Several contemporary philosophers have charged that there is a conceptual tension between nondualistic types of mystical awareness--an awareness of some particular conception of the divine as an all-pervasive unity within which there are no distinct substances--and the social character of morality. However, some nondualistic mystics have conceptualized enlightenment not only as being compatible with moral virtue--specifically, compassion and care--but as providing a foundation for it. I here offer a conceptual model for this grounding, at least according to Dōgen Zenji and (...) Meister Eckhart. Briefly, the model suggests that some forms of nondualistic mystical awareness are accompanied by the mystics' prudential concerns extending to include the well-being of "others" under their scope. Finally, utilizing this model, I suggest possible responses to two common arguments for the claim that nondualistic mysticism is essentially amoral. (shrink)

Perennialists regarding the phenomenology of mysticism, like Walter Stace, feel that all Christian mystical experiences are fundamentally similar to each other and to experiences described by mystics across religious traditions, cultures and ages. In his seminal work, Mystic Union: An Essay in the Phenomenology of Mysticism, Nelson Pike convincingly argues that this extreme position is inadequate for capturing the breadth of experiences described by the canonical Medieval Christian mystics. However, Pike may have leaned too far away from perennialism in claiming (...) that all the experiences of (Christian) mystic union are essentially theistic. Here, I argue that Pike did not successfully establish this point and that union without distinction, often described as the pinnacle of union by Christian mystics, remains a viable candidate for an instance of a trans-traditionally type-identical mystical experience. (shrink)