Is the Truth we speak always true?

     Truth is a rare 'commodity', especially in today's digital world, where the torrent and turbulence of data makes it virtually impossible to get to the core/ bottom of truth.  

How do we discern truth, especially when market-place and mind-space is flooded with a surfeit of surreal and sometimes surreptitious information? 

      Though everyone believes that he knows/ speaks the truth, the paradox of truth is that anything or everything known/ spoken as truth needn't be the truth.  

This is because Truth can be intentionally or inadvertently twisted or even tweaked. Hence, courts of justice, for example, have the unenviable task of discerning truth through the maze and haze of testimonies, each purportedly truer than the rest. 

Truth is of three kinds: 

Subjective truth 

Relative truth 

Objective truth  

Subjective truth is truth as perceived by an individual, for example, beauty, comfort, performance. The individual sees the truth through his imperfect senses, or evaluates/ expresses it with his belief-laden intellect. Consequently he sees/ expresses what he imagines the truth to be, and not necessarily what it actually is.  

Relative truth is truth as seen by collective individuals, for example, sun-rise, gravity, size.  The truth has validity relative to each other.  

Individuals within a group may have the same perspective about the truth, but other groups may have even diametrically opposite opinion. For example, people who are on space travel see earth as a dangling water-ball (or the sun as a dazzling fire-ball), while a driver coursing through a sub-Saharan Grand Prix would see earth as flat as a pancake, lacking curves and contours, save a few local ones. 

Absolute/ Objective/ Transcendental truth is truth independent of perception, the perceiver or the perceived. Very few are privy to Absolute truth, as only a detailed and determined enquiry reveals it.   

     Theoretically subjective truth should be the easiest to confront/ correct as it has a shaky/ non-existent foundation, besides being imagined/ interpreted by just one individual. In practice, it's the most difficult to disprove, as the beholder doesn't want to correct himself/ his belief. Pointed and poignant proof only makes the individual retreat more into a defensive mood or offensive mode.  

Relative truth is comparatively easier to unravel, if mind is trained in logical reasoning.  Sometimes it is difficult to prove, especially those which are beyond the reach or reasoning power of  intellect, for example, emotional feelings, sub-/ supra-/ meta-physical objects/ events, etc. 

It's also difficult to disprove, especially when belief overrides logic.   

Absolute truth is the toughest to crack as elaborate preparation is an essential prerequisite. (The preparation centers around subduing the rampaging senses and a ratiocinating mind). But it is the easiest to comprehend, as Transcendental truth is one only. Besides, limited senses and listless intellect have no role to play.  

     Subjective truth exists within the individual's mind; hence, defies exploration, except for a trained mind. Relative truth exists outside the mind (world); hence, open to exploration, except for an untrained mind. Absolute truth transcends mind and world; hence, beyond exploration, except for a 'silent' mind! 

     Subjective truth has only one hue, the colour perceived by beholder's senses or 'painted' by his intellect. Relative truth has many hues, the colours as perceived/ 'painted' by different groups, and shades by different individuals of the same group. Absolute truth is 'colourless'!! 

     A subjective truth occasionally has validity, but mostly no reality. A relative truth mostly has validity, but occasionally any reality. An absolute truth has both validity and reality!!! 

     Subjective truth arises due to strong belief system or weak intellect of individuals. Due to the intensity it generates, a subjective truth can be the cause for conflicts within individual/ between individuals, which sometimes drag even families, societies and nations into conflicts (Adolf Hitler's subjective notion that Aryan race was superior led the entire world to brink of extinction). Longer the truth remains uncorrected, greater is its damage potential (some religions' subjective notion that their God is superior to others has led communities to holy wars/ crusades whose echo is still heard across continents and over centuries). 

Unraveling subjective truth is the domain of legal practitioners/ psychological counselors/ social reformers/ talented statesmen. As logic is given a go-by, and emotion is granted a stand-by, it is open to differing interpretations, the reason why a good professional is always in demand. 

Unraveling relative truth is the purpose/ passion of scientific pursuits. No wonder the longest rated scientific theory by the highest ranked genius is Theory of Relativity, an ode to underlying relativity principle/ truth.  

It's the might and weight of a conditioned intellect that enables a seeker to enquire into the 'relativity' enigma. However, the extent and number of truths beckoning to be unraveled being infinite, most scientists seldom scrape past the surface.  

Also, because the truth is not absolute but relative, no scientific theory has gone unchallenged/ unaltered within a few days to few years of discovery. Besides, deterministic truth (= predicable/ measurable truth) is not questionable, but probabilistic truth (= quanta/ heuristic) is open to different interpretations. 

Is unraveling Absolute truth such an awesome task? 

     From spiritual perspective, if we define our life as a quest to find (Absolute) truth, we aren't very much off the mark. Education, employment, experience, etc. are simply the means or collateral in our journey/ enquiry to unearth objective truth. 

Unraveling Absolute truth is the purpose of higher (spiritual) pursuits. It's the illumining intuition (and divine blessings) which enables a seeker to achieve his goal. The truth being one, there are many seekers who have scripted success in their pursuits. And, of course, the Truth is absolute as well as ultimate; hence, remains unchallenged forever. 

If someone has already traversed the path to ultimate truth, why should everyone undertake the journey afresh/ anew? 

     It's indeed true that a fortunate few have navigated the path to truth successfully and their journey has been well chronicled. But, for others, that doesn't translate into a travel-guide, or add up to an action-plan.  

Individuals are not automatons; they can't be programmed to follow a rigid path or a rigorous process. Each one is an individual, with distinct likes and differing capabilities. In addition, each one is designed/ destined to have experiences. This can make exploration exasperating, but life becomes exciting.  

Why do we need a lifetime of enquiry to discover just one truth? 

     Actually objective truth, per se, doesn't need experimentation or exploration. But, unfortunately it has infinite clones/ variants, some of which are easy to distinguish, but majority are difficult to differentiate.  Besides, the path/ means of enquiry are numerous. 

Both the colourful clones and the labyrinthine lanes can easily confuse an ill-prepared inquirer. It needs lifetime of training and efforts, prayer and blessings to reach the goal. In fact, it needs several lifetimes to hit the bull's eye. 

So, in a way, our journey called life is really not an exploration of truth, but an expedition to eliminate non-truths (non truth is not same as untruth, the latter is a lie, while the former is a look-alike/ shade of real truth). 

     When non-truths are eliminated, what remains is the Absolute truth, profound and pristine, simple and scintillating, divine and delightful!!!