Kent Johnson
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: Meanings of words |
 |
|
In interpreting the wisdom of words, in this case the Writings of the Baha'i
Faith, we often become too rigid. If in one place we are told an "essence"
is unique, then in another we are expounded about the essences... Or if in
one place we are told there is one reality and in another we hear about
realities, or there are only three such and such and such and in another we
have suches to the gills, those items are not necessarily contradictory.
If there are only three possibilities of looking at truth or only three
stations possible in existence based upon a sentence in the Baha'i Writings
we are severely limiting the wisdom those writings can impart.
It has always been my position that wisdom is wisdom regardless who imparts
the wisdom. At the risk of being grossly misquoted, Hitler might have, at
one time in his life, said something that was true. We need not disregard
that truth because it was said by Hitler. Likewise, someone with a great
reputation, I hesitate to name names because of the misquotabiliy quotient,
but say God Himself might be misinterpreted in what He said.
I am reminded of the Chapter of the Fig that has been discussed here in the
past. Did Muhammad mean to swear by figs and olives? Or by Mt Sinai, Mount
of Olives and Mecca? If we cannot consider the possibility that He was
misquoted, whom do we serve by not considering it?
Is it possible that even in authoritative texts, where we have originals
written in the Hand of the Central Figure, institutionally translated and
approved by all the sanctioned authorities for such, can be misinterpreted?
Of course they can.
It is up to each of us to look at what a wise author intended, not a rigid
transcription of literal meanings.
--Kent |
|
