Follow the incitement: who benefits from the assertion that an event can standardize the interpretation of a teaching?
The idea that a particular, even spectacular, healing can guarantee a uniform reception of a broader message ignores the diverse nature of audiences and their motives.
It's like believing that a single massive intervention by the MAS in the currency market ensures a unanimous interpretation of monetary policy; this never happens.
Each actor, whether investor or faithful, filters information through their own belief prism and interests, making uniformity a chimera, not a reality.
For example, a Singaporean trader will see the actions of the MAS as a gain opportunity, while an importer will see a risk, showing that perceptions vary radically.