And in the hearts of men, there was division. In the minds of men, there was turmoil. Confusion made enemies of brothers. Misinformation made fools of scholars. Darkness had made the place of learning into a place of war…
Writing this is going to be a bit difficult. Everyone seems to start with a beginning. Stories are placed before ideas. Ideas are told within stories, but stories are interpreted in different ways. Meaning is given and taken from narrative in a way that becomes layered yet fraught with complication. The storyteller speaks volumes and the stories persist, but the intention of their message is known truly to them alone or to their students and friends with whom they have shared the message in close, personal translation.
I have never attempted to organize all of my own piecesinto a whole at any one point. For me, these experiences have come over the course of an extended lifetime and each has been typically addressed in its own time or as pertaining to a specific lesson or question as it has arisen. Deciding on a singular place to beginin order to cover all of it at once is not an easy task. I do not wish to leave a story that requires deciphering.
There are particular fundamentals which should be discussed and understood before the details are laid bare; however much of the requirement of such is bound up in the correction of miscommunications from previously established cultural ideas, beliefs, histories and religions. The faulty interpretation of stories has to be unlearned before the truth is accepted…
Therefore, it becomes necessary to address each of these topics separately before diving into the heart of matters.
Part of the complexity at work within this matter is a question of whether to begin personally, with an introduction to who I am and what my purpose is, or to simply relate the facts outright with all of the procedure that one might expect from a timeline or historical text.If I were to relate the account of who and what I am: Shall I begin with the beginning? Or do I begin with how and when this information became relevant to the present?
There are histories to be told and ideas to be presented. There are analogies that must be made but I do not wish to confuse. For this reason, I feel that in order to convey these matters most effectively, I must address them in sections. I do this out of sheer necessity. I choose to leave allegory to the fictionists. I state here and now that this shall be literal and in truth so far as I can stretch the limitations of human language. I will speak at the level of the basically learned for this time, and I will give my testament through direct address, using analogy only where it is demanded for the sake of simplicity.
I will not begin within the narrative of history or the fabric of physicality but within the speech of ideas, so that you may have the necessary context first and the pertinent details only afterward.
Thusly I begin.
The foremost issue with relaying the truth to most people, is that people as a whole arefar more inclined to hold onto what they think that they know already than to open themselves to something foreign in concept.
Humanity in general would like to think that the ultimate goal of any individual would be the pursuit of truth.This is an optimistic view of the self, an optimistic view of the world I would say. Unfortunately, it is also a bit naive.
The issue that goes unspoken is that ultimately fear is a larger part of the whole than often given credit. Human reactions to fear do not require any recognition of the fear itself. You do not have to know that you are afraid in order for your actions to become motivated by that fear. This makes it easy for you to remain unaware of something even as it drives you forward.