This Project Gutenberg EBook was produced by Distributed
Proofreaders
Mysticism in English Literature
By Caroline F. E. Spurgeon
"Many are the thyrsus-bearers, but few are the mystics"
Phædo
Note
The variety of applications of the term "mysticism" has forced
me to restrict myself here to a discussion of that philosophical
type of mysticism which concerns itself with questions of
ultimate reality. My aim, too, has been to consider this subject
in connection with great English writers. I have had, therefore,
to exclude, with regret, the literature of America, so rich in
mystical thought.
I wish to thank Mr John Murray for kind permission to make use
of an article of mine which appeared in the Quarterly
Review, and also Dr Ward and Mr Waller for similar permission
with regard to certain passages in a chapter of the Cambridge
History of English Literature, vol. ix.
I am also indebted to Mr Bertram Dobell, Messrs Longmans,
Green, Mrs Coventry Patmore and Mr Francis Meynell for most
kindly allowing me to quote from the works respectively of Thomas
Traherne, Richard Jefferies, Coventry Patmore, and Francis
Thompson.
C.F.E.S.
April 1913.
Contents
I. Introduction
Definition of Mysticism. The Early Mystical Writers. Plato.
Plotinus. Chronological Sketch of Mystical Thought in
England.
II. Love and Beauty Mystics
Shelley, Rossetti, Browning, Coventry Patmore, and Keats.
III. Nature Mystics
Henry Vaughan, Wordsworth, Richard Jefferies.
IV. Philosophical Mystics
(i) Poets.—Donne, Traherne, Emily Brontë,
Tennyson.
(ii) Prose Writers.—William Law, Burke,
Coleridge, Carlyle.
V. Devotional and Religious Mystics
The Early English Writers: Richard Rolle and Julian; Crashawe,
Herbert, and Christopher Harvey; Blake and Francis Thompson.
Bibliography
Mysticism in English Literature
Chapter I
Introduction
Mysticism is a term so irresponsibly applied in English that
it has become the first duty of those who use it to explain what
they mean by it. The Concise Oxford Dictionary (1911),
after defining a mystic as "one who believes in spiritual
apprehension of truths beyond the understanding," adds, "whence
mysticism (n.) (often contempt)." Whatever may be the
precise force of the remark in brackets, it is unquestionably
true that mysticism is often used in a semi-contemptuous way to
denote vaguely any kind of occultism or spiritualism, or any
specially curious or fantastic views about God and the
universe.
The word itself was originally taken over by the
Neo-platonists from the Greek mysteries, where the name of
μύστης given to the initiate,
probably arose from the fact that he was one who was gaining a
knowledge of divine things about which he must keep his mouth
shut (μύω = close lips or eyes). Hence the
association of secrecy or "mystery" which still clings round the
word.
Two facts in connection with mysticism are undeniable whatever
it may be, and whatever part it is destined to play in the
development of thought and of knowledge. In the first place, it
is the leading characteristic of some of the greatest thinkers of
the world—of the founders of the Eastern religions of Plato
and Plotinus, of Eckhart and Bruno, of Spinoza, Goethe, and
Hegel. Secondly, no one has ever been a lukewarm, an indifferent,
or an unhappy mystic. If a man has this particular temperament,
his mysticism is the very centre of his being: it is the flame
which feeds his whole life; and he is intensely and supremely
happy just so far as he is steeped in it.
Mysticism is, in truth, a temper rather than a doctrine, an
atmosphere rather than a system of philosophy. Various mystical
thinkers have contributed fresh aspects of Truth as they saw her,
for they have caught glimpses of her face at different angles,
transfigured by diverse emotions, so that their testimony, and in
some respects their views, are dissimilar to the point of
contradiction. Wordsworth, for instance, gained his revelation of
divinity through Nature, and through Nature alone; whereas to
Blake "Nature was a hindrance," and Imagination the only reality.
But all alike agree in one respect, in one passionate assertion,
and this is that unity underlies diversity. This, their
starting-point and their goal, is the basic fact of mysticism,
which, in its widest sense, may be described as an attitude of
mind founded upon an intuitive or experienced conviction of
unity, of oneness, of alikeness in all things. From this source
springs all mystical thought, and the mystic, of whatever age or
country, would say in the words of Krishna—
There is true knowledge. Learn thou it is this:
To see one changeless Life in all the Lives,
And in the Separate, One Inseparable.
The Bhagavad-Gîtâ, Book 18.
This fundamental belief in unity leads naturally to the
further belief that all things about us are but forms or
manifestations of the one divine life, and that these phenomena
are fleeting and impermanent, although the spirit which informs
them is immortal and endures. In other words, it leads to the
belief that "the Ideal is the only Real."
Further, if unity lies at the root of things, man must have
some share of the nature of God, for he is a spark of the Divine.
Consequently, man is capable of knowing God through this godlike
part of his own nature, that is, through his soul or spirit. For
the mystic believes that as the intellect is given us to
apprehend material things, so the spirit is given us to apprehend
spiritual things, and that to disregard the spirit in spiritual
matters, and to trust to reason is as foolish as if a carpenter,
about to begin a piece of work, were deliberately to reject his
keenest and sharpest tool. The methods of mental and spiritual
knowledge are entirely different. For we know a thing mentally by
looking at it from outside, by comparing it with other things, by
analysing and defining it, whereas we can know a thing
spiritually only by becoming it. We must be the thing
itself, and not merely talk about it or look at it. We must be in
love if we are to know what love is; we must be musicians if we
are to know what music is; we must be godlike if we are to know
what God is. For, in Porphyry's words: "Like is known only by
like, and the condition of all knowledge is that the subject
should become like to the object." So that to the mystic, whether
he be philosopher, poet, artist, or priest, the aim of life is to
become like God, and thus to attain to union with the Divine.
Hence, for him, life is a continual advance, a ceaseless
aspiration; and reality or truth is to the seeker after it a
vista ever expanding and charged with ever deeper meaning. John
Smith, the Cambridge Platonist, has summed up the mystic position
and desire in one brief sentence, when he says, "Such as men
themselves are, such will God Himself seem to them to be." For,
as it takes two to communicate the truth, one to speak and one to
hear, so our knowledge of God is precisely and accurately limited
by our capacity to receive Him. "Simple people," says Eckhart,
"conceive that we are to see God as if He stood on that side and
we on this. It is not so: God and I are one in the act of my
perceiving Him."
This sense of unity leads to another belief, though it is one
not always consistently or definitely stated by all mystics. It
is implied by Plato when he says, "All knowledge is
recollection." This is the belief in pre-existence or persistent
life, the belief that our souls are immortal, and no more came
into existence when we were born than they will cease to exist
when our bodies disintegrate. The idea is familiar in
Wordsworth's Ode on the Intimations of Immortality.
Finally, the mystic holds these views because he has lived
through an experience which has forced him to this attitude of
mind. This is his distinguishing mark, this is what
differentiates him alike from the theologian, the logician, the
rationalist philosopher, and the man of science, for he bases his
belief, not on revelation, logic, reason, or demonstrated facts,
but on feeling, on intuitive inner knowledge.
He has felt, he has seen, and he is therefore convinced; but
his experience does not convince any one else. The mystic is
somewhat in the position of a man who, in a world of blind men,
has suddenly been granted sight, and who, gazing at the sunrise,
and overwhelmed by the glory of it, tries, however falteringly,
to convey to his fellows what he sees. They, naturally, would be
sceptical about it, and would be inclined to say that he is
talking foolishly and incoherently. But the simile is not
altogether parallel. There is this difference. The mystic is not
alone; all through the ages we have the testimony of men and
women to whom this vision has been granted, and the record of
what they have seen is amazingly similar, considering the
disparity of personality and circumstances. And further, the
world is not peopled with totally blind men. The mystics would
never hold the audience they do hold, were it not that the vast
majority of people have in themselves what William James has
called a "mystical germ" which makes response to their
message.
James's description of his own position in this matter, and
his feeling for a "Beyond," is one to which numberless
"unmystical" people would subscribe. He compares it to a tune
that is always singing in the back of his mind, but which he can
never identify nor whistle nor get rid of. "It is," he says,
"very vague, and impossible to describe or put into words....
Especially at times of moral crisis it comes to me, as the sense
of an unknown something backing me up. It is most indefinite, to
be sure, and rather faint. And yet I know that if it should cease
there would be a great hush, a great void in my
life."[1]
This sensation, which many people experience vaguely and
intermittently, and especially at times of emotional exaltation,
would seem to be the first glimmerings of that secret power
which, with the mystics, is so finely developed and sustained
that it becomes their definite faculty of vision. We have as yet
no recognised name for this faculty, and it has been variously
called "transcendental feeling," "imagination," "mystic reason,"
"cosmic consciousness," "divine sagacity," "ecstasy," or
"vision," all these meaning the same thing. But although it lacks
a common name, we have ample testimony to its existence, the
testimony of the greatest teachers, philosophers, and poets of
the world, who describe to us in strangely similar
language—
That serene and blessed mood
In which ... the breath of this corporeal frame,
And even the motion of our human blood,
Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
In body, and become a living soul:
While with an eye made quiet by the power
Of harmony, and the deep power of joy, We see into the life of
things. Tintern Abbey.
"Harmony" and "Joy," it may be noted, are the two words used
most constantly by those who have experienced this vision.
The mystic reverses the ordinary methods of reasoning: he must
believe before he can know. As it is put in the Theologia
Germanica, "He who would know before he believeth cometh
never to true knowledge." Just as the sense of touch is not the
faculty concerned with realising the beauty of the sunrise, so
the intellect is not the faculty concerned with spiritual
knowledge, and ordinary intellectual methods of proof, therefore,
or of argument, the mystic holds, are powerless and futile before
these questions; for, in the words of Tennyson's Ancient
Sage—
Thou canst not prove the Nameless, O my son,
Nor canst thou prove the world thou movest in:
Thou canst not prove that thou art body alone,
Nor canst thou prove that thou art spirit alone,
Nor canst thou prove that thou art both in one:
Thou canst not prove thou art immortal, no,
Nor yet that thou art mortal—nay, my son,
Thou canst not prove that I who speak with thee
Am not thyself in converse with thyself,
For nothing worthy proving can be proven,
Nor yet disproven.
Symbolism is of immense importance in mysticism; indeed,
symbolism and mythology are, as it were, the language of the
mystic. This necessity for symbolism is an integral part of the
belief in unity; for the essence of true symbolism rests on the
belief that all things in Nature have something in common,
something in which they are really alike. In order to be a true
symbol, a thing must be partly the same as that which it
symbolises. Thus, human love is symbolic of divine love, because,
although working in another plane, it is governed by similar laws
and gives rise to similar results; or falling leaves are a symbol
of human mortality, because they are examples of the same law
which operates through all manifestation of life. Some of the
most illuminating notes ever written on the nature of symbolism
are in a short paper by R. L. Nettleship,[2] where he defines true mysticism as "the
consciousness that everything which we experience, every 'fact,'
is an element and only an element in 'the fact'; i.e. that, in
being what it is, it is significant or symbolic of more." In
short, every truth apprehended by finite intelligence must by its
very nature only be the husk of a deeper truth, and by the aid of
symbolism we are often enabled to catch a reflection of a truth
which we are not capable of apprehending in any other way.
Nettleship points out, for instance, that bread can only be
itself, can only be food, by entering into something else,
assimilating and being assimilated, and that the more it loses
itself (what it began by being) the more it "finds itself" (what
it is intended to be). If we follow carefully the analysis
Nettleship makes of the action of bread in the physical world, we
can see that to the man of mystic temper it throws more light
than do volumes of sermons on what seems sometimes a hard saying,
and what is at the same time the ultimate mystical counsel, "He
that loveth his life shall lose it."
It is worth while, in this connection, to ponder the constant
use Christ makes of nature symbolism, drawing the attention of
His hearers to the analogies in the law we see working around us
to the same law working in the spiritual world. The yearly
harvest, the sower and his seed, the leaven in the loaf, the
grain of mustard-seed, the lilies of the field, the action of
fire, worms, moth, rust, bread, wine, and water, the mystery of
the wind, unseen and yet felt—each one of these is shown to
contain and exemplify a great and abiding truth.
This is the attitude, these are the things, which lie at the
heart of mysticism. In the light of this, nothing in the world is
trivial, nothing is unimportant nothing is common or unclean. It
is the feeling that Blake has crystallised in the lines:
To see a world in a grain of sand
And a Heaven in a wild flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.
The true mystic then, in the full sense of the term, is one
who knows there is unity under diversity at the centre of
all existence, and he knows it by the most perfect of all tests
for the person concerned, because he has felt it. True
mysticism—and this cannot be over-emphasised—is an
experience and a life. It is an experimental science, and, as
Patmore has said, it is as incommunicable to those who have not
experienced it as is the odour of a violet to those who have
never smelt one. In its highest consummation it is the supreme
adventure of the soul: to use the matchless words of Plotinus, it
is "the flight of the Alone to the Alone."
As distinguished, therefore, from the mystical thinker or
philosopher, the practical mystic has direct knowledge of a truth
which for him is absolute. He consequently has invariably acted
upon this knowledge, as inevitably as the blind man to whom sight
had been granted would make use of his eyes.
Among English writers and poets the only two who fulfil this
strict definition of a mystic are Wordsworth and Blake. But we
are not here concerned primarily with a study of those great
souls who are mystics in the full and supreme sense of the word.
For an examination of their lives and vision Evelyn Underhill's
valuable book should be consulted. Our object is to examine very
briefly the chief English writers—men of letters and
poets—whose inmost principle is rooted in mysticism, or
whose work is on the whole so permeated by mystical thought that
their attitude of mind is not fully to be understood apart from
it.
Naturally it is with the poets we find the most complete and
continuous expression of mystical thought and inspiration.
Naturally, because it has ever been the habit of the English race
to clothe their profoundest thought and their highest aspiration
in poetic form. We do not possess a Plato, a Kant, or a
Descartes, but we have Shakespeare and Wordsworth and Browning.
And further, as the essence of mysticism is to believe that
everything we see and know is symbolic of something greater,
mysticism is on one side the poetry of life. For poetry, also,
consists in finding resemblances, and universalises the
particulars with which it deals. Hence the utterances of the
poets on mystical philosophy are peculiarly valuable. The
philosopher approaches philosophy directly, the poet obliquely;
but the indirect teaching of a poet touches us more profoundly
than the direct lesson of a moral treatise, because the latter
appeals principally to our reason, whereas the poet touches our
"transcendental feeling."
So it is that mysticism underlies the thought of most of our
great poets, of nearly all our greatest poets, if we except
Chaucer, Dryden, Pope, and Byron. Shakespeare must be left on one
side, first, because the dramatic form does not lend itself to
the expression of mystical feeling, and secondly, because even in
the poems there is little real mysticism, though there is much of
the fashionable Platonism. Shakespeare is metaphysical rather
than mystical, the difference being, roughly, that the
metaphysician seeks to know the beginnings or causes of things,
whereas the mystic feels he knows the end of things, that all
nature is leading up to union with the One.
We shall find that mystical thought, and the mystical
attitude, are curiously persistent in English literature, and
that although it seems out of keeping with our "John Bull"
character, the English race has a marked tendency towards
mysticism. What we do find lacking in England is the purely
philosophical and speculative spirit of the detached and
unprejudiced seeker after truth. The English mind is
anti-speculative; it cares little for metaphysics; it prefers
theology and a given authority. English mystics have, as a rule,
dealt little with the theoretical side of mysticism, the aspect
for instance with which Plotinus largely deals. They have been
mainly practical mystics, such as William Law. Those of the poets
who have consciously had a system and desired to impart it, have
done so from the practical point of view, urging, like
Wordsworth, the importance of contemplation and meditation, or,
like Blake, the value of cultivating the imagination; and in both
cases enforcing the necessity of cleansing the inner life, if we
are to become conscious of our divine nature and our great
heritage.
For the sake of clearness, this thought may first be traced
very briefly as it appears chronologically; it will, however, be
considered in detail, not in order of time, but according to the
special aspect of Being through which the writer felt most in
touch with the divine life. For mystics, unlike other thinkers,
scientific or philosophical, have little chronological
development, since "mystic truths can neither age nor die." So
much is this the case that passages of Plotinus and Tennyson, of
Boehme and Law, of Eckhart and Browning, may be placed side by
side and be scarcely distinguishable in thought. Yet as the race
evolves, certain avenues of sensation seem to become more widely
opened up. This is noticeable with regard to Nature. Love,
Beauty, Wisdom, and Devotion, these have been well-trodden paths
to the One ever since the days of Plato and Plotinus; but, with
the great exception of St Francis of Assisi and his immediate
followers, we have to wait for more modern times before we find
the intense feeling of the Divinity in Nature which we associate
with the name of Wordsworth. It is in the emphasis of this aspect
of the mystic vision that English writers are supreme. Henry
Vaughan, Wordsworth, Browning, Richard Jefferies, Francis
Thompson, and a host of other poet-seers have crystallised in
immortal words this illuminated vision of the world.
The thought which has been described as mystical has its roots
in the East, in the great Oriental religions. The mysterious
"secret" taught by the Upanishads is that the soul or spiritual
consciousness is the only source of true knowledge. The Hindu
calls the soul the "seer" or the "knower," and thinks of it as a
great eye in the centre of his being, which, if he concentrates
his attention upon it, is able to look outwards and to gaze upon
Reality. The soul is capable of this because in essence it is one
with Brahman, the universal soul. The apparent separation is an
illusion wrought by matter. Hence, to the Hindu, matter is an
obstruction and a deception, and the Eastern mystic despises and
rejects and subdues all that is material, and bends all his
faculties on realising his spiritual consciousness, and dwelling
in that.
This type of thought certainly existed to some extent in both
Greece and Egypt before the Christian era. Much of Plato's
thought is mystical in essence, and that which be points out to
be the motive force of the philosophic mind is also the motive
force of the mystic, namely, the element of attraction, and so of
love towards the thing which is akin to him. The illustration of
the dog being philosophic because he is angry with a stranger but
welcomes his friend,[3] though at
first it may seem, like many of Plato's illustrations,
far-fetched or fanciful, in truth goes to the very root of his
idea. Familiarity, akinness, is the basis of attraction and
affection. The desire of wisdom, or the love of beauty, is
therefore nothing but the yearning of the soul to join itself to
what is akin to it. This is the leading conception of the two
great mystical dialogues, the Symposium and the Phædrus. In
the former, Socrates, in the words of the stranger prophetess
Diotima, traces the path along which the soul must travel, and
points out the steps of the ladder to be climbed in order to
attain to union with the Divine. From beauty of form and body we
rise to beauty of mind and spirit, and so to the Beauty of God
Himself.
He who under the influence of true love rising upward from
these begins to see that beauty, is not far from the end. And the
true order of going or being led by another to the things of
love, is to use the beauties of earth as steps along which he
mounts upwards for the sake of that other beauty, going from one
to two, and from two to all fair forms, and from fair forms to
fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until
from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty,
and at last knows what the essence of beauty is. This ... is that
life above all others which man should live, in the contemplation
of beauty absolute.[4]
That is a passage whose music re-echoes through many pages of
English literature, especially in the poems of Spenser, Shelley,
and Keats.
Plato may therefore be regarded as the source of speculative
mysticism in Europe, but it is Plotinus, his disciple, the
Neo-platonist, who is the father of European mysticism in its
full sense, practical as well as speculative, and who is also its
most profound exponent. Plotinus (A.D. 204-270), who was an
Egyptian by birth, lived and studied under Ammonius Sakkas in
Alexandria at a time when it was the centre of the intellectual
world, seething with speculation and schools, teachers and
philosophies of all kinds, Platonic and Oriental, Egyptian and
Christian. Later, from the age of forty, he taught in Rome, where
he was surrounded by many eager adherents. He drew the form of
his thought both from Plato and from Hermetic philosophy (his
conception of Emanation), but its real inspiration was his own
experience, for his biographer Porphyry has recorded that during
the six years he lived with Plotinus the latter attained four
times to ecstatic union with "the One." Plotinus combined, in
unusual measure, the intellect of the metaphysician with the
temperament of the great psychic, so that he was able to analyse
with the most precise dialectic, experiences which in most cases
paralyse the tongue and blind the discursive reason. His sixth
Ennead, "On the Good or the One," is one of the great philosophic
treatises of the world, and it sums up in matchless words the
whole mystic position and experience. There are two statements in
it which contain the centre of the writer's thought. "God is not
external to any one, but is present in all things, though they
are ignorant that he is so." "God is not in a certain place, but
wherever anything is able to come into contact with him there he
is present" (Enn. vi. 9, §§ 4, 7). It is because
of our ignorance of the indwelling of God that our life is
discordant, for it is clashing with its own inmost principle. We
do not know ourselves. If we did, we would know that the way home
to God lies within ourselves. "A soul that knows itself must know
that the proper direction of its energy is not outwards in a
straight line, but round a centre which is within it"
(Enn. vi. 9, § 8).
The whole Universe is one vast Organism (Enn. ix. 4,
§§ 32, 45), and the Heart of God, the source of all
life, is at the centre, in which all finite things have their
being, and to which they must flow back; for there is in this
Organism, so Plotinus conceives, a double circulatory movement,
an eternal out-breathing and in-breathing, the way down and the
way up. The way down is the out-going of the undivided "One"
towards manifestation. From Him there flows out a succession of
emanations. The first of these is the "Nous" or Over-Mind of the
Universe, God as thought. The "Mind" in turn throws out an image,
the third Principle in this Trinity, the Soul of all things.
This, like the "Nous," is immaterial, but it can act on matter.
It is the link between man and God, for it has a lower and a
higher side. The lower side desires a body and so creates
it, but it is not wholly incarnate in it, for, as Plotinus says,
"the soul always leaves something of itself above."
From this World Soul proceed the individual souls of men, and
they partake of its nature. Its nature is triple, the animal or
sensual soul, closely bound to the body, the logical reasoning
human soul, and the intellectual soul, which is one with the
Divine Mind, from whence it comes and of which it is an
image.
Souls have forgotten then: divine origin because at first they
were so delighted with their liberty and surroundings (like
children let loose from their parents, says Plotinus), that they
ran away in a direction as far as possible from their source.
They thus became clogged with the joys and distractions of this
lower life, which can never satisfy them, and they are ignorant
of their own true nature and essence. In order to return home,
the soul has to retrace the path along which she came, and the
first step is to get to know herself, and so to know God. (See
Enn. vi. 9, § 7.) Thus only can she be restored to
the central unity of the universal soul. This first stage on the
upward path is the purgative life, which includes all the civic
and social virtues, gained through general purification,
self-discipline, and balance, with, at the same time, a gradual
attainment of detachment from the things of sense, and a desire
for the things of the spirit.
The next step is to rise up to mind (Enn. v. 1, §
3) to the world of pure thought, the highest unity possible to a
self-conscious being. This is often called the illuminative life,
and it might be summed up as concentration of all the
faculties—will, intellect, feeling—upon God. And
lastly comes the unitive life, which is contemplation, the
intense desire of the soul for union with God, the momentary
foretaste of which has been experienced by many of the mystics.
This last stage of the journey home, the supreme Adventure, the
ascension to the One above thought, this cannot be spoken of or
explained in words, for it is a state beyond words, it is "a mode
of vision which is ecstasy." When the soul attains to this state,
the One suddenly appears, "with nothing between," "and they are
no more two but one; and the soul is no more conscious of the
body or of whether she lives or is a human being or an essence;
she knows only that she has what she desired, that she is where
no deception can come, and that she would not exchange her bliss
for the whole of Heaven itself" (paraphrased from Enn. vi.
7, § 24).
The influence of Plotinus upon later Christian mysticism was
immense, though mainly indirect, through the writings of two of
his spiritual disciples, St Augustine (354-450), and the unknown
writer, probably of the early sixth century, possibly a Syrian
monk, who ascribes his works to Dionysius the Areopagite, the
friend of St Paul. The works of "Dionysius" were translated from
Greek into Latin by the great Irish philosopher and scholar, John
Scotus Erigena (Eriugena), and in that form they widely
influenced later mediæval mysticism.
The fusion of Eastern mysticism with Christianity finally
brought about the great change which constitutes the difference
between Eastern and Western mysticism, a change already
foreshadowed in Plato, for it was in part the natural outcome of
the Greek delight in material beauty, but finally consummated by
the teachings of the Christian faith. Eastern thought was pure
soul-consciousness, its teaching was to annihilate the flesh, to
deny its reality, to look within, and so to gain enlightenment.
Christianity, on the other hand, was centred in the doctrine of
the Incarnation, in the mystery of God the Father revealing
Himself in human form. Hence the human body, human love and
relationships became sanctified, became indeed a means of
revelation of the divine, and the mystic no longer turned his
thoughts wholly inwards, but also outwards and upwards, to the
Father who loved him and to the Son who had died for him. Thus,
in the West, mystical thought has ever recognised the deep
symbolism and sacredness of all that is human and natural, of
human love, of the human intellect, and of the natural world. All
those things which to the Eastern thinker are but an obstruction
and a veil, to the Western have become the very means of
spiritual ascent[5]. The ultimate
goal of the Eastern mystic is summed up in his assertion, "I am
Brahman," whereas the Western mystic believes that "he who sees
the Infinite in all things, sees God."
In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the mystical tradition
was carried on in France by St Bernard (1091-1153), the Abbot of
Clairvaux, and the Scotch or Irish Richard of the Abbey of St
Victor at Paris, and in Italy, among many others, by St
Bonaventura (1221-1274), a close student of Dionysius, and these
three form the chief direct influences on our earliest English
mystics.
England shares to the full in the wave of mystical experience,
thought, and teaching which swept over Europe in the fourteenth
and early fifteenth centuries, and at first the mystical
literature of England, as also of France, Germany, Italy, and
Sweden, is purely religious or devotional in type, prose
treatises for the most part containing practical instruction for
the inner life, written by hermits, priests, and "anchoresses."
In the fourteenth century we have a group of such writers of
great power and beauty, and in the work of Richard Rolle, Walter
Hilton, Julian of Norwich, and the author of the Cloud of
Unknowing, we have a body of writings dealing with the inner
life, and the steps of purification, contemplation, and ecstatic
union which throb with life and devotional fervour.
From the time of Julian of Norwich, who was still alive in
1413, we find practically no literature of a mystical type until
we come to Spenser's Hymns (1596), and these embody a
Platonism reached largely through the intellect, and not a mystic
experience. It would seem at first sight as if these hymns, or at
any rate the two later ones in honour of Heavenly Love and of
Heavenly Beauty, should rank as some of the finest mystical verse
in English. Yet this is not the case. They are saturated with the
spirit of Plato, and they express in musical form the lofty ideas
of the Symposium and the Phædrus: that
beauty, more nearly than any other earthly thing, resembles its
heavenly prototype, and that therefore the sight of it kindles
love, which is the excitement and rapture aroused in the soul by
the remembrance of that divine beauty which once it knew. And
Spenser, following Plato, traces the stages of ascent traversed
by the lover of beauty, until he is caught up into union with God
Himself. Yet, notwithstanding their melody and their Platonic
doctrine, the note of the real mystic is wanting in the
Hymns, the note of him who writes of these things because
he knows them.
It would take some space to support this view in detail. Any
one desirous of testing it might read the account of transport of
the soul when rapt into union with the One as given by Plotinus
(Enn. vi. 9, § 10), and compare it with Spenser's
description of a similar experience (An Hymne of Heavenly
Beautie, 11. 253-273). Despite their poetic melody, Spenser's
words sound poor and trivial. Instead of preferring to dwell on
the unutterable ecstasy, contentment, and bliss of the
experience, he is far more anxious to emphasise the fact that
"all that pleased earst now seemes to paine."
The contradictory nature of his belief is also arresting. In
the early part of the Hymne of Heavenly Beautie,
in-speaking of the glory of God which is so dazzling that angels
themselves may not endure His sight, he says, as Plato does,
The meanes, therefore, which unto us is lent
Him to behold, is on his workes to looke,
Which he hath made in beauty excellent.
This is the view of the true mystic, that God may be seen in
all His works, by the eye which is itself purified. Yet, in the
last stanza of this beautiful Hymn, this is how Spenser views the
joy of the union of the soul with its source, when it looks
at last up to that Soveraine Light,
From whose pure beams al perfect beauty springs,
That kindleth love in every godly spright
Even the love of God; which loathing brings
Of this vile world and these gay-seeming things.
This is not the voice of the mystic. It is the voice of the
Puritan, who is also an artist, who shrinks from earthly beauty
because it attracts him, who fears it, and tries to despise it.
In truth, the dominating feature in Spenser's poetry is a curious
blending of Puritanism of spirit with the Platonic mind.
In the seventeenth century, however, England is peculiarly
rich in writers steeped in mystical thought.
First come the Quakers, headed by George Fox. This rediscovery
and assertion of the mystical element in religion gave rise to a
great deal of writing, much of it very interesting to the student
of religious thought. Among the Journals of the early
Quakers, and especially that of George Fox, there are passages
which charm us with their sincerity, quaintness, and pure flame
of enthusiasm, but these works cannot as a whole be ranked as
literature. Then we have the little group of Cambridge
Platonists, Henry More, John Smith, Benjamin Whichcote, and John
Norris of Bemerton. These are all Platonic philosophers, and
among their writings, and especially in those of John Norris, are
many passages of mystical thought clothed in noble prose. Henry
More, who is also a poet, is in character a typical mystic,
serene, buoyant, and so spiritually happy that, as he told a
friend, he was sometimes "almost mad with pleasure." His poetical
faculty is, however, entirely subordinated to his philosophy, and
the larger portion of his work consists of passages from the
Enneads of Plotinus turned into rather obscure verse. So
that he is not a poet and artist who, working in the sphere of
the imagination, can directly present to us mystical thoughts and
ideas, but rather a mystic philosopher who has versified some of
his discourses. At this time also many of the "metaphysical
poets" are mystical in much of their thought. Chief among these
is John Donne, and we may also include Henry Vaughan, Traherne,
Crashaw, and George Herbert.
Bunyan might at first sight appear to have many of the
characteristics of the mystic, for he had certain very intense
psychic experiences which are of the nature of a direct
revelation of God to the soul; and in his vivid religious
autobiography, Grace Abounding, he records sensations
which are akin to those felt by Rolle, Julian, and many others.
But although psychically akin, he is in truth widely separated
from the mystics in spirit and temperament and belief. He is a
Puritan, overwhelmed with a sense of sin, the horrors of
punishment in hell, and the wrath of an outside Creator and
Judge, and his desire is aimed at escape from this wrath through
"election" and God's grace. But he is a Puritan endowed with a
psychopathic temperament sensitive to the point of disease and
gifted with an abnormally high visualising power. Hence his
resemblance to the mystics, which is a resemblance of psychical
temperament and not of spiritual attitude.
In the eighteenth century the names of William Law and William
Blake shine out like stars against a dark firmament of
"rationalism" and unbelief. Their writings form a remarkable
contrast to the prevailing spirit of the time. Law expresses in
clear and pointed prose the main teachings of the German seer
Jacob Boehme;[6] whereas Blake sees
visions and has knowledge which he strives to condense into forms
of picture and verse which may be understood of men. The
influence of Boehme in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is
very far-reaching. In addition to completely subjugating the
strong intellect of Law, he profoundly influenced Blake. He also
affected Thomas Erskine of Linlathen, and through him, Carlyle,
J. W. Farquhar, F. D. Maurice, and others. Hegel, Schelling, and
Schlegel are alike indebted to him, and through them, through his
French disciple St Martin, and through Coleridge—who was
much attracted to him—some of his root-ideas returned again
to England in the nineteenth century, thus preparing the way for
a better understanding of mystical thought. The Swedish seer
Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) was another strong influence in
the later eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries. Swedenborg in
some ways is curiously material, at any rate in expression, and
in one point at least he differs from other mystics. That is, he
does not seem to believe that man has within him a spark of the
divine essence, but rather that he is an organ that reflects the
divine life. He is a recipient of life, but not a part of life
itself. God is thought of as a light or sun outside, from which
spiritual heat and light (= love and wisdom) flow into men. But,
apart from this important difference Swedenborg's thought and
teaching are entirely mystical. He believes in the substantial
reality of spiritual things, and that the most essential part of
a person's nature, that which he carries with him into the
spiritual world, is his love. He teaches that heaven is not a
place, but a condition, that there is no question of outside
rewards or punishments, and man makes his own heaven or hell;
for, as Patmore pointedly expresses it—
Ice-cold seems heaven's noble glow
To spirits whose vital heat is hell.
He insists that Space and Time belong only to physical life,
and when men pass into the spiritual world that love is the bond
of union, and thought or "state" makes presence, for thought is
act. He holds that instinct is spiritual in origin; and the
principle of his science of correspondences is based on the
belief that everything outward and visible corresponds to some
invisible entity which is its inward and spiritual cause. This is
the view echoed by Mrs Browning more than once in Aurora
Leigh—
There's not a flower of spring,
That dies in June, but vaunts itself allied
By issue and symbol, by significance
And correspondence, to that spirit-world
Outside the limits of our space and time,
Whereto we are bound.
In all this and much more, Swedenborg's thought is mystical,
and it has had a quite unsuspected amount of influence in
England, and it is diffused through a good deal of English
literature.
Blake knew some at least of Swedenborg's books well; two of
his friends, C. A. Tulk and Flaxman, were devoted Swedenborgians,
and he told Tulk that he had two different states, one in which
he liked Swedenborg's writings, and one in which he disliked
them. Unquestionably, they sometimes irritated him, and then he
abused them, but it is only necessary to read his annotations of
his copy of Swedenborg's Wisdom of the Angels (now in the
British Museum) to realise in the first place that he sometimes
misunderstood Swedenborg's position and secondly, that when he
did understand it, he was thoroughly in agreement with it, and
that he and the Swedish seer had much in common. Coleridge
admired Swedenborg, he gave a good deal of time to studying him
(see Coleridge's letter to C. A. Tulk, July 17, 1820), and he,
with Boehme, were two of the four "Great Men" unjustly branded,
about whom he often thought of writing a "Vindication"
(Coleridge's Notes on Noble's Appeal, Collected Works, ed.
Shedd, 1853 and 1884, vol. v. p. 526).
Emerson owes much to Swedenborg,[7] and Emerson's thought had much influence in
England. Carlyle also was attracted to him (see his letter from
Chelsea, November 13, 1852); Mrs Browning studied him with
enthusiasm and spent the winter of 1852-3 in meditation on his
philosophy (Letters, vol. ii. p. 141), which bore fruit
four years later in Aurora Leigh.
Coventry Patmore is, however, the English writer most
saturated with Swedenborg's thought, and his Angel in the
House embodies the main features of Swedenborg's peculiar
views expressed in Conjugial Love, on sex and marriage and
their significance. It is not too much to say that Swedenborg
influenced and coloured the whole trend of Patmore's thought, and
that he was to him what Boehme was to Law, the match which set
alight his mystical flame. He says Swedenborg's Heaven and
Hell "abounds with perception of the truth to a degree
unparalleled perhaps in uninspired writing," and he asserts that
he never tires of reading him, "he is unfathomably profound and
yet simple."[8]
Whatever may be the source or reason, it is clear that at the
end of the eighteenth century we begin to find a mystical tinge
of thought in several thinkers and writers, such as Burke,
Coleridge, and Thomas Erskine of Linlathen. This increases in the
early nineteenth century, strengthened by the influence, direct
and indirect, of Boehme, Swedenborg, and the German
transcendental philosophers and this mystical spirit is very
marked in Carlyle, and, as we shall see, in most of the greatest
nineteenth-century poets.
In addition to those writers which are here dealt with in
detail, there is much of the mystic spirit in others of the same
period, to name a few only, George Meredith, "Fiona Macleod,"
Christina Rossetti, and Mrs Browning; while to-day writers like
"A. E.," W. B. Yeats, and Evelyn Underhill are carrying on the
mystic tradition.
Chapter II
Love and Beauty Mystics
In studying the mysticism of the English writers, and more
especially of the poets, one is at once struck by the diversity
of approach leading to unity of end.
"There are," says Plotinus, "different roads by which this end
[apprehension of the Infinite] may
be reached. The love of beauty, which exalts the poet; that
devotion to the One and that ascent of science which makes the
ambition of the philosopher; and that love and those prayers by
which some devout and ardent soul tends in its moral purity
towards perfection. These are the great highways conducting to
that height above the actual and the particular, where we stand
in the immediate presence of the Infinite, who shines out as from
the deeps of the soul."—Letter to Flaccus.
We have grouped together our English writers who are mystical
in thought, according to the five main pathways by which they
have seen the Vision: Love, Beauty, Nature, Wisdom, or Devotion.
Even within these groups, the method of approach, the
interpretation or application of the Idea, often differs very
greatly. For instance, Shelley and Browning may both be called
love-mystics; that is, they look upon love as the solution of the
mystery of life, as the link between God and man. To Shelley this
was a glorious intuition, which reached him through his
imagination, whereas the life of man as he saw it roused in him
little but mad indignation, wild revolt, and passionate protest.
To Browning this was knowledge—knowledge borne in upon him
just because of human life as he saw it, which to him was a clear
proof of the great destiny of the race. He would have agreed with
Patmore that "you can see the disc of Divinity quite clearly
through the smoked glass of humanity, but no otherwise." He found
"harmony in immortal souls, spite of the muddy vesture of
decay."
The three great English poets who are also fundamentally
mystical in thought are Browning, Wordsworth, and Blake. Their
philosophy or mystical belief, one in essence, though so
differently expressed, lies at the root, as it is also the
flower, of their life-work. In others, as in Shelley, Keats, and
Rossetti, although it is the inspiring force of their poetry, it
is not a flame, burning steadily and evenly, but rather a light
flashing out intermittently into brilliant and dazzling radiance.
Hence the man himself is not so permeated by it; and hence
results the unsatisfied desire, the almost painful yearning, the
recurring disappointment and disillusionment, which we do not
find in Browning, Wordsworth, and Blake.
In our first group we have four poets of markedly different
temperaments—Shelley intensely spiritual; Rossetti with a
strong tinge of sensuousness, of "earthiness" in his nature;
Browning, the keenly intellectual man of the world, and Patmore a
curious mixture of materialist and mystic; yet to all four love
is the secret of life, the one thing worth giving and
possessing.
Shelley believed in a Soul of the Universe, a Spirit in which
all things live and move and have their being; which, as one
feels in the Prometheus, is unnamable, inconceivable even
to man, for "the deep truth is imageless." His most passionate
desire was not, as was Browning's, for an increased and ennobled
individuality, but for the mystical fusion of his own personality
with this Spirit, this object of his worship and adoration. To
Shelley, death itself was but the rending of a veil which would
admit us to the full vision of the ideal, which alone is true
life. The sense of unity in all things is most strongly felt in
Adonais, where Shelley's maturest thought and philosophy
are to be found; and indeed the mystical fervour in this poem,
especially towards the end, is greater than anywhere else in his
writings. The Hymn to Intellectual Beauty is in some ways
Shelley's clearest and most obvious expression of his devotion to
the Spirit of Ideal Beauty, its reality to him, and his vow of
dedication to its service. But the Prometheus is the most
deeply mystical of his poems; indeed, as Mrs Shelley says, "it
requires a mind as subtle and penetrating as Shelley's own to
understand the mystic meanings scattered throughout the
poem."
Shelley, like Blake, regarded the human imagination as a
divine creative force; Prometheus stands for the human
imagination, or the genius of the world; and it is his union with
Asia, the divine Idea, the Spirit of Beauty and of Love, from
which a new universe is born. It is this union, which consummates
the aspirations of humanity, that Shelley celebrates in the
marvellous love-song of Prometheus. As befitted a disciple of
Godwin, he believed in the divine potentiality of man, convinced
that all good is to be found within man's own being, and that his
progress depends on his own will.
It is our will
That thus enchains us to permitted ill—
We might be otherwise—we might be all
We dream of happy, high, majestical.
Where is the love, beauty, and truth we seek
But in our mind?
Julian and Maddalo.
In the allegorical introduction to the Revolt of Islam,
which is an interesting example of Shelley's mystical mythology,
we have an insight into the poet's view of the good power in the
world. It is not an almighty creator standing outside mankind,
but a power which suffers and rebels and evolves, and is, in
fact, incarnate in humanity, so that it is unrecognised by men,
and indeed confounded with evil:—
And the Great Spirit of Good did creep among
The nations of mankind, and every tongue
Cursed and blasphemed him as he passed, for none
Knew good from evil.
There is no doubt that to Shelley the form assumed by the
divine in man was love. Mrs Shelley, in her note to Rosalind
and Helen, says that, "in his eyes it was the essence of our
being, and all woe and pain arose from the war made against it by
selfishness or insensibility, or mistake"; and Shelley himself
says, "the great secret of morals is love; or a going out of our
own nature, and an identification of ourselves with the beautiful
which exists in thought, action or person, not our own."
Shelley was always searching for love; and, although he knew
well, through his study of Plato, the difference between earthly
and spiritual love, that the one is but the lowest step on the
ladder which leads to the other, yet in actual practice he
confounded the two. He knew that he did so; and only a month
before his death, he summed up in a sentence the tragedy of his
life. He writes to Mr Gisborne about the Epipsychidion,
saying that he cannot look at it now, for—
"the person whom it celebrates was a cloud instead of a Juno,"
and continues, "If you are curious, however, to hear what I am
and have been, it will tell you something thereof. It is an
idealized history of my life and feelings. I think one is always
in love with something or other; the error—and I confess it
is not easy for spirits cased in flesh and blood to avoid
it—consists in seeking in a mortal image the likeness of
what is, perhaps, eternal."
No poet has a more distinct philosophy of life than Browning.
Indeed he has as much a right to a place among the philosophers,
as Plato has to one among the poets. Browning is a seer, and
pre-eminently a mystic; and it is especially interesting as in
the case of Plato and St Paul, to encounter this latter quality
as a dominating characteristic of the mind of so keen and logical
a dialectician. We see at once that the main position of
Browning's belief is identical with what we have found to be the
characteristic of mysticism—unity under diversity at the
centre of all existence. The same essence, the one life,
expresses itself through every diversity of form.
He dwells on this again and again:—
God is seen
In the star, in the stone, in the flesh, in the soul and the
clod.
And through all these forms there is growth upwards. Indeed,
it is only upon this supposition that the poet can account
for
many a thrill
Of kinship, I confess to, with the powers
Called Nature: animate, inanimate
In parts or in the whole, there's something there
Man-like that somehow meets the man in me.
Prince Hohenstiel-Schwangau.
The poet sees that in each higher stage we benefit by the
garnered experience of the past; and so man grows and expands and
becomes capable of feeling for and with everything that lives. At
the same time the higher is not degraded by having worked in and
through the lower, for he distinguishes between the continuous
persistent life, and the temporary coverings it makes use of on
its upward way;
From first to last of lodging, I was I,
And not at all the place that harboured me.
Humanity then, in Browning's view, is not a collection of
individuals, separate and often antagonistic, but one whole.
When I say "you" 'tis the common soul,
The collective I mean: the race of Man
That receives life in parts to live in a whole
And grow here according to God's clear plan.
Old Pictures in Florence.
This sense of unity is shown in many ways: for instance, in
Browning's protest against the one-sidedness of
nineteenth-century scientific thought, the sharp distinction or
gulf set up between science and religion. This sharp cleavage, to
the mystic, is impossible. He knows, however irreconcilable the
two may appear, that they are but different aspects of the same
thing. This is one of the ways in which Browning anticipates the
most advanced thought of the present day.
In Paracelsus he emphasises the fact that the exertion
of power in the intelligence, or the acquisition of knowledge, is
useless without the inspiration of love, just as love is waste
without power. Paracelsus sums up the matter when he says to
Aprile—
I too have sought to KNOW as thou to LOVE
Excluding love as thou refusedst knowledge....
We must never part ...
Till thou the lover, know; and I, the knower,
Love—until both are saved.
Arising logically out of this belief in unity, there follows,
as with all mystics, the belief in the potential divinity of man,
which permeates all Browning's thought, and is continually
insisted on in such poems as Rabbi ben Ezra, A Death in the
Desert, and The Ring and the Book. He takes for
granted the fundamental position of the mystic, that the object
of life is to know God; and according to the poet, in knowing
love we learn to know God. Hence it follows that love is the
meaning of life, and that he who finds it not
loses what he lived for
And eternally must lose it.
Christina.
For life with all it yields of joy and woe
And hope and fear ...
Is just our chance o' the prize of learning love.
A Death in the Desert.
This is Browning's central teaching, the key-note of his work
and philosophy. The importance of love in life is to Browning
supreme, because he holds it to be the meeting-point between God
and man. Love is the sublimest conception possible to man; and a
life inspired by it is the highest conceivable form of
goodness.
In this exaltation of love, as in several other points,
Browning much resembles the German mystic, Meister Eckhart. To
compare the two writers in detail would be an interesting task;
it is only possible here to suggest points of resemblance. The
following passage from Eckhart suggests several directions in
which Browning's thought is peculiarly mystical:—
Intelligence is the youngest faculty in man.... The soul in
itself is a simple work; what God works in the simple light of
the soul is more beautiful and more delightful than all the other
works which He works in all creatures. But foolish people take
evil for good and good for evil. But to him who rightly
understands, the one work which God works in the soul is better
and nobler and higher than all the world. Through that light
comes grace. Grace never comes in the intelligence or in the
will. If it could come in the intelligence or in the will, the
intelligence and the will would have to transcend themselves. On
this a master says: There is something secret about it; and
thereby he means the spark of the soul, which alone can apprehend
God. The true union between God and the soul takes place in the
little spark, which is called the spirit of the
soul.[9]
The essential unity of God and man is expressed more than once
by Browning in Eckhart's image: as when he speaks of God as
Him
Who never is dishonoured in the spark
He gave us from his fire of fires.
He is at one with Eckhart, and with all mystics, in his appeal
from the intellect to that which is beyond intellect; in his
assertion of the supremacy of feeling, intuition, over knowledge.
Browning never wearies of dwelling on the relativity of physical
knowledge, and its inadequacy to satisfy man. This is perhaps
best brought out in one of the last things he wrote, the
"Reverie" in Asolando; but it is dwelt on in nearly all
his later and more reflective poems. His maxim was—
Wholly distrust thy knowledge, then, and trust
As wholly love allied to ignorance!
There lies thy truth and safety. ...
Consider well!
Were knowledge all thy faculty, then God
Must be ignored: love gains him by first leap.
A Pillar at Sebzevar.
Another point of resemblance with Eckhart is suggested by his
words: "That foolish people take evil for good, and good for
evil." Browning's theory of evil is part of the working-out of
his principle of what may be called the coincidence of extreme
opposites. This is, of course, part of his main belief in unity,
but it is an interesting development of it. This theory is marked
all through his writings; and, although philosophers have dealt
with it, he is perhaps the one poet who faces the problem, and
expresses himself on the point with entire conviction. His view
is that good and evil are purely relative terms (see The
Bean-stripe), and that one cannot exist without the other. It
is evil which alone makes possible some of the divinest qualities
in man—compassion, pity, forgiveness patience. We have seen
that Shelley shares this view, "for none knew good from evil";
and Blake expresses himself very strongly about it, and complains
that Plato "knew nothing but the virtues and vices, the good and
evil.... There is nothing in all that.... Everything is good in
God's eyes." Mysticism is always a reconcilement of opposites;
and this, as we have seen in connection with science and
religion, knowledge and love, is a dominant note of Browning's
philosophy. He brings it out most startlingly perhaps in The
Statue and the Bust, where he shows that in his very capacity
for vice, a man proves his capacity for virtue, and that a
failure of energy in the one implies a corresponding failure of
energy in the other.
At the same time, clear knowledge that evil is illusion would
defeat its own end and paralyse all moral effort, for evil only
exists for the development of good in us.
Type needs antitype:
As night needs day, as shine needs shade, so good
Needs evil: how were pity understood
Unless by pain?
This is one reason why Browning never shrank from the evil in
the world, why indeed he expended so much of his mind and art on
the analysis and dissection of every kind of evil, laying bare
for us the working of the mind of the criminal, the hypocrite,
the weakling, and the cynic; because he held that—
Only by looking low, ere looking high
Comes penetration of the mystery.
There are other ways in which Browning's thought is especially
mystical, as, for instance, his belief in pre-existence, and his
theory of knowledge, for he, like Plato, believes in the light
within the soul, and holds that—
To know
Rather consists in opening out a way
Whence the imprisoned splendour may escape,
Than in effecting entry for a light
Supposed to be without.
Paracelsus, Act I.
But the one thought which is ever constant with him, and is
peculiarly helpful to the practical man, is his recognition of
the value of limitation in all our energies, and the stress he
lays on the fact that only by virtue of this limitation can we
grow. We should be paralysed else. It is Goethe's doctrine of
Entbehrung, and it is vividly portrayed in the epistle of
Karshish. Paracelsus learns it, and makes it clear to Festus at
the end.
The natural result of Browning's theory of evil, and his sense
of the value of limitation, is that he should welcome for man the
experience of doubt, difficulty, temptation, pain; and this we
find is the case.
Life is probation and the earth no goal
But starting point of man...
To try man's foot, if it will creep or climb
'Mid obstacles in seeming, points that prove
Advantage for who vaults from low to high
And makes the stumbling-block a stepping-stone.
The Ring and the Book: The Pope, 1436-7, 410-13.
It is this trust in unending progress, based on the
consciousness of present failure, which is peculiarly inspiriting
in Browning's thought, and it is essentially mystical. Instead of
shrinking from pain, the mystic prays for it, for, properly met,
it means growth.
Was the trial sore?
Temptation sharp? Thank God a second time!
Why comes temptation but for man to meet
And master and make crouch beneath his foot,
And so be pedestaled in triumph?
The Ring and the Book: The Pope, 1182-02.
Rossetti's mysticism is perhaps a more salient feature in his
art than is the case with Browning, and the lines of it, and its
place in his work, have been well described by Mr Theodore
Watts-Dutton.[10] We can only here
indicate wherein it lies, and how it differs from and falls short
of the mysticism of Shelley and Browning. Rossetti, unlike
Browning, is not the least metaphysical; he is not devoured by
philosophical curiosity; he has no desire to solve the riddle of
the universe. All his life he was dominated and fascinated by
beauty, one form of which in especial so appealed to him as at
times almost to overpower him—the beauty of the face of
woman.[11] But this beauty is not an
end in itself; it is not the desire of possession that so stirs
him, but rather an absolute thirst for the knowledge of the
mystery which he feels is hiding beneath and beyond it. Here lies
his mysticism. It is this haunting passion which is the greatest
thing in Rossetti, which inspires all that is best in him as
artist, the belief that beauty is but the expression or symbol of
something far greater and higher, and that it has kinship with
immortal things. For beauty, which, as Plato has told us, is of
all the divine ideas at once most manifest and most lovable to
man, is for Rossetti the actual and visible symbol of love, which
is at once the mystery and solution of the secret of
life.[12] Rossetti's mystical
passion is perhaps most perfectly expressed in his little early
prose romance, Hand and Soul. It is purer and more austere
than much of his poetry, and breathes an amazing force of
spiritual vision. One wonders, after reading it, that the writer
himself did not attain to a loftier and more spiritual
development of life and art; and one cannot help feeling the
reason was that he did not sufficiently heed the warning of
Plotinus, not to let ourselves become entangled in sensuous
beauty, which will engulf us as in a swamp.
Coventry Patmore was so entirely a mystic that it seems to be
the first and the last and the only thing to say about him. His
central conviction is the unity of all things, and hence their
mutual interpretation and symbolic force. There is only one kind
of knowledge which counts with him, and that is direct
apprehension or perception, the knowledge a man has of Love, by
being in love, not by reading about its symptoms. The "touch" of
God is not a figure of speech.
"Touch," says Aquinas, "applies to spiritual things as well as
to material things.... The fulness of intelligence is the
obliteration of intelligence. God is then our honey, and we, as
St Augustine says, are His; and who wants to understand honey or
requires the rationale of a kiss?" (Rod, Root, and
Flower, xx.)
Once given the essential idea, to be grasped by the intuitive
faculty alone, the world is full of analogies, of natural
revelations which help to support and illustrate great truths.
Patmore was, however, caught and enthralled by one aspect of
unity, by one great analogy, almost to the exclusion of all
others. This is that in human love, but above all in wedded love,
we have a symbol (that is an expression of a similar force in
different material) of the love between God and the soul. What
Patmore meant was that in the relationship and attitude of wedded
lovers we hold the key to the mystery at the heart of life, and
that we have in it a "real apprehension" (which is quite
different from real comprehension[13]) of the relationship and attitude of humanity
to God. His first wife's love revealed to him this, which is the
basic fact of all his thought and work.
The relationship of the soul to Christ as His betrothed
wife is the key to the feeling with which prayer and love and
honour should be offered to Him ... She showed me what
that relationship involves of heavenly submission and spotless
passionate loyalty.[14]
He believed that sex is a relationship at the base of all
things natural and divine;
Nature, with endless being rife,
Parts each thing into "him" and "her"
And, in the arithmetic of life,
The smallest unit is a pair.[15]
This division into two and reconciliation into one, this clash
of forces resulting in life, is, as Patmore points out in words
curiously reminiscent of those of Boehme, at the root of all
existence. All real apprehension of God, he says, is dependent
upon the realisation of his triple Personality in one Being.
Nature goes on giving echoes of the same living triplicity in
animal, plant, and mineral, every stone and material atom owing
its being to the synthesis or "embrace" of the two opposed forces
of expansion and contraction. Nothing whatever exists in a single
entity but in virtue of its being thesis, antithesis, and
synthesis and in humanity and natural life this takes the form of
sex, the masculine, the feminine, and the neuter, or third,
forgotten sex spoken of by Plato, which is not the absence of the
life of sex, but its fulfilment and power, as the electric fire
is the fulfilment and power of positive and negative in their
"embrace."
The essay from which this passage is taken, The Bow set in
the Cloud, together with The Precursor, give in full
detail an exposition of this belief of Patmore's, which was for
him "the burning heart of the Universe."
Female and male God made the man;
His image is the whole, not half;
And in our love we dimly scan
The love which is between Himself.[16]
God he conceived of as the great masculine positive force, the
soul as the feminine or receptive force, and the meeting of these
two, the "mystic rapture" of the marriage of Divinity and
Humanity, as the source of all life and joy.
This profound and very difficult theme is treated by Patmore
in a manner at once austere and passionate in the exquisite
little preludes to the Angel in the House, and more
especially in the odes, which stand alone in nineteenth-century
poetry for poignancy of feeling and depth of spiritual passion.
They are the highest expression of "erotic
mysticism"[17] in English; a
marvellous combination of flaming ardour and sensuousness of
description with purity and austerity of tone. This latter effect
is gained largely by the bare and irregular metre, which has a
curiously compelling beauty of rhythm and dignity of cadence.
The book into which Patmore put the fullness of his
convictions, the Sponsa Dei, which he burnt because he
feared it revealed too much to a world not ready for it, was says
Mr Gosse, who had read it in manuscript, "a transcendental
treatise on Divine desire seen through the veil of human desire."
We can guess fairly accurately its tenor and spirit if we read
the prose essay Dieu et ma Dame and the wonderful ode
Sponsa Dei, which, happily, the poet did not destroy.
It may be noted that the other human affections and
relationships also have for Patmore a deep symbolic value, and
two of his finest odes are written, the one in symbolism of
mother love, the other in that of father and son.[18]
We learn by human love, so be points out, to realise the
possibility of contact between the finite and Infinite, for
divinity can only be revealed by voluntarily submitting to
limitations. It is "the mystic craving of the great to become the
love-captive of the small, while the small has a corresponding
thirst for the enthralment of the great."[19]
And this process of intercourse between God and man is
symbolised in the Incarnation, which is not a single event in
time, but the culmination of an eternal process. It is the
central fact of a man's experience, "for it is going on
perceptibly in himself"; and in like manner "the Trinity becomes
the only and self-evident explanation of mysteries which are
daily wrought in his own complex nature."[20] In this way is it that to Patmore religion is
not a question of blameless life or the holding of certain
beliefs, but it is "an experimental science" to be lived and to
be felt, and the clues to the experiments are to be found in
natural human processes and experiences interpreted in the light
of the great dogmas of the Christian faith.
For Keats, the avenue to truth and reality took the form of
Beauty. The idea, underlying most deeply and consistently the
whole of his poetry, is that of the unity of life; and closely
allied with this is the belief in progress, through
ever-changing, ever-ascending stages. Sleep and Poetry,
Endymion, and Hyperion represent very well three
stages in the poet's thought and art. In Sleep and Poetry
Keats depicts the growth even in an individual life, and
describes the three stages of thought, or attitudes towards life,
through which the poet must pass. They are not quite parallel to
the three stages of the mystical ladder marked out by Wordsworth
in the main body of his poetry, because they do not go quite so
far, but they are almost exactly analogous to the three stages of
mind he describes in Tintern Abbey. The first is mere
animal pleasure and delight in living—
A pigeon tumbling in clear summer air;
A laughing school-boy without grief or care
Hiding the springy branches of an elm.
Then follows simple unreflective enjoyment of Nature. The next
stage is sympathy with human life, with human grief and joy,
which brings a sense of the mystery of the world, a longing to
pierce it and arrive at its meaning, symbolised in the figure of
the charioteer.
Towards the end of Keats's life this feeling was growing
stronger; and it is much dwelt upon in the Revision of
Hyperion. There he plainly states that the merely artistic
life, the life of the dreamer, is selfish; and that the only way
to gain real insight is through contact and sympathy with human
suffering and sorrow; and in the lost Woodhouse transcript of the
Revision, rediscovered in 1904, there are some lines in
which this point is still further emphasised. The full
realisation of this third stage was not granted to Keats during
his short life; he had but gleams of it. The only passage where
he describes the ecstasy of vision is in Endymion (bk. i.,
1. 774 ff.), and this resembles in essentials all the other
reports of this experience given by mystics. When the mind is
ready, anything may lead us to it—music, imagination, love,
friendship.
Feel we these things?—that moment have we stept
Into a sort of oneness, and our state
Is like a floating spirit's.
Keats felt this passage was inspired, and in a letter to
Taylor in January 1818 he says, "When I wrote it, it was a
regular stepping of the Imagination towards a truth."
In Endymion, the underlying idea is the unity of the
various elements of the individual soul; the love of woman is
shown to be the same as the love of beauty; and that in its turn
is identical with the love of the principle of beauty in all
things. Keats was always very sensitive to the mysterious effects
of moonlight, and so for him the moon became a symbol for the
great abstract principle of beauty, which, during the whole of
his poetic life, he worshipped intellectually and spiritually.
"The mighty abstract Idea I have of Beauty in all things stifles
the more divided and minute domestic happiness," he writes to his
brother George; and the last two well-known lines of the Ode
on a Grecian Urn fairly sum up his philosophy—
Beauty is truth, truth Beauty, that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
So that the moon represents to Keats the eternal idea, the one
essence in all. This is how he writes of it, in what is an
entirely mystical passage in Endymion—
... As I grew in years, still didst thou blend
With all my ardours: thou wast the deep glen;
Thou wast the mountain-top, the sage's pen,
The poet's harp, the voice of friends, the sun;
Thou wast the river, thou wast glory won;
Thou wast my clarion's blast, thou wast my steed,
My goblet full of wine, my topmost deed:
Thou wast the charm of women, lovely Moon!
In his fragment of Hyperion, Keats shadows forth the
unity of all existence, and gives magnificent utterance to the
belief that change is not decay, but the law of growth and
progress. Oceanus, in his speech to the overthrown Titans, sums
up the whole meaning as far as it has gone, in verse which is
unsurpassed in English—
We fall by course of Nature's law, not force
Of thunder, or of Jove ...
... on our heels a fresh perfection treads,
A power more strong in beauty, born of us
And fated to excel us, as we pass
In glory that old Darkness ...
... for 'tis the eternal law
That first in beauty should be first in might.
This is true mysticism, the mysticism Keats shares with Burke
and Carlyle, the passionate belief in continuity of essence
through ever-changing forms.
Chapter III
Nature Mystics
Vaughan and Wordsworth stand pre-eminent among our English
poets in being almost exclusively occupied with one theme, the
mystical interpretation of nature. Both poets are of a
meditative, brooding cast of mind; but whereas Wordsworth arrives
at his philosophy entirely through personal experience and
sensation, Vaughan is more of a mystical philosopher, deeply read
in Plato and the mediæval alchemists. The constant
comparison of natural with spiritual processes is, on the whole,
the most marked feature of Vaughan's poetry. If man will but
attend, he seems to say to us, everything will discourse to him
of the spirit. He broods on the silk-worm's change into the
butterfly (Resurrection and Immortality); he ponders over
the mystery of the continuity of life as seen in the plant, dying
down and entirely disappearing in winter, and shooting up anew in
the spring (The Hidden Flower); or, while wandering by his
beloved river Usk, he meditates near the deep pool of a waterfall
on its mystical significance as it seems to linger beneath the
banks and then to shoot onward in swifter course, and he sees in
it an image of life beyond the grave. The seed growing secretly
in the earth suggests to him the growth of the soul in the
darkness of physical matter; and in Affliction he points
out that all nature is governed by a law of periodicity and
contrast, night and day, sunshine and shower; and as the beauty
of colour can only exist by contrast, so are pain, sickness, and
trouble needful for the development of man. These poems are
sufficient to illustrate the temper of Vaughan's mind, his keen,
reverent observation of nature in all her moods, and his intense
interest in the minutest happenings, because they are all
manifestations of the one mighty law.
Vaughan appears to have had a more definite belief in
pre-existence than Wordsworth, for he refers to it more than
once; and The Retreate, which is probably the best known
of all his poems and must have furnished some suggestion for the
Immortality Ode, is based upon it. Vaughan has
occasionally an almost perfect felicity of mystical expression, a
power he shares with Donne, Keats, Rossetti, and Wordsworth. His
ideas then produce their effect through the medium of art,
directly on the feelings. The poem called Quickness is
perhaps the best example of this peculiar quality, which cannot
be analysed but must simply be felt; or The World, with
its magnificent symbol in the opening lines:—
I saw Eternity the other night,
Like a great Ring of pure and endless light,
All calm, as it was bright;
And round beneath it, Time, in hours, days, years,
Driv'n by the spheres,
Like a vast shadow mov'd.[21]
Mysticism is the most salient feature of Wordsworth's poetry,
for he was one who saw, whose inward eye was focussed to visions
scarce dreamt of by men. It is because of the strangeness and
unfamiliarity of his vision that he is a difficult poet to
understand, and the key to the understanding of him is a mystic
one. People talk of the difficulty of Browning, but he is easy
reading compared with a great deal of Wordsworth. It is just the
apparent simplicity of Wordsworth's thought which is so
misleading. A statement about him of the following kind would be
fairly generally accepted as the truth. Wordsworth was a
simple-minded poet with a passion for nature, he found great joy
and consolation in the contemplation of the beauty of hills and
dales and clouds and flowers, and urged others to find this too;
he lived, and recommended others to live a quiet retired
unexciting kind of life, and he preached a doctrine of simplicity
and austerity. Now, except that Wordsworth had a passion for
Nature, there is not a single true statement here. Wordsworth was
not only a poet, he was also a seer, a mystic and a practical
psychologist with an amazingly subtle mind, and an unusual
capacity for feeling; he lived a life of excitement and passion,
and he preached a doctrine of magnificence and glory. It was not
the beauty of Nature which brought him joy and peace, but the
life in Nature. He himself had caught a vision of that
life, he knew it and felt it, and it transformed the whole of
existence for him. He believed that every man could attain this
vision which he so fully possessed, and his whole life's work
took the form of a minute and careful analysis of the processes
of feeling in his own nature, which he left as a guide for those
who would tread the same path. It would be correct to say that
the whole of his poetry is a series of notes and investigations
devoted to the practical and detailed explanation of how he
considered this state of vision might be reached. He disdained no
experience—however trivial, apparently—the working of
the mind of a peasant child or an idiot boy, the effect produced
on his own emotions by a flower, a glowworm, a bird's note, a
girl's song; he passed by nothing which might help to throw light
on this problem. The experience which Wordsworth was so anxious
others should share was the following. He found that when his
mind was freed from pre-occupation with disturbing objects, petty
cares, "little enmities and low desires," that he could then
reach a condition of equilibrium, which he describes as a "wise
passiveness," or a "happy stillness of the mind." He believed
this condition could be deliberately induced by a kind of
relaxation of the will, and by a stilling of the busy intellect
and striving desires. It is a purifying process, an emptying out
of all that is worrying, self-assertive, and self-seeking. If we
can habitually train ourselves and attune our minds to this
condition, we may at any moment come across something which will
arouse our emotions, and it is then, when our emotions—thus
purified—are excited to the point of passion, that our
vision becomes sufficiently clear to enable us to gain actual
experience of the "central peace subsisting for ever at the heart
of endless agitation." Once seen, this vision changes for us the
whole of life; it reveals unity in what to our every-day sight
appears to be diversity, harmony where ordinarily we hear but
discord, and joy, overmastering joy, instead of sorrow.
It is a kind of illumination, whereby in a lightning flash we
see that the world is quite different from what it ordinarily
appears to be, and when it is over—for the experience is
but momentary—it is impossible to describe the vision in
precise terms, but the effect of it is such as to inspire and
guide the whole subsequent life of the seer. Wordsworth several
times depicts this "bliss ineffable" when "all his thought were
steeped in feeling." The well-known passage in Tintern
Abbey already quoted (p. 7) is one of the finest analysis of
it left us by any of the seers, and it closely resembles the
accounts given by Plotinus and Boehme of similar experiences.
To Wordsworth this vision came through Nature, and for this
reason. He believed that all we see round us is alive, beating
with the same life which pulsates in us. It is, he
says,—
my faith that every flower
Enjoys the air it breathes.
and that if we will but listen and look, we will hear and see
and feel this central life. This is the pith of the message we
find repeated again and again in various forms throughout
Wordsworth's poetry, and perhaps best summed up at the end of the
fourth book of the Excursion, a book which should be
closely studied by any one who would explore the secret of the
poet's outlook upon life. He tells us in the Prelude (Book
iii.) that even in boyhood it was by this feeling he "mounted to
community with highest truth"—
To every natural form, rock, fruits, or flower,
Even the loose stones that cover the highway,
I gave a moral life: I saw them feel,
Or linked them to some feeling: the great mass
Lay bedded in a quickening soul, and all
That I beheld respired with inward meaning.
Wordsworth, in short, was haunted by the belief that the
secret of the universe is written clearly all round us, could we
but train and purify our mind and emotions so as to behold it. He
believed that we are in something the same attitude towards
Nature as an illiterate untrained person might be in the presence
of a book containing the philosophy of Hegel. To the educated
trained thinker, who by long and arduous discipline has developed
his mental powers, that book contains the revelation of the
thought of a great mind; whereas to the uneducated person it is
merely a bundle of paper with words printed on it. He can handle
it, touch it, see it, he can read the words, he can even
understand many of them separately, but the essence of the book
and its meaning remains closed to him until he can effect some
alteration in himself which will enable him to understand it.
Wordsworth's claim is that he had discovered by his own
experience a way to effect the necessary alteration in ourselves
which will enable us to catch glimpses of the truths expressing
themselves all round us. It is a great claim, but he would seem
to have justified it.
It is interesting that the steps in the ladder of perfection,
as described by Wordsworth, are precisely analogous to the
threefold path or "way" of the religious and philosophic mystic,
an ethical system or rule of life, of which, very probably,
Wordsworth had never heard.
The mystic vision was not attained by him, any more than by
others, without deliberate renunciation. He lays great stress
upon this; and yet it is a point in his teaching sometimes
overlooked. He insists repeatedly upon the fact that before any
one can taste of these joys of the spirit, he must be purified,
disciplined, self-controlled. He leaves us a full account of his
purgative stage. Although he started life with a naturally pure
and austere temperament, yet he had deliberately to crush out
certain strong passions to which he was liable, as well as all
personal ambition, all love of power, all desire for fame or
money; and to confine himself to the contemplation of such
objects as—
excite
No morbid passions, no disquietude,
No vengeance and no hatred.
In the Recluse he records how he deliberately fought,
and bent to other uses, a certain wild passionate delight he felt
in danger, a struggle or victory over a foe, in short, some of
the primitive instincts of a strong, healthy animal, feelings
which few would regard as reprehensible. These natural instincts,
this force and energy, good in themselves, Wordsworth did not
crush, but deliberately turned into a higher channel.
At the end of the Prelude he makes his confession of
the sins he did not commit.
Never did I, in quest of right and wrong,
Tamper with conscience from a private aim;
Nor was in any public hope the dupe
Of selfish passions; nor did ever yield
Wilfully to mean cares or low pursuits.
Such a confession, or rather boast, in the mouth of almost any
other man would sound hypocritical or self-complacent; but with
Wordsworth, we feel it is the bare truth told us for our help and
guidance, as being the necessary and preliminary step. It is a
high standard which is held up before us, even in this first
stage, for it includes, not merely the avoidance of all obvious
sins against man and society, but a tuning-up, a transmuting of
the whole nature to high and noble endeavour. Wordsworth found
his reward, in a settled state of calm serenity, "consummate
happiness," "wide-spreading, steady, calm, contemplative," and,
as he tells us in the fourth book of the Prelude, on one
evening during that summer vacation,
Gently did my soul
Put off her veil, and, self-transmuted, stood
Naked, as in the presence of her God.
When the mind and soul have been prepared, the next step is
concentration, aspiration. Then it is borne in upon the poet that
in the infinite and in the eternal alone can we find rest, can we
find ourselves; and towards this infinitude we must strive with
unflagging ardour;
Our destiny, our being's heart and home,
Is with infinitude, and only there.
Prelude, Book vi. 604.
The result of this aspiration towards the infinite is a
quickening of consciousness, upon which follows the attainment of
the third or unitive stage, the moment when man can "breathe in
worlds to which the heaven of heavens is but a veil," and
perceive "the forms whose kingdom is where time and place are
not." Such minds—
need not extraordinary calls
To rouse them; in a world of life they live,
By sensible impressions not enthralled,
... the highest bliss
That flesh can know is theirs—the consciousness
Of Whom they are.
Prelude, Book xiv. 105, 113,
Wordsworth possessed in a peculiar degree a mystic sense of
infinity, of the boundless, of the opening-out of the world of
our normal finite experience into the transcendental; and he had
a rare power of putting this into words. It was a feeling which,
as he tells us in the Prelude (Book xiii.), he had from
earliest childhood, when the disappearing line of the public
highway—
Was like an invitation into space
Boundless, or guide into eternity,
a feeling which, applied to man, gives that inspiriting
certitude of boundless growth, when the soul has—
... an obscure sense
Of possible sublimity, whereto
With growing faculties she doth aspire.
It is at this point, and on this subject, that Wordsworth's
poetical and ethical imagination are most nearly fused. This
fusion is far from constant with him; and the result is that
there are tracts of his writings where the sentiments are
excellent, the philosophy illuminating, but the poetry is not
great: it does not awaken the "transcendental
feeling."[22] The moments when this
condition is most fully attained by Wordsworth occur when, by
sheer force of poetic imagination combined with spiritual
insight, in some mysterious and indescribable way, he flashes
upon us a sensation of boundless infinity. Herein consists the
peculiar magic of such a poem as Stepping Westward; and
there is a touch of the same feeling in the Solitary
Reaper.
It is hardly necessary to dwell on other mystical elements in
Wordsworth, such as his belief in the one law governing all
things, "from creeping plant to sovereign man," and the hint of
belief in pre-existence in the Ode on Immortality. His
attitude towards life as a whole is to be found in a few lines in
the "after-thought" to the Duddon sonnets.
The Form remains, the Function never dies;
While we, the brave, the mighty and the wise,
We Men, who in our morn of youth defied
The elements, must vanish:—be it so!
Enough, if something from our hands have power
To live, and act, and serve the future hour;
And if, as toward the silent tomb we go,
Through love, through hope, and faith's transcendent dower,
We feel that we are greater than we know.
Richard Jefferies is closely akin to Wordsworth in his
overpowering consciousness of the life in nature. This
consciousness is the strongest force in him, so that at times he
is almost submerged by it, and he loses the sense of outward
things. In this condition of trance the sense of time vanishes,
there is, he asserts, no such thing, no past or future, only now,
which is eternity. In The Story of my Heart, a rhapsody of
mystic experience and aspiration he describes in detail several
such moments of exaltation or trance. He seems to be peculiarly
sensitive to sunshine. As the moon typifies to Keats the eternal
essence in all things, so to Jefferies the sun seems to be the
physical expression or symbol of the central Force of the world,
and it is through gazing on sunlight that he most often enters
into the trance state.
Standing, one summer's morning, in a recess on London Bridge,
he looks out on the sunshine "burning on steadfast," "lighting
the great heaven; gleaming on my finger-nail."
"I was intensely conscious of it," he writes, "I felt it; I
felt the presence of the immense powers of the universe; I felt
out into the depths of the ether. So intensely conscious of the
sun, the sky, the limitless space, I felt too in the midst of
eternity then, in the midst of the supernatural, among the
immortal, and the greatness of the material realised the spirit.
By these I saw my soul; by these I knew the supernatural to be
more intensely real than the sun. I touched the supernatural, the
immortal, there that moment."[23]
When he reaches this state, outer things drop
away,[24] and he seems to become
lost, and absorbed into the being of the universe. He partakes,
momentarily, of a larger, fuller life, he drinks in vitality
through nature. The least blade of grass, he says, or the
greatest oak, "seemed like exterior nerves and veins for the
conveyance of feeling to me. Sometimes a very ecstasy of
exquisite enjoyment of the entire visible universe filled
me."[25]
This great central Life Force, which Jefferies, like
Wordsworth, seemed at moments to touch, he, in marked contrast to
other mystics, refuses to call God. For, he says, what we
understand by deity is the purest form of mind, and he sees no
mind in nature. It is a force without a mind, "more subtle than
electricity, but absolutely devoid of consciousness and with no
more feeling than the force which lifts the tides."[26] Yet this cannot content him, for later he
declares there must be an existence higher than deity, towards
which he aspires and presses with the whole force of his being.
"Give me," he cries, "to live the deepest soul-life now and
always with this 'Highest Soul.'"[27]
This thrilling consciousness of spiritual life felt through
nature, coupled with passionate aspiration to be absorbed in that
larger life, are the two main features of the mysticism of
Richard Jefferies.
His books, and especially The Story of my Heart,
contain, together with the most exquisite nature description, a
rich and vivid record of sensation, feeling, and aspiration. But
it is a feeling which, though vivifying, can only be expressed in
general terms, and it carries with it no vision and no
philosophy. It is almost entirely emotional, and it is as an
emotional record that it is of value, for Jefferies' intellectual
reflections are, for the most part, curiously contradictory and
unconvincing.
The certainty and rapture of this experience of spiritual
emotion is all the more amazing when we remember that the record
of it was written in agony, when he was wrecked with mortal
illness and his nerves were shattered with pain. For with him, as
later with Francis Thompson, physical pain and material trouble
seemed to serve only to direct him towards and to enhance the
glory of the spiritual vision.
Chapter IV
Philosophical Mystics
The mystical sense may be called philosophical in all those
writers who present their convictions in a philosophic form
calculated to appeal to the intellect as well as to the emotions.
These writers, as a rule, though not always, are themselves
markedly intellectual, and their primary concern therefore is
with truth or wisdom. Thus Donne, William Law, Burke, Coleridge,
and Carlyle are all predominantly intellectual, while Traherne,
Emily Brontë, and Tennyson clothe their thoughts to some
extent in the language of philosophy.
The dominating characteristic of Donne is intellectuality; and
this may partly account for the lack in him of some essentialty
mystical qualities, more especially reverence, and that ascension
of thought so characteristic of Plato and Browning. These
shortcomings are very well illustrated in that extraordinary
poem, The, Progress of the Soul. The idea is a mystical
one, derived from Pythagorean philosophy, and has great
possibilities, which Donne entirely fails to utilise; for,
instead of following the soul upwards on its way, he depicts it
as merely jumping about from body to body, and we are conscious
of an entire lack of any lift or grandeur of thought. This poem
helps us to understand how it was that Donne, though so richly
endowed with intellectual gifts, yet failed to reach the highest
rank as a poet. He was brilliant in particulars, but lacked the
epic qualities of breadth, unity, and proportion, characteristics
destined to be the distinctive marks of the school of which he is
looked upon as the founder.
Apart from this somewhat important defect, Donne's attitude of
mind is essentially mystical. This is especially marked in his
feeling about the body and natural law, in his treatment of love,
and in his conception of woman. The mystic's postulate—if
we could know ourselves, we should know all—is often on
Donne's lips, as for instance in that curious poem written in
memory of Elizabeth Drury, on the second anniversary of her
death. It is perhaps best expressed in the following verse:
But we know our selves least; Mere outward shews
Our mindes so store,
That our soules, no more than our eyes disclose
But forme and colour. Onely he who knowes
Himselfe, knowes more.
Ode: Of our Sense of Sinne.
One of the marked characteristics of Donne's poetry is his
continual comparison of mental and spiritual with, physical
processes. This sense of analogy prevailing throughout nature is
with him very strong. The mystery of continual flux and change
particularly attracts him, as it did the Buddhists[28] and the early Greek thinkers, and
Nettleship's remarks about the nature of bread and unselfishness
are akin to the following comparison:—
Dost thou love
Beauty? (And beauty worthy'st is to move)
Poor cousened consener, that she, and that
thou,
Which did begin to love, are neither now;
Next day repaires (but ill) last dayes decay.
Nor are, (although the river keepe the name)
Yesterdaies waters, and to-daies the same.
Of the Progresse of the Soule. The second Anniversarie,
389-96.
Donne believes firmly in man's potential greatness, and the
power within his own soul:
Seeke wee then our selves in our selves; for as
Men force the Sunne with much more force to passe.
By gathering his beames with a chrystall glasse;
So wee, If wee into our selves will turne,
Blowing our sparkes of virtue, may out-burne
The straw, which doth about our hearts sojourne.
Letter to Mr Roland Woodward.
And although, in the Progress of the Soul, he failed to
give expression to it, yet his belief in progress is
unquenchable. He fully shares the mystic's view that "man, to get
towards Him that's Infinite, must first be great" (Letter to
the Countess of Salisbury).
In his treatment of love, Donne's mystical attitude is most
clearly seen. He holds the Platonic conception, that love
concerns the soul only, and is independent of the body, or bodily
presence; and he is the poet, who, at his best, expresses this
idea in the most dignified and refined way. The reader feels not
only that Donne believes it, but that he has in some measure
experienced it; whereas with his imitators it degenerated into
little more than a fashionable "conceit." The Undertaking
expresses the discovery he has made of this higher and deeper
kind of love; and in the Ecstasy he describes the union of
the souls of two lovers in language which proves his familiarity
with the description of ecstasy given by Plotinus (Enn.
vi. 9, § 11). The great value of this spiritual love is that
it is unaffected by time and space, a belief which is nowhere
more exquisitely expressed than in the refrain of his little
song, Soul's Joy.[29]
O give no way to griefe,
But let beliefe
Of mutuall love,
This wonder to the vulgar prove
Our Bodyes, not wee move.
In one of his verse letters to the Countess of
Huntingdon[30] he explains how true
love cannot be desire:
'Tis love, but with such fatall weaknesse made,
That it destroyes it selfe with its owne shade.
He goes still further in the poem entitled Negative
Love, where he says that love is such a passion as can only
be defined by negatives, for it is above apprehension, and his
language here is closely akin to the description of the One or
the Good given by Plotinus in the sixth Ennead.
Thomas Traherne is a mystical writer of singular charm and
originality. The manuscripts of his poems and his prose
Meditations, a kind of spiritual autobiography and
notebook, were only discovered and printed quite recently, and
they form a valuable addition to the mystical literature of the
seventeenth century.
He has affinities with Vaughan, Herbert, and Sir Thomas
Browne, with Blake and with Wordsworth. He is deeply sensitive to
the beauty of the natural world, and he insists on the necessity
for rejoicing in this beauty if we are really to live. By love
alone is God to be approached and known, he says, but this love
must not be finite. "He must be loved in all with an unlimited
love, even in all His doings, in all His friends, in all His
creatures." In a prose passage of sustained beauty Traherne thus
describes the attitude towards earth which is needful before we
can enter heaven.
You never enjoy the world aright, till the Sea itself floweth
in your veins, till you are clothed with the heavens, and crowned
with the stars:.... Till you can sing and rejoice and delight in
God, as misers do in gold, and Kings in sceptres, you never enjoy
the world.
Till your spirit filleth the whole world, and the stars are
your jewels;.... till you love men so as to desire their
happiness, with a thirst equal to the zeal of your own: till you
delight in God for being good to all: you never enjoy the
world.... The world is a mirror of infinite beauty, yet no man
sees it. It is a Temple of Majesty, yet no man regards it. It is
a region of Light and Peace, did not men disquiet it. It is the
Paradise of God.... It is, the place of Angels and the Gate of
Heaven.[31]
He is for ever reiterating, in company with all the mystics,
that
'Tis not the object, but the light
That maketh Heaven: 'tis a purer sight.
He shares Wordsworth's rapture in the life of nature, and
Browning's interest in his fellow-men; he has Shelley's belief in
the inner meaning of love, and much of Keats's worship of beauty,
and he expresses this in an original and lyrical prose of quite
peculiar and haunting beauty. He has embodied his main ideas,
with a good deal of repetition both in prose and verse, but it is
invariably the prose version, probably written first, which is
the most arresting and vigorous.
His Meditations well repay careful study; they are full
of wisdom and of an imaginative philosophy, expressed in pithy
and telling form, which continually reminds the reader of Blake's
Proverbs of Hell.
To have no principles or to live beside them, is equally
miserable.
Philosophers are not those that speak but do great things.
All men see the same objects, but do not equally understand
them.
Souls to souls are like apples, one being rotten rots
another.
This kind of saying abounds on every page. Some of his more
sustained philosophic passages are also noteworthy; such, for
instance, is his comparison of the powers of the soul to the rays
of the sun, which carry light in them unexpressed until they meet
an object (Meditations, second century, No. 78). But
Traherne's most interesting contribution to the psychology of
mysticism is his account of his childhood and the "vision
splendid" that he brought with him. Even more to him than to
Vaughan or Wordsworth,
The earth, and every common sight
... did seem
Apparelled in celestial light,
and his description of his feelings and spiritual insight are
both astonishing and convincing. A number of his poems are
devoted to this topic (The Salutation, Wonder, Eden,
Innocence, The Rapture, The Approach, and others), but it is
the prose account which must be given.
All appeared now, and strange at first, inexpressibly rare and
delightful and beautiful. I was a little stranger, which at my
entrance into the world was saluted and surrounded with
innumerable joys.... The corn was orient and immortal wheat,
which never should be reaped, nor was ever sown. I thought it had
stood from everlasting to everlasting. The dust and stones of the
street were as precious as gold: the gates were at first the end
of the world. The green trees when I saw them first ...
transported and ravished me, their sweetness and unusual beauty
made my heart to leap, and almost mad with ecstasy, they were
such strange and wonderful things. The Men! O what venerable and
reverend creatures did the aged seem! Immortal Cherubims! And
young men glittering and sparkling Angels, and maids strange
seraphic pieces of life and beauty! Boys and girls tumbling in
the street, and playing, were moving jewels. I knew not that they
were born or should die; but all things abided eternally as they
were in their proper places.... The city seemed to stand in Eden,
or to be built in Heaven.[32]
It is necessary to quote at some length, because it is the way
in which Traherne expresses his experiences or reflections which
is the moving and original thing about him. This last passage
seems to anticipate something of the magic of Keats in the Ode
to a Nightingale or the Grecian Urn, the sense of
continuity, and of eternity expressed in time. Traherne's account
of the gradual dimming of this early radiance, and his enforced
change of values is equally unusual. Only with great difficulty
did his elders persuade him "that the tinselled ware upon a
hobby-horse was a fine thing" and that a purse of gold was of any
value, but by degrees when he found that all men prized things he
did not dream of, and never mentioned those he cared for, then
his "thoughts were blotted out; and at last all the celestial
great and stable treasures, to which I was born, as wholly
forgotten, if as they had never been."
But he remembered enough of those early glories to realise
that if he would regain happiness, he must "become, as it were, a
little child again," get free of "the burden and cumber of
devised wants," and recapture the value and the glory of the
common things of life.
He was so resolutely bent on this that when he had left
college and come into the country and was free, he lived upon
£10 a year, fed on bread and water, and, like George Fox,
wore a leather suit. Thus released from all worldly cares, he
says, through God's blessing, "I live a free and kingly life as
if the world were turned again into Eden, or much more, as it is
at this day."
In Emily Brontë we have an unusual type of mystic. Indeed
she is one of the most strange and baffling figures in our
literature. We know in truth very little about her, but that
little is quite unlike what we know about any one else. It is now
beginning to be realised that she was a greater and more original
genius than her famous sister, and that strong as were
Charlotte's passion and imagination, the passion and imagination
of Emily were still stronger. She had, so far as we can tell,
peculiarly little actual experience of life, her material
interests were bounded by her family, the old servant Tabby, the
dogs, and the moors. For the greater part of her thirty years of
life she did the work of a servant in the little parsonage house
on the edge of the graveyard. She can have read little of
philosophy or metaphysics, and probably had never heard of the
mystics; she was brought up in a narrow, crude, and harshly
material creed; yet her own inner experience, her touch with the
secret of life, enabled her to write the remarkable series of
poems the peculiar and haunting quality of which has as yet
scarcely been recognised. They are strong and free and certain,
hampered by no dogma, weighted by no explanation, but
containing—in the simplest language—the record of the
experience and the vision of a soul. Emily Brontë lived
remote, unapproachable, self-sufficing and entirely detached, yet
consumed with a fierce, unquenchable love of life and of nature,
of the life which withheld from her all the gifts most prized of
men, love, friendship, experience, recognition, fame; and of the
nature which she knew only on a circumscribed space of the wild
Yorkshire moors.
In her poems her mysticism is seen principally in two ways: in
her unerring apprehension of values, of the illusory quality of
material things, even of the nature she so loved, together with
the certain vision of the one Reality behind all forms. This, and
her description of ecstasy, of the all-sufficing joy of the inner
life of one who has tasted this experience, mark her out as being
among those who have seen, and who know. In The Prisoner,
the speaker, a woman, is "confined in triple walls," yet in spite
of bolts and bars and dungeon gloom she holds within herself an
inextinguishable joy and unmeasured freedom brought to her every
night by a "messenger."
He comes with western winds, with evening's wandering
airs,
With that clear dusk of heaven that brings the thickest
stars.
Winds take a pensive tone, and stars a tender fire,
And visions rise, and change, that kill me with desire.
But, first, a hush of peace—a soundless calm
descends;
The struggle of distress, and fierce impatience ends;
Mute music soothes my breast—unuttered harmony,
That I could never dream, till Earth was lost to me.
Then dawns the Invisible; the Unseen its truth reveals;
My outward sense is gone, my inward essence feels:
Its wings are almost free—its home, its harbour found,
Measuring the gulf, it stoops and dares the final bound.
Oh! dreadful is the check—intense the agony—
When the ear begins to hear, and the eye begins to see;
When the pulse begins to throb, the brain to think again;
The soul to feel the flesh, and the flesh to feel the chain.
This is the description—always unmistakable—of the
supreme mystic experience, the joy of the outward flight, the
pain of the return, and it could only have been written by one
who in some measure had knowledge of it. This, together with the
exquisite little poem The Visionary, which describes a
similar experience, and The Philosopher, stand apart as
expressions of spiritual vision, and are among the most perfect
mystic poems in English.
Her realisation of the meaning of common things, her knowledge
that they hold the secret of the universe, and her
crystallisation of this in verse, place her with Blake and
Wordsworth.
What have those lonely mountains worth revealing? More glory
and more grief than I can tell: The earth that wakes one human
heart to feeling Can centre both the worlds of Heaven and
Hell.
And finally, the sense of continuous life—one central,
all-sustaining Life—of the oneness of God and man, has
never been more nobly expressed than in what is her best-known
poem, the last lines she ever wrote:—
O God within my breast,
Almighty, ever-present Deity!
Life—that in me has rest,
As I—undying Life—have power in Thee!
With wide-embracing love
Thy spirit animates eternal years,
Pervades and broods above,
Changes, sustains, dissolves, creates, and rears.
Though earth and man were gone,
And suns and universes ceased to be,
And Thou wert left alone,
Every existence would exist in Thee.
Tennyson differs widely from the other poets whom we are
considering in this connection. He was not born with the mystical
temperament, but, on the contrary, he had a long and bitter
struggle with his own doubts and questionings before he wrested
from them peace. There is nothing of mystic calm or strength in
the lines—
Oh, yet we trust that somehow good
Will be the final goal of ill.
He has no mystic rapture in Nature like Wordsworth,
I found Him not in world or sun
Or eagle's wing, or insect's eye;
no mystic interpretation of life as had Browning, no yearning
for union with the spirit of love and beauty as had Shelley.
Tennyson's mysticism came, as it were, rather in spite of
himself, and is based on one thing only—experience. He
states his position quite clearly in In Memoriam, cxxiv.
As is well known, he had from time to time a certain peculiar
experience, which he describes fully both in prose and verse, a
touch at intervals throughout his life of "ecstasy," and it was
on this he based his deepest belief. He has left several prose
accounts of this mental state, which often came to him through
repeating his own name silently,
till all at once, as it wore, out of the intensity of the
consciousness of individuality, the individuality itself seemed
to resolve and fade away into boundless being, and this not a
confused state, but the clearest of the clearest, the surest of
the surest, utterly beyond words, where death was an almost
laughable impossibility, the loss of personality (if so it were)
seeming no extinction, but the only true life[33]
It is a somewhat similar experience which is described in
In Memoriam, xcv.
And all at once it seem'd at last
The living soul was flash'd on mine,
And mine in this was wound, and whirl'd
About empyreal heights of thought,
And came on that which is, and caught
The deep pulsations of the world.
And again in the conclusion of the Holy
Grail—
Let visions of the night or of the day
Come, as they will; and many a time they come,
Until this earth he walks on seems not earth,
This light that strikes his eyeball is not light,
This air that strikes his forehead is not air
But vision—yea, his very hand and foot—
In moments when he feels he cannot die,
And knows himself no vision to himself,
Nor the high God a A vision, nor that One
Who rose again.
"These three lines," said Tennyson, speaking of the last three
quoted, "are the (spiritually) central lines in the Idylls." They
are also the central lines in his own philosophy, for it was the
experience of this "vision" that inspired all his deepest
convictions with regard to the unity of all things, the reality
of the unseen, and the persistence of life.
The belief in the impotence of intellectual knowledge is very
closely connected, it is indeed based, upon these "gleams" of
ecstasy. The prologue to In Memoriam (written when the
poem was completed) seems to sum up his faith after many years of
struggle and doubt; but it is in the most philosophical as well
as one of the latest, of his poems, The Ancient Sage, that
we find this attitude most fully expressed. Tennyson wrote of it:
"The whole poem is very personal. The passages about 'Faith' and
'the Passion of the Past' were more especially my own personal
feelings." Through the mouth of the Sage, the poet declares in
impassioned words the position of the mystic, and points out the
impotence of sense-knowledge in dealing with that which is beyond
either the senses or the reason:
For Knowledge is the swallow on the lake
That sees and stirs the surface-shadow there
But never yet hath dipt into the abysm.
Tennyson, like Wordsworth, emphasises the truth that the only
way in which man can gain real knowledge and hear the "Nameless"
is by diving or sinking into the centre of his own being. There
is a great deal of Eastern philosophy and mysticism in the
Ancient Sage, as, for instance, the feeling of the unity
of all existence to the point of merging the personality into the
universal.
But that one ripple on the boundless deep
Feels that the deep is boundless, and itself
For ever changing form, but evermore
One with the boundless motion of the deep.
We know that Tennyson had been studying the philosophy of
Lâo-Tsze about this time; yet, though this is, as it were,
grafted on to the poet's mind, still we may take it as being his
genuine and deepest conviction. The nearest approach to a
definite statement of it to be found in his poems is in the few
stanzas called The Higher Pantheism, which he sent to be
read at the first meeting of the Metaphysical Society in
1869.
Speak to Him thou for He hears, and Spirit with Spirit can
meet—
Closer is He than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet.
And the ear of man cannot hear, and the eye of man cannot
see;
But if we could see and hear, this Vision—were it not
He?
In William Law, Burke, Coleridge, and Carlyle, we have a
succession of great English prose-writers whose work and thought
is permeated by a mystical philosophy. Of these four, Law is,
during his later life, by far the most consistently and
predominantly mystical.
As has been indicated, there were many strains of influence
which in the seventeenth century tended to foster mystical
thought in England. The group of Cambridge Platonists, to which
Henry More belonged, gave new expression to the great
Neo-platonic ideas, but in addition to this a strong vein of
mysticism had been kept alive in Amsterdam, where the exiled
Separatists had gone in 1593. They flourished there and waxed
strong, and sent back to England during the next century a
continual stream of opinion and literature. To this source can be
traced the ideas which inspired alike the Quakers, the Seekers,
the Behmenists, the Familists, and numberless other sects who all
embodied a reaction against forms and ceremonies, which, in
ceasing to be understood, had become lifeless. These sects were,
up to a certain point, mystical in thought, for they all believed
in the "inner light," in the immediate revelation of God within
the soul as the all-important experience.
The persecutions of the Quakers under Charles II. tended to
withdraw them from active philanthropy, and to throw them more in
the direction of a personal and contemplative religion. It was
then that the writings of Madame Bourignon, Madame Guyon, and
Fénelon became popular, and were much read among a certain
section of thinkers, while the influence of the teachings of
Jacob Boehme, whose works had been translated into English
between the years 1644 and 1692, can be traced, in diverse ways.
They impressed themselves on the thought of the founders of the
Society of Friends, they produced a distinct "Behmenist" sect,
and it would seem that the idea of the three laws of motion first
reached Newton through his eager study of Boehme. But all this
has nothing directly to do with literature, and would not concern
us here were it not that in the eighteenth century William Law
came into touch with many of these mystical thinkers, and that he
has embodied in some of the finest prose in our language a
portion of the "inspired cobbler's" vision of the universe.
Law's character is one of considerable interest. Typically
English, and in intellect typically of the eighteenth century,
logical, sane, practical, he is not, at first sight, the man one
would expect to find in sympathy with the mystics. Sincerity is
the keynote of his whole nature, sincerity of thought, of belief,
of speech, and of life. Sincerity implies courage, and Law was a
brave man, never shirking the logical outcome of his convictions,
from the day when he ruined his prospects at Cambridge, to the
later years when he suffered his really considerable reputation
to be eclipsed by his espousal of an uncomprehended and unpopular
mysticism. He had a keen rather than a profound intellect, and
his thought is lightened by brilliant flashes of wit or of grim
satire. We can tell, however, from his letters and his later
writings, that underneath a severe and slightly stiff exterior,
were hidden emotion, enthusiasm, and great tenderness of
feeling.
By middle life Law was well known as a most able and brilliant
writer on most of the burning theological questions of the day,
as well as the author of one of the best loved and most widely
read practical and ethical treatises in the language, A
Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. These earlier
writings are by far the best known of his works, and it is with
the Serious Call that his name will always be
associated.
Until middle age he showed no marked mystical tendency,
although we know that from the time he was an undergraduate he
was a "diligent reader" of mystical books, and that he had
studied, among others, Dionysius the Areopagite, Ruysbroek,
Tauler, Suso, and the seventeenth century Quietists,
Fénelon, Madame Guyon, and Antoinette Bourignon.
When, however, he was about forty-six (c. 1733), he came
across the writings of the seer who set his whole nature aglow
with spiritual fervour, so that when he first read his works they
put him into "a perfect sweat." Jacob Boehme—or Behmen, as
he has usually been called in England—(1575-1624), the
illiterate and untrained peasant shoemaker of Görlitz, is
one of the most amazing phenomena in the history of mysticism, a
history which does not lack wonders. His work has so much
influenced later mystical thought and philosophy that a little
space must be devoted to him here. He lived outwardly the quiet,
hard-working life of a simple German peasant, but
inwardly—like his fellow-seer Blake—he lived in a
glory of illumination, which by flashes revealed to him the
mysteries and splendours he tries in broken and faltering words
to record. He saw with the eye of his mind into the heart of
things, and he wrote down as much of it as he could express.
The older mystics—eastern and western alike—had
laid stress on unity as seen in the nature of God and all things.
No one more fully believed in ultimate unity than did Boehme, but
he lays peculiar stress on the duality, or more accurately, the
trinity in unity; and the central point of his philosophy is the
fundamental postulate that all manifestation necessitates
opposition. He asserted the uniformity of law throughout all
existence, physical and spiritual, and this law, which applies
all through nature, divine and human alike, is that nothing can
reveal itself without resistance, good can only be known through
evil, and weakness through strength, just as light is only
visible when reflected by a dark body.
Thus when God, the Triune Principle, or Will under
three aspects, desires to become manifest, He divides the Will
into two, the "yes" and the "no," and so founds an eternal
contrast to Himself out of His own hidden Nature, in order to
enter into struggle with it, and finally to discipline and
assimilate it. The object of all manifested nature is the
transforming of the will which says "No" into the will which says
"Yes," and this is brought about by seven organising spirits or
forms. The first three of these bring nature out of the dark
element to the point where contact with the light is possible.
Boe