It is often stated that the goal of mysticism is "unity with God." This is a somewhat misleading description as it seems to express a state or condition that a human being has, a positive attribute belonging to a person. Moreover, and this has been one argument applied by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages in their persecutions of mystics, it seems to imply that the person has become God, as if such a thing were possible.
Rather I would argue that mysticism is more a matter of the removal of that which is not God, that which interferes with the will of God. It is more a process of self-erasure, but not a self-erasure into nonexistence but a self-erasure into real existence, of which the self-interested Self and the world is but a shadow. Mystics of various religions do speak of such things as "nothingness" and "emptiness," but this is more a negation of the illusory world of concepts than a negation of reality. The mystic in fact embraces real reality and real truth in this "emptiness," and it is human concepts about reality that are in fact empty of reality.
I should first speak of the concept of mysticism itself: the concept of mysticism and the state of being a mystic are not the same thing. They bear the same resemblance as a person to their shadow, a meteor to its impact crater, the soul to the personality, or of God to the World. Mysticism is a concept and therefore unreal, but it is possible that by my crude drawing of stick figures in the sand I might convey something of use, so lets go with that.
Secondly, there are two concepts that go along with the first but are not synonymous or in some cases necessary to the first, which are quietism and asceticism. Quietism is really more a group of associated ideas rather than one idea, a grouping of ideas originally formulated by its opponents, the Catholic Church and its Inquisition. They lumped a number of related and (to them) objectionable ideas under one roof and called it Quietism. As often happens, some thus labeled adopted it too. One form of quietism is simply the idea that silent contemplation is of more real spiritual use than ritual and ceremony or specific prayers like the Hail Mary or the Lord's Prayer. While this is part of the dictionary definition of "quietism," that is not in my opinion a more complete understanding of the word, though certainly very compatible with it.
To understand quietism more completely, you have to understand a recurrent idea either implicit or explicit in much of the Old Testament and in some of the New as well, which is that the ego and will of Man does not serve God. Sometimes God is depicted as using human will, desire and ambition, but the human will is almost invariably described as itself evil. The good man is depicted as he who submits to God's will, not his own. The Gnostics and arguably the Gospel of John took this to its logical conclusion: that the world itself and Man in it is evil or under the dominion of evil, which is to say Man in his natural animal state is such. Man's will, desire, and usually his action in the world. Quietism is one logical response to understanding this truth: Quietism in this form is the abandonment of self-will and the abnegation of the self generally. Many mystics like Marguerite Porete took this to its conclusion and spoke of the annihilation of the Self in God.
Asceticism might seem to be a logical companion to Quietism and mysticism, but it is actually quite separable. Even very mainstream Catholics have practiced asceticism, like Pope Paul VI, members of Opus Dei, and even some Protestants like High Anglicans. Asceticism is to some extent implicit in most monastic orders. The purpose of asceticism to mystics is actually quite different. There are two kinds of asceticism: natural asceticism and unnatural or hard asceticism. In natural asceticism there is no desire to harm the body or not provide it what it needs, but rather to reduce the providing for those needs to the barest simplicity and minimalism while still providing the body what it needs and avoiding undue pain. Hard asceticism would be such practices as sleeping on a bed of nails or wearing a hairshirt or cilice under one's clothes, denial of the body's needs, extreme fasting and so on.
For mystics, the avoidance of undue will or desire or excess interference in the natural functioning of the world is the objective, not the mortification of the body itself or the imitation of the sufferings of Jesus or the uses to which it is put in mainstream Catholicism for instance. That being the case, natural asceticism, simplicity and minimalism is the objective. It should also be remembered that food for instance requires the taking of life or at least injury to living things, and doing so in excess of real need would be an unwarranted imposition of human will upon the world. It is actually the human will itself and not the body that is the target of ascetic principles in mysticism.
Concerning the matter of human self-will, it is an interesting question what this human will even is. In the Gospel of John and in other parts of the New Testament and in parts of the Old Testament, it is stated that nothing whatsoever happens apart from the will of God. Nothing, at all, no exceptions. In the Gospel of John, it is stated that it is not at all your individual choice as to whether you will be saved, but it was decided before you were born and before you did anything good or bad in life. In Exodus 33 God says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion (in other words it is not up to us.) In Isaiah 45 it is said:
Rather I would argue that mysticism is more a matter of the removal of that which is not God, that which interferes with the will of God. It is more a process of self-erasure, but not a self-erasure into nonexistence but a self-erasure into real existence, of which the self-interested Self and the world is but a shadow. Mystics of various religions do speak of such things as "nothingness" and "emptiness," but this is more a negation of the illusory world of concepts than a negation of reality. The mystic in fact embraces real reality and real truth in this "emptiness," and it is human concepts about reality that are in fact empty of reality.
I should first speak of the concept of mysticism itself: the concept of mysticism and the state of being a mystic are not the same thing. They bear the same resemblance as a person to their shadow, a meteor to its impact crater, the soul to the personality, or of God to the World. Mysticism is a concept and therefore unreal, but it is possible that by my crude drawing of stick figures in the sand I might convey something of use, so lets go with that.
Secondly, there are two concepts that go along with the first but are not synonymous or in some cases necessary to the first, which are quietism and asceticism. Quietism is really more a group of associated ideas rather than one idea, a grouping of ideas originally formulated by its opponents, the Catholic Church and its Inquisition. They lumped a number of related and (to them) objectionable ideas under one roof and called it Quietism. As often happens, some thus labeled adopted it too. One form of quietism is simply the idea that silent contemplation is of more real spiritual use than ritual and ceremony or specific prayers like the Hail Mary or the Lord's Prayer. While this is part of the dictionary definition of "quietism," that is not in my opinion a more complete understanding of the word, though certainly very compatible with it.
To understand quietism more completely, you have to understand a recurrent idea either implicit or explicit in much of the Old Testament and in some of the New as well, which is that the ego and will of Man does not serve God. Sometimes God is depicted as using human will, desire and ambition, but the human will is almost invariably described as itself evil. The good man is depicted as he who submits to God's will, not his own. The Gnostics and arguably the Gospel of John took this to its logical conclusion: that the world itself and Man in it is evil or under the dominion of evil, which is to say Man in his natural animal state is such. Man's will, desire, and usually his action in the world. Quietism is one logical response to understanding this truth: Quietism in this form is the abandonment of self-will and the abnegation of the self generally. Many mystics like Marguerite Porete took this to its conclusion and spoke of the annihilation of the Self in God.
Asceticism might seem to be a logical companion to Quietism and mysticism, but it is actually quite separable. Even very mainstream Catholics have practiced asceticism, like Pope Paul VI, members of Opus Dei, and even some Protestants like High Anglicans. Asceticism is to some extent implicit in most monastic orders. The purpose of asceticism to mystics is actually quite different. There are two kinds of asceticism: natural asceticism and unnatural or hard asceticism. In natural asceticism there is no desire to harm the body or not provide it what it needs, but rather to reduce the providing for those needs to the barest simplicity and minimalism while still providing the body what it needs and avoiding undue pain. Hard asceticism would be such practices as sleeping on a bed of nails or wearing a hairshirt or cilice under one's clothes, denial of the body's needs, extreme fasting and so on.
For mystics, the avoidance of undue will or desire or excess interference in the natural functioning of the world is the objective, not the mortification of the body itself or the imitation of the sufferings of Jesus or the uses to which it is put in mainstream Catholicism for instance. That being the case, natural asceticism, simplicity and minimalism is the objective. It should also be remembered that food for instance requires the taking of life or at least injury to living things, and doing so in excess of real need would be an unwarranted imposition of human will upon the world. It is actually the human will itself and not the body that is the target of ascetic principles in mysticism.
Concerning the matter of human self-will, it is an interesting question what this human will even is. In the Gospel of John and in other parts of the New Testament and in parts of the Old Testament, it is stated that nothing whatsoever happens apart from the will of God. Nothing, at all, no exceptions. In the Gospel of John, it is stated that it is not at all your individual choice as to whether you will be saved, but it was decided before you were born and before you did anything good or bad in life. In Exodus 33 God says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion (in other words it is not up to us.) In Isaiah 45 it is said:
those who are nothing but potsherds
among the potsherds on the ground.
Does the clay say to the potter,
‘What are you making?’
Romans 9 is essentially a consolidation of quotes from the Old Testament related to this sovereignty of God. Because of this, some Christian mystics believe that everything that happens to one, everything whatsoever good or bad that happens, is directly due to the will of God and is ultimately meant for our improvement. In this context then, what is human will? It is nothing more or less than our disagreement with God, our disagreement with what God has provided us. Sometimes God allows this inner dissent to manifest in action, and sometimes not, but this is much in keeping with a true understanding of what a human being truly has power over. A human being does not have unrestricted power over the world or his circumstances or anything in the world, or even over his own welfare, but he does have unrestricted power over his own internal will, his assent or disagreement, his yea or nay within himself. So for mystics of this bent, the abnegation of the will is merely to always say "yea" to God, which would mean saying "yea" to whatever circumstances you find yourself in since they are always given to you by God. So fundamentally human will would be then nothing more or less than the decision to turn towards or away from God. You may think you are deciding to eat that hamburger or buy that new car, but that is not fundamentally what you are doing.
