Ok just to start off, and I hope I am not the only one....(Mesilas Yesharim in English and hebrew can be found Here)

While bemoaning the lack of learning "mussar" by the wise (read by some here on another thread to be saying "mussar is king" ) he writes that one of the reason it is not learned is because they "know it already" and they are used to hearing it so many times. (conversely, when someone keeps on telling you something, does it make you listen more or less?)



Note that it appears he is of the opinion that recitation of psalms all day is NOT what makes one saintly [although in chassidic circles you do hear about the stories of the Baal Shem Tov etc. regarding the simple folk who recited psalms all day, but I guess what he really means here is that it does not necessarily show\mean saintliness].

!!!

I think that some William James is very relevant here:

William James: The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902)

http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/james/james08.html
Lectures 11-13: Saintliness
James starts the second half of his lecture series by proposing to describe what he calls the "practical fruits" of the conversion process he has previously described, proclaiming that:
"the best fruits of religious experience are the best things that history has to show." [p 259]

The writer describes his fruits in terms of "saintliness":
"The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is Saintliness. The saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same in all religions, of which the features can easily be traced." [p 271]

The four fruits
Specifically, the fruits are, with the writer's own numbering:
"1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world's selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. In Christian saintliness this power is always personified as God; but abstract moral ideas, civic or patriotic utopias, or inner visions of holiness or right may also be felt as the true lords and enlargers of our life ...
2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to its control.
3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outlines of the confining selfhood melt down.
4. A shifting of the emotional centre towards loving and harmonious affections, towards 'yes, yes,' and away from 'no', where the claims of the non-ego are concerned." [pp 272-273]

Characteristics of saintliness
James further identifies the "characteristic practical consequences" of saintliness. These are, with his lettering and italics:
"a. Asceticism. - The self-surrender may ... so overrule the ordinary inhibitions of the flesh that the saint finds positive pleasure in sacrifice and asceticism. ...
b. Strength of Soul. - ... personal motives and inhibitions, commonly omnipotent, become too insignificant for notice, and new reaches of patience and fortitude open out. ...
c. Purity. - ... the cleansing of existence from brutal and sensual elements becomes imperative. ... In some temperaments ... weaknesses of the flesh are treated with relentless severity.
d. Charity. - ... tenderness for fellow-creatures ... The saint loves his enemies, and treats loathsome beggars as his brothers." [pp 273-274]

Five fruits, with examples
The rest of the material on saintliness is devoted to examples of "the fruits of the spiritual tree". [p 274] James groups his examples with a further set of categories.

The first fruit in this series is "the sense of Presence of a higher and friendly Power" [p 274] The first example is taken from Thoreau's Walden, but the others are of Christians, Protestant and Catholic, who offer testimony of their intense, even ecstatic feeling of God's love for them.

The second fruit is "Charity and Brotherly Love" {p 278]. The writer again brings in Catholic as well as Protestant examples, including the Catholic saints, Francis of Assisi and Ignatius Loyola.

The third fruit is "inward tranquillity" [p 285], based on letting go and living in the present. In the example of Blaise Pascal this takes the form of resignation.

The craving for moral consistency
The fourth fruit is "Purity of Life". [p 290] Here James refers to the writings of early Quakers, who banished from their lives various kinds of conventionality that they found to be superfluous and who suffered as a consequence. Thus Fox [1] refused to take his hat off to social superiors and got beaten up for it. The c18th Quaker, John Woolman, concluded that dye in clothing disguised dirt and so was contrary to cleanliness; so wearing an undyed fur hat made him an oddity. James comments:
"When the craving for moral consistency and purity is developed to this degree, the subject may well find the outer world too full of shocks to dwell in, and can unify his life and keep his soul unspotted only by withdrawing from it." [p 296]

A fifth fruit is "Asceticism" [p 296], involving various sorts of self-denial or cultivation of hardship. Most of the material refers to Catholic ascetics, such as St John of the Cross.

What he really means is what he writes: that people that construe saintliness to be recitation of psalms all day are wrong since that is incompatible with intellect and which reason cannot accept. Don't put words in his mouth.

When he says that he means that too say " saintliness.. consist in the recitation of many Psalms, very long confessions, difficult fasts, and ablutions in ice and snow - IS "incompatible with intellect and which reason cannot accept"
but I am not sure he contradicts what I said.

Comments in bold:






The writer says: I have written this work not to teach men what they do not know, but to remind them of what they already know and is very evident to them, for you will find in most of my words only things which most people know, and concerning which they entertain no doubts. But to the extent that they are well known and their truths revealed to all, so is forgetfulness in relation to them extremely prevalent. It follows, then, that the benefit to be obtained from this work is not derived from a single reading; for it is possible that the reader will find that he has learned little after having read it that he did not know before. Its benefit is to be derived, rather, through review and persistent study, by which one is reminded of those things which, by nature, he is prone to forget and through which he is caused to take to heart the duty that he tends to overlook.



When he says "persistent study" is the advice to read and study the book over and over again? Does the author suggest (maybe later on in the book somewhere?) other techniques for integrating what is written in a book with daily behavior?





A consideration of the general state of affairs will reveal that the majority of men of quick intelligence and keen mentality devote most of their thought and speculation to the subtleties of wisdom and the profundities of analysis, each according to the inclination of his intelligence and his natural bent. There are some who expend a great deal of effort in studying the creation and nature. Others devote all of their thought to astronomy and mathematics, and others to the arts. There are those who go more deeply into sacred studies, into the study of the holy Torah, some occupying themselves with Halachic discussions, others with Midrash and others with legal decisions. There are few, however, who devote thought and study to perfection of Divine service - to love, fear, communion and all of the other aspects of saintliness.




Very true observation...





Also the implication is that Torah study does not improve midos.





It is not that they consider this knowledge unessential; if questioned each one will maintain that it is of paramount importance and that one who is not clearly versed in it cannot be deemed truly wise. Their failure to devote more attention to it stems rather from its being so manifest and so obvious to them that they see no need for spending much time upon it. Consequently, this study and the reading of works of this kind have been left to those of a not too sensitive, almost dull intelligence. These you will see immersed in the study of saintliness, not stirring from it. It has reached the stage that when one sees another engaging in saintly conduct, he cannot help but suspect him of dullwittedness. This state of affairs results in evil consequences both for those who possess wisdom and for those who do not, causing both classes to lack true saintliness, and rendering it extremely rare. The wise lack it because of their limited consideration of it and the unwise because of their limited grasp. The result is that saintliness is construed by most to consist in the recitation of many Psalms, very long confessions, difficult fasts, and ablutions in ice and snow - all of which are incompatible with intellect and which reason cannot accept.



In other words, people don't understand what "saintliness" is. The assumption seems to be that we all must strive to be saintly. Hopefully he'll explain later what he means by saintliness...






<....>
Again, is it conceivable that we should find time for all other branches of study and none for this study? Why should a man not at least set aside for himself certain times for this speculation if he is obliged in the remainder of his time to turn to other studies or undertakings?







That's not an argument that mussar takes precedence over other studies, just that it should ALSO be studied. Unfortuntely days aren't made of rubber...








<...>


"Fear of God" denotes fear of the Majesty of the Blessed One, fearing Him as one would a great and mighty king, and being ashamed at one's every movement in consequence of His greatness, especially when speaking before Him in prayer or engaging in the study of His Torah.



In the words of William James: "a feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world's selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power..."





"Walking in His ways" embodies the whole area of cultivation and correction of character traits. As our Sages of blessed memory have explained, "As He is merciful, be also merciful..." The essence of all this is that a person conform all of his traits and all the varieties of his actions to what is just and ethical. Our Sages of blessed memory have thus summarized the idea (Avoth 2.1): "All that is praiseworthy in its doer and brings praise to him from others;" that is, all that leads to the end of true good, namely, strengthening of Torah and furthering of brotherliness.



"... tenderness for fellow-creatures ... The saint loves his enemies, and treats loathsome beggars as his brothers"





"Love" - that there be implanted in a person's heart a love for the Blessed One which will arouse his soul to do what is pleasing before Him, just as his heart is aroused to give pleasure to his father and mother. He will be grieved if he or others are lacking in this; he will be jealous for it and he will rejoice greatly in fulfilling aught of it. "Whole-heartedness" - that service before the Blessed One be characterized by purity of motive, that its end be His service alone and nothing else. Included in this is that one's heart be complete in Divine service, that his interests not be divided or his observance mechanical, but that his whole heart be devoted to it.



William James: "... personal motives and inhibitions, commonly omnipotent, become too insignificant for notice, and new reaches of patience and fortitude open out. ..."

Less, but I remember it better.









William James came after the Mesilas Yesharim.

I know??

ETA:
William James is one of the most influential thinkers of the last 200 years, and his essay on religion is very insightful. It is interesting how keen observers across several centuries observing different kinds of religious behaviors (James does not speak about Jews iirc) come to the same conclusion that the goal of religious life is the achievement of saintliness, and they are both so close in their description of what saintliness involves. I think that's cool. And I think it's interesting that completely different religions produce, via different paths, their own saints.

Ok, whatever. Thanks for bringing him in... ummm... who was James and what does he have to do with anything?

See edited post.

Cool. Thanks.