The perfect attitude toward religious writings? From the Introduction to The Five Houses of Zen (1997) by Thomas Cleary:

... Buddhist scriptures were not treated by Zen adepts as holy writ that was necessarily regarded as literally true, but as compendia of potentially useful ideas, outlooks, and exercises, commonly couched in sometimes dazzling symbolic language. Insisting on understanding the scriptures in practical terms, not just reciting them piously, the leading masters of Zen interpreted Buddhist symbolism by a special kind of structural analysis based on aspects and phases of Buddhist experiences of awakening and awareness. This discipline was also applied to the growing body of special Zen lore, particularly stories and poems. ...

... "potentially useful ideas, outlooks, and exercises" in "sometimes dazzling symbolic language" to assist in "awakening and awareness" — how wise! Perhaps that's what the ZhurnalyWiki should strive be ...

(for a thoughtful review of The Five Houses of Zen see [1] by Sarah Fremerman; cf Present-Moment Reality (2008-11-05), Being with Your Breath (2010-02-20), Breath and Awareness (2011-03-12), Coming Back to Your Breath (2011-09-25), Core Buddhism (2011-10-17), Wait for the Breath (2013-07-09), Beginning Mindfulness (2013-09-22), No Goals (2016-06-08), Gently, Gently, Gently (2016-08-13), No Watcher, Only Watching (2016-10-07), Mantra - Attention, Attention, Attention (2017-05-27), ...) - ^z - 2018-06-26