truth vs. Truth (part IV)

People often confuse the truths that they believe in as ultimate truths. But the supposed superiority of your beliefs does not put you in a superior position. The purpose of this article is to distinguish the difference between capital “T” Truth versus our own lower case “t” truth.

I have a problem with any religion, group, or individual that holds an exclusivist agenda. All biases, all discriminations, all pride says more about the accuser than the accused. Prejudices about the other are a way of holding on to what we perceive as the known. In our ignorance and fear of the other we elevate ourselves to the level of absolutes which take the place of God as an object of worship. The commitment to our clan and our belief in the “truth” acquire a greater value than actual “Truth.” When we make statements where we say we “know something” it isn’t because we know it at all, but instead a deep need to label things to satisfy our egos of our value, not because it’s actually true.

Does God care about labels? Suppose I show you two cups, one containing crap and the other containing a delicacy. The cup containing crap is marked “delicacy” while the one marked “crap” contains the delicacy. Which cup is more valuable to you if you can see beyond the label? In the same way, our deeds and beliefs are valued by their spirit rather than their material or physical dimensions. A priest can condemn a youth for taking drugs, but does not see the emptiness that modernity causes in the youth’s soul. The priest thinks that the “obvious good” is a scathing sermon whereby drug takers and dealers are going to be dispatched to the lowest depths of hell. How much does his sermon really, and not seemingly, help?

The Qu’ran has a verse that says “Their flesh reaches not Allah, nor their blood, but it is your righteousness that reaches Him.” Similarly, Paul in the Bible says it is possible “to give ourselves to be burnt at the stake and for it not to be an act of love.” How strange that people can actually be prepared to die and kill for their commitment to what they see as the truth, and yet for this commitment to be based on lies and denial. People are so confident; they love to point to their knowledge or experience to back up their beliefs. A college degree, living in a country for 20 years, or being an “expert” does not guarantee anything. Yes, I do not deny that you may know about the subject, or that you have extensive experience, or that you occupy a superior position, but what about it? From what perspective were you looking at things? What side were you on? What was your agenda?

There is much truth in the idea that those who shout loudest against something usually feel most personally threatened by it – and often this “it” that they feel threatened by is actually or feared to be located deep within themselves. In the same way that fanatics resort to screaming certainties as a way of camouflaging their own doubts, our fear of whatever we demonize is a shield against our own deep-seated real or feared internal other.

We need to ask what exactly it is that we are afraid of; is it the loss of our own faith? Is it a loss of power or of authority? Is it our own sense of masculinity? If it is, then is it not more rewarding to look deep into ourselves and personal histories and study this hunger for power, this desire for authority and our own deep-seated sexual insecurity?

It is not enough to say that you are on the side of truth. Because who’s truth is it? One of dogma, doctrine, tradition, culture, tribalism, selfishness, reason, the oppressed, the powerful? The truth of men with fragile egos or that of battered women? The truth of Muslims or of Jews? The truth of evangelical Christians or pluralist Christians?

There may be millions of truths that are superficialy true. But what happens when two people’s truth’s conflict? Up until this article, I have stressed that we must be conscious of our actions and motivations and intentions to discern what truth is. However, there are many different truths that people hold, and they can’t all be right, especially if we’re talking about God and an ultimate Truth. Projections and conceptions, especially of God, do not make it so. The Qu’ran twice mentions that “Allah is free from what they ascribe to him.” In other words, all our doctrinal formulations and perceptions of Allah are just those; as for Allah he is eternally greater. Allah is not the greatest, as the statement Allahu Akbar is often mistakenly translated, but simply “greater.” Greater than the prisons of any historical or religious community, greater than any football team or political party, greater than any sides of war and greater than all our projections. The invitation to understanding God is therefore one of transcendence, to go beyond ourselves and what we can understand.

Therefore, we need to be balanced in our views about the people with whom we work and about those with whom we refuse to work; the people who disagree with us are not necessarily the brothers and sisters of Satan nor are the people with whom we agree angels. There is no White person or Black person; people are only found in various degrees of combinations; if there is anything essential about the human condition then it is greyness. We only pretend that our position is rock solid (and any student of basic geology will tell you that not even rocks are solid).

I don’t know what ultimate Truth is, I don’t know what God wants, but I’m certain that if there is one it must be one based on love and reverence for all of God’s people. Our diversity is a testament to God’s love and will for diversity. If there is a “Truth,” then it is for us not to have “truths.”

Instead, recognize the God in all of us, and the God in everything. God is not someone who sits on a cloud disconnected from our lives. He is in the mountain and in the space in between the mountains, and in the water surrounding the mountains. We don’t questions the existence of mountains or rivers; their mere presence is sufficient reason for them continuing to be there and for us to enjoy them. Unlike mountains, the fact that social norms exist is not sufficient enough for them to be. Styles of clothing, ways of dealing with people, judgments, stereotypes, need to be continuously reexamined.

If I may offer one word of advise, it would be to listen carefully to others, both to what they are saying and to what they are not saying. Someone, I forget who, said “To “listen” to another soul as a condition of disclosure and discovery may be the greatest service that any human being ever performed for another.” I believe there is Truth in that.

Intention vs. Truth (Part III)

So let’s do a recap. Words can be a powerful tool to express emotions and knowledge. However, due to their inherent lack of physical presence, actions are more trustworthy. Actions in and of themselves, however, are also not trustworthy because it is necessary to look at the intention behind it to determine its true purpose. Therefore, up to here, I have slowly built my case up that the intention behind the action is the truest indicator of what’s real.

This article proposes that even if someone has a clear intention, and successfully accomplishes the act, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the truth. If someone kills in the name of God, and sincerely believes it, does that mean God sanctioned the man’s death? If a spouse hits the other and says they did it because they loved them, and honestly believe that, does it make it ok?

The Qur’an has a good verse which says “It is possible that you like something and yet it is not good for you” (Q. 2:216) You don’t need to be Muslim or religious to understand this. Cigarettes are obviously a destructive tool but millions of people willingly, consciously, and intentionally smoke. Many of these same people exercise, or eat healthy, are successful, or have family. Do they want to kill themselves? More likely than not they will say no. So does their action and intention contrast with a greater truth about themselves? Is there an independent objective truth? Or is all truth subjective?

If truth is simply subjective, then that would mean that all people’s perceptions are accurate. That would make Jews evil. Muslims, terrorists. Christians, idol worshipers. American women, fat. Mexicans, lazy. Stereotypes, racist opinions, and pure delusion would all be true. Of course you could say that it’s still truth, except it’s only the individual’s truth. Even though we can only understand the world through our senses so that our conception of reality is built exclusively on perception which becomes our own unique truth (like an “alternate reality”), you can not say that any one person’s truth is absolute. Sure it’s what they perceive, but it doesn’t necessarily make it so.

Accepting this should lead to two conclusions. One, that you must respect and tolerate other people who disagree with you and not try to change or condemn them. Because even if you know for a fact that they are incorrect, chances are you are also incorrect about things you’re certain about. This is the second conclusion you should reach and it should be quite humbling for most of us. The acceptance that nothing you know can be taken as true or real.

But why should any of this matter? If the steak tastes good to you, it’s good, regardless if the chef told you it was marinated in urine but only threw spice on it to mask the taste. Right? I dunno, the fact that it was marinated in urine kind of does matter to me. Because I know I would rather pick one marinated differently if I had the choice.

The ability to make good choices is contingent upon the options that are available. But the only way to research different options is to understand that nothing you know can be for certain and nothing that anybody else knows is certain either. So you must approach every moment as a new one. You must be open to new ideas and experiences. Your past stays with you, whether you like it or not. But it’s not a burden on you, unless you choose it to be.

There is something liberating in the idea that one can be in charge of one’s own choices; that one is not a helpless victim of an environment. However, the choices we make can’t always be self-centered. In some ways, we will always be driven by self-serving motives. The question is whether we regard the sanctity of others by our intentions and actions (and words), as well as our willingness to look our motivations in the face and recognize them accurately for what they are. After all, desperate as we are to relish the shortcomings of others or to point out their mistakes, we must turn to ourselves. It is only a caring and gentle self-esteem that is going to enable us to grow, and thereby change our perception of the disliked other even when we cannot change their behavior.

But I digress. Ultimately, we don’t have truths, we only have choices. Our perception of reality is real to us, but it doesn’t mean its real to anyone else or even the truth about ourselves. Just because you think God told you to bomb abortion clinics, doesn’t mean that’s what God really wants. The truth is you’re delusional. Just because you say “I love you” to someone doesn’t mean you’re actually looking for them to say “I love you” back. The truth is, you are insecure. Therefore, even when the intention is clear behind a persons actions (or words), there is a greater truth that is more indicative of reality. Whatever that is.