著者

鶴岡 賀雄

出版者

東京大学文学部宗教学研究室

雑誌

東京大学宗教学年報 (ISSN:2896400)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.18, pp.1-14, 2001-03-31

---

Mysticism is an ambiguous term, no definition of which has ever gained general acceptance among scholars, notwithstanding its fairy frequent use in both academia and the public sphere. In this paper I attempt to examine the "historicities" of this term, in order to illuminate its historical determinations and to make evident its "genealogical" origins. Such examinations are required, I believe, if we are to continue to employ this term and evaluate it as meaningful to contemporay religious studies. In this paper, I will outline several distinct strata within a perceivable "historicity of mysticism." I designate historicity-0 as the essential factual positivity of mystics" activities in particular historical situations. I then designate the temporal dimension of history as historicity-1, in which chronological presentation of mystics becomes possible. However, a more or less "eternal" (i.e. a-historical) essence of mysticism - a variety of neo-platonistic metaphysics, a universal core of mystical experiences, etc. - is generally presupposed behind this "historicity" of mysticism. From the viewpoint of historicity-2 we can postulate significant divisions within history, because here mysticism is understood to change in value and status according to the nature of each era's knowledge and power. I hypothecize that the history of western mysticism can be divided into seven distinct periods, and outline them in detail. Historicity-3 is concerned with genealogy, where the manner in which mysticism emerges in a particular historical situation is analyzed. Here I point out two historical stages of the formation of mysticism, highlighting the parallels between them. The first is the 17th century when some advocates of theologia mystica "created" the tradition of Christian mysticism through reverence of ancient, medieval and contemporary saints and mystics, in whom the "eternal" essence of Christianity was supposedly realized. The second is the period from the latter part of the 19th century to the first half of the 20th century, when historians of religions developed the notion of mysticism as being the essence of all religion. Finally, I situate myself on the level of historicity-4, where we are obliged to be fully aware of these strata of historicity and of the fact that our considerations about them are also historically conditioned. From this location I posit some conditions in which a new evalutation of the nature of mysticism may be investigated. Throughout this paper I refer to Michel de Certeau's studies on modern Western mysticism, which provide a perspicacious and uniquely "postmodern" view of this subject.