Rating: 
Summary: Tedious and didactic
Review: When Teasdale speaks of his own mystic encounters, he is interesting. But that is a small percentage of the book. His overview of how mysticim figures in the world's religions is also of interest, particularly if you are not very familiar with Hinduism. But apart from Hindu and Christian, he seems to be looking at everything else from quite a distance, so that we never get much of a feel for what Jewish or Islamic mysticism look or feel like. His description of the natural mysticism of American Indians works well only because he never goes into any depth or details. He can talk lightly on one page about harm no sentient life, and then on the next page extol American Indians as paragons of virtue, with no comment on the fact that they were hunters and warriors for the most part.
My main complaint is that he seems overly-impressed with the ability of the group that he's a part of (Parliament of World Religions) to change the world. A United Nations-type committee to bring about world mystical harmony is more or less absurd to my mind.
Teasdale gives us too many generalities and too many lists of virtues and guidelines. There is a sermonizing quality to much of what he says, a desire to be moralize.
Also, his bottom line seemed to be that Christian mysticism leads to union with Love itself, while some other forms of mysticism lead to a state that is compassionate and blissful but may also be experienced as Void. To me this indicates that Christianity is a step beyond earlier mystic insights (although it has not done as well in leading people to follow Christ to this end-point). But Teasdale seems far more critical of Christianity than he does of Hinduism and other traditions. He says, for example, "Christian mysticism has always rejected the body, as evidenced by the extreme asceticism of Francis of Assisi. He spent a good deal of time fasting, sometimes praying all night on his knees. His poor body was a victim of his piety!....The East has its equivalent ascetical hardships on the body, but has also managed to understand that the body can be beneficial to the spiritual journey." Well, Francis of Assisi may have been hard on his body, but praying all night on your knees is nothing compared to the extreme ascetical practices still followed in Hinduism, where men spend years with one arm held over their heads or standing on their feet day and night for years. And it is simply untrue that Christian mysticism as a whole flatly rejects the body. The Mystical Marriage, with its erotic overtones, is the primary Christian mystical metaphor. F. C. Happold's book entitled Mysticism is superior to Teasdale's in allowing the mystic traditions to speak for themselves and also in providing a framework for understanding what they have to say. Another book called Mystics, Masters, Saints and Sages also is more valuable in actually allowing mystics of various traditions and no traditions at all to speak of their vision. One other complaint: Teasdale's question about psycho-active drugs/plants is worth raising, but his answer misses the point. If a state of mind similar to a mystical state can be induced by peyote, for example, the question is: doesn't this suggest that mystical states are physiologically caused? He never confronts this question.
| 
