And you shall know the
truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:32)
The truth is cruel, but it can be
loved, and it makes free those who have loved it….. Truth is a jewel which
should not be painted over; but it may be set to advantage and shown in a good
light. (Naturalist
philosopher George Santayana)
And Pilate said to Jesus, “So you are a king?”
Jesus answered “You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for
this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is
of the truth hears my voice.” Pilate said to him “What, then, is truth?” – (to
which question no answer was recorded.)
(John
18:37)
The
tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
Those who know the Tao don't talk.
Those who talk about the Tao don't know. (Lao
Tzu “Tao Te Ching”)
Don’t seek the truth; just cease to cherish
opinions. (Zen teaching)
THE DIALOGUE:
Marnie: When one studies some of the material on
Our World and Times” e.g. under the headings ‘Beware the Mind Fields’, or ‘The
Bush League’, one is confronted time after time by the effects of mind control
and propaganda techniques – aimed at influencing people’s reality and
controlling their minds. One wonders sometimes if there is any real truth
anywhere, or is everything built upon lies. I wonder if there isn’t a deep
connection with one’s relationship to “truth”, and to the integrity of one’s
personal uniqueness, or authenticity. And concerning the first text above, I
wonder if the innate drive for truth is not connected with freedom from what is
referred to in the Eastern systems as the principle of societal ‘justice’ called
‘Karma’. That we live our Karma in the sense that we relive our past,
driving ourselves to obsess for the ‘truth’, and until we find it we go on
recycling and reliving unresolved issues within our minds.
Keith: Yes, I indeed think that there are such
linkages. Inner, psychological Karma is a reality – we wear ourselves down more
in worrying about past issues than during the transactions themselves. And as
to the ‘truth-authenticity’ linkage – the Law of Balance implies that the
intentional falsehoods and damage that one projects into others’ lives will
have a corresponding negative effect on one’s own sense of integrity – that one
will became diminished in spiritual force or less authentic in his own
eyes. I used to think that the truth was pretty clear-cut – not easy to find,
mind you – but a reality, and that behind all the smoke and mirrors of human
involvements there would be but one truth. And then as I walked in the forest
one day some 12 years ago – recycling and reliving unresolved issues, as you say, I was astounded to see that – depending upon individuals’
life experiences and maturity, they could well have very differing
perspectives – or ‘truths’ – concerning the very same issue. Hence so many
differences of opinion, and such a multitude of political, religious and
philosophical positions, I suppose.
M: So maybe that was what the Dalai Lama meant
concerning ‘contingent truths’ in the following quote from a
conversation with Robert Thurman:
“The Buddha spoke about reality.
Reality may be one, in its deepest essence, but the Buddha also stated that all
propositions about reality are only contingent. Reality is devoid of any
intrinsic identity that can be captured by any one single proposition -- that
is what Buddha meant by "voidness." Therefore, Buddhism strongly
discourages blind faith and fanaticism.
Of course, there are different
truths on different levels. Things are true relative to other things;
"long" and "short" relate to each other, "high"
and "low," and so on. But is there any absolute truth??? Something
self-sufficient, independently true in itself?? I don't think so.
In Buddhism we have the concept of
"interpretable truths," teachings that are reasonable and logical for
certain people in certain situations. Buddha himself taught different teachings
to different people under different circumstances. For some people, there are
beliefs based on a Creator. For others, no Creator. The only "definitive
truth" for Buddhism is the absolute negation of any one truth as the
Definitive Truth”
K: Yet it is almost as though we
humans, the so-called social species, are hardwired from birth to be programmed, to be
‘believers’. Our own parents imprinted us with their ‘truths’ as they
themselves were earlier imprinted by their parents. And then the priests
and teachers take over our conditioning or ‘education’ process, until by the
time we become adults, we are ready to be programmed by the Lords of the Workplace,
by the marketers, by the politicians and by the hate/war-mongers. All of whom
have their vested interest in their ‘truth’ being believed.
M: Then what
chance does an individual ever have of being able to see beyond the inductions and
of thereby being ‘free’? Humans seem so vulnerable to having to buy into the
agendas of greed, of nationalistic jingoism, competition and hate-mongering.
Look at how easily the people of the most powerful country on the planet were
persuaded to attack and occupy one of the most defenseless countries. And the
techniques used on the American people to get them on board were the usual,
time-honoured ones: fear, greed and the lust for domination over others! So
many people so willing to abdicate their own critical reasoning processes, to
be led astray on the mere word of a leader – no proofs provided nor asked for.
I wonder if there isn’t some connection between the religious dogmas forced
upon people – whereby they are made to ‘believe’ the most incredible things –
and people’s later proclivity to believe any agenda, as long as its coming from
an ‘authority’. Personally, when it comes to the dictates of authorities, I always
try to remember the Buddha’s
last teaching to his key disciples from his
deathbed:
“I have shown you the way to
liberation – now you must take it for yourself.
Do not believe on the strength of the
sages of old times; Do not believe that which you yourself imagined, thinking a
god has inspired you. Believe nothing which depends only on the
authority of your priests. After investigation, only believe that which you
have yourselves tested in your personal experience and found reasonable”.
K: Yet it seems that one must still
be engaged to some extent in the social process, otherwise there is a danger in
becoming reclusively paranoid or cynical. On the other hand, we don’t all
have to be mindless sheeple, either having to all be in agreement or else at
each other’s throats. There has to be a Middle Way. Despite the hubris of some
people who think that they are at the apex of the power pyramid and thus can
force their own reality on others, still there are many who humbly sense that
we are all in this together – that there is a Higher Order, a substrate from
which all things arise and back into which – in time – they must return. There
is a line from the Desiderata which points to this:
Go placidly amid the noise and
haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible,
without surrender, be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly: and listen to others – even
the dull and ignorant; they too have their story.
M: And
so what if others don’t listen to one’s spoken ‘quiet, clear truth’. One
shouldn’t be overly attached to outcomes, and fight others to try to get
everyone to think alike. So long as one didn’t follow the crowd, but speaks
their truth, their ‘authenticity’ will register the clearness of their own mind
– and that is the extent of their responsibility. Toleration. To speak one’s truth,
but to not be attached to the outcome, for to do so would surely turn issues
into personal power plays. As the Roman warrior-emperor Marcus
Aurelius
said:
“Dream not of Utopias but be
content if the least thing go forward, and count the outcome of the matter in
hand as a small thing. For who can change another’s conviction? Failing a
change of conviction, we merely get others pretending to be persuaded and
chafing like slaves under coercion.”
And while – on the surface – it may appear that our
personal truths have no effect on others, I believe that every effort helps –
that somewhere in another’s inner processes our expressed truth registers and
will ferment, but maybe not as quickly as we might desire. Now we can traffic
in others’ quotes all day long – but where are you personally?
K: Well, I agree as to the
impracticality of trying to impose my ‘truth’ over those of others – that seems
a sure way to end up getting nailed. But I also see the real necessity of pointing
oneself toward the truth. I internally relate to Truth as a worthy Ideal.
Truth beyond self-interest. This requires fine discrimination and even (this is
the bane of the religious sectarians) the application of critical JUDGMENT. Judgment
of facts, of human propensities and processes. I feel that a person should use
his God-given memory plus his developed analytical and judging skills, without
regard for the ranting of the self-styled pious ones and their admonitions to
“Judge Not”. The prattling of this Cult of Mediocrity never did sit well with
me. That’s just one example of many aphorisms employed within society to
‘level’ the intellectual capacities of its members. One shouldn’t conspire with
the levellers, nor try to convert them; just smile and internally say ‘Forgive
them Lord – the emptiest barrels always make the most noise.’
So Truth as an Ideal can be an energizing force
to quicken our faculties – an eternal and universal Ideal to which we can align
our lives. And there’s no danger of arriving at the absolute truth such as we
arrive at physical destinations, after which there’s nothing left to do. The
very love and pursuit of Truth as an Ideal has its own
intellectual rewards, and will ennoble and give meaning to our existence while
also ‘dimensioning’ us within the minds of others. Thus I believe that one must
love and cherish the truth as though it were a direct link with one’s own
Source, which in effect it is. And I feel that one should always to be open to
the truths of other humble souls, and always prepared to correct one’s own
course if one hears another’s finer truth. Gandhi put this well:
“What I am concerned with is my readiness to
obey the call of Truth, my God, from moment to moment, no matter how
inconsistent it may appear. My commitment is to the Truth, not to consistency.”
And when it comes to Truth as Ideal, I think of the
inspiring words of Ralph Waldo Emerson:
“We
lie in the lap of immense intelligence, which makes us receivers of its truth
and organs of its activity. When we discern justice, when we discern truth, we
do nothing of ourselves, but allow a passage to its beams. If we ask whence
this comes, if we seek to pry into the soul that causes, all philosophy is at
fault. Its presence or its absence is all we can affirm.”
Further, I would emphasize that relating to Truth as
an Ideal or guiding principle is not like searching for a material
object or thing, and is therefore not knowable through our five physical
senses. An Ideal is ‘in the world, yet not of it’; it is essentially an
other-worldly energizing force. When one aligns oneself with an Ideal,
one is joining in the universal challenge – that of ‘bringing Heaven to Earth’. The art of living consists of
living in a less-than-ideal world without being of
it, in other words living in the Now, from the
timeless world of Ideals. Being imperfect mortals, we will never fully achieve
the Heaven®Earth project, yet
through our alignment with the Ideal of ‘truth’ we can nevertheless bring about
positive changes.
[There is no danger of completing the Heaven®Earth project; there will always be
ample work for others – and for succeeding generations – as each person in turn
embarks on the Hero’s Journey to align with Truth.]
M: If
we’re not to be ‘attached to outcomes’, since such attachment would only lead
to personal frustration and suffering, then I can see why we really can’t get
fazed in numbers games. For instance, when outnumbered by consensual
group-think. Realistically, 1x0=0, and 14x0 is still zero, from the point of
human growth and enjoyment. A number of people can become antagonistic toward
one’s truth, yet it all may stem from the character of just one person. Over
time and through the assiduous, unrelenting efforts of the one, the numbers mount.
We know of situations wherein members of a family were painted as “different”,
then ostracized and shut out of family celebrations – in time being turned into
pariahs. Such situations just require a bit of withholding here, some meanness
and calumny there, mixed with careful dashes of back-biting on occasion – and
eventually the whole family can be turned against its own interests.
Destruction is easier than construction. Just enough bits of calculated malice
spread amongst gullible enablers/ supporters long enough, and one person’s
skilful malice can contaminate many, many lives. It seems so unfair.
K: You
jest, my Dear. What’s ‘unfair’? We both know that life – especially in its
human form – isn’t fair. It’s just what it is. ‘Fairness’ is a social
concept, a manufactured meme projected by those who have something to sell. And
the family scene – as I implied before our marriage almost 47 years ago – is a
field for blood sport. And the generations play for keeps. If there’s any
‘unfairness’, it’s in what people do to themselves when they have so little
integrity – authenticity – that through their own hubris they have
short-changed themselves.
Now as we’re learned, all things come as mixed
blessings. There is no ‘good’ in life but that it has its shadow side. All of
us, sometimes, buffer ourselves from truths ‘until later’, knowing full well
that the truth of an issue may trigger confusion and suffering within us that
we are not yet ready to assimilate. For instance, the implacable meanness of
estranged family members might depress their parents if they were to naively
believe that the truth alone would resolve the problem. Realistically,
the parents should know that it would take well-intentioned efforts from all
quarters, not just from themselves. Insight alone doesn’t automatically result
in the resolution of dysfunctional dynamics. Yet the parents’ suffering from
accepting the truth themselves is light compared to their continually dashed
hopes following recurrent but futile efforts to reconcile. When one sees the
ironic aspects of such human dramas, one can only smile, eh?
Before leaving this subject of getting through to
others, there is an admitted problem in transmitting a realized, experiential
truth through to someone who strongly desires reported reality to be
otherwise than what it really is. Such a challenge arises when setting the
record straight to an immature person – say a teenager who is very dependent
upon – and invested in – her comfortable micro world-view. In some cases, the
supposed gift of one’s feather of truth can be seen by the recipient as a
frightful, bludgeoning 2x4. Yet there are certain inescapable realities –
people actually do shameful things to ‘win’ over others to their agendas, and
one can’t forever buy peace at any price, nor be a hypocrite and dress up an
ugly issue just to protect the young from reality. The young don’t have much
experience in the ways of the world and human nature, and sometimes if their
belief systems are shaken, they can become frightened. With time, they’ll
learn, as we all do, that there is a connection between Truth and justice,
albeit compassionate appreciation for others’ circumstances has to be added to
the recipe.
Aldous Huxley alluded to this aspect so eloquently:
Taking
my mind at its best, truth and justice would be the idols I should follow; and
they would be idols for they would not supply ALL the food that the mind
wants, and while worshiping them, reverence and humility and tenderness might
very well be forgotten.
M: OK on
that. Now, let’s get back to the “truth as Ideal” - - I have some thoughts on
techniques to assist in cutting through others’ inductions, so as to get closer
to the elusive ‘truth that sets one free’.
K: Go for it.
M: Well, firstly I feel that to maintain equanimity it’s helpful if one has
a healthy sense of psychological balance concerning the ups and downs of life.
Good times – as well as bad times – have to be taken in stride, as was taught
long ago by Sufi masters in such stories as “This, Too, Will Pass”
in Remedy’s Allegories. Also, to access insight, it seems that one’s
so-called normal every day state of consciousness has to be disengaged. After
all, that ‘normal’ state was the one wherein the social dynamics occurred which
disturbed us and made us anxious in the first place. So, after paddling in
those murky ‘normal’ waters long enough to get the lay of the terrain and still
being lost, one has to then be able to access another mode. In my Therapeutic
Touch training, I was taught how to ‘centre’ myself, which means to stop my ‘thinking’
and go deeply within my energy field to my Still Spot, and from there to feel –
and affect – another’s energy state.
Another technique is to focus on the breathing; by
doing that one can often detach from negative inter-personal dramas. Also, I
have found that our daily T’ai Chi practice takes me away from mental
anxieties, and gives my mind a rest while I focus on the body movements.
Similarly, I also discovered that restful benefit through hatha yoga. It seems
that the common thread in all of these techniques is that of drawing awareness
away from the normal mind- tracks, thereby giving the overall system a break.
As a result, the background concern is often resolved from within, as the
‘truth’ of the disturbing energy dynamic is observed. I consider such intuitive
insights as being gifts from the Void, or Still Point within. I feel that this
is also the place of resolution and healing that one can access in deep sleep –
the place within us where the intractable knots of our yesterdays are released
so that we can better engage the new day.
And you??
K: I
know that you’ve also benefited from the HeartMath Institute training and its
computer-aided biofeedback training exercises geared to anxiety reduction. My
own initiation into insight techniques dates back to our first extended trip to
the Association For Research and Enlightenment (A.R.E.) in Virginia Beach 10
years ago. One of the valued items that I came across there related to
Vipassana Meditation. How by focusing on the flow of breath, one could become
so quiet and still that one could untie the knot of ego and emotions
bundled along with one’s memories. And by being able to set aside one’s
self-justifications and emotions of hurt, anger and revenge, one could see all
the components of the memory transaction itself very clearly – how and why
certain painful incidents had occurred.
Later in Mexico we met up with a British Columbia
couple who had regularly practiced Vipassana Insight meditation for years, and
they confirmed our own findings, that when one ‘shines the light’ on issues in
this manner, it is laid to rest. Later, other Buddhist teachings helped my
understanding, and then my appreciation of the autobiographical commentary of
the late therapist R.D. Laing concerning his discovery and later intentional,
conscious use of reverie. This is something that almost everyone
does without thinking every day, but when done intentionally the calming,
healing benefits are magnified. Reverie is simply goal-less
day-dreaming. And then later I came to understand the technique of focused stillness.
Stillness gradually becomes part of one’s daily mind-set and can be
wilfully engaged at any time, say when walking in the woods or when just
sitting on the porch, observing life and its processes. A developmental thread
from Vipassana ® to reverie ® to stillness. Almost all of these
techniques involve bringing oneself out of the mind, into the body – out of
memories of the past or concerns as to the future, and into the Now of
bodily Presence. And there – within – is where one finds and strengthens one’s
sense of integrity, one’s authenticity. And no one else can do it for us.
M: I confess to being inspired by the insight as to the bundling of
one’s commitment to ‘truth’ with one’s own ‘authenticity’. Being interested in
the genesis of things, I am intrigued that this dialogue was kindled as
a result of the influence of the work of the Japanese-American philosopher Yasuhiko Genku Kimura who founded The
Twilight Club - we recently used the
following quote from one of his essays in an update of the Remedy Journal:
Authenticity is fundamental, more
fundamental than spiritual enlightenment. Without authenticity, no genuine
spiritual enlightenment is possible. Authenticity is the state of being
committed to truth. ...Truth is simple, utterly so.... And no matter how simply
a truth is stated, only those who have walked the path of understanding and
evolution on their own can know and understand it authentically. The path of
truth is the path least traveled ... Authenticity is the clarity of being, in
which there is no self-deceit.
Why is authenticity so fundamental,
and why is it more important than even spiritual enlightenment? Well - you see,
our mind is extremely clever, and it has a tremendous capacity for delusion and
self-deception. Authenticity is a counteraction for that self-deceit and
tendency to delude oneself. I often quote P.D. Ouspensky's simple statement
that the most difficult thing in life is to know what one knows and to know what
one doesn't know and to know the difference between the two. It requires a kind
of honesty and authenticity to be aware of this difference and to really
examine one's body of knowledge. What is it that one really knows and that one
doesn't know? This is the kind of discipline that one needs to exert in one's
own life. It is essential for taking advantage of the spiritual experience that
one has. Otherwise, it can turn into another form of self-delusion utilized by
the ego. So a person needs to have humility and authenticity with regard to the
truth of the experience that they do have. And this authenticity leads one to
higher and higher levels or into a more whole knowledge and understanding of
the truth that is revealed to one.
When one is true to oneself, when one is authentic, one becomes true to the
evolutionary thrust for self-optimization that exists within oneself and within
the universe. And that evolutionary thrust is a continuous unfolding process.
Initially posted 02-11-06
Updated
and recast 29-09-12
Acknowledgement:
Our children – source of past fond memories and
current inspiration: And Our Children’s Children:
Everett Lloyd
Elliott (b.1960); and his wife Karen –
m. 1984 Bradley
Clement Elliott (b.1964); and his wife Katariina – m. 1991 Keith Ronald Elliott
(b. Jan 1966 - died Mar 1966) Robert Dwight Elliott
(b.1969); and his wife
Kim – m. 2000 Melissa Dawn Elliott
(b.1971); and her husband Jeff
Whitaker – m. 2002 |
Meghan Elliott
(b.1987); Lauren Elliott (b.1991) Ryan Elliott
(b.1994); Kirsten Elliott (b.1997)
- - - - - - Olivia Elliott
(b.2002); Gavin Elliott (b.2004) Sawyer Whitaker (b.2003); Jackson Whitaker (b.2005) |
Home
|
Our Stories
|
The Sublime
|
Our World and Times
|
Book Reviews
|
Marnie's Images
|
The Journal
|
Gleanings
|
From The Writings Of. . .
|
Allegories
|