PDA

View Full Version : pearls before swine



solomon levi
05-14-2012, 05:31 PM
I was talking with my dad yesterday and we realised:
At least swine will eat the pearls! They eat the shit and the pearls
and everything alike. Oh, if man were so noble! So All-embracing.


There was another (of many) moment of zen... I was discussing how
the known is 1% compared to the unknown 99%, and realising that the
known and unknown together make 1% compared to the unknowable 99%
and relating this to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd attentions...
My dad said that he knew 1%, then he learned a little bit more.
Now he knows 1/10th of a percent. :D
We ended up rolling on the floor laughing at the paradox.

solomon levi
05-14-2012, 05:41 PM
My dad played the most amazing song for me. I hope you enjoy it.
Be patient for the lyrics. And remember, as wonderful as the lyrics are,
they are the archemical. The saxophone is the spiritus mundi. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzvlivbptXk

"Goddammit! Trying to make it real, compared to what?"
F-ing beautiful!

horticult
05-14-2012, 07:23 PM
full quote:

"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."

Matthew 7:6

solomon levi
10-24-2012, 07:54 PM
full quote:

"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."

Matthew 7:6

That guy also said he didn't come for the righteous, but for the sinners. :)
Mark 2:17
http://bible.cc/mark/2-17.htm

Lo!
10-25-2012, 09:17 PM
Solomon, could you clarify the point you're making? I'm pretty sure I'm misunderstanding, but I'll take a stab here...
If only men were as noble as those swine; if only we embraced all truths as equal, then maybe we'd really get somewhere!

Am I way off course, or is this what you were saying? Reject all dogmatism; be open to and embrace all things? Wherein does discernment play a roll in all of this, I ask? We musn't fall into the trap of the foolish philosopher who claims the most important thing to do in life is to search for truth, and who then turns around and claims it is foolish to ever claim to have found it! If there is truth, then it must be to the exclusion of all other non-truths. I'm not trying to contradict the hermetic axiom of all truths being half-truths here; that pertains to our limits of expression. I'm simply saying that I believe there is ultimate truth and those who are unworthy of its blessings due to their misunderstanding or ignorance; they would misuse it or defile it. THIS is what this verse means to me.

Ghislain
10-25-2012, 11:14 PM
I'm simply saying that I believe there is ultimate truth and those who are unworthy of its blessings due to their misunderstanding or ignorance; they would misuse it or defile it. THIS is what this verse means to me.

I dont think of truth as a blessing or that it is hidden because it may be missused Lo...

I think the truth is here in plain sight if you know what you are looking for, but it lays hidden by our
expectations that create misconceptions.

Ask yourself, "can I handle the truth whatever that truth may be?"

What if that truth made this "reality" completely worthless...are you willing to destroy what you have?

I believe that is what you have to do to find the truth you are looking for...

Perhaps it is what we already think we know that stops us finding the truth...

I used to go swimming with my friends and would tire of it quicker than the others so I would get out, get dressed
and go up to the spectators section only to see my friends having a great time then wishing I had stayed.


Genesis 3:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Perhaps not a litteral death, but perhaps death of the self.

One last question...if you found this truth what would you do with it?

Sorry if that was more in reply to Lo's question/statement than to the thread.

Ghislain

Lo!
10-28-2012, 07:22 AM
Perhaps I could clarify what I meant a little more, and that might help. Do keep in mind that although I'm on a path of mysticism, I am still in my heart a fairly (and without shame) orthodox Christian. I'm going to say God, and not THE ALL, or the mother-father deity. I'll use the pronoun "He," and ascribe characteristics to His nature that are revealed through scripture. So just... don't get hung up on that, ok?

Now then. When I speak of the revelation of truth I have a kind of two-fold occurence playing out in my head. One is the revelation of an indicative truth (God is holy, and I am made in His image), and the other is the imperative that springs forth from that truth (I am to be holy).
Now, I'm sure that you would all agree that the more truth you assimilate into your consciousness, the more free you become. Truth brings wisdom and understanding. In this sense, it is an incredible blessing to search out or receive truth. Truth also brings power, as I'm sure you are also aware of. The higher laws of this universe can be untilized to the manipulation of lesser laws... With truth comes the power to sway people, to accrue wealth, the harness creativity more lucidly; all of this can be exploited and misused.

There's a man who puts salt on everything before he even tastes it. He has a simple palette, and throws the majority of his servings away. What world class chef would spend the time preparing an elaborate and creative meal for such a man? What kind of wise teacher, able to pass down the mysteries of life and of the universe, would take something so precious and give it to a man who is unworthy? This is the casting of pearls before swine... You'd be wasting your time uttering such sacred things to someone who could barely spit them back up at you. I'm not sure what I may have communicated to you, but I was simply making a comment on the importance of discernment, both in seeking truth and in sharing it. Have I confused you as to my meaning further, or does that clear something up?

Ghislain
10-28-2012, 11:36 AM
Lo, you talk of things Holy, therefore before I start I would like to shed some light on this word.


Holiness, or sanctity, is in general the state of being holy (perceived by religious individuals as
associated with the divine) or sacred (considered worthy of spiritual respect or devotion; or
inspiring awe or reverence among believers in a given set of spiritual ideas).

The English word "holy" dates back to at least the 11th Century with the Old English word hālig, an
adjective derived from hāl meaning "whole"

Hierology (Greek ιερος, hieros, "sacred" or "holy", + λογος, logos, "word", "account", or
"reason") refers to the study of the sacred and sacredness. It is generally pursued by those
who find real truth in many faiths and especially refers to philosophical speculations about
religion that involve the traditions of multiple cultures or belief systems. It differs from
theology in that a god or gods are not necessarily a focus and in that it may include sources
with no origin in Western philosophy or religion.
Source: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred)




Ho•lism

The theory that whole entities, as fundamental components of reality,
have an existence other than as the mere sum of their parts.

Perhaps Holy has been confused with the word Wholly.


Whol•ly

1. entirely; totally; altogether; quite.
2. to the whole amount, extent, etc.
3. so as to comprise or involve all.

Origin:
1250–1300; Middle English holliche. See whole, -ly

Can be confused:   holey, holy,

Sorce: Dictionary.com ( http://dictionary.reference.com)


My train of thought is more within Hierology than religion. Religion tries to pigeonhole “what is”
into some type of dogma that people can relate to in this, their worldly, form of “life”;not that there
is a “they” at all. To understand what truly is would take a great undoing of what we are brought up
to believe about ourselves. Religion IMO is a way to attempt to comprehend an intuition that one
cannot put into words.

At the last supper (Matthew 26:26): While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and
broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body.". Matthew 26:28” He
then took his cup of wine and said, “Take this all of you and drink from it, this is my blood of the
new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”


In ancient times, covenants or contracts were ratified by slaying an animal; by the shedding of its
blood, imprecating similar vengeance if either party failed in the compact.
Sorce: Barnes' Notes on the Bible (http://bible.cc/matthew/26-28.htm)

This may have been a way to seal a pact that his creed or dogma would be supported by those present
after his death.

IMO Jesus died to rise again to open the gates of heaven. In other words, he knew what was
forgotten and to realise the truth you could follow his teachings, which will help you remember so that
you can exit Samsara (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsara).

As a child I was raised a Roman Catholic and received the Eucharist every Sunday...a piece of
wafer placed on my tongue. I used to roll it into a ball in my mouth and play with it to neutralise
the boredom I felt at hearing these same words every Sunday; watching the congregation,
wondering what they were actually there for; going on the journey home watching my mother and
father start bickering over something that had happened before we attended the mass, thinking
to myself that nothing had changed on that front due to them receiving this holy sacrament.

Had any one of those people actually wondered who they were, why they were here? No need
to worry themselves with that as the priest had all the answers, and should they sin, well that
could be forgiven :).


The bread and wine were obviously not Jesus’ body and blood but a representation of such; and
if Jesus was aware of “what is” beyond it being just an intuition then perhaps he was saying, “it
matters not what you eat and drink as all is one”. And here one can understand about the
casting pearls before swine as without this intuition the bread and wine would mean nothing.

There is only one sin...Original sin...this is not a bad thing, it is what one needs to live in this illusion
one calls life. Original sin is the human knowledge of the thinking mind which blinds the truth of
what we are so that we can live in this duality. Look at it this way...the One creates duality, but the
fabricated duality knows from whence it came and thus cannot think in separateness and knows it is
actually part of the One. Remove this knowledge and hey presto...duality! I Hope I don’t
sound too much like the serpent in the garden :(.

All that said I love the duality of life and fear what I may find by once again joining with the One, hence my statement...


What if that truth made this "reality" completely worthless...are you willing to destroy what you have?

I believe that is what you have to do to find the truth you are looking for...



Ghislain

solomon levi
10-28-2012, 11:21 PM
Solomon, could you clarify the point you're making? I'm pretty sure I'm misunderstanding, but I'll take a stab here...
If only men were as noble as those swine; if only we embraced all truths as equal, then maybe we'd really get somewhere!

Am I way off course, or is this what you were saying? Reject all dogmatism; be open to and embrace all things? Wherein does discernment play a roll in all of this, I ask? We musn't fall into the trap of the foolish philosopher who claims the most important thing to do in life is to search for truth, and who then turns around and claims it is foolish to ever claim to have found it! If there is truth, then it must be to the exclusion of all other non-truths. I'm not trying to contradict the hermetic axiom of all truths being half-truths here; that pertains to our limits of expression. I'm simply saying that I believe there is ultimate truth and those who are unworthy of its blessings due to their misunderstanding or ignorance; they would misuse it or defile it. THIS is what this verse means to me.

Hi Lo!
Yeah - I was seeing it kind of literally - if you throw pearls to swine, they'd probably eat them,
whereas most humans will not "digest"/contemplate them. I was thinking swine are not so discerning,
(prejudiced?) but rather eat anything (may not be true - I haven't raised swine before) and my idea of
"God" or Source is that it is all-embracing and excluding nothing - the All Whole One.

I myself am a dreamer, which means I can assume other people's points of view fairly well because I
am not so attached to my own - I don't identify with many particulars or specifics, beliefs, dogmas, etc.
I don't even value knowledge as it is dead. So this makes me relatively fluid and unattached.

Anyway, it takes an identity/believer to actually say, "I don't want to throw pearls before swine."
It is for me to cast pearls... it is not for me to judge who receives and doesn't receive them.
Even what constitutes a "pearl" is pretty relative.

The only non-relative Truth is the unconditioned. And the conditioned IS the unconditioned
wearing diverse masks. :)

To use another quote from the new testament, I was seeing just recently that this treasure buried in a field...
or this one pearl of great price... can only be the unconditioned. It is that which you give away all conditions for.
Of course, you don't really give away all conditions - just your attachment/identification with them. Then they
resemble the unconditioned and all is Zen. :)

solomon levi
10-29-2012, 12:19 AM
Perhaps I could clarify what I meant a little more, and that might help. Do keep in mind that although I'm on a path of mysticism, I am still in my heart a fairly (and without shame) orthodox Christian. I'm going to say God, and not THE ALL, or the mother-father deity. I'll use the pronoun "He," and ascribe characteristics to His nature that are revealed through scripture. So just... don't get hung up on that, ok?

Now then. When I speak of the revelation of truth I have a kind of two-fold occurence playing out in my head. One is the revelation of an indicative truth (God is holy, and I am made in His image), and the other is the imperative that springs forth from that truth (I am to be holy).
Now, I'm sure that you would all agree that the more truth you assimilate into your consciousness, the more free you become. Truth brings wisdom and understanding. In this sense, it is an incredible blessing to search out or receive truth. Truth also brings power, as I'm sure you are also aware of. The higher laws of this universe can be untilized to the manipulation of lesser laws... With truth comes the power to sway people, to accrue wealth, the harness creativity more lucidly; all of this can be exploited and misused.

There's a man who puts salt on everything before he even tastes it. He has a simple palette, and throws the majority of his servings away. What world class chef would spend the time preparing an elaborate and creative meal for such a man? What kind of wise teacher, able to pass down the mysteries of life and of the universe, would take something so precious and give it to a man who is unworthy? This is the casting of pearls before swine... You'd be wasting your time uttering such sacred things to someone who could barely spit them back up at you. I'm not sure what I may have communicated to you, but I was simply making a comment on the importance of discernment, both in seeking truth and in sharing it. Have I confused you as to my meaning further, or does that clear something up?

It is the conditioned mind that believes time can be wasted, especially by casting pearls!
Casting pearls for me roughly translates as raising frequency, shining your light, etc.
When is it appropriate to not do that? One doesn't light a candle and place it under a bushel. (Jesus)
When we love God unconditionally, we lose/forfeit/sacrifice our ability as men to choose and
we become instruments/vessels of the One. Man makes choices based on his conditioning.
This is IMO "thinking as man thinks, not as God thinks." Matt 16:23 Thus the foundation stone becomes a
stumbling block, depending on whether one is identified/resonating with conditioning or unconditioned.
And they are the same stone. It just depends on how you use it, or on who/what is using what.
The conditioned is the unconditioned for those who can see what is before there very eyes (as opposed
to seeing their knowledge/conditioning). Thus Jesus said, "Behold, the Kingdom of heaven is upon you."

I can see that casting pearls before swine is like the Zen master filling the cup of tea to overflowing - the cup
is already full. A full cup is more of an objective fact than calling someone a swine, sometimes. :)
The hierarchy implied by many who deem themselves pearl-casters and others swine is a common misconception.

A world-class chef probably has an identity, an awareness of his "greatness".
Can s/he cook because it is who s/he is, or does s/he cook to be recognised and appreciated by men?
Wisdom and humility seem to go hand in hand for the balanced/Tiphareth.
Humility/humbleness comes from seeing that all truth is relative, thus the playing field is leveled/equal and one
is not greater than another when compared to infinity/Youniverse/Whole (comparison is not possible in Oneness).
The only begotten son of God is the Unconditioned - the only changeless Truth.
We can talk about levels - I often do. So level 4 is a higher truth than level 3, 2 and 1. But this is all insignificant
when compared to the One... all levels are still conditioned to some extant, or they would be unrecognisable.
To use your words, "more free" is a comparison to "less free", and neither is True/Absolute freedom. An identity can
never be free. That's just how it is. Identity/conditioning is always relative. There are billions and billions of conditioned relatives,
and only one Unconditioned. There is also only one you. :) This is the subject of the sages IMO. I just pointed to it:
How did all this come from the One and be so diverse? How can one diversity be unworthy and another diversity be worthy?
Why divide God/The One? Isn't all this division arbitrary and relative/subjective?

Andro
10-29-2012, 12:49 AM
Does the Sun apply discernment upon whom to cast its pearls/rays/heat/light?

It's the swine in us who 'do' the discernment, consciously or not :)

And we are ALL swine, to various extents.

Just as we are ALL microcosmic Suns.

So eat the Sun, like the Green Lion.

http://symbolwatcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/green-lion-of-alchemy.jpg

Also eat yourself, just like the Ouroboros.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Ouroboros.png

And eat shit, so you can shit Pearls.

http://s1.hubimg.com/u/416064_f520.jpg

Here comes the sun, little darling.

http://www.wachusettpediatrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/sun.jpg

Oink.

III
10-29-2012, 04:14 AM
I would like to suggest the posibility that the advice was more practical then otherwise. In many time and places saying the wrong thing to the wrong people could be a fatal mistake. "Pearls before swine" might be used instead of "losse lips sink ships".

In some place saying the wrong things can get you locked up for a long time instead of outright murdered.

As far as keeping the "secrets" from the "unworthy"; I tend to agree with EJ Gold, "The secret keeps itself". The danger isn't that they will understand it. The danger is that they will differently understand in a way dangerous to the caster of such pearls

I really don't know if it matters or makes any difference. It was advice given in a very different world, a world in which heresy could be fatal at various times. One man's"pearls" can be anothers "heresy" or a "burning offense". Nowadays maybe somebody thinks that one is a new age freak" of some kind or a joker or whatever. It doesn't matter in the least to me if somebody knows I claim to practice a Tantric Alchemy and have sex. It makes no difference to my life at all. 100 years ago that could have been more than a little inconvienient.

Lo!
10-29-2012, 09:36 AM
Solomon Levi and Ghislain, thank you both for the ideas and considerations you've managed to wordsmith so eloquently. I can't let this community know enough how different (another root meaning of the word holy) this board is than many other places on the internet to discuss the nature of these ideas. Whomever can boldly profess true love and gnosis while at the same time keeping their hearts open to seek it further are blessed indeed, especially when in the company those similarly attuned.

Have you acted as salt and light into a person's life when they reacted negatively? Maybe at a bar when you're trying to give a casual friend some advice that evokes an awareness of spirit that they want nothing to do with? It always turns into a debate... In my mind, of course, I'm recalling countless conversations about the nature of God's righteousness and mercy, or else His existence period. Even more simple conversations trying to convince someone who's constantly depressed to seek bravely their heart's desires and with intent and confidence! They don't want to hear it, they want to oppose anything that rings of "spirit, vibration, will or transformation." I believe, although this is obviously an esoteric passage that can be taken (and learned from) from many angles, that this was perhaps said in a conversation that followed a disciple's heated debate with philosopher, or perhaps to ease the anger of the disciples after an instigator questioned Jesus. Or perhaps He just had one of those bar arguments in mind when He surveyed the simplicity of our minds in their blinded states. "Don't waste your time arguing with someone about ANYTHING you consider precious when all they're interested in is proving you wrong. The both of you will end up violating your own principles in an attempt to prove the other person wrong." That's the Lo! paraphrase of that verse, and mainly the point on which I was making my comment on discernment.

solomon levi
10-29-2012, 11:37 AM
Thanks Lo! In some ways discernment is a cornerstone, and in others a stumbling block, I suppose.
How few men can discern the quintessence!
Jesus said, "I shall give you what no eye has seen and what no ear has heard and what no hand has
touched and what has never occurred to the human mind." - Gospel of Thomas


Then King Khalid said: "Tell me whether this matter is very common or very rare".
Morienus answered: "Now consider what an authority said, that this magistery is customarily accomplished
with a single matter. Attend well to this and apply yourself to it, and you will find no contradictions among
the natures which you will perceive...
...To guard you from error, I tell you again what I said at the beginning. Take care neither to depart from
the root, nor seek any other form of it, for you will attain the profit and the regard you pursue only by means
of this. There is no need for you to reduce it or to mix anything else with it. Again I admonish you to heed
well that which we have said so far".


Discernment with your knowledge/past (as man thinks) is always partial and incomplete.
Discernment (as God thinks) is whole rather than fracturing/separating/dividing.

Depending on which place you are coming from, you can do wonders and open the most closed minds.
It needn't be a philosophical debate or argument. Be/live what you want the world to see and hear.
And do it for God's sake. The God that I know doesn't care about converting anyone - that's just a
side effect. If we focus on the side effects, we miss the Whole (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle).
So we say what we need to say without concerning ourselves with how it is received. That is the way
of the Tao. If you do end up conversing with someone who is only interested in proving you wrong,
that too is God speaking, unless you are thinking as man thinks. Whatever the present moment brings
is Presence, if you can discern it.

solomon levi
10-29-2012, 12:07 PM
How can a pearl be more valuable than a "swine"!?
There are no pearls without swine to realise them.
These people some call "swine" are microcosms!!
A pearl, if a pearl is some bit of knowledge or wisdom,
is one among millions of pearls that a man can realise.

IMO, this whole worthy/unworthy idea is man-think.
Every "worthy" person was once "unworthy".
If God is omnipresent, then It is the unworthy as much as the worthy.
A seer doesn't concern himself with these trifles.
If I must discern between the worthy and unworthy, then I want nothing of God...
I'd rather be an ignorant swine.
This reminds me of a comic I saw recently:

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/s480x480/222545_456745481030393_1477294660_n.jpg


This is the amazing thing about God. It doesn't say "do this, don't do that."
It doesn't say "discern this from that"...
If It said anything, I imagine it would say, "There is no place that I am not; there is no thing anyone can do
to offend me, for all things are of me. There is nothing you can do to win or lose my favor. You are free
to realise this or not."

Andro
10-29-2012, 03:54 PM
If we're already making the distinction, how about:

"Let he who is without Swine cast the first Pearl."


Human beings are perhaps never more dangerous/frightening than when they are convinced beyond doubt that they are right.

- Lauren van der Post

Lo!
10-29-2012, 10:51 PM
Solomon I think you made a great point there about the common dignity shared by all people, as we are all made in the image of God. Please don't project a light of judgment or condescension on me based on my words. It's easy to come off that way when speaking about discernment. Thanks everyone for the wonderul thoughts.

Ghislain
10-30-2012, 07:43 AM
III

That put the thread back on track with a succinct bump. :)

Lo! Perhaps the pearls should only be cast on request...as Swine cannot request that which they
are not aware of? But then I don't mind people trying to prove me wrong as I have nothing to be
right about. In coversations such as you describe often a pearl is cast in my direction.


"Let he who is without Swine cast the first Pearl."

That’s one answer, but are Swine so irredeemable? Just cast those pearls carefully.


Human beings are perhaps never more dangerous/frightening than when they are convinced beyond doubt that they are right.

- Lauren van der Post

If it is beyond doubt Androgynus then perhaps they are right; if they are not then they should be
shown where to fit the doubt in. :)

“It is not what opinions are held, but how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, opinions are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment
lead to their abandonment.”

- Bertrand Russel, and me.

Beyond belief and opinion there is intuition.


Ghislain

Andro
10-30-2012, 01:14 PM
If it is beyond doubt Androgynus then perhaps they are right...

No right or wrong but thinking (or rather believing) makes it so :)


...if they are not then they should be shown where to fit the doubt in.

They should be shown the door.


That’s one answer, but are Swine so irredeemable? Just cast those pearls carefully.

I'm not saying one should not be sharing, discussing, expressing, etc...

'Redemption' is not a word I am particularly fond of. Not that there are too many words that I AM fond of :)

Discernment (IMO) should be applied more in the way III talked about it, which means being careful what one shares and with whom, so one might keep their heads for a little bit longer, IF so inclined...

But the 'pearls and the swine' metaphor is a silly one, IMO, because it stinks of cultist, dogmatic & interventionist self-righteousness. I also find the expression to be quite anachronistic (as opposed to a 'classic').

I would rather say: 'Don't sing if your song doesn't sing back at you'.

Have you ever tried to speak/sing in an 'acoustically dead' room, with no reverberation/feedback/resonance? It feels terrible.

This doesn't make your song a 'pearl' and the room a 'swine'.

solomon levi
10-31-2012, 10:02 PM
Solomon I think you made a great point there about the common dignity shared by all people, as we are all made in the image of God. Please don't project a light of judgment or condescension on me based on my words. It's easy to come off that way when speaking about discernment. Thanks everyone for the wonderul thoughts.

Yeah, I only meant to point to that possibility. I'm not saying that's what you're doing.
As with everything, the alchemist is the most important/significant ingredient in alchemy...
it really depends on who is discerning... where that discernment comes from. ;)
We have to look at ourselves as objectively as possible and ask - "Is my discernment
creating/intending separation where there is none; or is my discernment simply seeing
what is there?"

When I ask this objectively, there are no swines. Swine is a projection; not 'what is'.
So I would just be careful/aware when speaking about this not to misrepresent myself.