Pete, the voluntary bit came up early on when I began looking at the research on slow reading, and saw the large volume of material on slow reading as a problem, especially for children. Also, on the web you see many references to slow reading as a problem that can be “cured” by taking a course in speed-reading. For a time, I used Google and Technorati alerts to watch whenever a new reference to “slow reading” came up on the web; many of these references were people blogging and complaining about their slow reading speed. Something was needed to distinguish the positive sense of slow reading, and “voluntary” seemed the best choice; it still does.

For present purposes, I plan to touch on the disciplined methods, but focus more deeply on the voluntary/free-form methods (these will be in the next post). The disciplined methods deserve treatment on their own, perhaps a part-two someday.

The story fo the writing of the Law is, as I understand it, a relatively late one associated with 7th/6th century reforms in Judah. But the basic idea is right, and applies ( I would say) to the tephillim- the presence of the text, the reminder of the Law, and the command to think on it every day. You see a simliar idea in the Muslim notion of the hafiz and in Sikh readings of the Guru Granth Sahib.

“Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.”

“Meditate” is really a poor translation. The literal translation is “read in an undertone day and night”. The story as I was told is that every new king was expected to physically make a personal copy of the Law in his own hand and read it out loud, but not in a loud voice, every day. The whole point of the exercise was to slow down his reading and re-enforce his understanding because he would be looking at, speaking and also listening to the words on the page.