The Oceanic Feeling Interpreted

Abstract

Abstract Drawing on the multiple resources unearthed in the last chapter, we are now in a position to offer a fresh interpretation of Rolland’s mysticism. The latter presents interesting peculiarities: Rolland was an unchurched Western mystic deracinated from traditional religious modes of expressing religious sentiments; a recipient of unchurched mystical experiences, and an advocate of the creation of a “mystical psychoanalysis.” As such, a psychoanalytic analysis of his mysticism does not encounter the more difficult sociohistorical and comparativist problems presented by tradition-bound mystics. On the other hand, I do think Rolland belongs to what can loosely be called a “tradition.” I begin, then, by situating Rolland’s mysticism with respect to extant comparativist literature, focusing at first on what has been termed “nature mysticism.” Here I appropriate the writings of R. C. Zaehner, for only Zaehner has suggested a conception of nature mysticism fruitful enough to begin to account for the experiential, sociohistorical, and theoretical dimensions of Rolland’s mysticism. As important, Zaehner’s rubric provides convenient theoretical bridges to psychoanalytic studies that allow me to implement the dialogical position advocated in the last chapter. Building on Zaehner, then, I devote the rest of the chapter to creating a dialogue between Rolland’s mysticism, culture studies, psychoanalysis, and issues in mystical epistemology.