Those who know don't speak

[B. de Corbin]

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
The unnameable is the eternally real.

This is from one of the translations of The Tao Te Ching, attributed to Lao Tzu (Master Lao). This has led to an idea I've seen which is often expressed in Zen Buddhism as "those who know don't speak, those who speak don't know."

The idea seems to be that the thing they are expressing (in this case, the Tao) is something which can be understood (or felt, or sensed, or something like that) but can not be accurately expressed in words.

Are there actually things which can be known but not expressed in words?

If so, what kind of things are they (are they ALL mystical "truths," or are there common, every day examples as well?)?

Assuming that such things exist, WHY is it that words can't hold them?

This is an ongoing problem for me... There seem to be a lot of things which I don't talk about because I can't clearly express them in words. Maybe it's just that my command of the language isn't up to the task...

[Dufonce]

Re: Those who know don't speak

i completely agree with this. How does one express the feeling they get when they connect to deity? the feeling of the energy flowing through you during certain energy workings? even if you describe it best you can, you cant come close to expressing the full experience. or even just true love? the oldest one of how do you know? when you find it, you'll know. is the best answer anyones ever been able to give, and it says nothing about it.

some things have to be experienced to be known. theres even some things you can tell a person all day long and they wont believe a word. but show them, make them see and feel what you're talking about. and they will know it too. Humans need "proof" of anything. Faith isnt enough for some people. Most of what i know, I don't tell simply because generally people wouldnt understand, they'd call me crazy and send me off on my way. Very few people have i discussed certain things with and its because they came to me or they expressed interest and a somewhat base knowledge of what i know. Them having some experience opens their minds to what can be said, so they can feel the rest.

[Ophidia]

Re: Those who know don't speak

There are some things that English has no good words for. I can tell people that I feel connected to everything on earth when I meditate, but saying 'I feel connected' doesn't convey that feeling of my consciousness merging into everything when I meditate. Calling the 'oversoul of everything' 'the Great Mystery' or 'The Source' or even 'God', or naming it YHVH or Allah or Babalu-Aye or Bon Dieu has no magnitude.

I know what it is when I feel it, but there are no words to describe it.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Those who know don't speak

I run into the same problem, Perzephone - there are words for certain things, but:

A. We've all heard them used by so many flakes so many times that we end up looking like flakes ourselves when we use them in the correct context ("Like, Dude! I am, like, one with the universe, man!).

B. Even though the words describe the subjective experience, they are almost always misunderstood by others. If I tell somebody (for example) that I have daily conversations with my soul, I'm apt to get the "smile politely and back away quickly" look. Yet, I do, and the only other way I have to say it would be to explain it from a psychological perspective, but then it sounds like (surprise!) psychology, but that isn't what it feels like when I do it, which means I've changed the experience by talking about it...

[Ophidia]

Re: Those who know don't speak

It's not just the Whack-Job factor, it's the actual lack of words, and the perception of those words. We had to borrow words like 'karma' and 'shaman'. You can call an experience 'divine', 'sublime', 'ecstatic', 'awe-full' or 'awe-some', and when you're talking about connections with deity, even 'terrible' in the old-fashioned sense, but it still doesn't fully convey the experience. One person's sublime might be someone else's 'meh'. I think it's part of why I fail at having rational, well thought-out and logical discussions with people about my UPGs - I understand the psychology behind the experiences, and even behind religion, faith and belief. The experiences themselves fall into the realm of poetry.

There's a huge abyss of understanding between:

I approached the confines of death. I trod the threshold of Proserpine and borne through the Elements, I returned. I saw at midnight the Sun shining in all His glory. I approached the Gods above & the Gods below, & I stood before Them & worshiped Them.
- Lucius Apuleius, The Golden Ass

and:
"I entered an altered state of consciousness through various rhythm and drug-based technologies. Although I was laying with other people in a darkened, cave-like room, I imagined that I went on a journey through the Land of the Dead as we culturally recognize it. In my visualization, I came before anthropomorphized beings representing death and rebirth, and I spoke ritualized greetings to them. I continued my visualized journey back to the surface. Although it was still night time, I imagined the sun rising, and I offered more anthropomorphized beings ritualized greetings. All in all, it was a cathartic experience and I feel I am reconciling various aspects of my personality as a result."

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Those who know don't speak

Yup - the analogy I use is attempting to describe a dream.

We have these dreams that seem so monumentally huge, and when we attempt to describe the "hugeness" of it, we can tell the jumbled plot, but the feelings - which create the overwhelming impact of the dream - get lost in the translation.

Poetry - or something like - it is the way to go, but, even then, it's only people who have had similar experiences who will understand what you are saying. And even then, it is so easy to get confused by the poetry, or poetic metaphors, and miss the real thing...

Which is why, I guess, you get this (also from the Zen people):

Don't mistake the finger pointing for the thing it points at.