know the truth?
- Thread starter Jarrett
- Start date
path_of_one
Embracing the Mystery
What do you mean by truth?
Sancho
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Using words such as 'truth', or 'god', or 'love', is tricky business. The various collective meanings (the ways in which they are understood by groups of people) tend to often be at odds with how individuals subjectively experience it.
Then there is the whole swamp of epistimology to wade through before we can know if we can know anything at all.
To me the word 'truth' refers to a subjective experience.
Then there is the whole swamp of epistimology to wade through before we can know if we can know anything at all.
To me the word 'truth' refers to a subjective experience.
What is the truth? Is that knowledge obtainable? Is the knowing of the truth obtainable? Does knowledge exist without the one who knows? If knowledge existed before the one who knows, then what is this knowledge and who knows it?
So which came first? The knowledge? Or the one who knows? Obviously one could not exist before the other. But also since we can know "knowledge", it is clear that before us, knowing & knowledge existed. In fact, the very fact that we exist proves the existence of knowledge that has always existed along with the one who knows it.
So what is this knowledge and who is the one who knows it? Could these two in unison be truth? So how do we formulate truth? How do we express knowledge without word? Without word knowledge could not be expressed nor could it be perceived. Because without word you cannot know, without word you cannot have knowledge. So the word is the personification of knowledge, the knowledge that only exists because of the one who knows.So these all must exist in unison, word, knowledge and the one who knows. But by what power do they exist? And who is the first to have known this? Wouldn't this one prove the existence of the word, knowledge and the one who knows, even before that oneself existed? It is indeed a knowledge which is of itself, from itself and surely folds into itself an infinite number of times. But can we obtain it? No. The very fact that we question on any level, any knowledge of anything, proves that we are apart from true knowing. If we have knowledge then we are the one who knows and since we don't know, we aren't. If we did know, we would be knowing and would have always known. Therefore, we would have always been. So as it seems this knowledge for us is clearly unobtainable. This would be a hopelessly miserable existence if that were it. We would live, search and die never knowing. That would be tragic. However, some do question the things thought to be true. They exhibit an inclination to seek real truth, which shows something inside the one who questions, that is not in the one who does not. He who does not question believes himself to be in possession of the truth (or doesn't care) therefore he has no need of knowing the truth. And he who does not seek will not find. The one who questions only questions the validity of his knowledge, not the validity of truth. All of this makes it apparent it is about wanting the truth and not being satisfied with the knowledge you have. True knowledge is not obtainable, it can only be given but only to the one who has need. It is to this one whom the word is given. This word is from the one who knows and is the one who knows. And it is he that redeems the seeker because the seeker has a deficit. Within the knowledge of the infinite one no deficit exists. The only deficiency that exists is where there is an absence of the consent of true knowledge. (he who does not seek is full) This deficiency is what the word illuminates. Giving true knowledge so that the one that receives this word receives knowing and becomes knowing, being known by the one who has always known. This is truth.
So which came first? The knowledge? Or the one who knows? Obviously one could not exist before the other. But also since we can know "knowledge", it is clear that before us, knowing & knowledge existed. In fact, the very fact that we exist proves the existence of knowledge that has always existed along with the one who knows it.
So what is this knowledge and who is the one who knows it? Could these two in unison be truth? So how do we formulate truth? How do we express knowledge without word? Without word knowledge could not be expressed nor could it be perceived. Because without word you cannot know, without word you cannot have knowledge. So the word is the personification of knowledge, the knowledge that only exists because of the one who knows.So these all must exist in unison, word, knowledge and the one who knows. But by what power do they exist? And who is the first to have known this? Wouldn't this one prove the existence of the word, knowledge and the one who knows, even before that oneself existed? It is indeed a knowledge which is of itself, from itself and surely folds into itself an infinite number of times. But can we obtain it? No. The very fact that we question on any level, any knowledge of anything, proves that we are apart from true knowing. If we have knowledge then we are the one who knows and since we don't know, we aren't. If we did know, we would be knowing and would have always known. Therefore, we would have always been. So as it seems this knowledge for us is clearly unobtainable. This would be a hopelessly miserable existence if that were it. We would live, search and die never knowing. That would be tragic. However, some do question the things thought to be true. They exhibit an inclination to seek real truth, which shows something inside the one who questions, that is not in the one who does not. He who does not question believes himself to be in possession of the truth (or doesn't care) therefore he has no need of knowing the truth. And he who does not seek will not find. The one who questions only questions the validity of his knowledge, not the validity of truth. All of this makes it apparent it is about wanting the truth and not being satisfied with the knowledge you have. True knowledge is not obtainable, it can only be given but only to the one who has need. It is to this one whom the word is given. This word is from the one who knows and is the one who knows. And it is he that redeems the seeker because the seeker has a deficit. Within the knowledge of the infinite one no deficit exists. The only deficiency that exists is where there is an absence of the consent of true knowledge. (he who does not seek is full) This deficiency is what the word illuminates. Giving true knowledge so that the one that receives this word receives knowing and becomes knowing, being known by the one who has always known. This is truth.
Ciel
in essence
And Wisdom waits until the tide of mind recedes back to the ocean of existence from whence it came.......
When all is silence...... Wisdom exhales.....without words...... with gentle breath......... in the space between....
Truth is.
And there is transcended life in being.
- c -
When all is silence...... Wisdom exhales.....without words...... with gentle breath......... in the space between....
Truth is.
And there is transcended life in being.
- c -
nativeastral
fluffy future
I agree with that. and your stance is very Kierkgaardian. Although Heiddegar, not a theist, thought the source of all intelligibility [and therefore 'truth'] came from the accumulated wisdom/knowledge of that culture [now global].
perchance watched this just now
[youtube]9tlFCUFgfeo[/youtube]
path_of_one
Embracing the Mystery
A few observations...
I don't seek to know truth. I seek to be truth. For me, truth is what really is... and I can't approach that through my mind, but rather through my entire being. Truth, like the Divine, is process... is being.
Knowledge, wisdom, understanding, and truth are different things to me.
Art. Music. Dance.
Obviously, I disagree. All beings have knowledge of various things... only human beings have language. Language can actually get in the way of knowing. It builds limitations around thought and expression... this is why mysticism so often engages poetry and art. "Words fail me" is an expression most often used when confronting the complex, often paradoxical, nature of reality.
My two cents.
I don't seek to know truth. I seek to be truth. For me, truth is what really is... and I can't approach that through my mind, but rather through my entire being. Truth, like the Divine, is process... is being.
Knowledge, wisdom, understanding, and truth are different things to me.
Art. Music. Dance.
Obviously, I disagree. All beings have knowledge of various things... only human beings have language. Language can actually get in the way of knowing. It builds limitations around thought and expression... this is why mysticism so often engages poetry and art. "Words fail me" is an expression most often used when confronting the complex, often paradoxical, nature of reality.
My two cents.
Yes we can know the truth to our being.
But this is not the truth to your being.
We are one. Our truth is one.
We are unique, our truth is unique.
But this is not the truth to your being.
We are one. Our truth is one.
We are unique, our truth is unique.
shawn
Well-Known Member
Uniquely the same.
Truth is the underlying firmament which reality rests upon.
There are many layers of meaning in every word/symbol we have within our minds.
But under all the layers of meaning is the firmament which gives rise to each.
The thing is, if you are ever able to gain insight into these fundamentals you will find that they are absolutely inexpressible.
So you will be free of the illusions, but you will still be restrained or rather constrained by the limitations of language.
Truth is the underlying firmament which reality rests upon.
There are many layers of meaning in every word/symbol we have within our minds.
But under all the layers of meaning is the firmament which gives rise to each.
The thing is, if you are ever able to gain insight into these fundamentals you will find that they are absolutely inexpressible.
So you will be free of the illusions, but you will still be restrained or rather constrained by the limitations of language.
R
Radical_Reformer
Guest
Yes, of course one can know the truth. It is one of the most important parts of our lives. To seek the truth is important. To live the truth is important. To know the truth, when this is possible is important.
We have all met people who we think love to confuse things. Those people do not value truth. I do not have much respect for those people.
shawn
Well-Known Member
I agree....on one level, but we have all seen examples of people whose truths are much different.
They often are very fervent in their convictions....thinking that they "know" the "truth" and are free from the deceptions, misconceptions and lies.
We all, if we are being honest, have gone through that experience on a personal level as well.
Many here (from what I have read) have gone through several paradigm changes and belief alterations in the course of their life and so they have transcended their former beliefs (which they accepted at the time as being truths).
I Personally believe that to seek truth is a noble pursuit and is a feature which elicits respect in me for those so engaged.
But there must also be a corresponding open-mind as well which recognized that however profound ones experience of "truth" it is most likely only a window view at best of what we can call "ultimate truth".
And I also share your opinion of those who "love to confuse".
Well maybe we kinda agree. Words in the spoken since as we exist can indeed make limitations. Emotions are indeed at many times beyond verbal expression. However, when we contemplate, would we be able at any time to grasp the meaning of our various emotional states without the word. Could we truly express ourselves to one another, with depth, by dancing or playing an instrument? Even if we communicated telepathically would we not comprehend with some sort of word? Now there does exist those things that can not be given good expression with word in spoken form alone. for instance, LOVE, it can not be truly expressed without action. It takes a focusing of 4 types of word. The word that is spoken, the word that is thought, the word that is felt, and the word that is motion. When combined, to me, these 4 make the existence of true expression by word fundamental for knowing.
You have expressed yourself brilliantly with word, but im sure you experiance this thought with a language unspoken as well.
Yes we are constrained by the limitations of spoken language. What is say without do? Is India free from British control if Gandhi only said? Are there billions of supposed christians, if the one called Jesus only said? Does the wall in Germany come down if all that Reagan did was say, "Gorbechav tear down this wall." Spoken language is limited without thought, feeling and action. Together they are word.
Well, not that this is your case at all, if there is not a barometer of some sort inside of oneself that points or pulls in a certain direction, understanding what truth is can be difficult. Truth is pure love manifested in righteous action. The action is only known to be righteous by the fruit that it grows and weather it has a good taste or it is sour. Therefore truth can only be experienced when acting out true pure love by combining spoken word, thought, emotions, and actions. But then it is only known if it is received and it returns to the place it comes from when it is not.
path_of_one
Embracing the Mystery
True- and not just emotions, but sensory input, experience, the entirety of living and being itself.
The idea of grasping the meaning already limits oneself to language. Why grasp the meaning? Why focus on the thought of things? Why not focus on the being? On the process and experience itself?
For me, truth flows. Your idea that truth is "pure love manifested as righteous action"- this flows for me. This would be grounded in connection to the Divine. It is only in this connection that I can know love, and what is righteous in that moment.
The instant I move from being in the moment, from being itself- to thinking about being- I have already distanced myself from the connection. And therefore, I am less likely to be manifesting love or righteousness, as I am stuck "in myself" rather than being "in the Divine."
For me, yes. I feel much more like I am connected to someone through art than I am through language. I can talk and talk to someone and not really know them at all. But when I see someone dance, I feel like there is some deep connection to them. Maybe this is a personality difference. Some people are more linguistic, and others more visual, musical, etc.
No, not necessarily. Before we learn words, we still take in information from the world around us. Other species do not have words, yet they do communicate. My experience as a mystic is that when I wish to communicate with non-humans (trees, elements, animals, whatever), I need to move outside of language and be open to communicating through energy, emotion, intuition, and vision. Horses, for example, communicate through visual. If I think in words as a rider, this does nothing for my riding. But if I think in a vision of what I want my horse to look like, the horse more clearly understands. This is not just me- there are several books by different riding masters who chronicle this.
So humans are capable of communicating other than through words. They are capable of thinking other than with words. And other beings can communicate with us, sometimes much better, without words.
I would never associate love as feeling and motion/action as anything to do with the word. Animals have no word for love, yet they feel it and act on it. To me, we love first, and we learn that the word for this action/choice/emotion is "love" later.
Else, we would not love our mother until we learned the word. But this is not the case.
Meaning is not in our words, but in our souls. Our souls do not think or communicate primarily in words.
then for you there are many truths, my question is, how can any one of those be true if they are not all the same? Many truths is an ironic statement. If truth is one thing for me but many differant things for many differant people, i would say that rather than being truths they are whims. Now these whims carry many away captive.
So to you i mean words formed with letters only. You do not know, i guess, what i believe the word is. Not only could you never express yourself without the word, animals could not either. Animals have the other 3 types of word at some level and many even have a form of spoken word, but most lack the ability to comunicate with us verbaly. All things were created by the power of the word. This word is far more than you can imagine. The sounds that we put together in our spoken word only shed light on the unspoken word that already existed.If we never learned a spoken language. We would express ourselves with one of the other types of word. But the thing we express where does it come from and in what form does it exist? I say it exists as word already.
path_of_one
Embracing the Mystery
OK- that sounds fine. But then, I would not define "word" that way. You perhaps mean consciousness? Or concept? Or thought? Or something like this?
Word, to me, is a rather limited term to describe what you're talking about. In part, I thought this because you proposed that we cannot know another person very well without "words" (i.e., through dance or music), which to me indicates a split between consciousness or concept or feeling or thought and language itself.
So it's very confusing what you actually mean by "word."
It also seems like you are leading into a particular doctrine about how the cosmos works, rather than inquiring of what people think. If so, perhaps you could elaborate and be a little more clear on what belief you're discussing?