• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What's the word?

Tumah

Veteran Member
Is Isaiah 40:9 God's word?

O thou that tellest good tidings to Zion, Get thee up into the high mountain; O thou that tellest good tidings to Jerusalem, Lift up thy voice with strength; Lift it up, be not afraid; Say unto the cities of Judah: 'Behold your God!'

Are the tidings God's words? And is the scripture also God's word?
These are prophecies. Prophecies are things that G-d says to prophets. Words are things that are said. So yes.
 
I see the Pe****ta translates it simply as מילתא which is the Aramaic equivalent to the Hebrew דבר meaning a word or thing.

Sophia -> hokmot -> wisdom -> 'accumulated knowledge'

Sophia translates as wisdom (and apparently hokmot, sorry if I'm mangling your language and/or theology :grimacing:).

Sophia in a Christian context though (and presumably hokmot in a Jewish context) don't simply mean wisdom is the modern sense of 'accumulated knowledge' though. There is a wealth of philosophical musings on the issue that escape a pithy description.

Logos as a concept appears in pre-Christian Greek philosophy (and post-Christian too) with a range of meanings and philosophical purposes. With Logos there is also the added confusion of where it came from. Was it Greek philosophical influence or perhaps a Hellenisation of an aspect of Jewish theology?

It's pretty interesting, but unfortunately I have insufficient 'sofia' to be of much use on the topic.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Its the word(s) from another through which you can understand the meaning of the word from God (any scripts). Is that what you wanted to know?
I have no idea if that's what I wanted to know, because I have no idea what you're saying. I'm trying to get an understanding of John 1 over here. John says the word was with god and the word was god, etc. A word is something that is spoken. If it wasn't spoken, then its not a word, its a thought, right? So what is John saying?
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Sophia -> hokmot -> wisdom -> 'accumulated knowledge'

Sophia translates as wisdom (and apparently hokmot, sorry if I'm mangling your language and/or theology :grimacing:).

Sophia in a Christian context though (and presumably hokmot in a Jewish context) don't simply mean wisdom is the modern sense of 'accumulated knowledge' though. There is a wealth of philosophical musings on the issue that escape a pithy description.

Logos as a concept appears in pre-Christian Greek philosophy (and post-Christian too) with a range of meanings and philosophical purposes. With Logos there is also the added confusion of where it came from. Was it Greek philosophical influence or perhaps a Hellenisation of an aspect of Jewish theology?

It's pretty interesting, but unfortunately I have insufficient 'sofia' to be of much use on the topic.
I don't understand how Sophia got involved here. (Knowledge is pronounced Ḥoxma, Ḥoxmot would be plural). In Judaism (to the best of my knowledge), math, science, philosophy, are all types of Ḥoxmot.

I see here, that its only for Christianity that logos gets a new translation as wisdom of god.

λόγος ‎(lógos) m ‎(genitive λόγου); second declension

  1. That which is said: word, sentence, speech, story, debate, utterance.
  2. That which is thought: reason, consideration, computation, reckoning.
  3. An account, explanation, or narrative.
  4. Subject matter.
  5. (Christianity) The word or wisdom of God, identified with Jesus in the New Testament.
But then why doesn't it just say "wisdom"? What is being gained with the word, "word"?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So back to the original question about John...
I think that the person of Jesus, whether at the time real or not (He is real now) was born of the words God gave to the Hebrews. Is Hebrews in this context correct?
He would not come except through the law and the prophets. I suppose you can say that the law is his mother. God is his Father.
 
I don't understand how Sophia got involved here. (Knowledge is pronounced Ḥoxma, Ḥoxmot would be plural). In Judaism (to the best of my knowledge), math, science, philosophy, are all types of Ḥoxmot.

I see here, that its only for Christianity that logos gets a new translation as wisdom of god.

λόγος ‎(lógos) m ‎(genitive λόγου); second declension




    • Subject matter.
But then why doesn't it just say "wisdom"? What is being gained with the word, "word"?

Sorry, was just an example of a concept that goes beyond a simple definition. Perhaps not a good one.

It's not the word 'word', it is the concept of Logos.

What this concept is depends on the context. In rhetoric for example it would be (in a basic sense) an appeal to logical reasoning, so considering it to mean 'word' would be misleading.

John's Logos would not be the Logos of rhetoric though, or the Logos of 'word'. It could perhaps be something more like this: Philo's Logos as Divine Mediator.

Or perhaps it is something else again.It is unlikely to be anything that can accurately be described by the English 'word' though.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Can you explain?

Thank you Tumah. I will try. Word is, as per Veda, simply not merely the spoken or heard sound. The spoken or heard sound is the tip of the iceberg, so to say. Veda says it as below:

Rig Veda 1.164.45 “catvari vak parimita padani tani vidur brahmana ye minishinah, guha trini nihita neengayanti turiyam vaco manushya vadanti
The knowers know of the Vak (Word-Speech) that exists in four forms. Three are hidden and the fourth is what men speak.


Material for the note below is taken from: http://veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/vedicsound.htm. I have tried to retain only the relevant portions and removed sanskrit words.

I have earlier said that in Vedas the Word is infinite Brahman in a state called ‘para’ (transcendental) that proliferates as the universe and many through three stages: pashyanti, madhyama and vaikhari.

Within the pashyanti-vak exists the nature's iccha-shakti, or the power of will. Within the madhyama-vak exists the nature's jnana-shakti, or the power of knowledge. And within the vaikhari-vak exists the nature's kriya-shakti, or power of action.

This will probably require a small explanation, which is given below.

Sound is the non-material source of the material manifestation. As sound is of the nature of the syllables is said that the creative force of the universe resides in all the letters of the alphabet. The different letters symbolize the different functions of that creative force, and their totality is designated as matrika or the "mother in essence".

A will (sankalpa) - a pure thought - has to pass through several stages before it actually manifests as concrete creative force. Similarly the sound has to pass through several stages before it is fully experienced by the listener in perfection. These stages are termed as para, pashyanti, madhyama and vaikhari.

This scheme of four levels of Word is linked to an overall concept, which I must bring in here. Hindus have a sacred syllable ”om”, composed of three alphabets, namely "a", "u", and "m". These three alphabets correspond respectively to forms of consciousness' of in our waking (gross), dreaming (subtle) and deep sleep (causal) states and these three states exactly correspond to vaikhari, madhyama and pashyanti states of the Word.

Transcending yet connecting these three alphabets, the "a-u-m" is the fourth transcendental reality, namely the the non-syllable or unstruck sound. This corresponds to the humming sound after one recites the "om" syllable. The non-syllable or unstruck sound represents the transcendence, the turiya, the para-vak, the Supreme Lord.

This can be said in another way. The Transcendental Lord lives as the experiencing/connecting consciousness in our waking, dreaming, and sleep states.

These four levels of sound correspond to four states of consciousness. Para represents the transcendental consciousness - Turiya (Brahman-Lord). Pashyanti represents the intellectual consciousness (deep sleep causal state). Madhyama represents the mental consciousness (dreaming state). And Vaikhari represents the physical consciousness (waking state). These states of consciousness correspond with the four states known technically as jagrat, svapna, susupti, and turiya - or the wakeful state, the dreaming state, the dreamless state, and the transcendental state.

Vaikhari-vak is the grossest level of speech, and it is heard through the external senses. Madhyama-vak is the intermediate unexpressed state of sound, which exists between the states of dream and waking. Madhyama-vak refers to mental speech, when we normally experience thought. On the levels of madhyama and vaikhari, there is a distinction between the sound and the object. The object is perceived as something different from the sound, and sound is connected to an object by convention. Pashyanti vak (that which can be visualized) possesses qualities such as color and form, when speech is intuitively connected to the object. There is near oneness between the word and the experience described.

Para-vak is the transcendent sound, beyond the perception of the senses, only to be realized in perfect meditation. On the stage of para-vak there is no distinction between the object and the sound. The sound contains within it all the qualities of the object.

Within the pashyanti-vak exists the nature's iccha-shakti, or the power of will. Within the madhyama-vak exists the nature's jnana-shakti, or the power of knowledge. And within the vaikhari-vak exists the nature's kriya-shakti, or power of action.

The syllable "om", is the complete representation of the four stages of sound and their existential counterparts. The existential realities are the physical (waking) which is connected to the vaikhari-shabda, the subtle (dream) which is connected to the madhyama-shabda, the causal (causal -sleep) which is connected with the pashyanti-shabda, and the transcendental (para) which is related to the para-shabda. These four existential realities further correspond to the four states of consciousness.
 
Last edited:

Tumah

Veteran Member
I think that the person of Jesus, whether at the time real or not (He is real now) was born of the words God gave to the Hebrews. Is Hebrews in this context correct?
He would not come except through the law and the prophets. I suppose you can say that the law is his mother. God is his Father.
Hebrew is correct, but how you're fitting this with John... I have no idea. John said that in the beginning there was the word. Which beginning is John talking about? The beginning after G-d gave the Laws to the Hebrews?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Hebrew is correct, but how you're fitting this with John... I have no idea. John said that in the beginning there was the word. Which beginning is John talking about? The beginning after G-d gave the Laws to the Hebrews?
I do not agree with you that God's word means the words given to the Hebrews by God. That is only part of it. I think John is referring to the beginning of humankind. As far as I know, humans are the only species whom God talks to and who talks to God. That God talks to us is The Word imo.

I think humans might have been created for God to talk to. Thus Jesus is the word because he teaches us how to listen to God and talk back. LOL A pun.

For you'll who don't know English idioms, to "talk back" is usually a bad thing. It means to start an argument, thus I think it is a pun because I really mean responds with words back.
 
Last edited:

Tumah

Veteran Member
Sorry, was just an example of a concept that goes beyond a simple definition. Perhaps not a good one.

It's not the word 'word', it is the concept of Logos.

What this concept is depends on the context. In rhetoric for example it would be (in a basic sense) an appeal to logical reasoning, so considering it to mean 'word' would be misleading.

John's Logos would not be the Logos of rhetoric though, or the Logos of 'word'. It could perhaps be something more like this: Philo's Logos as Divine Mediator.

Or perhaps it is something else again.It is unlikely to be anything that can accurately be described by the English 'word' though.
That link is a good find! So John took may have taken inspiration from or was influenced by Hellenistic philosophy and not something directly coming out of Tanach.
Would you say its wrong then, to assume that instances of "word" in Tanach are synonymous with the logos?
I can see how someone might find the Pe****ta lacking in this respect. The word מילתא is a common Aramaic word, found often in the Talmud and it doesn't imply any of these things.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
I do not agree with you that God's word means the words given to the Hebrews by God. That is only part of it. I think John is referring to the beginning of humankind. As far as I know, humans are the only species whom God talks to and who talks to God. That God talks to us is The Word imo.

I think humans might have been created for God to talk to. Thus Jesus is the word because he teaches us how to listen to God and talk back. LOL A pun.
Some poster earlier said
I suppose you can say that the law is his mother.
The Law was given to the Jews. So I guess I confused you with another poster, since you're saying something completely different.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Some poster earlier said
I suppose you can say that the law is his mother.
The Law was given to the Jews. So I guess I confused you with another poster, since you're saying something completely different.
It was me. The physical man Jesus was who I was referring to. That he was from the beginning is something different. The character of Jesus in the New Testament came out of the people who the law was given to. I think it is a historical fact. Why are you bothering me? ;)

Now, I will bother you. :D
I think Jesus had to be born a human because the Earth God gave to humans. That they say Jesus is God does nothing for the Earth imo.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
This seems like an obvious question, but I don't see it having been asked.

The NT says that Jesus is the word made flesh. What's the word? And what's the purpose of pointing out that it was a word?
I mean, I know Psalms 33:6 says, "With the word of G-d, the heavens were made..." But obviously that's referring to all the times Genesis 1 says "And G-d said". "Let there be light" are the two words that created light, etc.
And Isa. 40:8 says "...and the word of G-d will stand forever." But on context, that's obviously referring to the prophecy of that chapter. As many prophecies have something along the lines of "and the word of G-d was to me (Jer. 1:4)" or "Hear the word of G-d (Jer. 2:4, Isa. 66:5)".
So we know that those "words" refer to things that G-d metaphorically spoke and we know what those words were.

So what's the other word meant to be?
I'm tempted to say, "Poof!", but...

inb4: the bird.
Heraclitus of Ephesus (about 535-475 BCE) assumed as the principle of substance aetherial fire. From fire all things originate, and return to it again by a never-resting process of development. All things, therefore, are in a perpetual flux. However, this perpetual flux is structured by :eek:logos:confused:-- which most basically means 'word,' but can also designate 'argument,' 'logic,' or 'reason' more generally. The logos which structures the human soul mirrors the logos which structures the ever-changing processes of the universe. ---> Taken from Ancient Greek Philosophy | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

also see --- logos -- Encyclopedia Britannica
Given that the word is 'Logos', a word from Greek culture its good to start with the Greek idea and see where it goes from there.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Thank you Tumah. I will try. Word is, as per Veda, simply not merely the spoken or heard sound. The spoken or heard sound is the tip of the iceberg, so to say. Veda says it as below:

Rig Veda 1.164.45 “catvari vak parimita padani tani vidur brahmana ye minishinah, guha trini nihita neengayanti turiyam vaco manushya vadanti
The knowers know of the Vak (Word-Speech) that exists in four forms. Three are hidden and the fourth is what men speak.


Material for the note below is taken from: http://veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/vedicsound.htm. I have tried to retain only the relevant portions and removed sanskrit words.

I have earlier said that in Vedas the Word is infinite Brahman in a state called ‘para’ (transcendental) that proliferates as the universe and many through three stages: pashyanti, madhyama and vaikhari.

Within the pashyanti-vak exists the nature's iccha-shakti, or the power of will. Within the madhyama-vak exists the nature's jnana-shakti, or the power of knowledge. And within the vaikhari-vak exists the nature's kriya-shakti, or power of action.

This will probably require a small explanation, which is given below.

Sound is the non-material source of the material manifestation. As sound is of the nature of the syllables is said that the creative force of the universe resides in all the letters of the alphabet. The different letters symbolize the different functions of that creative force, and their totality is designated as matrika or the "mother in essence".

A will (sankalpa) - a pure thought - has to pass through several stages before it actually manifests as concrete creative force. Similarly the sound has to pass through several stages before it is fully experienced by the listener in perfection. These stages are termed as para, pashyanti, madhyama and vaikhari.

This scheme of four levels of Word is linked to an overall concept, which I must bring in here. Hindus have a sacred syllable ”om”, composed of three alphabets, namely "a", "u", and "m". These three alphabets correspond respectively to forms of consciousness' of in our waking (gross), dreaming (subtle) and deep sleep (causal) states and these three states exactly correspond to vaikhari, madhyama and pashyanti states of the Word.

Transcending yet connecting these three alphabets, the "a-u-m" is the fourth transcendental reality, namely the the non-syllable or unstruck sound. This corresponds to the humming sound after one recites the "om" syllable. The non-syllable or unstruck sound represents the transcendence, the turiya, the para-vak, the Supreme Lord.

This can be said in another way. The Transcendental Lord lives as the experiencing/connecting consciousness in our waking, dreaming, and sleep states.

These four levels of sound correspond to four states of consciousness. Para represents the transcendental consciousness - Turiya (Brahman-Lord). Pashyanti represents the intellectual consciousness (deep sleep causal state). Madhyama represents the mental consciousness (dreaming state). And Vaikhari represents the physical consciousness (waking state). These states of consciousness correspond with the four states known technically as jagrat, svapna, susupti, and turiya - or the wakeful state, the dreaming state, the dreamless state, and the transcendental state.

Vaikhari-vak is the grossest level of speech, and it is heard through the external senses. Madhyama-vak is the intermediate unexpressed state of sound, which exists between the states of dream and waking. Madhyama-vak refers to mental speech, when we normally experience thought. On the levels of madhyama and vaikhari, there is a distinction between the sound and the object. The object is perceived as something different from the sound, and sound is connected to an object by convention. Pashyanti vak (that which can be visualized) possesses qualities such as color and form, when speech is intuitively connected to the object. There is near oneness between the word and the experience described.

Para-vak is the transcendent sound, beyond the perception of the senses, only to be realized in perfect meditation. On the stage of para-vak there is no distinction between the object and the sound. The sound contains within it all the qualities of the object.

Within the pashyanti-vak exists the nature's iccha-shakti, or the power of will. Within the madhyama-vak exists the nature's jnana-shakti, or the power of knowledge. And within the vaikhari-vak exists the nature's kriya-shakti, or power of action.

The syllable "om", is the complete representation of the four stages of sound and their existential counterparts. The existential realities are the physical (waking) which is connected to the vaikhari-shabda, the subtle (dream) which is connected to the madhyama-shabda, the causal (causal -sleep) which is connected with the pashyanti-shabda, and the transcendental (para) which is related to the para-shabda. These four existential realities further correspond to the four states of consciousness.
There are some very similar concepts in Judaism, but without going into that, I found this on Wikipedia
Bhartrihari explains that Vaikhari, the most external and differentiated level of language, on which speech is uttered by the speaker and heard by the hearer has its temporal sequence fully developed; Madhyama represents the thinking level of the mind; Pashyantiis the finest relative level where there is no distinction between the word and the meaning and there is no temporal sequence, and Parā is the fully unmanifest level of language beyond Pashyanti.​

Couldn't you say the same thing with action instead of speech? That is, starting from the initial thought to perform an action, until the action is performed?
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
It was me. The physical man Jesus was who I was referring to. That he was from the beginning is something different. The character of Jesus in the New Testament came out of the people who the law was given to. I think it is a historical fact. Why are you bothering me? ;)
If you are talking about the physical man jesus, then Marry was his mother and not the Law. You can't mix your metaphors with reality.

Now, I will bother you. :D
I think Jesus had to be born a human because the Earth God gave to humans. That they say Jesus is God does nothing for the Earth imo.
I don't know what you're talking about.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Given that the word is 'Logos', a word from Greek culture its good to start with the Greek idea and see where it goes from there.
Good post! I can see how logos when defined as "logic or reason" would be more appropriate. I wonder why the author didn't use sophia instead (which would make more sense to me), unless the author was referring to Philo's Hellenistic concept of logos that Augustus linked above.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
If you are talking about the physical man jesus, then Marry was his mother and not the Law. You can't mix your metaphors with reality.
Yes, but without the law Mary could not have been his mother, so she was his surrogate mother. She carried him for his real mother. They would not have understood that, but now we do. John 16:12


I don't know what you're talking about.
If Jesus is God, who gave the Earth to humans, Jesus would not be an inheritor with us for the Earth. It would be God taking it back. Wouldn't it?
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Yes, but without the law Mary could not have been his mother, so she was his surrogate mother. She carried him for his real mother. They would not have understood that, but now we do. John 16:12
I'm pretty sure that giving birth to a child makes you its more regardless of any law.

If Jesus is God, who gave the Earth to humans, Jesus would not be an inheritor with us for the Earth. It would be God taking it back. Wouldn't it?
I have no idea.
 
Top