Does language devalue spiritual...

[stvdv]

Holding on to pearls sounds like a pride issue, to tell you honestly.

You twist (maybe unaware) what I said

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You twist (maybe unaware) what I said

I don't think so. Cast pearls among swine sounds like down throw what you value to people who don't appreciate it (or biblically, don't give your experience to god to pagans).

In my opinion, that sounds like a pride issue. How would you interpret that verse?

 

[stvdv]

It's even advised by Masters to NOT to speak about one's spiritual experiences, because some people mock your experience; mocking part is bad

That would mean the choice to express one's spirituality isn't dependent on one's own spiritual conduit but based on other people's reactions whatever they may be?

Of course, as they say "Do not cast your pearls before swine"

Holding on to pearls sounds like a pride issue, to tell you honestly.

You twist (maybe unaware) what I said

I don't think so. Cast pearls among swine sounds like down throw what you value to people who don't appreciate it (or biblically, don't give your experience to god to pagans).

In my opinion, that sounds like a pride issue. How would you interpret that verse?

I just use the definition below. Has nothing to do with pride. Also, IF I know someone gets upset with my story THEN I don't tell, as simple as that.

What does it mean to not cast your pearls before swine?
Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I just use the definition below. Has nothing to do with pride. Also, IF I know someone gets upset with my story THEN I don't tell, as simple as that.

To me, it sounds like pride. How I come across people in person who are proud about their religion and experiences insofar they will literally withhold who they for their experiences not to be threatened by the other's opinions and questions. I think after awhile it starts to die down and people become more humble that the experiences they have does not need to be property. Though, it could be a cultural thing too.

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

Holding on to pearls sounds like a pride issue, to tell you honestly.

UArtistji, I'm surprised to hear you say this. There's just so much "wrong" with it that doesn't seem to echo other positions I thought you've taken. The pearls of genuine spiritual experience are so fine, so beautiful, so rich in knowledge and/or love, so satisfying that I'll wager there's not a SINGLE devotee who has had one who doesn't want to share it with others so that they, too, may experience the same bliss of reconnection with Source. Being gifted by Grace with pearls of genuine spiritual experience usually results in more humility, not pride and arrogance. Of course, there will be exceptions which God will take care of as He shapes and refines His devotee.

But those pearls are also very powerful! Knowledge of God cannot just be handed out willy nilly. Sometimes what are called "supernatural powers" comes to a devotee. It is like being given the keys to unharnessing nuclear energy, which has both powerfully constructive and powerfully destructive capabilities. Devotees pray for discrimination on when to use them, when to withhold. Spiritual experience changes one's mundane landscape and view of it forever.

He probably has [had spiritual experience]. He just didn't fall into the majority who see spiritual experiences needing to be mystic and all for them to have spiritual value. There is a way the brain can "look outside itself" to monitory and clear away thoughts and emotions, etc. The brain and mind can do a lot of things we take for granted.

Maybe I didn't write clearly enough about how spiritual experiences and emotion experiences are not the same? They don't even occur in the same realms. So if he says they are the same, it's proof he has had one but not the other.

Why does spirituality need to be mystic and mystery in order for it to have value as a spiritual experience?

It doesn't need to be, it just is. Mystic implies something beyond the five senses, i.e., transcendental. Genuine spiritual experience is. And it's only a mystery until, for you, it isn't. It's why devotees who have had experience clamor for others to make their efforts to obtain that highest, unconditional love and illuminating knowledge, why they urge their friends and family to "buy the cookbook, prep the meal and then EAT it! Soooooo tasty!!"

 

[Unveiled Artist]

UArtistji, I'm surprised to hear you say this. There's just so much "wrong" with it that doesn't seem to echo other positions I thought you've taken. The pearls of genuine spiritual experience are so fine, so beautiful, so rich in knowledge and/or love, so satisfying that I'll wager there's not a SINGLE devotee who has had one who doesn't want to share it with others so that they, too, may experience the same bliss of reconnection with Source. Being gifted by Grace with pearls of genuine spiritual experience usually results in more humility, not pride and arrogance. Of course, there will be exceptions which God will take care of as He shapes and refines His devotee.

The pride is holding that genuine experience as "pearls" and, because it is personal and cannot be explained in words, to throw (I guess in a sense throw away the experience) to someone who is not part of the group would be wrong. He or she has a lot of pride so far to feel others reactions will challenge and damage the pearls.

I love freedom of expression. I do get confused when someone holds back who they are as a person. The expression of "I don't want to because others won't appreciate it" type of thing, doesn't sound like humility. Maybe its more they need to grow to put a boundary between their expression and benefit in itself without comparing the authenticity of it from other people's reactions and opinions.

But those pearls are also very powerful! Knowledge of God cannot just be handed out willy nilly. Sometimes what are called "supernatural powers" comes to a devotee. It is like being given the keys to unharnessing nuclear energy, which has both powerfully constructive and powerfully destructive capabilities. Devotees pray for discrimination on when to use them, when to withhold. Spiritual experience changes one's mundane landscape and view of it forever.

Why would scripture say not to throw knowledge of god among people who do not share that knowledge?

Maybe I didn't write clearly enough about how spiritual experiences and emotion experiences are not the same? They don't even occur in the same realms. So if he says they are the same, it's proof he has had one but not the other.

He's saying that spiritual experiences are products of our limbic system. Since the limbic system doesn't have the ability to form language and words, we say we have "mystic" experiences or things we cannot explain. It's more so because the experience is so profound, our limbic system and other physiological parts of the body can't really take that expression in put it into "words others will understand." That's why you have many artists try to draw their experiences and people dance or do rituals to express it. It's a human nature thing.

I don't know why that devalues spiritual experiences. That's as if the spiritual experience is dependent on whether can be explained. If it can be explained, it's not spiritual. If it cannot, it's mystical. Neither the two shall cross.

It doesn't need to be, it just is. Mystic implies something beyond the five senses, i.e., transcendental. Genuine spiritual experience is. And it's only a mystery until, for you, it isn't. It's why devotees who have had experience clamor for others to make their efforts to obtain that highest, unconditional love and illuminating knowledge, why they urge their friends and family to "buy the cookbook, prep the meal and then EAT it! Soooooo tasty!!"

But they can be one and the same. Explanation and experience put everything together. If it stays a mystery, it looses meaning for me. The physical/mental/spiritual all go together.

To say one has not had an real spiritual experience because they can explain where it comes that just doesn't sound right. I guess another way to put it. If god had a origin, why can't he still be god?

 

[Vinayaka]

Is the experience of spirituality devalued when put into words?

If so, why and/or how?

Lots of things are lost by putting it into words. Would you rather feel a cool breeze on a hot day, or read a book about it?

I met a man on a jungle trail to a remote temple. He was coming out, (in two ways) and I was going in. The best he could say was 'something is over there' with eyes glowing from his recent experience of bliss. I needed no explanation.

 

[pearl]

Is the experience of spirituality devalued when put into words?

The experience belongs to the receiver alone and may not be passed on. So the task for the receiver is to put it in words listeners may equate with their own lives, otherwise there is little meaning for them.

 

[Ponder This]

Is the experience of spirituality devalued when put into words?

If so, why and/or how?

I would say that it isn't that words devalue the spiritual, but rather that words can be limited in their capacity to express certain experiences.
No matter how well you describe the sunset, the best way to understand the sunset is to experience the sunset yourself.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Is the experience of spirituality devalued when put into words?

If so, why and/or how?

Dear Unveiled Artist,

There are no words with which to describe what is experienced spiritually, but as we are limited to language in communicating our experiences to others, we are forced to use metaphors and analogies when attempting to do so.

I think the use of language inevitably impacts on what is being expressed. There is much room for misinterpretation, etc.

Humbly
Hermit

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Lots of things are lost by putting it into words. Would you rather feel a cool breeze on a hot day, or read a book about it?

I met a man on a jungle trail to a remote temple. He was coming out, (in two ways) and I was going in. The best he could say was 'something is over there' with eyes glowing from his recent experience of bliss. I needed no explanation.

I'm thinking of both, actually. Simultaneously. So, for example, if you were a hug person and you came across someone you did not know. You two exchange looks of gratitude (or so have you-here is kinda like that) and you hug cause of the human to human contact. You don't need to say anything but that expression (whether words and/or behavior) is just as important as the "unspoken conversation."

I rather have both. I'm not too much of an abstract person by nature. So, if I feel a cool breeze, more than likely I can express what I'm experiencing in some way whether it be words, language, art, maybe. Language in many cultures are an extension of their identity. So, to separate language (spoken/written/behavior/etc) from identity as a separate-mundane thing is pretty much an insult to that culture (a few of them I came across and some worked with) and even religious lifestyle.

So, say, I read a good book. That experience of reading, characters, so have you I can have a good decent conversation with someone else who loves reading too. While the characters are not alive, we can still converse our appreciation of the authors intent by how we converse and the language we understood among each other in that use.

Why the separation?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The experience belongs to the receiver alone and may not be passed on. So the task for the receiver is to put it in words listeners may equate with their own lives, otherwise there is little meaning for them.

So expression would be dependent on whether the receiver finds meaning into the message expressed?

Wouldn't the language be meaningful in itself regardless if the other party receives it or not? It's has it's own value.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I would say that it isn't that words devalue the spiritual, but rather that words can be limited in their capacity to express certain experiences.
No matter how well you describe the sunset, the best way to understand the sunset is to experience the sunset yourself.

Instead of using language to explain what a sunset feeling is, could language be used to express the sunset of what it means to you?

Does accuracy need to be involved in expressing spiritual experiences?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Dear Unveiled Artist,

There are no words with which to describe what is experienced spiritually, but as we are limited to language in communicating our experiences to others, we are forced to use metaphors and analogies when attempting to do so.

I think the use of language inevitably impacts on what is being expressed. There is much room for misinterpretation, etc.

Humbly
Hermit

Can one communicate spiritual experience in language they, themselves, understand and still holds its spiritual value or one's limitation in language only based on whether it's understood by others?

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

There's a lot to unpack here. I appreciate your thoughtful responses and the time it takes to get all the QUOTE stuff done.

The pride is holding that genuine experience as "pearls" and, because it is personal and cannot be explained in words, to throw (I guess in a sense throw away the experience) to someone who is not part of the group would be wrong. He or she has a lot of pride so far to feel others reactions will challenge and damage the pearls.

I love freedom of expression. I do get confused when someone holds back who they are as a person. The expression of "I don't want to because others won't appreciate it" type of thing, doesn't sound like humility. Maybe its more they need to grow to put a boundary between their expression and benefit in itself without comparing the authenticity of it from other people's reactions and opinions.

I think I'm beginning to understand what's going on here. Have you been approached by various someone(s) who hoarded and privatized what they said were these pearls we're talking about? Someone who comes across or is in possession of genuine pearls doesn't need an education in pearls to recognize their value. The worth is instantly recognized as is the indestructible nature of the pearl. A holder of genuine pearls would laugh at the idea of damage to the pearls. There might be "damage" to one's ego as it grasps the import of the pearl, though.

Why would scripture say not to throw knowledge of god among people who do not share that knowledge?

It's because knowledge of God doesn't come from books and words. That knowledge comes in the form of Light, a very high energy Light. Consider one's body and its various receptors as a light bulb. Due to improper diet and thoughts (toxins) the light bulb is only rated at 25 watts. But God's Light comes in at say, 300 watts (obviously much more but you get the idea). It does not take a superbrain to see that would be problematic and has proven so for many a soul. These are the considerations a holder of genuine pearls takes into account before sharing/transmitting divine knowledge.

As an aside, this is also where many souls get into trouble mistaking the light bulb (a person) for the Light (divinity within that person). It's how the mistakes of cults and fanaticism are created.

He's saying that spiritual experiences are products of our limbic system. Since the limbic system doesn't have the ability to form language and words, we say we have "mystic" experiences or things we cannot explain. It's more so because the experience is so profound, our limbic system and other physiological parts of the body can't really take that expression in put it into "words others will understand." That's why you have many artists try to draw their experiences and people dance or do rituals to express it. It's a human nature thing.

I don't know why that devalues spiritual experiences. That's as if the spiritual experience is dependent on whether can be explained. If it can be explained, it's not spiritual. If it cannot, it's mystical. Neither the two shall cross.

But they can be one and the same. Explanation and experience put everything together. If it stays a mystery, it looses meaning for me. The physical/mental/spiritual all go together.

I looked up limbic system. Says it has everything to do with the brain, the emotional body and its adjuncts. Can't stress enough how a spiritual experience might impact your emotions but are not created by them. And trying to express one's experience through the arts is about the only way it can be done. No one ever comes back from an experience with God and writes prose. It'll be song, dance, poems, painting, you name it, but not a dissertation. That comes later. And it does not devalue the experience at all to try to express it, although it truly can never be done. Simply put, what is beyond words and expression cannot be adequately relayed by words and expression. But thank God artists and the like--those who have experienced--give it a go.

Physical/mental/spiritual don't all go together. The first two are transient, the latter is not. And none of this has to stay a mystery, although it will remain so for those who only want to read about it or hear about it from other people's perspectives. There is no path to personal genuine spiritual experience which is trod only through meditating on the experiences of others. Gotta do the work, walk the razor's edge for oneself.

To say one has not had an real spiritual experience because they can explain where it comes that just doesn't sound right. I guess another way to put it. If god had a origin, why can't he still be god?

God did not have an origin. Origin is a concept of time and space, both of which are illusions created by God in order manifest this stage, props and actors we, as sparks of the same Divinity, are all cavorting on, with and as in our various costumes--male, female, black, brown, white, etc.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Lots of things are lost by putting it into words. Would you rather feel a cool breeze on a hot day, or read a book about it?

I met a man on a jungle trail to a remote temple. He was coming out, (in two ways) and I was going in. The best he could say was 'something is over there' with eyes glowing from his recent experience of bliss. I needed no explanation.

Also, if it can be expressed in words, does that mean it's no longer a spiritual experience?

It's one thing if it can't be expressed in words. I guess that's the majority opinion. However, once it can be, what happens to it?

 

[stvdv]

It's even advised by Masters to NOT to speak about one's spiritual experiences, because some people mock your experience; mocking part is bad

What does it mean to not cast your pearls before swine?
Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.

To me, it sounds like pride.

You totally miss my point. I have a simple analogy. I remember you love analogies, this is a very easy one. No need to think too much

Your grandmother gave you some costly jewels and you walk in the marketplace. Then you see a jewel thief.
Now you tell me it's a smart move that you go to the jewel thief and show him your jewels?
Because if you don't, it is you being too proud about your jewels?

Spoiler: All replies listed

It's even advised by Masters to NOT to speak about one's spiritual experiences, because some people mock your experience; mocking part is bad

That would mean the choice to express one's spirituality isn't dependent on one's own spiritual conduit but based on other people's reactions whatever they may be?

Of course, as they say "Do not cast your pearls before swine"

Holding on to pearls sounds like a pride issue, to tell you honestly.

You twist (maybe unaware) what I said

I don't think so. Cast pearls among swine sounds like down throw what you value to people who don't appreciate it (or biblically, don't give your experience to god to pagans).
In my opinion, that sounds like a pride issue. How would you interpret that verse?

I just use the definition below. Has nothing to do with pride. Also, IF I know someone gets upset with my story THEN I don't tell, as simple as that.

What does it mean to not cast your pearls before swine?
Do not waste good things on people who will not appreciate them. This proverb is adapted from a saying of Jesus from the Gospels, “Cast not pearls before swine.” Jesus appears to be warning his disciples to preach only before receptive audiences.

To me, it sounds like pride. How I come across people in person who are proud about their religion and experiences insofar they will literally withhold who they for their experiences not to be threatened by the other's opinions and questions. I think after awhile it starts to die down and people become more humble that the experiences they have does not need to be property. Though, it could be a cultural thing too.

You totally miss my point. I have a simple analogy. I remember you love analogies, this is a very easy one. No need to think too much

Your grandmother gave you some costly jewels and you walk in the marketplace. Then you see a jewel thief.
Now you tell me that you go to the jewel thief and show him your jewels?
Because if you don't, it is you being too proud about your jewels?

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

You totally miss my point. I have a simple analogy. I remember you love analogies, this is a very easy one. No need to think too much

Now, IMO, that sounds darn supercilious and unlike you, stvdvji. Not becoming for one who embraces Sanatana Dharma which advises ahimsa in thought, word and deed. Don't let your ego take offense in these forums and strike out, even subtly. Saldan! You have much to offer but snide remarks at the outset of your discourse distract from your important messages.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Can one communicate spiritual experience in language they, themselves, understand and still holds its spiritual value or one's limitation in language only based on whether it's understood by others?

You can communicate spiritual experiences to others in the same way that you can describe the colour red to someone without sight.

You’d need some good, non-visual analogies.

Otherwise it would all seem very disturbing ...like, when we hear things like:
I was there, but was not I.
I had no body, but was floating.
I had no ears, but heard the sound.
I was alone, but all were present (...as One).
All was wrong, but there was nothing ...and that was all ...and all was good.
And though I had no eyes, all had been dark ...until I’d seen its light.

And that’s just descriptions of themselves; imagine how senseless their descriptions of any spiritual insights they would seem, were they not put into metaphor.

Humbly
Hermit

 

[stvdv]

You totally miss my point. I have a simple analogy. I remember you love analogies, this is a very easy one. No need to think too much

Now, IMO, that sounds darn supercilious and unlike you, stvdvji. Not becoming for one who embraces Sanatana Dharma which advises ahimsa in thought, word and deed. Don't let your ego take offense in these forums and strike out, even subtly. Saldan! You have much to offer but snide remarks at the outset of your discourse distract from your important messages.

It was exactly what I wrote
She totally missed my point (that can happen to all, and happens also to me)
Hence
I was happy that I found a simple analogy
Remembering
She loves analogies (as do I)

Sometimes I give difficult analogies or I quote some from a Scripture
Hence I say here
This is an easy one. No need to think too much, so very straight forward (because I also have shared analogies which took me years to puzzle it out)