Our mysticism is not as their mysticism.
One of the most confusing things we deal with is a vast legacy of Western-style mysticism. The Western version remains cerebral; it does not target a heart-led understanding. Instead, there is some nebulous goal of reaching a higher level of intellect. So you see a lot of Western mystics using tortured grammar in a bid to bump the mind into a higher orbit, as it were.
Consider the Parable of the Sower in Matthew 13. It’s a parable about parables, in one sense. The Twelve did not yet operate from their heart-minds, so they didn’t understand the parable. Jesus gave an explanation that was contextual for His disciples. The wording of the parable itself is contextual, but the spiritual truth within belongs to a higher realm. We don’t bump into higher orbits with our minds; we step into another dimension with our hearts. We aren’t elevating the mind, but subjecting it to a higher faculty.
Parables are seeds of the truth. They echo against our convictions. People with no link to their hearts cannot sense the convictions that God writes on every human heart. Parables beckon to that higher faculty. The Twelve were in that interval between an awakened sense of conviction, but minds poorly trained to respond to faith. Explaining the parable in their own context helped train their minds. The seeds were sown and took root. It waited until the rain of the Holy Spirit sent from above to bring forth fruit.
Did you see how I did that? Can you recognize how what I wrote above was at least an attempt to do what Jesus did for His disciples? I actually mixed two entirely different parabolic images, one from our modern space-faring context and one used by Jesus in His ancient agrarian society. If your awareness is in touch with your convictions, you should have little trouble seizing upon the moral imperatives indicated by my choice of words. You don’t need me to draw boundaries with words, but to indicate paths of exploration. That’s the difference between descriptive language (drawing boundaries around ideas) and indicative language (pointing to something that is boundless).
While we do face a little ambiguity with the term “symbolic logic” due to it’s association with math, there is a well-established meaning from the study of antiquities, a term philosophers use to point out a different approach to language and thinking. That second meaning of the term “symbolic logic” is equivalent to “parabolic logic” — logic of parables. In this case, the symbols are defined in the parabolic imagery of the Old Testament. This is why we need a big dose of ANE studies to bring those Old Testament parables to life. That’s a major intent of Bible study. We strive to breathe life into the ancient tales, to plow the field of the intellect and make it ready to receive divine truth and bear fruit to God’s glory.
But in the end, the truth indicated by parables does not rest on any language. We seek to escape the entire realm of linguistic boundaries. We use whatever language we have to paint signs that invite people to explore places no tongue can go. Our mysticism does not rest in words that the mind can grapple with, but calls for the mind to rest while the heart takes dominion.