Does it have something to do with The Jewel of the Nile?

Probably not.

Falling: for the mundane, the profane, the physical. And yet each instance of it reflects the divine to the extent that it is identified with it.

This strikes me as very similar in spirit to Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, Chapter 13, verses 9-12:

For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Less poetically, this is a very Platonic argument that what we see as truth is only an imperfect, transitory, and fragmentary instantiation of a perfect, immutable, and whole truth, which we can only understand by allegory, viz. the Allegory of the Cave in Republic VII.

I think the falling that Jim keyed on is important because the opposite of falling, in a sense, is standing firm and stable, feet on the ground. In terms of perception, we don't do that: what we perceive is influenced by what we know and expect. But what we expect is influenced by what we perceive, so there's a reflection in that, a recursive influence. You could call it falling because it's a continuous motion. You didn't start it and you won't stop it.

More broadly, the 'image in the wine' introduces the problem of consciousness, of subjective experience, through inebriation. Inebriation makes consciousness available for thinking about, by altering it. Experiencing two different states of consciousness reveals consciousness, in a way that merely changing the focus of our attention, from one object to another, cannot. Inebriation also speaks of value. The image in the wine is an object given value. It binds the two aspects of ourselves, body and mind, profane and sacred.

Of course, I'm just guessing!!

I have a Western mind. I haven't for years to understand that of the East and feel I have made some ground. Very little. Comparison of an Eastern idea with one of the West inevitably results in a loss of meaning. I'm hard pressed to find a better example.

Call me hopelessly dull, but I didn't feel anything for it at all.

What strikes me about the poetry forms of Islamic culture, including the Koran is that its beautiful but in an empty way. My impression is that too much energy is put into making it too pristine, too perfect, too polished but then I guess I shouldn't be surprised since that is their value system, where the more perfect and flawless something is the more divine it is. So if something is really good like human love or beauty or sex etc then it must be exalted and put under glass along with everything else divine where it can be visited given the proper effort.

Even when I wasn't a believer, I much prefered the earthiness of Hebrew verse as in the Psalms or the blood and guts, so to speak, of Shakespeare and the western poetic tradition where the "flesh" is present and up front in all its conflicted, messy, sometimes awful, always electrifying glory. But that is in keeping with Western values where the divine freely mixes and incarnates with unexalted flesh, where the divine comes down to us to dwell with us just as we are as imperfect as we are. We find the divine right where we need it the most, ever present and available in the midst of the juicy messiness of our humanity because no amount of imperfection can obscure it. In fact, the messier and earthier something is the better it enables us not only to the divine in our lives but to also see what is divine about all flesh.

I guess some people like the exalted mental exercise of a Sufi poem but I always slam into that glass-like surface that seems to cover them and slide right off them.

I think I could summarize what I see as the differences between us and the East a little better now that I've thought about it some more.

In the east is seems that the prevailing belief is that the divine is best accessed through exalted channels whatever those might be. Whether it is accessed through sex or the Koran, what have you, the common denominator is that the channel is considered exalted and it is only approached in word or deed with the highest reverence and the greatest concern for purity.

But according to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the divine is accessed through simple observation and it is found simply everywhere. It is thought that it is not in the least diminished by easy availability, nor is it tarnished by association with imperfection. Instead these things are thought to make the divine show forth all the greater in contrast. When divinity is seen unscathed even when present in the most hostile environments, it becomes clear just how strong and pure it is. It can then be more clearly seen that it overcomes rather than being overcome itself. Our wisdom says that the divine does not shun the places where it is not welcome but is rather attracted to those places being concerned as it is with redemption. So the divine can be found anywhere and everywhere and whenever a spark of it is present in the worst vessel, the survival of that spark is all the more awesome.

I think that is why Western literature is realistic where as Islamic literature is rarified. Islamic lit is fine for those who dig it I guess, but I get much more out of Western lit than a philosophical exercise which is the most I have ever got from Sufi poetry.

Ok I'M done now ;)

Peggy, fair enough, but as for:

...accessed through simple observation and it is found simply everywhere. It is thought that it is not in the least diminished by easy availability, nor is it tarnished by association with imperfection.

This sounds even more Taoist/Zen Buddhist than Christian. Have you read Chuang-tzu or any Zen texts? You'll be quite pleased with how China fits into your East-West scheme. In your scheme they count as very Western, which gives me a chuckle!

Jim,

It would seem so if you went just by my post. But I was adressing the east/west divide in general terms appropriate for a general comment on the differences between Islamic poetry and Western poetry. I was not looking to exhaust the subject nor was I thinking in some sort of black and white terms. I believe that I said that in the east there is a stronger tendency to go in one direction and in the West there is a tendency to go in another. I never said that the West is all one way and the east is all the other way.

Yes, Christianity has eastern elements since it originated in the east (or rather an east/west crucible) but it has since tipped towards the west philosophically. So yes, it retains some eastern philosophical tendencies while it has a much stronger tendency towards the west. I see this as nothing but a positive.

It is this Western factor that distinguishes Christianity from Bhuddist philosophy even if they share some common element. I didn't feel the need to mention that before but I'm saying it now. I would also have to say that while Islam is largely eastern in character, especially when it comes to the Sufis, it shares western elements in common with Christianity and Judaism in its belief system. The most obvious evidence of this is Islam's strict monothesim and its belief that God is separate from the world rather than the same as the world to name just two.

Basically a Christian can look about them and access God easily through observation but we would never, as the Bhuddist and Hindu faiths do, de-personalize that presence and equate that presence with the sum of material world or all of existence. This is not to degrade the worth of the material world but simply to distinguish one thing from another in this case what is God and what is not God. If someone believes that God has revealed himself to be of a form like that of an individual person then it is a untruth for them to believe that he is also a rock or a cat etc.

If you really want to know where I draw the line, I draw it through Judaism. East of Israel, religions tend towards the Bhuddist/Hindu view to the degree that their lands of origin are distant from Jewish influence. To the West of Israel, the world is dominated by Christian philosophy regardless of individual belief or non-belief. From the Jews we have taken the idea of a personal Divine, one who speaks to us and who wants us to speak to Him and who is not driven away by imperfection. We believe that God walks with us and we don't need rarified channels which only open during exceptional physical experiences or disciplines in order to get close to Him. For us such rarified channels are one option not less than simply stopping and resting in God's ever-personal ever-presence.

Just think of a Sufi twirling madly in order to reach God and an elderly Jewish person's easy conversations with God while in prayer to get the idea of what I am talking about. Just try to have a easy conversation with someone in the room while you are spinning wildly. Just try to have a conversation with a rock. Ok, maybe some Bhuddist monk has tried it already but I doubt he got much conversation back in response.

Ok now I am really done.