Maslow's concept of self-transcendence
Abraham Maslow, a prominent 20th-century psychologist, is best known for his hierarchy of needs, a theory that outlines human motivation in a pyramid structure. At the base are physiological needs like food and shelter, followed by safety, love and belonging, esteem, and finally self-actualization at the apex. Maslow later expanded this framework to include a level beyond self-actualization: self-transcendence. This highest level involves experiences that go beyond the individual self, connecting to something greater—whether that’s humanity, the universe, or a spiritual dimension. It’s here that Maslow’s work begins to intersect with mysticism, a concept rooted in the pursuit of direct, personal experiences of the divine or ultimate reality.
Mysticism, across various traditions, emphasizes transcending ordinary perception to achieve unity with a higher power or cosmic truth. Maslow’s self-actualization aligns with the mystic’s journey in its focus on realizing one’s fullest potential, often through creativity, authenticity, and peak experiences—moments of profound joy, awe, or insight. These peak experiences, which Maslow studied extensively, mirror mystical states: they’re marked by a sense of timelessness, unity, and ineffability. For Maslow, such moments weren’t reserved for the religious but were accessible to anyone reaching the upper tiers of his hierarchy, suggesting a secular bridge to mystical phenomena.
Self-transcendence, however, is where Maslow’s theories most directly resonate with mysticism. He described this stage as a shift from ego-driven goals to a selfless connection with the “Being-values”—truth, beauty, goodness, and wholeness. Mystics, whether in Christian, Sufi, or Buddhist traditions, similarly seek to dissolve the ego, merging with the infinite or divine. Maslow’s inclusion of this level reflects his later interest in humanistic and transpersonal psychology, influenced by Eastern philosophies and mystical traditions. He saw self-transcendence as both a psychological and spiritual culmination, where individuals might encounter what mystics call the “ground of being” or ultimate reality.
The relationship between Maslow’s theories and mysticism isn’t without tension. His framework is grounded in psychology, aiming for empirical understanding, while mysticism often defies rational analysis, embracing paradox and mystery. Yet, Maslow’s openness to the non-rational—evident in his study of peak experiences and his admiration for the ineffable—suggests a convergence. By positing that human growth naturally ascends toward transcendent states, Maslow offers a modern lens on mysticism, framing it as an inherent potential within the human psyche rather than an esoteric anomaly. In this way, his hierarchy not only maps personal development but also charts a path toward the mystical, uniting the scientific and the sacred.
This is a thoughtful and timely reflection—Maslow’s expansion to self-transcendence is often treated as a footnote, yet it gestures toward something far deeper: a phenomenology of union that mystics across traditions have described for centuries. Over on my Substack, Desert and Fire, I’ve been exploring this convergence—how the interior architecture of mystical ascent (purgation, illumination, union) shows up not only in St. John of the Cross, but also in Rumi, Dogen, Ramana Maharshi, and others who, despite wildly different cosmologies, seem to traverse the same interior terrain.
My most recent post (https://steveherrmann.substack.com/p/the-logos-beneath-all-things) makes the case that this shared schema points not to perennialism, but to a deeper ontological reality: the Logos. That is, the Christian claim that Christ is not merely a religious figure, but the metaphysical ground of all being—explaining, rather than negating, the mystical resonance found across traditions. If Maslow was inching toward self-transcendence as a psychological category, the mystics were already living it as ontological transformation.
Appreciate your work in bringing these threads together. There’s something sacred in rediscovering the unity behind our fragmented frameworks.
I just subbed!