; it is straying from a path in pursuit of greater divine union and self-reflection. It is here I am reminded of what Hill says in "Outwitting the Devil" about drifters, that people who veer off their purpose are subject to their own devil and subject to the negativity inherent under a dualistic paradigm of existence as spiritual beings in physical bodies.
James has further commentary on negativity formulated as the problem of evil in these lectures, critiquing a monistic approach to reality. He examines the duality present in the works of Hegel, stating that for Hegel reality is a totality, that evil is an irrational entity negated as waste by the rational process of this totality in its efforts to perfect an ideal (130-133). The problem here becomes a contrast of this ideal from what is actual, which I suspect is another way to say Hegel's reasoning is flawed in trying to ignore the parts of reality that do not fit neatly within his system. Hegel's theory is one of a process that modifies itself after each progressive step, but this process fails to encompass all there is.
For James, it is not about good and evil, it is about nonjudgment (144). A footnote offered on this page states that the wiseman is content, suggesting balance is the check to religious happiness and religious melancholy. As someone once heavily devoted to Hegelian studies, this chapter sheds light on his philosophy that I had not previously considered: the entire dialectical motion falls apart in a state of non-judgement. The negation cannot operation without a negativity to be overcome; contentment thus sublating both the positive and negative and ceasing movement for it is no longer necessary upon achieving that contentment.
Further, I am questioning my own monolithic paradigm here. If James is suggesting differentiation over totality, that different states of spirit "are" rather than "are part of," there is a peace in seeing one can strive for contentment rather than accomplishing some alchemical Great Work as if its success or failure is a direct imperative of the soul. My thoughts are that this is moving past duality in a way that can be discussed; a limited natural theology that, as I previously discussed, brings to mind the writings of Scotus.
There is an irony in reflecting upon these two lectures for me personally. I am not seeking "enlightenment" in that I don't think such a term practically exists, but reframing it as "contentment" seems to point toward a non-dualistic state. Maybe this is like, but not analogous to, the Garden of Eden. If "good" and "evil" are poles, then contentment collapses them. There is no judgment, but acknowledgement, of the flux of human experience.