Neo-Perennialism and Mystical Exceptionalism

Neo-perennialists claim that a cross-cultural category of experiences can be defined as 'mystical.' The author clarifies this project and defends its feasibility, then criticizes the narrow focus on mystical experiences in neo-perennialist research—both in the dominant understanding of mystical states and the tendency to study them exclusively among altered states. The essay analyzes criteria external to the phenomenology of extraordinary experiences that might justify restricting a neo-perennialist account to certain mystical states. It closes by calling for a refined definition of 'mystical experience' and for expanding cross-cultural study of altered states beyond the mystical.

Study at a glance

Abstract

I take “neo-perennialists” to share the following, minimal claim: there exists a cross-cultural category of experiences that can be defined as “mystical”. I first clarify the neo-perennialist project and defend its overall feasibility. I then criticize the narrow focus on mystical experiences that has characterized much neo-perennialist research, and research based on the above-mentioned core claim. With “narrow” I refer both to the specific understanding of mystical states that has become dominant in the literature, and the tendency to focus on mystical experiences specifically, out of all possible altered states. I finally analyze some criteria, external to the phenomenology of extraordinary experiences, that one might appeal to in order to justify restricting a neo-perennialist account, or study, to (certain) mystical states. I close the essay with a call to (1) refine the definition of “mystical experience”, and (2) push the cross-cultural study of altered states of consciousness beyond mystical states.