7 January 2010

The limitations of words

Sometimes I tire of words. They're so subjective, so dualistic. Someone can present a clever and cogent argument based on their own perspective, but that argument can be so easily countered by someone else with an equally sophisticated argument based on THEIR point of view, and so it goes on, ad infinitum. This must be one of the major sources of conflict in the world. Everyone's got their own point of view, and everyone thinks they're right. Even truthseekers can fall prey to this - visit any conspiracy-oriented forums and witness some of the futile debates going on there.

Any words you say can be misinterpreted or skewed or refuted by the human mind. I'm starting to realise that it's not the words per se that are important but the spirit behind them. When I'm arguing a point, I often feel like I'm not conveying the nuances of what I really mean. Apparently, before the fall into duality, beings could telepathically communicate in direct concepts rather than subjective and ambiguous words; wouldn't that just be so much simpler?

It seems every true concept gets perverted in this fallen world: the obvious truth that women and men are of equal value was skewed to mean that women and men are the same and should act as such, and became the ideology that is today known as feminism. The revelation of higher spiritual truths than offered by orthodox religion got distorted into the deceptive, naive and impotent New Age movement. We always get tricked into arguing for one polarity or another rather than seeing through the false dichotomy and finding the hidden solution that is not merely a compromise between the two extremes, but a higher truth altogether. My next post will examine the false dichotomy of "New Age versus orthodox religion"; in the meantime, you could read this pertinent article from Carissa's In2Worlds.

0 comments: