Hello Monsoor,

You wrote,
Don't say i know the truth, rather say i know a truth....What does this mean?

The insistence that there is one truth in the Universe is a peculiar error of the ego. When someone asserts, "There is one Truth," they aren't saying "There is one truth and somewhere it exists." They're saying, "There is one truth and that truth matches what I believe." In other words, if someone says, "There is one Truth" and you ask, "What is that Truth," they'll tell you what they believe. That is a naive, arrogant error of the ego. It has resulted in discrimination, separation, genocide, and war.

It stems from the separation of the person from the Universe that began with Aristotle and came to its climax in Rene Descartes. We in the West now believe that the physical realm of matter and energy is all that can be weighed, measured, or counted, so it is all that exists. Things like consciousness, the Divine, and afterlife that are very personal and cannot be weighed, measured, or counted don't exist.

So when someone says, "There is one Truth, and I have it," they're saying "Truth exists outside of people or consciousness and I know what that is; so believe me." Since others say they know the one Truth and it differs from that person's one Truth, the person is also saying, "Personal Truths are meaningless unless they agree with my Truth, because I know the one Truth." Of course, since no one's Truth matches that person's Truth exactly, and billions of personal truths don't match that person's in marked ways, the person, like most in the West, are saying personal Truths are invalid, superfluous, or even nonexistent. That's naive arrogance.

It is better to state the obvious: since everyone's Truth differs from everyone else's, and the Truths people articulate change even in the same person over time, Truth must be very personal and idiosyncratic. Since Truth is personal, the one Truth is my Truth, but it is Truth for me; it doesn't exist outside of me.

We in the West have great difficulty accepting that because the church that dominated the precursors of Western thought since the fourth century all place Truth outside of the person and all insist there is one Truth and the church has it.

Instead, we should be able to say, "What is true for me at this moment won't be true for anyone else, and may not be true for the person I'll be in another year. My Truth is my personal view of the Universe."

When we say that, we're really describing what is meaningful to us at this moment. That meaningfulness involves my view of myself, others, the Divine, and the Universe. Others can have their own views of themselves, others, the Divine, and the Universe, and I can accept them with tolerance because their Truths are true for them just as validly as my Truths are true for me.

That acceptance of others and their Truths makes possible unconditional love. A person can't feel unconditional love when he posits a Truth outside of himself and outside of others that becomes the standard everyone must match. That means there will be judgment, guilt, and condemnation. It means those who adhere to the Truth are acceptable; those who do not are unacceptable. The silly, naive statement, "I love you but I don't like what you believe," is disingenuous. No one is loving unconditionally when they say that anything about the other person is wrong. Any judgment results in condemnation and separation.

And so, I know one Truth. It is my Truth. But it is not the Truth for others, or even for me in a year. It is, instead, a description of who I am at this moment. When you describe your Truth to me, I might say, "I agree wholeheartedly," but that just means my Truth is similar to your Truth, right now.

Love and peace, Craig