New Zealand Listener - 09.07,2019

SEPTEMBER 7 2019 LISTENER 23

the Mishnah [the first major written collec-

tion of Jewish oral traditions] could never

have taken root among the people.

L

ong before they had any scriptures,

the early Christians had com-

memorated Jesus’ horrific death in

a ceremonial meal. Later, the splendour

of Byzantine liturgy would transform the

participants’ perception of both Christ and

themselves. In western Europe, Benedictine

monks chanted the entire Psalter [the Book

of Psalms], interspersed with scriptural read-

ings, every week, an exercise that required

breath control and ritualised genuflections

and bowing, physical disciplines that taught

them attitudes of reverence at a level deeper

than the cerebral. The haunting, repeti-

tive cadences of the Gregorian chant also

restricted and bound the rational, discursive

activity of the left brain so that the monks

were open to the intuitive vision of the

right.

The Quran is called “The Recitation”. From

the very beginning, the Prophet drew on the

Eastern tradition of sacred sound, and the

Quran records the extraordinary effect it had

on its first audiences. Quranic recitation is

the major art form in the Islamic world. It

evokes a state known as huzn, designed spe-

cifically to give audiences what Christians

used to call “the gift of tears”. When West-

erners claim to have “read” the Quran, they

have experienced nothing like this.

Scripture has never yielded clear, univocal

messages or lucid incontrovertible doctrines.

On the contrary, before the modern era,

scripture was regarded as an “indication”

that could only point to the ineffable. From

the rishis [Hindu sages or saints], through

the brahmodya ritual, to the Upanishadic

sages, the Indian expositors of scripture

knew they were trying to express something

that lay beyond the capacity of language

and could say only, “Neti ... neti [not this,

not that]”. It was possible to grasp these

truths only by the careful cultivation of a

different mode of consciousness in physi-

cal exercises, rituals and complex mental

disciplines.

Even the Hebrew scriptures, which per-

sonified the divine, presented Yahweh [a

form of the Hebrew name of God] as opaque,

puzzling and inconsistent. It is significant

that the image of God that became embed-

ded in Jewish consciousness was Ezekiel’s

baffling vision of the divine kavod [glory]

that defied categorisation. It was this that

inspired Jewish philosophers and mystics

to insist that God’s essential being was not

even mentioned in the Bible or the Talmud

[the central text of Rabbinic Judaism].

In Christianity, the Cappadocians, Denys

and Thomas Aquinas all insisted scripture

could tell us nothing about what God really

was. In the Quran, Allah is given 99 names

that Muslims recite as a mantra, but these

are contradictory, cancel one another out,

and can only therefore point to a reality that

lies beyond the reach of speech.

Consequently, scripture has no clear mes-

sage and has nothing in common with the

clear and distinct ideas that characterise sola

ratio. Sometimes it even forces us to experi-

ence the shock of total unknowing. This was

clear in the Mahābhārata, which induces a

spiritual and conceptual vertigo, but which

is, significantly, one of India’s most popu-

lar scriptures. In their scriptures, Daoists

inveighed against dogmatism and the lust

for certainty that makes people fall in love

with their own opinions, because “the dao

that can be known is not the eternal Dao”.

The Analects [an ancient Chinese book

composed of a collection of sayings and

ideas attributed to Confucius and his con-

temporaries] left the Chinese with a deep

suspicion of lucid dogmas and rigid formu-

lations. It is impossible to find a set of tidy

doctrines in the Hebrew Bible; and in the

New Testament, there is not one gospel but

four, each presenting a different picture of

Jesus. The Quran, too, produces no clear

teaching on such topics as the conduct of

war, and jurists had to rely on their own

“independent reasoning” when they devel-

oped Islamic jurisprudence. The Protestant

reformers’ discovery that they could not

agree about what scripture said on such

basic issues as the Eucharist split the move-

ment into divisive sects. Yet that has not

deterred later monotheists from making

dogmatic and often aggressive statements

about what scripture really means.

Scriptures could eschew such dogmatism

because, until relatively recently, they were

never regarded as the Last Word; they were

always a work in progress. From as early as

the Rigveda [an ancient Indian collection

of Vedic Sanskrit hymns and commentaries

on liturgy, ritual and mystical exegesis], later

texts were grafted onto older scriptures that

had a very different vision because they were

expressing new concerns. Scripture always

drew on the past to give meaning to the

present. Its message was never cast in stone.

In China, Confucians read their own ideas

into Confucius’ words; he was the soil in

which they planted their own views and

reflections. In India, the Upanishadic sages

radically reinterpreted the mystical experi-

ence of the ancient rishis, and new Vedantic

writings continue this process today. During

their exile in Babylonia, an editor or group

of editors recast the ancient traditions of

Israel and Judah in a way that spoke directly

to their condition and left its imprint on

nearly every book of the Hebrew Bible.

Later, after the destruction of the temple,

the rabbis developed the art of midrash

[ancient commentary] that marched pur-

posefully away from the Written Torah.

They joined disparate quotations to form a

horoz that gave the original texts a different

meaning, and even changed the words of

scripture to give them a more compassion-

ate significance. The New Testament authors

ransacked the Written Torah to create their

own pesher exegesis, reinterpreting ancient

laws and prophecies to make them predict

the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

While some Muslim jurists, such as Ibn

Taymiyyah, tried to interpret the Quran liter-

ally, Shiis very early read their own esoteric

beliefs into certain verses, and influential

mystics, such as the formidable scholar Ibn

al-Arabi, insisted that every time a Muslim

recited a verse from the Quran, it should

mean something different to him.

Unlike science, scripture always had a

moral dimension and was essentially a sum-

mons to compassionate, altruistic action.

Its purpose was

not to confirm the

reader or listener

in their firmly

held opinions, but

to transform them

utterly. l

THE LOST ART

OF SCRIPTURE:

RESCUING THE

SACRED TEXTS,

by Karen Armstrong

(Bodley Head, $40)

From the very beginning,

the Prophet drew on

the Eastern tradition

of sacred sound, and

the Quran records the

extraordinary effect it

had on its first audiences.