Ambiguity

This morning I was to talk about religious language; I want to talk about words like God and spirituality. Some thinkers believe that these traditional religious words are an obstacle to clear communication.

• One Unitarian Universalist suggests that people have used the word "God" to refer to so many things that it no longer has any meaning; he suggests that we banish it from serious conversations about religion.



• Another, reviewing the many ways that people use the word spirituality in church newsletters, in sermons and in church magazines, observes that the whole idea of spirituality is a mess and that probably we should scrap the term.



• Still another, examining the many uses of the word prayer suggests that we might do well to stop using the term.

I understand this. I tend to think that clarity is good and that ambiguity is bad. We have achieved much of the best in modern life though clarity and precision. Modern science, technology, commerce, transportation and the management of large organizations are unthinkable without precise communication. Intellectual discussions are often based on the assumption that we should precisely define the meaning of a word before we can use it seriously.

We tend to distrust people who do not speak precisely. A nineteenth century American patriot, General John Wilcott Phelps, expressed a characteristic view that ambiguity is always used when people want to be dishonest. He said:

When men resort to the use of ambiguous expressions, vague similes, parallels, signs, symbols, etc., it is reasonable to infer that they have some object in view that will not bear the light [of day].

Religion has played a role in creating an aversion to ambiguity. Puritanism encouraged people to apply their physical strength and their intellect to solve the practical problems of life such as getting enough food and dealing with the Indians. Puritan religious leaders discouraged artistic pleasures. The first churches they built in New England were stark white, inside and out. They had no religious paintings, no stained glass.

In their sermons the clergy stressed plain talk and honesty. The Puritans stripped the sermons of allusions and poetry, in favor of a straightforward style of speaking. These values were cherished in American society. As a result, the dominant American temper today calls for clear and direct communication. It expresses itself in such common injunctions as "say what you mean," "don't beat around the bush," and "get to the point."

Writing in 1982, an African novelist summed up his impression of the United States: "Americans tend to be direct and literal rather than allusive and figurative, stark rather than subtle. They are happier dealing with statistics than with nuances."

This morning I want to clearly suggest that we cannot define some areas of life. Furthermore I want to suggest that these areas have religious value. Put another way, I want to suggest that to be religious requires that we be comfortable with the limits of language, the limits of words.

The Latin root of the word "ambiguous" is the same as the root for the word amble; it originally meant "to wander about."

Clarity in human expression is like getting in a car and driving fast with a goal in mind, a destination. Often we wish to do this. Often we wish to have clarity of expression to achieve tasks and accomplish goals. No modern human community can long survive without communications that are clear and precise.

In contrast, ambiguity in human expression is like wandering about, ambling, walking amid the trees in a forest.

In human relationships clarity can lead us to an either/or, win/lose relationship, which can in turn lead to a confrontation and a break down in human relationships. Bluntness limits the opportunity for people to sustain relationships and community.

However, my goal is to sustain the relationship, not to have a confrontation. Ambiguity helps me achieve this goal. It keeps me from being put in the position where I must answer yes or no, or where I must decide. I can circle the issue and prevent a direct confrontation. Of course an ambiguous response can be extremely frustrating to a person who wants a fight, who longs for a battle.

However for people who build friendship and community, ambiguous talk provides a continuing invitation to engage in conversation. The use of words with multiple meanings maintains relationships. They help in negotiation by inviting participation in a continuing conversation, and provide time to develop relationships further.

Ambiguous gestures, like smiles, also sustain relationships. We expect human beings to smile sometimes. However, usually we cannot be sure when that smile will break out, what it will look like when it does appear, and the total meaning the person intends to deliver. Smiles enable us to act together in sustaining, in noninjurious ways.

In treaties negotiated between countries sections are often left deliberately ambiguous. When this happens, it means that diplomats from both countries have decided that the ongoing relationship is more important than the need for clarity. Ambiguity buys time. The hope is that over time, trust can be built. The carrying on of politics without using ambiguous language is impossible for men and women.

One way to define maturity is by the way we handle the ambiguity of life. When we can think and express ourselves only in absolutes, only in right or wrong only in black and white we are regressing into immaturity. Maturity is the ability to see and express multiple meanings. To be mature is to see that the same person who is generous and good can also be annoying and imperfect. Maturity is the ability to see that the same job that is boring and frustrating can also be exciting and stimulating. Maturity is recognizing that the same world that can be joyful and bright can be tragic and gray.

These social, psychological, and political functions of ambiguity lead me to religion. Ambiguous expressions help remind me of a common experience of mystery in life. I experience life as complex, as multi dimensional. Precise definitions do not capture the overtones and crosscurrents of my perceptions. Ambiguous expressions describe the full richness of reality. When I confront words that first mean one thing and then mean something else, I experience a progression from a mediocre truth to a higher, or deeper, truth.

The French Philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty wrote:

Ambiguity is only a way of putting into words . . . the value of those moments when life renews itself and continues on, when we get hold of ourselves again, and understand ourselves by passing beyond, when our private world becomes the common world.

A more inclusive sense of reality, a sense of mystery, and the experience of oneness are attributes of mystical religion. The truth sought by mysticism is not knowable or explainable by conventional methods. It does not lend itself to precise descriptions and often, silence can best express it. At the most, ambiguous expressions can only allude to it. Mysticism involves a surrender to the universe, an intimate participation in the oneness of reality. It aims toward fusion, toward a state of harmonious oneness with the universe.

Without a tolerance for ambiguity a necessary dimension is left out of religious experience, the dimension of what Rudolf Otto called "the mystery that repels and attracts." The mystics are loath to leave this dimension out and, directly or indirectly, insist on its inclusion.

I am suggesting that, as much as I love clarity, clarity is not of the essence of religion. The sense of the holy, though it can be discussed, it cannot be well defined. The holy can, however, be experienced and evoked, as part of that mystery that we humans face--even if we can not clearly define that mystery.

The Protestant religion of America rejected mysticism and encouraged a worldly discipline that enabled us to build and maintain a great industrial nation. Mystical ambiguity was set aside by our Puritan mothers and fathers as they battled the wilderness. This strong practical orientation created an aversion to ambiguity.

In contrast, mystics, aware that all verbal descriptions of reality are inaccurate and incomplete, aim for a direct experience of reality that transcends the realm of thought and language. Japanese Zen Buddhists have perfected the art of the ambiguous response. A question like "What is the essence of Zen Buddhism?" will elicit such answers as "The wind blows and the sun heats," or "An oak tree in the garden."

In our own society painting, music and poetry are the refuge of ambiguity, instead of religion. Artists often fill their works with multiple meanings that cannot be wholly made clear. Robert Frost said that poetry is what is lost when we define it. In the same way, I have come to believe that God is what is lost when we try to define it.

Nikos Kazantzakis wrote:

We have seen the highest of spiraling powers. We have named this circle God. We might have given it any name we wished: Abyss, Absolute Darkness, Absolute Light, Matter, Spirit, Ultimate Hope, Ultimate Despair, Silence. But never forget, it is we who give it a name.

Or to repeat these wonderful lines from Eliot:

Words strain, Crack and sometimes break, under the burden, Under the tension, slip, slide, perish, decay with imprecision, will not stay in place, will not stay still.

Of course, the appreciation of ambiguity has its limits. I must link ambiguity to a willingness and an ability to press toward clarity and precision at appropriate moments. I use ambiguity to remind myself of a common experience of mystery in life. And I strive for clarity when I have a task or goal to achieve.

I cannot wish away the modern world. Science and technology, bombs and missiles, computers and television, airplanes and hospitals, satellites and laser-beams, spaceships and artificial hearts--all are products of the puritan work ethic. Not all are evil.

Nevertheless, beyond our wires and buttons is still a great mystery, a great unity that underlies existence. The toleration of ambiguity in words like God, spirituality, and prayer can be productive, if we take the toleration not as a permission for sloppy thinking, but as an invitation to deal responsibly with issues that go beyond words.

• May we recognize the ambiguity and mystery that underlie our existence.



• May we see this mystery as real and vital and awesome.



• And may we feel a reverence before it.

Sources

Levine, Donald, The Flight From Ambiguity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1985.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, In Praise of Philosophy, Northwestern University Press, Evanston, 1963.

Reader, Mark & Wolf, Donald, "On Being Human," Political Theory, Vol. 1 No. 2, May 1973 pp 186-202.

Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church
9601 Cedar Lane, Bethesda, Maryland 20814-4099
Tel: 301-493-8300    Fax: 301-897-5713
e-mail: office@CedarLane.org
Sunday Services at 9 and 11 a.m.
© 1998-2008, Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church
Webminister