@chaski Said
I don't believe in "the word".
The very idea of "the word" is a failed and necessarily flawed attempt of humans to define their god and put limitations on their god.
Thus the Buddha, at least initially, resisted having his teaching documented.
Zen masters use seemingly nonsensical koans... nonsensical phrases..words... to shock or trick the follower into enlightenment.
I suspect that Jesus was much the same, this is demonstrated by the very few recorded things that he said and the way he said them. (The vast majority of the NT being the
words of others...
The converse is religion. Christianity, as an example, IMO, has fallen prey to this "word"... and the need to interpret "the word" with other words.
It seems probable that Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and other religions have also fallen prey to "the word" and human need to "define" it with words.
It is quite possible that primitive "religions" were closer to "the word" simply because they, it would appear, did not spend excessive time writing words that define "the word"... and in fact did not seem to perceive "the word".
I expect that Joseph Campbell might disagree with me, as might be demonstrated in his book
The Hero with a Thousand Faces... as might Jung.
On the other hand, if there is a universal or collective conscious or unconscious... it would best be realized by not calling it "the word" nor limiting it to the descriptive words of humans... again IMO.
There again, Campbell and Jung would likely disagree with me...religious leaders and followers definitely would tend to disagree with me.
I would agree. Even the term
Living Word can mislead.
The "silence of the Buddha" in respect of metaphysical questions is well documented.
This can be drawn from a Theravada Text......A monk, Kassapa, is questioning the Buddha....
"Then is suffering caused by oneself?"
"Do not put it like that Kassapa"
"Then is suffering caused by another?"
"Do not put it like that Kassapa"
"Then is suffering caused both by oneself and another?"
"Do not put it like that Kassapa"
"Then is suffering neither caused by oneself or another?"
"Do not put it like that Kassapa"
"Then there is no suffering?"
"It is not a fact that there is no suffering: there is suffering, Kassapa"
"Then does Master Gotama (the Buddha) neither know nor see suffering?"
"It is not a fact that I neither know nor see suffering: I both know and see suffering, Kassapa"
In effect we are being asked to "come and see" (for oneself), or in Pali "ehipassiko".
The same sort of exchange can be found for much else.......life after death, the beginnings of the world, etc etc.
Alas, most begin with conclusions and do not LOOK.