Truth versus philosophy

Dear BK and PBK Brothers.

Just presenting a short churning on 'Truth'. If you feel that something is missing or something is not proper, then please feel free to add or subtract.
Thanks.
==========

Universal criteria for Truth:

1. Truth is always objective - never subjective. It is the same for everyone, regardless of how one may view it - just as the sun is same for everyone in this world.

2. All philosophies lead to truth but Truth is no philosophy.
Truth is stranger than any philosophy.
Philosophies divide but Truth unites the world under one brotherhood.

3. Truth Is always Singular - It can never be plural . Only one view can be true. All other views mislead, regardless of how clever they sound.

4. Truth sets you free from all beliefs and bondages and sufferings. Truth is not based on faith.

5. Truth enlightens and dispels all darkness (ignorance).

6. Truth accurately reports time cycles ie past, present, and future.

7. Truth sought and found Increases Peace and Harmony:
Truth can never be argued or debated i.e. Truth is non-controversial.
Truth denied, suppressed or mocked brings argument.

8. Truth is Eternal and Never Changes with time:
Nothing can be added to or substracted from Truth. It never needs updating or correction or refining.

9. Truth agrees and integrates with all reality.
Knowledge through all channels (history, geography, science, religion, spirituality and the paranormal) will agree and converge to that which is true.

10. Truth is the word of God only. The power of Truth grants immortality.

Let the readers decide if any knowledge (basic or advance or otherwise) in the world satifies the above criteria fully to be called the Truth.
shivsena

Some more points;

1) Truth is absolute, it is not relative to falseness; but falseness is relative to truth & one falseness is not relative to another falseness. In other words, the truthfulness of a fact cannot be derived from the falseness of some other fact; but a true fact is essential (for comparison) to prove that the given fact is false. And the falseness of a fact cannot be proved with the help of the falseness of some other fact.

2) A true fact may be completely true without any attribute of falseness, but there is no any fact which is completely false without any attribute of truth. In other words, each & every false fact contain truth to some extent; but a true fact may not contain falseness at all. For example, God is the 100% complete embodiment of truth without any attribute of falseness; but though Maya is considered as the embodiment of falseness, she is not 100% complete enbodiment of falseness, she does possess the quality of truth to some extent & with the help of that quality of truth, she could assume the form of God to deceive Rudra souls.

A general question.
Is the statement
"1 + 1 = 2"
a true statement or just a philosophical statement?

My dear Brother Rudra-Maala soul shivsena,
1) Truth is deterministic & philosophy is probabilistic.
2) Knowledge is not truth but a gateway to truth. Knowledge is relative but truth is absolute. Truth cannot be expressed by any language or it cannot be put on paper. In this sense, Shrimat is the gateway to the absolute truth but it is just (Godly) knowledge & it could not be called as truth.

[quote="shivsena"]Truth is always Singular - It can never be plural. Only one view can be true. All other views mislead.[/quete]
I agree to you. But a query to you & also to me.
Some higher order differential equations have more than one solution. A very simple example: square root of 4 = 2 or -2. Then, are all the solutions of these higher order differential equations true??

Though mathematical statements (for example: 1 + 1 = 2) may be objective, deterministic & singular, they cannot be called true. They are neither truth nor philosophy. They are just 'logic' - intellectual derivations.

A general question.
What is difference between 'truth' and 'logic'?

* Are truth & false opposite terms, i.e, antonyms?
* Why, how & when did souls, who are children of almighty God (who is the complete embodiment of truth, consciousness & bliss, i.e, Sat-Chit-Aanand Swaroop) fail victim to falsehood, i.e, Maya?

Truth, philosophy, science, metaphysics & much more. http://www.spaceandmotion.com

* Are truth & false opposite terms, i.e, antonyms?
* Why, how & when did souls, who are children of almighty God (who is the complete embodiment of truth, consciousness & bliss, i.e, Sat-Chit-Aanand Swaroop) fail victim to falsehood, i.e, Maya?

A generalisation perhaps?

Maybe your question should read "when did SOME souls, who are children of almighty God ... " - as for sure not everyone of 'them' you refer to has fallen into "Maya's" clutches. I'd say its a bit like here in this country where many feel that they are beyond the law, especially those in government or official positions; and so many of those who follow break the law endlessly and without regard to others; maybe we could describe them as being unconscious and uncaring?

The when the leadership sticks together (a la Mbeki and Mugabe saying there's no crisis in Zimbabwe ...) in a "brotherhood/sisterhood" style status quo, its no wonder the people underneath the 'heavies' behave as they do. Its all about learning to behave just like mommy and daddy taught you to behave. And mommy and daddy do teach all 'bout moral regeneration and moral values but then end up knifing each other in anger and hatred over the fact that one of them forgets to put the toothpaste cap back on after brushing. ~!~

And in answer to your question "Are truth & false opposite terms, i.e, antonyms:" I'd day that they're the same long breadstick, just one end has been baked bigger and brighter than the other but it depends on who's eating it and who's taste buds are more developed. That is, of course, if you aren't bread intolerant too ... roll:

Truth is non-controversial. Truth denied, suppressed or mocked brings argument.

I strongly agree in principle with most of what you write except the last one, 10, where you say, "Truth is the word of God only". At this point, I think you are introducing quite a separate product and having to play to the game of the BKWSU. Especially as it is underlined that the god of the Murli is "God-God" and the Murli is that truth.

Likewise, I would agree that Truth is "incontrovertible" - which is perhaps what you meant - but is almost always "controversial" because of the untruthfulness or egotism of humanity. A good indicator of where some sits on the spiritual spectrum is to observe how they react to an "inconvenient" truth.

Maybe your question should read "When did SOME souls, who are children of almighty God...."

Possibly, you have mistaken my question. I've given a comma (,) before the word 'who' which clearly indicates that the word 'who' includes 'all souls' & not 'some souls'.
Read:
1) Souls who are children of almighty God. - Here 'who' includes 'only those souls who are children of God' &
2) Souls, who are children of almighty God. - Here 'who' includes 'all souls' (means all souls are children of almighty God).

Brother ex-l, truth is not the word of God, it is the Swaroop (nature) of God. No any word, including that of God, is truth. God's word is Shrimat, which is the gateway to truth, but even Shrimat is not absolute truth. According to shivsena, Hindi will be the language of God (Ramshivbaba) when He will revealed in the near future. Now I've a question. Could the language Hindi express the absolute truth?

Truth is Eternal and Never Changes with time; Nothing can be added to or subtracted from Truth. It never needs updating or correction or refining.

But first of all, what is Truth. It is said "Ram naam satya hai" or "Satyam Shhvam Sundaram" meaning God (Ram/Shiv) is Truth. Thus God is Truth & Truth is God. In Hindu scriptures God is described as 'Sat-Chit-Aanand Swaroop' (embodiment of Truth-Consciousness-Bliss). Truth is the nature (Swaroop) of God. He is the source of all 'Truth'. And for the Eternity of Truth, we must have to accept the Eternity of God. Does God loses His Godly nature?? Does He achieve His Original Godly nature when He becomes 100% incorporeal, in the Auspicious Confluence Age, & loses His Godly nature, due to the passage of time, in the broad drama? Brother Shivsena, do you mean that Truth is Eternal, but Godly nature of God is Temporary?

Truth is non-controversial. Truth denied, suppressed or mocked brings argument.

I strongly agree in principle with most of what you write except the last one, 10, where you say, "Truth is the word of God only". At this point, I think you are introducing quite a separate product and having to play to the game of the BKWSU. Especially as it is underlined that the god of the Murli is "God-God" and the Murli is that truth.

Dear ex-l.
I have never said or implied that BKs or PBKs have the truth or Murli is the word of God or cds are explantion of ShivBaba; Murlis(words of Shiva+Brahma) only contain some hints about who will be the personified fom of God in the near future and that is what we (as BKs and PBKs ) have to churn on and identify; once we have done that, then we just have to wait till that personified form of God comes and speaks the truth.

I just want to add one more point on "Truth";
In bhakti-marg ''Truth" is known as ''The bitter truth" and ''The naked Truth''.
Can BKs and PBKs please share their views on why this saying has come to stay in Bhakti(when it is said that God is Truth and Truth is God);
Truth ie God should be blissfull (sat-chit-ananda swaroop)and not bitter.
shivsena.