One of the fundamental assumptions of the consciousness of the ‘thinker’—that is, the consciousness which creates philosophy and metaphysics in
the first place—is that the Revelation of Truth consists of nothing more than the Revelation of conceptual Truths or thoughts; an assumption which
carries with it the implication that the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ is fully capable of translating Revealed Truths into meaningful concepts
which can be easily understood by the ‘thinker’.
This is the reason why the Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious ‘authorities’ are paid
to read their respective Revelations and then
interpret their meaning and significance. And, in fact, the entire multi-billion dollar business, or enterprise, or cottage industry of theological
interpretation is based quite directly upon the rigidly-held assumption that the Truths which have been Revealed to the prophets are fully
commensurable with the thoughts of the ‘thinker’.
But the following example will clearly demonstrate how fatally unwarranted such an assumption really is:
Assume that you have heard with your own ears what a rooster sounds like; that you are well-acquainted with the term “cock-a-doodle-do”; and that
you have been tasked with translating the term “cock-a-doodle-do” into Italian.
Now, instantaneously, you are aware that the phrase “cock-a-doodle-do” is not a thought. Rather, it is an attempt to represent in words the actual
that a rooster makes; with words that, in fact, do not sound ANYTHING like what a rooster sounds like in reality.
In any case, you ask an Italian friend what the equivalent would be to “cock-a-doodle-do”; and she tells you “corri-co-co-ro”; words which,
, do not sound ANYTHING like what a rooster sounds like in reality. Rather, those words, too, are used as merely a representation
the reality of that sound.
Now, the relationship between the sound that a rooster actually makes in reality and the English or Italian representations of that sound, is similar
to the relationship between the actual experience of the Revelation of Truth and the interpretations of those Revealed Truths by the
First of all, it must be understood that Genesis
, the Book of Isaiah
, the Book of Daniel
, the Gospels
, the Revelation
and the Quran
were all written to convey the Knowledge that had been Revealed to someone who had received the Vision of the “Son
of man” and the Revelation of the “resurrection”. But what is not
so widely known about these Revelations is that they are ‘Sensate’
Revelations: the Vision of the “Son of man” consisting primarily of both visual and auditory information; while the Revelation of the Memory of
Creation and the revelation of the memories of previous lives consist primarily of information which is more ‘felt’ than either seen or heard.
Thus, the attempts by the ‘thinker’-theologians to explain either of these Revelations on the basis of human thought have about as much
correspondence to the Truth of those Revelations as does the phrase “cock-a-doodle-do” to the actual sound
that a rooster makes in
But it is even several orders of magnitude WORSE
Now assume that a person who has never heard with his own ears what a rooster actually sounds like—someone who, also, has no acquaintance at all
with either the term “cock-a-doodle-do” or what it refers to—has been tasked with translating that term into Italian.
The very first assumption that such a person would make—in fact, the only possible
assumption for him to make—would be that the term
“cock-a-doodle-do” consists of a thought. He would then proceed to translate each of those words—“cock”, “a”, “doodle” and
“do”—into their Italian equivalents. And, stringing all of those Italian words together, he would then claim to have succeeded in
“translating” “cock-a-doodle-do” into Italian.
And this, approximately, is what the theologians are claiming when, for example, they attempt to interpret the Revelation of John
having either seen or heard the Vision of the “Son of man”, or ‘felt’ the Revelation of the Memory of Creation or the revelation of the
memories of previous lives.
That is, in reality, they are no different than people who have NEVER heard what a rooster sounds like; have NO acquaintance whatsoever with even the
term “cock-a-doodle-do”; and, for that reason, can only
assume that it consists of a thought.
In other words, in order to understand that a rooster does not speak
the English words
“cock-a-doodle-do”—and that those words are
merely a representation of that sound—you would have to have heard that sound with your own ears.
So, the theologians can “cock-a-doodle-do”, or “corri-co-co-ro”, or do whatever else that they want to do for as long as they want to do
But that does NOT mean that they have ever heard ‘what a rooster sounds like’…
Or that they have ANY
understanding of those Revelations at all.
Mi cha el
edit on 26-11-2010 by Michael Cecil because: (no reason given)