3 ms·
Exactly. It subrly hints at the limitations of language in capturing true understanding. This is something I was impressed with. Almost every other ancient tex
by sifar 9mo ago
Exactly. It subrly hints at the limitations of language in capturing true understanding.
This is something I was impressed with. Almost every other ancient text starts of being full of certainty or being the authoratitve truth.
- mbivert 9mo ago> It subtly hints at the limitations of language in capturing true understanding and that's still one interpretation ^_^ > Almost every other ancient text starts of being full of certainty I can't say for sure about ancient texts, but famous wise men certainly (always?) encouraged a fair amount of humility (e.g. Shakyamuni, Socrates, Jesus, Confucius). But few actually wrote. however, in general, their followers − and popular interpretations − embarrass themselves much less with humility. in case this isn't known to you − I find this delightful − note that the (respectful) "子" suffix used in names (e.g. Lao-tseu is 老子, Confucius is 孔夫子) means "small thing", "seed", "child".