Fashionably late to the party, I hope I can play too?
Absolute:
adjective:
absolute
- not qualified or diminished in any way; total.
synonyms: complete, total, utter, out-and-out, outright, entire, perfect, pure, decided; More
thorough, thoroughgoing, undivided, unqualified, unadulterated, unalloyed, unmodified, unreserved, downright, undiluted, consummate, unmitigated, sheer, arrant, rank, dyed-in-the-wool
- viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative.
synonyms: universal, fixed, independent, nonrelative, nonvariable, absolutist
noun:
absolute; plural noun:
absolutes
- Philosophy:
a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.
OK, but are we discussing the concept of "absolute," or the nature of "reality?"
The concept can be used across such a wide spectrum of meanings, and can be cleverly used to cross reference, causing confusion either intentional or not, that can make discussion difficult.
The nature of reality, in my view, largely speaks for itself...though in a language humans are not intimately familiar with.
This enters the realm of "wide spectrum of meaning" and "causing confusion."
"Absolute Truths" must be considered by a truthful philosopher to himself if no other, as hopeful delusions.
The absolute truth is, I must draw my next breath, or I will die. Absolute Truths are those presented by sages of all religious traditions as meaningful paths that have some supernatural reward promised for obedience. Two *entirely* different concepts, and both equally valid, and easily confused...intentionally or not.
I think I see already this discussion is challenging by, among other things, jargon which is easily used to obfuscate. Now, if this had been written to an Indian audience who was already familiar with the terminology, perhaps the thoughts conveyed would travel better. And I must admit that I came in from an outside angle to a conversation I was not directly invited to. However, the nature of the conversation implies, to me, an acceptance of the English language and a knowledgeable writer...so conveying the meaning with jargon in some effort to sound meaningful (to be polite) seems to me bordering on disingenuous. I am reserving such criticism because I am coming from an outside angle, but I never fail to notice this tendency among those who present on this subject...as though the jargon is mandatory to convey the underlying meaning. And if you don't know the jargon already, you are simply not part of the "in-crowd." It creates an attitude of cliquish, clannish elitism...as though you hold TRUTH and no one else does...which in my view is simply not true.
OK, but then Jesus is also an Absolute Truth. Siddhārtha Gautama Buddha is also an Absolute Truth. Moses is an Absolute Truth. All of these are true by the very same usage of the term "Absolute Truth" that you are using here. And the analogy can be taken *much* further....
OK, but I still contend that multiple lives are not necessary, indeed the concept that is taught serves only the ruling elite...the under classes are confined from the moment of birth to the caste of their state of existence...there is no hope for elevation because the teachings do not re-incarnate in the next existence. That is a VERY deterministic view, one I don't buy into. I have the opportunity, even the obligation, to go directly to the Source of my own volition.
Let me be clear, as this seems in one form or other to be a stumbling block among deep and heartfelt discussions with fervent and well studied seekers...Sages and teachers have their roles to play in teaching laypersons and students by any other name the basics. We all must start somewhere. I think a great deal of confusion among all major faiths, perhaps all faiths period, is getting so caught up in the minutiae of the teachings, what "i's" are dotted and what "t's" are crossed, and what vowel points and inflection and grammar are used....instead of seeing the lessons for what they are
and APPLYING them in our lives!
If I were to posit an Absolute Truth, first I would posit that there is a Divine Presence / Creator / Source / Well Spring from which all came. I cannot describe the Source, but I think most major religions have anthropomorphed an image in their own likeness of the Source. Which is why we end up with a Huge Human floating around on a cloud, hurling thunderbolts at whomever displeases Him / Her. I don't think like that at all, and haven't for many years, since before ever coming to this site. But mine is a concept not easily received...students must build upon the familiar, but at some point, as the Buddhists teach, you must let go of the raft after you reach the other side.
I am not familiar with your path, and Krishna...but it seems to me, by the little I see here already, that your beliefs will take you essentially to the same place other faiths wish to take you to. The root core of most world faiths is significantly the same, the differences are in the details. Humans get so caught up in the details, they lose sight of the big picture.
You can know your Lord by whatever intellectual pursuit you choose....if you do not apply the message and the lessons to your daily life, that knowledge is meaningless. "Lord, Lord...why have you forsaken me? Because you did not do the things I asked of you to do."
I may continue more, I don't know. I will say this before I go for now. What you know is irrelevant if what you know is not put into action. It is not what you know that helps you return to the Source, it is what you do with what you know that helps you return to the Source. THAT....is Absolute.