Relative Truth

2000-7-22 20:03:00

Saul writes:
What do you mean by 'narrow definition of truth'? Where did I say 2+2 does not equal 4?

JJ:
You said that 2+2=4 is a relative truth and is not always true. In that circumstance where 2+2=4 is not true, then 2+2 will obviously not equal 4. Therefore you are saying that in some circumstances 2+2 does not equal 4. Unfortunately, you cannot give us an example that anyone can test.

Saul:
"When you have a glimpse of the vastness of space, for instance, do you clearly distinguish between here and there? Do you count anything at all? No, in glimpses like that what you see is all one together, nothing is separated from anything else. Only when your mind entered the scene you started to separate and count."

JJ:
Your example of looking at the wholeness of the universe does not work, for when I do this, 2+2 still equals 4. Also when I am thinking about the wholeness of flowers, 2+2 still equals 4.

It does not matter if I am counting numbers or not. The numbers still add up and their sums are still true. I have not multiplied 64 X 64 to get 4096 since high school, but for all these years this sum has still been true, even though I have not been thinking about it. I'm sure this is obvious to most and it seems silly go me that I must relate this data.

Saul:
"Information can be shared, but experience cannot be shared in the sense of being transported from one person to another. Each has to experience it by and for themselves."

JJ:
But a teacher can guide others so the experience that he had may be had by others. If your experience is not just in your imagination, you should be able to tell us how to have it also. Then I also will be able to see that 2+2 is not always 4.

JJ Quote:
"Passing truth is true because it will always exist as a point in time and space, and time and space will always exist in the mind of God."

Saul Responds:
The time and space in the mind of God are not the same as experienced by us. If we applied the concepts of time and space as we know them to God we would have erred.

JJ:
It is not a matter of us applying. Time and space is just there whether we think about it or not and because it exists, it has to come from the source of all things which is God. Therefore, the concept of time and space must be eternally in the mind of God which makes 2+2=4 eternally true.

Geoffrey writes:
I, for once, think I can see where Saul is coming from.

If I was to ask all on this list and God (who lives in the sun) to take a reading of the outside temperature and measure the inclination of the sun to the earth, everyone would give a different result.

Each would be telling the truth, but everyone would be saying something different. Now if I was to ask all to retake the readings in one hours time, again each persons reading would be different from before and again different to each other. All except one, that would be God as his readings would be the same each time.

Who is telling the truth here?????? God is telling the truth as it IS, the rest of us are telling our truth relatively to where we are in our position to God. Our truths are changing daily until the day when we join with God and our truths will be the same.

JJ:
"Each would be telling the truth." Not exactly. Each would be telling the truth about his perception, but his perception may be entirely false. If someone shows me a bottle of beans and asks me to guess the number, my guess is a true communication of my best perception, but if I have the wrong number then my perception is wrong.

As in all things it is possible to get to the truth of all things and if I want to test my perception, I can count all the beans in the jar and get the correct number.

Let us suppose there are 1482 beans in the jar and ten people guess different numbers and they are all wrong. The fact that they guessed different numbers does not mean that the 1482 beans is relative. The correct number stayed the same throughout. The perception of the correct number, however, was relative to the talent of the observer, but the correct number did not change.

Now if you add a bean, does this mean that the correct number is relative?

No

The old correct number will be eternally what it was in that point in time and space.

JFK was assassinated November 23, 1963. The fact that there is no assassination occurring today, does not nullify the truth that this event occurred at that certain point in time and space. That event will be eternally true and will not change relative to anything.

If there were a cataclysm and all history were lost, that still does not nullify the event. It only takes away our perception of the event, which perception can be restored by a retrieval of history.

Truth is always independent of perception making truth absolute, but perception relative. All classifications of truth being relative, is in reality caused by calling perception truth; whereas that which is perceived is often not true.

The problem in understanding this is amplified by the fact that many teachers present their perceptions as "the truth." Many enlightened souls rebel at this presentation by stating that this is merely "his truth," and "my truth" is "different." This is a wrong use of words for instead of using "his truth" the correct use of words would be "his perception." His perception or your perception may or may not be true.

This is why in all my teachings I advise the seeker to check my words with their own souls because what I am saying may only be my perceptions and could be untrue. The only reliable test of truth is the through the windows of your own soul which, unlike us mortals, always perceives truth correctly.