Master and student

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Master and student

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Master and student

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Master and student - 3/13/2012 6:37:03 AM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

I always wondered why Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha and Socrates didnt write down the books themselves. Or at least dictated their opinions to a writer directly, if they were analphabetic.
I dont think anybody believes Socrates could not write.
The only logical explanation I have for this is that they were aware words are twisted around once written down.

Whats your take on it?

Post #: 1

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 7:39:31 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Writing is a recent invention, whereas all mammals pretty much model on behavior, and oral tradition has probably been around since the first word was spoken - language itself attests to this, as the definition what a given word itself symbolizes is essentially an oral tradition, the word "no" is pretty much straight from Sanskrit.

The Hebrews were probably the first predominantly literate/legalist culture, so you're talking about 5,000 years or so here is all, 1500 generations for that tradition to spread.

In many ways, literary traditions are less flexible than oral traditions, which generate paradigm models of reality on the fly to suit the situation, and more flexible oral traditions are alluded to in the bible as having authority.

And, it's very hard to assign a shelf life to oral tradition, ol' BM is regurgitating oral traditions that date back to the preliterate ages, Yahwehism, Old Testament stuff, you don't find much of that in the NT.

He's probably from the South, where that stuff is strong.

< Message edited by xssve -- 3/13/2012 7:40:34 AM >

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 2

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 7:42:03 AM

Kainundeva

Posts: 79
Joined: 2/12/2012
Status: offline

originals got lost or extinct after being bent to the likes of some ruler.
mohammed was illiterate, but i think he DID pass it to a writer...
jesus was maybe not writing because the people he addressed could not read anyway... he told his people to pass the word, as buddha did...
socrates? don´t know.
buddha did in fact teach his buddhistic monks and they did not pass a written word for some generations, until asoka ordered the first book to be written 300 BC.
funny enough asoka DID send buddhist monks to the isreali area in 300-200 BC and there WERE already written buddhist texts. which could explain why jesus picked up some of the stuff. now, to be a bit adventorous: if jesus was buddhist and there already were buddhist books, why should he write one?

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 3

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 8:06:34 AM

Winterapple

Posts: 1343
Joined: 8/19/2011
Status: offline

FR
The easiest explanation would be that
the oral tradition was a part of all of
their cultures. But there are arguements
that all of them could read. Reading and
writing use to be more separate skills.
Plato wrote words down so his thoughts
are closest to the source. The Greek alphabet
was relatively new.
It's my understanding that Buddha's words
were first written down 400 hundred years
after his death. Some scholars believe he
could read Sanskrit.
Jesus's words or those credited to him were
written down first I think around sixty
years or so of his death. Or the first
we know of. The NT offers evidence that
Jesus could read and write. That he could
have been taught to read to study the
Scriptures is possible.
Some say the belief they Mohommed was
illiterate is untrue. The Koran
appeared after his death but I'm not
sure how long after.
Socrates distrusted the written for
three reasons we are given.
Inflexibility. The spoken word was clay.
The written word was uncarvable stone.
Loss of memory. The mind wouldn't
retain the written word as well as the spoken.
Loss of control of language. Knowledge might
lose context. Superficial understanding.
The examined life needed back and forth
feedback with others.
An interesting book to read Proust
and the Squid by Maryanne Wolf.
The Squid references ink.

_____________________________

A thousand dreams within me softly burn.
Rimbaud

(in reply to Kainundeva)

Post #: 4

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 8:40:35 AM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

I just see a definite pattern. Good explanation about Socrates take on it WA, thanks.
I suspect all 4 philosophers/prophets made an informed decision on it.
And I wonder what they think of the ones who did wrote it down.
And if Jesus was buddhistic and that was his reason not to write because the truth was already written down, all testaments of his apostles border on heresy.
In essence my first intuition tells me they were afraid to write their words down and be held accountable for them.

(in reply to Winterapple)

Post #: 5

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 9:48:30 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Well first of all the apostles didn't write shit, the gospels were not written by the apostles, Paul was not an apostle, he was in fact a Roman quisling and bounty hunter, on his way to bring Jesus in when he experienced conversion.

Second, Christianity has been a syncretic religion from the start: lots of Greek and Roman mystery religions in there, including Mithrism and Solarism (via Constantine), and a Western Mediterranean brand of Zoroastrian dualism, at utter odds with mainstream Judaism had a great deal of influence, all these influences were a mixture of oral and written traditions, though the latter mostly based on oral traditions - the textual component of Zoroastrianism, the Avesta, for example, is much like the other texts under discussion; Zoroaster is believed to have written a little of it, but most of what is left is commentary on the his teachings by later writers - much as Abraham didn't appear to write anything down.

A goodly majority of the Christian saints are actually syncretized pagan gods, demigods and hero's, absorbed as Christianity spread into western Europe.

W/regard to the topic, the apt parable here is Moses - he goes up the mountain to receive the written word of god, and as soon as his back is turned, the Israelites go right back to oral animism.

< Message edited by xssve -- 3/13/2012 9:53:27 AM >

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 6

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 9:48:42 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Mohammed was illiterate but did dictate the Qu'ran to his earliest followers, including one of his wives.
Buddha may have written some of the earliest buddhist texts however he rejected the idea of the infallibility of scripture so so it simply wasn't pat of what he taught.
Socrates is an odd case. He certainly existed but it is unclear how much of what Plato wrote attributed to Socrates was actually said by Socrates and how much was Plato's own beliefs put into the mouth of his revered teacher.
There is simply no reason to believe anything written about Jesus has any connection to the original person.

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 7

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 10:03:09 AM

Moonhead

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

Lao Tzu is a case in point: it's believed that he did sit down and write out the philosophy of taoism as a series of aphorisms before leaving China in a snit.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 8

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 12:25:06 PM

vincentML

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

I just see a definite pattern. Good explanation about Socrates take on it WA, thanks.
I suspect all 4 philosophers/prophets made an informed decision on it.
And I wonder what they think of the ones who did wrote it down.
And if Jesus was buddhistic and that was his reason not to write because the truth was already written down, all testaments of his apostles border on heresy.
In essence my first intuition tells me they were afraid to write their words down and be held accountable for them.

Jesus was apocolyptic. The end time was near. Why bother writing anything? For who?

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 9

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 2:01:23 PM

Anaxagoras

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani
I dont think anybody believes Socrates could not write.

Socrates was literate as he referred to studying the works of pre-Socratic philosophers like Anaxagoras, and adapted the idea of Nous from him - no relation to myself.

I think Socrates didn't really advance a form of structured philosophy, rather he tried to engage people at a personal level through dialogue, often by showing them through questioning that they knew very little, which of course led to a good deal of resentment and bad feeling in Athens that probably contributed to his eventual execution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Socrates is an odd case. He certainly existed but it is unclear how much of what Plato wrote attributed to Socrates was actually said by Socrates and how much was Plato's own beliefs put into the mouth of his revered teacher.

Generally it is understood that Plato's early works like the Apologia reflect Socrates' philosophy quite accurately because their fairly loose philosophical style differs a great deal with later works like The Republic, in which Plato developed a highly systemic form of dualistic philosophy.

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 10

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 2:10:01 PM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

I just see a definite pattern. Good explanation about Socrates take on it WA, thanks.
I suspect all 4 philosophers/prophets made an informed decision on it.
And I wonder what they think of the ones who did wrote it down.
And if Jesus was buddhistic and that was his reason not to write because the truth was already written down, all testaments of his apostles border on heresy.
In essence my first intuition tells me they were afraid to write their words down and be held accountable for them.

I said this because I believe there is good merit to it. Would all those men write it down, it would be used against them in a court of law.
Just a thought.
I dont know if Plato was accused of the same thing Socrates was. But since Plato kinda wrote it like a biography it could free him of accusations. The same goes for his later work wich is percieved to be his own but he still used Socrates. Right?

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 11

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 5:21:17 PM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

xssve, I am aware of the throwin together Constantine did. It is why I believe they called Jesus the son of God. All faiths in Europe had human figures as Gods. So it fitted the profile.
Interesting fact of Moses btw. He did write the ten commandments down. In stone tablets as far as I know, so maybe he was a mason, wich supports another theory of mine.

About the apostles not writing shit, I kinda knew that, but they testified, hence the word testament?

Moonhead, I read up a bit on taoism and see it was a mixture, but a good lead none the less. I googled confucius quickly as well and he didnt write it down himself as well. Something to investigate more for me so thanks.

Vincent I dont see why J was apocalyptic. Maybe you can adress that.

Anaxagoras, never heard of him. I will read up on it. Like the word Nous.

Just read the Nous, too bad there is no etymology to it in wiki. Thanks for the heads up to all.

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 12

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 7:00:34 PM

Winterapple

Posts: 1343
Joined: 8/19/2011
Status: offline

There are those that will argue none of these
men existed. But most scholars say they did.
Mohommed being closest to us is the
easiest to make a case for. I believe all
four men existed, were philosopher/ teachers
and had followers/disciples. And a case
can be made that three of the four were
literate.
The Koran says Mohommed was illiterate.
We know he had a personal secretary
who was his scribe. We also know the names
of I believe five other men who during his
lifetime collected his words.
Where some of those words might
have come from and the journey they
made is quite interesting.
His wife Aisha never wrote anything.
She dictated some things to a scribe.
The complete Koran Codex did not exist
during Mohammed's lifetime.
As with the Bible a timeline for the
Koran can be established.
I'd be interested (sincerely) in reading
anything a reputable scholar has to
say about the Buddha ever writing
anything in his own hand.
Where are these manuscripts or what
happened to them and what evidence
is there they existed?
The Pali Canon is the oldest and most
extant if the Buddhist Scriptures.
Written and compiled from the oral
traditions in 29 BCE some 400 years
after the Buddha's death.
There are those that say Aristotle was
just a construct of Plato's.Xenophen
and Aristophanes also write of him.
But none of these writes were really
histories as such they were philosophy
and drama. But scholarly evidence says
he existed and wasn't just a literary device.
But he never wrote his philosophy.
He was skeptical of the written word.
So Socrates comes to us filtered through
Plato and others.
I should have said the Jesus presented
in the NT is characterized as being able
to read and in one instance write.
This Jesus can be interpreted by the
squeamish as a literary figure. But I
think you can make a case that a man
of Jesus's culture and time could have
been literate in Hebrew. He could
have been taught to read. The Hebrew
alphabet was well established by his
time and reading the Scriptures was
and established part of the culture before
Jesus was born. The episode in the
gospels where he is described as writing
a word on the ground is one of the most
enigmatic episodes. Whether this
happened or not is not really as
interesting to me as why it was included
and what the meaning was behind it.
I would never claim the gospels are
eyewitness accounts of anything.
Oral traditions as with Buddha but
to be fair written a lot closer to the
time Jesus was said to have lived.
The gospel of Mark was believed to
be the first written in 70 CE, Matthew
80CE, Luke 90CE, John a few years after
Luke but before the first century.
None of the unknown authors were
likely to have known Jesus but they
could have known people who did.
In saying that I'm not making any pitch
about the divinity of Jesus or saying
that the events written in the gospel
happened or happened as recorded.
That's true about all four men.
Stories about them come to us from
others. Their philosophies, the most
important thing about all of them,
were also passed down by others.
It doesn't mean they aren't worth
reading or studying.
It's doubtful any of them could actually
write even if they could read.
The two didn't always go hand in hand.
Many people that could read couldn't
write. And writing was rather tedious
work which is where the scribes came
in. And to all four men the oral tradition
would have been respected.
There's also a difference between being
able to write and being a skilled.
Even if all four men could write whose
to say any of them would have had
a tiny bit of the talent of, say L Ron
Hubbard.

_____________________________

A thousand dreams within me softly burn.
Rimbaud

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 13

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 7:12:55 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

I always wondered why Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha and Socrates didnt write down the books themselves.

This was before tenure, so they had no need to publish.

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 14

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 7:47:37 PM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

I didnt know really people could read but not write.
I will have to research that somehow.
Although it sounds a bit strange.

To tenure I can only say Plato did feel the obvious need to write.

They were all obviously men with great intellect.
They all were aware of written records as far as I know.
And they all knew damn well how words could be twisted.
So there still is this enigma.
It would have been wiser to have first hand accounts.
However much people might twist it, you could only twist the original source.
Not second and third hand opinions.
It's also more clear to me now why muslims have more faith in their religion then christians, in general.
However there is one common denominator wich is most apparent in how quickly things change.
The muslim faith broke into factions like a thunderbolt.
Whatever Allah told Mohammed and God told Jesus, they both failed to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, relating it to their followers.

Endless rivers of blood sprung from their legacy.
Thats not the case with Socrates and Buddha.

(in reply to Winterapple)

Post #: 15

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 8:03:31 PM

fucktoyprincess

Posts: 2337
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

I just see a definite pattern. Good explanation about Socrates take on it WA, thanks.
I suspect all 4 philosophers/prophets made an informed decision on it.
And I wonder what they think of the ones who did wrote it down.
And if Jesus was buddhistic and that was his reason not to write because the truth was already written down, all testaments of his apostles border on heresy.
In essence my first intuition tells me they were afraid to write their words down and be held accountable for them.

I said this because I believe there is good merit to it. Would all those men write it down, it would be used against them in a court of law.
Just a thought.
I dont know if Plato was accused of the same thing Socrates was. But since Plato kinda wrote it like a biography it could free him of accusations. The same goes for his later work wich is percieved to be his own but he still used Socrates. Right?

When I first read the question, the first thought I had was that they purposely did not write things down.

And as we know from history, both Jesus and Socrates were, in effect, tried and executed for their beliefs - or more importantly, for the influence that they had.

It is not unreasonable to think they just didn't want to have things written down (whether on their own, or even recorded by someone else). Of course, in the end, that did not save either of them.

Buddha was born a Hindu prince, and given his social standing and class, I have to believe he knew how to write. Why he chose not to write down his philosophy, I can't say I know.

< Message edited by fucktoyprincess -- 3/13/2012 8:05:44 PM >

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 16

RE: Master and student - 3/13/2012 8:21:36 PM

MrBukani

Posts: 1920
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline

Jesus and Socrates refused to flee, wich they both could have done.
In Socrates case, I can understand it.
In Jesus case not.
Plato did leave the country.
Jesus was ordered to die by God. He had to die for our sins.
If God is omnipotent, then he should have given him time to be more clear about his position.

Death can come anyday.
And its easy to hide a book.
Book or no book they both knew very well, they would be hunted down.
Mohammed on the other hand acted like a warrior in a way.

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)

Post #: 17

RE: Master and student - 3/14/2012 3:14:24 AM

BenevolentM

Posts: 3394
Joined: 11/15/2006
Status: offline

What is my take on why Jesus did not appoint someone to follow him around doing dictation? I don't mean to brag, but I figured out why. I'm just not going to tell you.

(in reply to MrBukani)

Post #: 18

RE: Master and student - 3/14/2012 5:27:07 AM

Moonhead

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
Jesus was apocolyptic. The end time was near. Why bother writing anything? For who?

Not according to most of the gospels he wasn't. He comes across as more of a social reformer than anything else, and nobody who thinks that the end times are looming gives a hoot about changing society for the better.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to vincentML)

Post #: 19

RE: Master and student - 3/14/2012 7:23:28 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Yeah, he warned of a Jewish apocalypse, and the Book of Revelations has been a topic of internal dispute for centuries, Martin Luther commented, "Christ is neither taught nor known in it".

Revelations is very much in the vein of Zoroastrian duality, a war between good and evil, which is barely mentioned by Jesus, and in much less occult terms, he usually refers to evil as an internal flaw, rather than an external force.

The gnostic and dualist schools of the bible basically center around whether salvation is obtained through Jesus life and teachings (gnostic) or his sacrificial death (dualist).

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to Moonhead)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Master and student

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.203