The Mother (Mirra Alfassa) makes some interesting comments. She says that meditation has nothing to do with spirituality. It is just a mental discipline. She gives the example of people with a remarkable capacity for meditation, but who become furious if their practice is disturbed (hmm, reminds me of someone with (so he and his supporters claim) a remarkable capacity for meditation, but become furious if anyone criticises his writings). I’m not talking about these sort of experiences, I’m talking about genuine spirituality. Spirituality that comes from the heart, that’s integral to the entire being, and that leads to true self-mastery.
Regarding rationally reconstructing such experiences, I have to disagree with you; in my understanding such experiences go beyond the rational-mental, and cannot be understood in terms of the rational mental. This is where empiricism - as superb a tool as it may be on the external physical level - fails; Jorge Ferrer has some useful comments here in his book Revisioning Transpersonal Theory.
As I point out in my essay on Integral World, to understand Sri Aurobindo - or any other authentic mystic or Teacher - it is necessary to go beyond the rational mind. Sure you can approach any mystic or sage or enlightened being or avatar from a rational perspective, and only see and appreciate that facet of them. Which is still valid, it is still a part, but it is just the barest surface, it isn’t what they truly represent. As Marko has eloquently explained in an earlier comment here, one has to contact the presence of a living spiritual tradition, and this cannot be done with the external intellect or mere theorising. And as I said in my essay, I only appreciated Sri Aurobindo when I stopped reading him intellectually, and instead used his words as gateways to the Soul. Says: alan kazlev Open Integral July 28th, 2006 at 3:17 pm