When I use the word transcendant, I am referring to experiencing what our senses deliver without the filters of the conditioned mind using symbols as an interface to the raw world. And that is not exactly precise because if there were no filters there could be no talk of the experience, such as in a deep sleep. More accurate is a greatly reduced filtering of the raw experiences by the conditioned mind. Enough filters so that some record can be installed in the brain accessible to recall.
There is a huge difference between watching, being taught, and imagining what a transcendant experience would be like and actually having such an experience. Same as watching, training for, and imagining what it would feel like to skydive the first time. Much can be said about both experiences without having them. There is far fewer terms that relate to a religious, transcendant experience than to the first skydive. That is a big problem that is continually exploited by the charlatans who will rely on ancient text language as the standard. The mystic experience, especially a recent one, will mostly cause the visionary to be fanatical about his vision and proselytize to whoever will listen. The speech and mannerisms of the visionary can be emulated enough that the gullible and vulnerable will take the charlatan as a leader while ignoring the fact that they too, might be able to have their own vision.
The mystic experience is unique to the individual. The language used and system used to speak of the ineffable is a cultural phenomenon that is not in existence to exclusively communicate the visions. Generally the language has been in religious terms, Kabbalistic, Sufi, Gnosticism, and such. I do not consider Jung's terminology to be religious, though I am reminded that many do.
Yes. That is one characteristic that I will go along with generally. Science, too, pursues doing away with "not understanding." Those who worship the darkness of "not understanding," fear the light of reason.If you ask me, "religion" is another term for not understanding.
Conditioning at a young age makes it tough to openly advocate an opposing position. I stamp white horses. Used to be because I was emulating Mom. Then because I'd had a good life, I feared not to. I'd made some kind of connection with my good fortune and stamping horses. Now I do it, or rather hesitate in doing it, so I can feel what my Catholic raised friends feel at any tendency to question their faith. So that I can feel their pain, so to speak. In doing this, I understand, no, not understand, I experience my and their feelings of fear when I attempt to reasonably discuss religion with them.Religion is possible mostly because it is difficult to reliably recover from its "teachings".
When most people get hooked into that kind of thinking, it seems very hard for them to get out.