
             Much of the discussion on this list focusses
             on establishing a community of meaning,
           an agreement about what Kierkegaard wrote,
         and an agreement about what Kierkegaard meant.
So far as I can tell, there is relatively little, if any uncertainty
        about the Danish texts of Kierkegaard;s writings.
           Uncertainties arise from the translations.
   One of the reasons why translating Kierkegaard is difficult
        is that the translator cannot possibly anticipate
        all the tests that will subsequently be applied,
                     all the diverse demands
           that will subsequently be made of the text.

       When one opens a book of Kierkegaards one is confronted
           with a text that has at least two meanings:

        One meaning might be characterized as the literal one;
               as taking a word at its face value,
           accepting the text to "mean what it says."
              But even the supposed literal meaning
       of the text appears to be somewhat of an illusion,
            because even literal meaning cannot arise
and cannot exist independent of a tacit, implicit prior agreement
                  of the writer and the reader.
      This agreement is entailed in the acceptance by them
                      of a common language,
    an acceptance which occurs when the language is learned.

         There are some terms that appear to be unambiguous.
      We refer boldly to calling a spade a spade, although
         closer perusal, perhaps of a gardening catalog,
                  will demonstrate uncertainty
       even in what appeared originally to be an identity.

        But even if, for argument's sake we accpt as fact that
     there is in Kierkegaard's texts an identity of meaning
    amenable (susceptible) to being discovered and expressed
     perhaps if not all List correspondents will agree that
 the text requires to be construed, requires to be interpreted,
    that there is no obvious single meaning, and that what we
    purport to find in Kierkegaards text's are reflections of
    our own experiences mirrorred in Kierkegaards sentences.

              Was aber beim Lesen tatsaechlich geschieht
     laeuft weit tiefer und zugleich breiter (more broadly).
       Denn das Lesen ist die Anregung zu eigenem Denken,
                      zu eigenen Melodien.
                    Es ist als ob das Gemuet
          durch das Lesen in Schwingung gesetzt wuerde
  und nunmehr seine eigene Musik als Variationen auf ein Thema
      von sich gibt. Und es ist unmoeglich, unvorstellbar,
dass dieses eigene Denken mit dem Denken des Verfassers oder mit dem
Denken auch nur eines einzigen anderen Lesers uebereinstimmen sollte.
     Und so entsteht eine Musik unterschiedlicher Qualitaet,
                    je nach den Faehigkeiten,
             je nach der Begabung der Teilnehmenden.

     Es ist wichtig einzusehen, in welchem Masse der Leser sich
                             am Sinn
der Schrift beteiligt, in welchem Masse er in sie hineingezogen wird.
   Thus the understanding of Kierkegaard is a synthesis which
         the reader elaborates on the basis of the text,
 but which goes far beyond the text. The reader is an essential
  contributor to the meaning. The meaning comes into existence
only with the reader. Although the author is the primary reader of
       the text, once it is written, he no longer owns it,
               and the author must then experience
         what he has written as might a total stranger.

     The Bible is the prototypical book. The reading and
                        interpretation of
  the Bible is closely related to the reading of secular texts.
  The "Holiness" ascribed to the Bible is inseparable from its
        meaning and inseparable from its interpretation.
      What constitutes the Bible is an historical question.
There is probably general agreement that the Bible is a collection
                    written by human authors,
             and the belief that the Bible is holy,
       the belief that makes the Bible the basis of faith,
            is that the collection of its components
   and the composition of its sentences were inspired by God,
     that the Bible was in effect written at his direction.
                  The pseudonymity of an author
           is a pointer to a similar state of affairs.
       In a sense, however, all authors are pseudonymous.
             A pseudonym is a badge of inspiration.
       The Bible is the pseudonymous text par excellence.

                            * * * * *