Rumi might suggest that it is better to struggle over the words through the archaic phrasing than it is to believe you have understood what you have read. "Easier to read" is not necessarily a positive characteristic in sacred texts, which mostly aim for extra-ordinary states of consciousness. In religions of the book such as Chirstianity, Islam and Judaism, Reading is part of the act of worship. Why should it be particularly easy? "Clarity" is, I think, a positive value, but often that clarity is shielded by paradox, as in the Diamond Sutra ( "The Diamond Sutra is not the Sutra. Nevertheless, it is called the Diamond Sutra"), perhaps to incorporate the labor of a reader into the process of becoming enlightened. If you can get a reader to participate in the process of creating meaning - and any participation is more "difficult" than no participation - the text takes on a whole new level of rhetorical power. Reader's begin to identify with the text, incorporate into their consciousness, act as if it is their own, because in some ways it is! - mobius