Traditionally mysticism and physics have been seen as polar opposites

• One has to recognize that science is not metaphysics, and certainly not mysticism; it can never bring us the illumination and the satisfaction experienced by one enraptured in ecstasy. Science is sobriety and clarity of conception, not intoxicated vision.  Ludwig von Mises
• Science and metaphysics are generally considered to be polar opposites. Science is experimental, practical, rigorous, empirical, materialistic, objective, and intellectual. Metaphysics is spiritual, experiential, abstract, mystical, ephemeral, internal, irreplicable, imprecise, subjective, otherworldly, impractical, and impossible to prove. Science studies the world of matter while metaphysics seeks to transcend it. Dawson Church

.

However, the truth is that both mysticism and physics enquire into the nature of reality, just using different methods

• A page from a journal of modern experimental physics will be as mysterious to the uninitiated as a Tibetan mandala. Both are records of enquiries into the nature of the universe. Fritjof Capra
• Those who use the science of religion to explore reality are simply using another method to discover the same truths as science reveals. There is—and can only be—one reality. Those versed in the science of religion, and those versed in the science of matter, simply use different methods to explore the same reality.  Material scientists discover its properties through rigorously controlled experimentation and call it reality. Spiritual scientists discover its properties through rigorously controlled transcendent experience and call it Reality.  Joseph Selbie

.

Physics adopts a rational approach while mysticism uses the intuitive mind

• The modern physicist experiences the world through an extreme specialization of the rational mind; the mystic through an extreme specialization of the intuitive mind. Fritjof Capra
• The fact that modern physics, the manifestation of an extreme specialization of the rational mind, is now making contact with mysticism, the essence of religion and manifestation of an extreme specialization of the intuitive mind, shows very beautifully the unity and complementary nature of the rational and intuitive modes of consciousness; of the yang and the yin. Fritjof Capra

.

Physics is conceptual while mysticism is non-conceptual

• Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reasons for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. The roiling mystery of the world can be analyzed with concepts (this is science), or it can be experienced free of concepts (this is myticism). Religion is nothing more than bad concepts held in place of good ones for all time. It is the denial-at once full of hope and full of fear-of the vastitude of human ignorance. Sam Harris
• To acquire mystical knowledge means to undergo a transformation; one could even say that the knowledge is the transformation. Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, can often stay abstract and theoretical. Fritjof Capra

.

Both physics and mysticism have their source in wonder and curiosity

• I assert that the cosmic religious experience is the strongest and the noblest driving force behind scientific research. Albert Einstein
• In the beginning there was wonder and awe. These inspired the search with which science and religion began. Originally they were one, untroubled by the modern separation that would develop to decree that they become distinct domains with uncrossable borders. In that separation, the sense of wonder became science, the sense of awe, mysticism. … To this day, science seeks the boundaries of nature, mysticism its unboundedness, science the droplet of the ocean, mysticism the wave. … They share the search for reality because, in their own way, both science and mysticism look for the basic truth about matter and the source of matter. Reneé Weber

.

Physics investigates the nature of objects while mysticism enquires into the nature of the subject

• Are we, in pursuing the mystical outlook, facing the hard facts of experience? Surely we are. I think that those who would wish to take cognisance of nothing but the measurements of the scientific world made by our sense-organs are shirking one of the most immediate facts of experience, namely that consciousness is not wholly, nor even primarily a device for receiving sense-impressions. Arthur Eddington
• Just as nowadays many ridicule those who believe in a higher consciousness, in a few hundred years – or perhaps much sooner – people will say of science, “How could anyone have believed that? The evidence against it is glaring, staring people in the face, but they were blind to the obvious – they took miracles for granted.” The irony is that mysticism is closer to the truth, than is science. Science is to truth what interior design is to architecture. Scott Owen
• The mystic investigates himself; the artist and scientist explore the world. If both go far enough they inevitably end up with the same conclusion: that everything and everyone share the same reality. It is only because either party doesn’t go all the way that there seem to be differences. Rupert Spira

.

Both provide a creative theory that acts as an explanation of empirical observations

• The integration of science and mysticism should not be too disconcerting. After all, they share an important similarity: Both grew out of empirical data interpreted in the light of theoretical explanatory principles. In science, theory serves both as explanation of data and as the instrument of prediction and guidance for future experiments. The idealist philosophy, too, can be viewed as a creative theory that acts as an explanation of empirical observations of the mystics as well as guidance for other researchers of Truth. Finally, like science, mysticism seems to be a universal enterprise. There is no parochialism in mysticism. Parochialism enters when religions simplify mystical teachings to make them more communicable to the masses of humankind. Amit Goswami

.

Both provide a systematic and rigorous methodology for exploring the nature of the world…

• Mystical refers to the direct perception of reality; knowledge derived directly rather than indirectly. In many respects, mysticism is surprisingly similar to science in that it is a systematic method of exploring the nature of the world. Science concentrates on outer, objective phenomena, and mysticism concentrates on inner, subjective phenomena. It is interesting that numerous scientists, scholars, and sages over the years have revealed deep, under lying similarities between the goals, practices, and findings of science and mysticism. Some of the most famous scientists wrote in terms that are practically indistinguishable from the writings of mystics. Dean I. Radin
• To arrive at an understanding of Truth, a mystic usually discovers and employs a particular methodology. Amit Goswami
• The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by that of the mystic’s consciousness—both physical and spiritual—in deep meditation. Fritjof Capra

.

…physics investigating the outer world and mysticism investigating inner experience

• In contrast to the mystic, the physicist begins his enquiry into the essential nature of things by studying the material world. Penetrating into ever deeper realms of matter, he has become aware of the essential unity of all things and events. More than that, he has also learnt that he himself and his consciousness are an integral part of this unity. Thus the mystic and the physicist arrive at the same conclusion; one starting from the inner realm, the other from the outer world. Fritjof Capra
• Yet I did not need any proof of what I felt during that summer night in Maine looking up at the sky. It was a purely personal experience, and its validity and power resided in the experience itself. Science knows what it knows from experiment with the external world. Belief in the Absolutes comes from internal experience, or sometimes from received teachings and culture-granted authority. Alan Lightman
• The similarity between science and mysticism is a common search for unity. Theoretical physicists seek this unity from the “outside,” expressing their ideas in scientifically elegant proposals for a “Grand Unified Theory” and a physical “Theory of Everything.” Mystics seek this unity from the “inside,” through the direct experience of oneness with the universe. Dean I. Radin

.

Both require a high level of mastery and practice

• Anybody who wants to repeat an experiment in modern subatomic physics has to undergo many years of training. Only then will he or she be able to ask nature a specific question through the experiment and to understand the answer. Similarly, a deep mystical experience requires, generally, many years of training under an experienced master and, as in the scientific training, the dedicated time does not alone guarantee success. If the student is successful, however, he or she will be able to ‘repeat the experiment’. The repeatability of the experience is, in fact, essential to every mystical training and is the very aim of the mystic’s spiritual instruction. Fritjof Capra
• The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by that of the mystic’s consciousness—both physical and spiritual—in deep meditation. Fritjof Capra

.

Both use intense observation; physics through experimentation and mysticism through non-sensory experience of reality

• The parallel between scientific experiments and mystical (read spiritual) experiences may seem surprising in view of the very different nature of these acts of observation. Physics perform experiments involving an elaborate teamwork and a highly sophisticated technology, whereas mystics obtain their knowledge purely through introspection, without any machinery, in the privacy of meditation. Scientific experiments, furthermore, seem repeatable any time and by anybody, whereas mystical experiences seem to be reserved for a few individuals at special occasions. A closer examination shows, however that the differences between the two kinds of observation lie only in their approach and not in their reliability or complexity. Fritjof Capra
• The primary difference between the science of religion and the science of matter is in the discovery process: the science of matter’s view of reality is based on the repeatable and consistent findings of physical experiments; the science of religion’s view of reality is based on the repeatable and consistent findings of transcendent experience. Joseph Selbie
• Seeing in mystical traditions should not be taken too literally, but has to be understood in a metaphorical sense, since the mystical experience of reality is an essentially non-sensory experience. When the Eastern mystics talk about ‘seeing’, they refer to a mode of perception which may include visual perception, but which always and essentially transcends it to become a non-sensory experience of reality. What they do emphasize, however, when they talk about seeing, looking or observing, is the empirical character of their knowledge. This empirical approach of Eastern philosophy is strongly reminiscent of the emphasis on observation in science. Fritjof Capra
• The mystics ask you to take nothing on mere belief. Rather, they give you a set of experiments to test in your own awareness and experience. The laboratory is your own mind, the experiment is meditation. Ken Wilbur
• A mystical experience, therefore, is not any more unique than a modern experiment in physics. On the other hand, it is not less sophisticated either, although its sophistication is of a very different kind. The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by that of the mystics consciousness – both physics and spiritual – in deep meditation. The scientists and the mystics then, have developed highly sophisticated methods of observing nature which are inaccessible to the layperson. A [Page from a journal of modern experimental physics will be as mysterious to the uninitiated as the Tibetan mandala. Both are records of enquires into the nature of the universe. Fritjof Capra
• Physicists derive their knowledge from experiments; mystics from meditative insights. Both are observations, and in both fields these observations are acknowledged as the only source of knowledge. The object of observation is of course very different in the two cases. The mystic looks within and explores his or her consciousness at its various levels, which include the body as the physical manifestation of the mind. The experience of one’s body is, in fact, emphasized in many Eastern traditions and is often seen as the key to the mystical experience of the world. Fritjof Capra

.

In both physics and mysticism, observation takes place in realms which are inaccessible to the ordinary senses

• A further similarity between the ways of the physicist and mystic is the fact that their observations take place in realms which are inaccessible to the ordinary senses. In modern physics, these are the realms of the atomic and subatomic world; in mysticism they are non-ordinary states of consciousness in Tao of which the sense world is transcended. Fritjof Capra

.

Modern physics increasingly is coming to the same conclusions as mysticism…

• Is modern science, with all its sophisticated machinery, merely rediscovering ancient wisdom, known to the Eastern sages for thousands of years? Fritjof Capra
• My main professional interest during the 1970s has been in the dramatic change of concepts and ideas that has occurred in physics during the first three decades of the century, and that is still being elaborated in our current theories of matter. The new concepts in physics have brought about a profound change in our world view; from the mechanistic conception of Descartes and Newton to a holistic and ecological view, a view which I have found to be similar to the views of mystics of all ages and traditions. Fritjof Capra
• If physics leads us today to a world view which is essentially mystical, it returns, in a way, to its beginning, 2,500 years ago… This time, however, it is not only based on intuition, but also on experiments of great precision and sophistication, and on a rigorous and consistent mathematical formalism. Fritjof Capra
• The parallels to modern physics [with mysticism] appear not only in the Vedas of Hinduism, in the I Ching, or in the Buddhist sutras, but also in the fragments of Heraclitus, in the Sufism of Ibn Arabi, or in the teachings of the Yaqui sorcerer Don Juan. Fritjof Capra
• The new concepts in physics have brought about a profound change in our world view; from the mechanistic conception of Descartes and Newton to a holistic and ecological view, a view which I have found to be similar to the views of mystics of all ages and traditions. Fritjof Capra
• The principal theories and models of modern physics lead to a view of the world which is internally consistent and in perfect harmony with the views of Eastern mysticism. Fritjof Capra

.

…both pointing to a fundamental oneness of the universe…

• Most of today’s physicists do not seem to realize the philosophical, cultural and spiritual implications of their theories. Many of them actively support a society which is still based on the mechanistic, fragmented world view, without seeing that science points beyond such a view, towards a oneness of the universe which includes not only our natural environment but also our fellow human beings. Fritjof Capra

.

…both concluding that the observed and observer cannot be separated

• It is mysticism, not science, which pursues the Grand Unified Theory with ruthless logic—the one that includes the questioner within its answer. Although the scientist wants to unify everything in one ultimate equation, he does not want to unify consistently, since he wants to leave himself outside that equation. Of course, with the advent of quantum mechanics, that is far less possible than it was in classical physics. Now observer and observed are admitted to constitute a unit. But the full meaning of this has not yet caught up with most of the community of scientists who, despite quantum mechanics, believe they can stand aloof from what they work on. Reneé Weber

.

Increasingly, mysticism and physics are able to inform each other

• Mysticism is just tomorrow’s science dreamed today. Marshall McLuhan
• Mysticism can provide valid knowledge of the world, equal to science and logic. Walter Terence Stace
• As Eastern thought has begun to interest a significant number of people, and meditation is no longer viewed with ridicule or suspicion, mysticism is being taken seriously even within the scientific community. An increasing number of scientists are aware that mystical thought provides a consistent and relevant philosophical background to the theories of Contemporary science, a conception of the world in which the scientific discoveries of men and women can be in perfect harmony with their spiritual aims and religious beliefs. Fritjof Capra
• The integration of science and mysticism also helps resolve some of the difficult questions raised by mysticism. Amit Goswami

.

We need both mysticism and physics to properly understand our world and the nature of reality

• Mystics understand the roots of the Tao but not its branches; scientists understand its branches but not its roots. Science does not need mysticism and mysticism does not need science; but man needs both. Fritjof Capra
• In everyday life, then, both the mechanistic and the organic views of the universe are valid and useful; the one for science and technology, the other for a balanced and fulfilled spiritual life. Beyond the dimensions of our everyday environment, however, the mechanistic concepts lose their validity and have to be replaced by the organic concepts of quantum mechanics which are very similar to those used by the mystics. Fritjof Capra
• Mysticism has been in the past and probably ever will be one of the great powers of the world and it is bad scholarship to pretend the contrary. William Butler Yeats