Friends! Today, I want to share a story I read regarding 'Truth' and express my thoughts on it.
Most people assume that 'Truth' merely means stating an event or fact exactly as it is—that is, they mistake literal honesty for the ultimate truth. They hold onto this even if it is achieved by betraying one's own soul, and regardless of how painful its consequences might be. However, this story presents a completely different and practical perspective on it....👇
The story is...,
The Definition of Truth
The famous philosopher Bertrand Russell was once out for a walk. In the forest, he saw a deeply exhausted, limping, and groaning fox. Looking at it, it was glaringly obvious that the creature was terrified and running to escape some grave danger.
Shortly after, hunters arrived from the front.
They asked Russell, "Did you see a fox passing by this way?"
Russell replied, "Yes."
"So, which way did it go?" the hunters asked eagerly.
Russell pointed his finger and directed them toward the exact opposite direction of where the fox had gone. Consequently, the hunters were misled, and the mute fox's life was saved.
Reflecting on this memoir, Bertrand Russell wrote in his philosophical text: 'I do not believe that I acted untruthfully there. When a person's core purpose is noble and benevolent, their conduct—no matter what it appears to be superficially—must be deemed as Truth. Had I told the hunters the correct direction of the fox, that behavior, which would have outwardly appeared as the truth, would in reality have been a profound untruth in my eyes.'
Story by 'Courtesy: Akhand Jyoti, June-1976'
This story highlights with utmost clarity that a spoken fact (Sach) is not necessarily the ultimate Truth (Satya). The scope of 'fact' or 'literal honesty' is often limited to speech or providing evidence, whereas 'Truth' is all-encompassing, and nothing lies beyond it. If we look closely, the broader ultimate Truth accommodates both 'relative honesty' and 'untruth'. Or rather, literal honesty and lies are both limbs of Truth; Truth is formed by integrating both and becomes far more expansive than either.
As Russell acknowledged in the story—had he told the hunters the literal truth, he would not have experienced the essence of Truth despite being honest; and by telling a lie instead, he felt no sense of falsehood. Why? Because his soul recognized that he spoke a 'benevolent truth' rather than a 'harmful fact'.
It is worth noting that the meaning is weightier than the word, the intent is weightier than the meaning, and the consequence is far more crucial than the intent... How then can a literal fact be called Truth if its underlying meaning is detrimental and its intent is entirely insensitive?
Undoubted, such a so-called truth can only be a mere 'fact', but it can never be the ultimate 'Truth'.
Generally, people treat 'literal fact' (Sach) and 'ultimate truth' (Satya) as identical. In truth, there are many words in Hindi and Sanskrit that are casually considered synonyms or equivalents, but in reality, they are not. Almost every single word in Hindi and Sanskrit carries its own independent and unique nuance. After all, it is worth pondering: if a word already existed for a specific concept, why was another one created?
This is because they are never used in the exact same sense. Yes, for the sake of conversational convenience, their meanings are temporarily assumed to be identical and they are labeled as synonyms. Often, the role of multiple words with overlapping meanings is just like a single individual holding various designations. That is, the same person assumes the roles of a father, an uncle, a boss, a manager, and a son, and their behavior and responsibilities change with each role. The individual remains the exact same person and has one unique personal name, yet their designations shift based on the context.
Take the synonyms of the Sun as an example: Surya, Dinkar, Aditya, and Prabhakar.
- Surya: The one who is supreme among the deities (Suras) or celestial bodies is Surya.
- Dinkar: The one who dispels darkness and initiates the day (Din) is Dinkar.
- Aditya: The one who is the primal cause behind the beginning (Aadi) and end of the daytime is Aditya.
- Prabhakar: The one who spreads 'Prabha'—meaning light—is Prabhakar.
Here, while 'Surya' is the primary name, Dinkar, Aditya, and Prabhakar are its distinct designations across varying contexts and interpretations. In this manner, the same Sun holds multiple titles depending on the circumstances. (We shall discuss other such words at length some other time). Thus, the meaning or application of a word's synonym can vary every single time.
Now, let us return to 'Satya' (Truth) and 'Sach' (Literal Fact). The practical honesty or the verbatim description of an event, word, or action is called 'Sach'. This literal honesty has a clear antonym—'Jhuth' (Lie). However, ultimate Truth is different; essential Truth has no true antonym. Yes, in ordinary day-to-day language, we assume 'untruth' to be the opposite of truth, but deeply speaking, it is not. Some might bring up the word 'Mithya' (illusion/falsehood) here, but I would argue that in the context of ultimate Truth, Mithya means something entirely different. While absolute Truth encompasses the very existence of the universe, Mithya refers only to that which is perceived (an illusion) but holds no real existence in reality (like a mirage).
Friends! In reality, Truth is neither a mere word, nor an abstract meaning, nor a predetermined social behavior; rather, if there is a most precise and concise definition of Truth, it is...
'Satyam Shivam Sundaram'...
Which means, fundamentally, whatever is beautiful in its essence and 'Shiva' (benevolent/welfare-aligned) in its final consequence, that alone is Truth.
In my view, Truth, Knowledge, and God are interconnected as one or essentially identical, because the fundamental definition of all three is exactly the same...
- All three are supremely beautiful and ultimately benevolent.
- All three are omnipresent and transcend time (timeless).
- All three are immutable and indivisible.
- To fully know, comprehend, and attain any of the three is an infinite pursuit.
- Nothing exists beyond them, and none of the three have a true antonym in the real sense (untruth, ignorance, and darkness are merely the absence of light or knowledge and illusions spun by the ego, not actual opposites).
Regarding these three, Goswami Tulsidas Ji beautifully stated:
"Upon knowing You, one merges and becomes You."
Therefore, a seeker of Truth, while speaking a literal fact, must always remember—even if you practically view Truth as just spoken words, you must deeply weigh its consequences before speaking. If the final result is not benevolent, your words might be a 'fact', but they can never be the 'Truth'. Hence, it is generally wise to avoid speaking a harsh fact that breaks someone's heart or brings harm and misfortune to another.
This verse from the scriptures regarding truth is highly remarkable:
"सत्यं ब्रूयात् प्रियं ब्रूयात् न ब्रूयात् सत्यमप्रियम्।
प्रियं च नानृतं ब्रूयात् एष धर्मः सनातनः।।"
Meaning: Speak the truth, speak agreeably, but if the fact is bitter (harmful), do not speak such an unpalatable fact. At the same time, do not speak a sweet lie just to please someone, which would taint your speech and turn you into a liar. This alone is the Eternal Righteousness (Sanatan Dharma).
In another instance, the famous saint Kabir Das Ji said:
"No penance matches the adherence to Truth..."
This is the first line of a highly renowned couplet, which all of you have undoubtedly heard or read. This line posits that speaking the truth is a great penance. But what is the true meaning of 'penance' here? We have often seen some individuals mistake speaking harsh, rude, and piercingly bitter facts for a great penance or an act of bravery, spewing verbal venom everywhere. But is that truly penance? What spiritual discipline has such a speaker mastered? Is an untamed tongue a penance, or is the appropriate, controlled, and sensitive use of speech the real penance? Do ponder upon this...😊
In conclusion, I would say that if at any moment I do not possess a benevolent fact worth sharing, I would choose 'silence' over a lie or an unkind fact. In my view, this would be a hundred times better choice than an uncalled-for or forced, harmful statement.
In passing, and in this very context of speaking facts, I present a few lines penned by myself:
"Why not pause and reflect a little... before we speak,
Let's gather the pleasant flowers of words... before our lips open.
After all, our mindset peeks through the window of our words, my friend!!
Come, let's beautify our thoughts, 'Nishabd'... before opening this window."
Friends! That is all for today...😊
May your day be blessed and auspicious...🙏🌷
✍️ From the pen of 'Nishabd'....💕
🖌️Images generated with the help of Gemini & Copilot (AI)🌷
🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸
Next recommendation:
"By Which Label Are You Identified?" Why do we identify one another by labels of identity today, rather than through our shared humanity or relationships?
Do take the time to read this, and try to find the answer to the question posed at the end—perhaps you will rediscover something that had been lost... 🙏💕
🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸☘️🌸
No comments:
Post a Comment