Interpretation of religious texts (prophet, Islam, God, Lord)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You might find John Reigstad's book, The Logic of God of interest. He talks about the Aristotlean approach to respect enlightened Pluralism. The affirmation of your own religious tradition and the tradition of your ancestors, while remaining sympathetic to the PEACEFUL traditions of others.
Religious texts about often about "do THIS; DON'T do THAT."
Secular laws -- at least in the US -- don't tell us NOT to murder (for example). They define murder, subject , and what the penalties would be if found stepping outside of the definition. They propose annotations to help clarify the law.
But at no time do those secular laws say DON'T.
Interesting contrast.
Secular laws have no ambiguities. This is the law. If you break this law it is a crime. If you commit this crime this is the punishment. Don't do it is implied and inferred by anyone who can read.
Religious texts mostly to do with Do's - Do this, Do that, and if you do you will get good karmas, you will go to heaven.
Yes they also include Donts.
Then they have other sections - the Vedanta in Hindusim after all the Do's and Dont's. Jesus's teachings in Christianity as well as other sayings. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God."
Then there are other interpretations, the significance of Mary's virginity, what did Jesus mean the words he uttered while he was dying? Why did Jesus have to die?
Vedanta talks about the purpose of life: Spiritual inquiry.
So the religious texts go from the concrete and mundane to the philosophical and the eternal.
Secular laws are made by the community to organize the community. They are subject to change. They are always about the here and now, and they don't care about your philosophy.
Religious texts are not laws, although some are. They are instructions.
There's perhaps always a measure of suspect with anything in print. I'm not convinced that putting such matters down on paper can fully do justice to them. This is a realm better suited for personal observation and sensing; often beyond mere words. The writings might only be a starting point, at best.
If you want to understand a flower, reading about it might help to some degree. But seeing it, touching it, smelling it, etc. will engage your senses for a better understanding. Really, both help, but the human interaction / engaging can't be missed.
Probably the biggest problem with religion(s) is a one-dimensional reading of words from others, and no true personal interaction. People can be lead all kinds of ways by listening to others, and not themselves. Their inner self might be trying to get their attention with pros or cons, but they've tunnel-visioned themselves.
Last edited by Thoreau424; 03-30-2023 at 02:46 PM..
There's perhaps always a measure of suspect with anything in print. I'm not convinced that putting such matters down on paper can fully do justice to them. This is a realm better suited for personal observation and sensing; often beyond mere words. The writings might only be a starting point, at best.
If you want to understand a flower, reading about it might help to some degree. But seeing it, touching it, smelling it, etc. will engage your senses for a better understanding. Really, both help, but the human interaction / engaging can't be missed.
Probably the biggest problem with religion(s) is a one-dimensional reading of words from others, and no true personal interaction. People can be lead all kinds of ways by listening to others, and not themselves. Their inner self might be trying to get their attention and caution, but they've tunnel-visioned themselves with other's words and ideas.
Like anything we read, we bring a lot of ourselves to what we read. Once a book is published the author no longer exists, the meaning belongs to the reader. The author may not like this one bit, but he longer owns it, only the copyright. The reviewers and readers do, they interpret, they like or dislike the words, they see things in it the author may not even have felt, but is nevertheless true. That is how powerful words are.
Religion preserves those words, the thoughts and experiences of the seers and sages, which provide a road map to spiritual realization. Again we take from religion what we need, what inspires us, what we seek, the effort we put into it, or don't. Each individual is a world in himself, his own history and geography, on his own journey and destination. There is no wrong or right way, there is only one way set by the order of the universe.
Like anything we read, we bring a lot of ourselves to what we read. Once a book is published the author no longer exists, the meaning belongs to the reader. The author may not like this one bit, but he longer owns it, only the copyright. The reviewers and readers do, they interpret, they like or dislike the words, they see things in it the author may not even have felt, but is nevertheless true. That is how powerful words are.
That's not completely true, either. Once a book/paper is written, the author doesn't just fall of the face of the earth. I have gotten in touch with a few authors in my day and asked them about something specific they've written about. They were more than happy to clarify, and in ONE instance, I was told that he had received several queries about the same issue.
Also, others have interviewed authors after the fact about their book. Authors have written other papers referencing/clarifying their material. Even screenwriters are often called in after a screenplay is bought and paid for, in order to clarify an actor's role.
So, it's not that set-in-stone.
Unless of course, one doesn't want to make the effort.
Quote:
Religion preserves those words, the thoughts and experiences of the seers and sages, which provide a road map to spiritual realization. Again we take from religion what we need, what inspires us, what we seek, the effort we put into it, or don't. Each individual is a world in himself, his own history and geography, on his own journey and destination. There is no wrong or right way, there is only one way set by the order of the universe.
Unfortunately, many don't put that much effort into it. They sometimes figure that they read the book ONCE, and they understand everything about the book.
That's not completely true, either. Once a book/paper is written, the author doesn't just fall of the face of the earth. I have gotten in touch with a few authors in my day and asked them about something specific they've written about. They were more than happy to clarify, and in ONE instance, I was told that he had received several queries about the same issue.
Whoa. It did not occur to me one can infer I said the author just died by "does not exist." He does not own the work anymore in the sense of he cannot dictate how it should be read, or what meaning should be taken only in relation to the work. Does not mean he died. Yes you can contact the author, he gives readings, he can answer questions of course. He can even write another boook, he can even write criticizing his critiques. Of course no good writer will do such things, because they too know.
This might help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_the_Author
Quote:
The Death of the Author" (French: La mort de l'auteur) is a 1967 essay by the Frenchliterary critic and theoristRoland Barthes (1915–1980). Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of relying on the intentions and biography of an author to definitively explain the "ultimate meaning" of a text. Instead, the essay emphasizes the primacy of each individual reader's interpretation of the work over any "definitive" meaning intended by the author, a process in which subtle or unnoticed characteristics may be drawn out for new insight. The essay's first English-language publication was in the American journal Aspen, no. 5–6 in 1967; the French debut was in the magazine Manteia, no. 5 (1968). The essay later appeared in an anthology of Barthes's essays, Image-Music-Text (1977), a book that also included his "From Work to Text".
Barthes ONLY refers to works of literature, not Religious Works, just to be clear.
Last edited by cb2008; 03-30-2023 at 02:48 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
