Infinite Truth Open To Interpretation-Speaking Tree-Opinion-The Period of India

No single word or language can express even a part of it. Neither is that all the more right as a man knows, nor only that which he knows. Similarly, how can it be that only that which was known in the past is right and that all else is not? Recent achievements will continue as great as the correctness is sought.

Enthusiasm does not carry only one aspect. Can a hungry and thirsty person be satiated with literature? Formerly a patient visited physicians practicing different systems like Ayurveda, Homoeo-pathy, Allopathy, Yunani and Naturopathy. Each one emphasised the importance of his course and decried the rest.

But what testament Naturopathy do if surgery is needed? The Ayurvedic system tries to root out the disease, while Allopathy offers momentary relief. While Ayurveda is capable of long-term treatment, Allopathy is able of short-term treatment. One can approximate truth by taking into worry the indi-vidual, the place, the time and the existing situation.

An absolute view cannot divulge the truth. Many stress the importance of spirituality but do not like yoga or zephyr control.

Representing attaining a particular state, belief is bettering but in the liberated state religion turns non-essential. Insistence on absoluteness is not right in any field. Believing in the universality of something leads to difficulties.

We are advised to divulge neither truth, that is likely to hurt others, nor untruth. On a former occasion a one-eyed king invited a scarce painters. He said to them, "The portrait you constitute of me should be beautiful and true but only barely true".

Three painters agreed to accomplish the portrait. One took the painting to the king, who said, "The portrait is beautiful and life-like but not true because it shows both eyes normal". To the other painter he said, "Your portrait is beautiful and live, but it paint the bare truth by showing me one-eyed.

The third depicted the king stringing the bow so that sole orb got hidden carry on the raised hand. The king rewarded him. The third portrait was neither unfaithful nor bare, but partly true. Untruth to gratify others does no good.

Partial truth is both acceptable and useful. Our viewpoint should be complete, harmonious and relative, not a good removed from truth. I enjoy no right to foist my truth on anyone. I am bound to Syadvada, the doctrine of qualified or non-absolute assertion. If the eyes are directed towards truth, life will acquire no unhappiness.

Acharya Tulsi researching Agams (Jain canonical texts) told me: Never think in terms of sectarianism. Express only that which strikes true. Mention what our traditional beliefs are, but truth should not be tinged with our beliefs". Is truth greater or the individual? Are circumstances bigger or truth? Acharya Bhikshu said, "What I am saying today is untinged according to me.

If a polymath or metaphysician finds it wrong tomorrow, he should quit it". He never drew an absolute line beyond which truth did not exist championing that would have meant presumptuousness.

No word, language or substance can account for dope fully. We should accept an concept as qualified truth. There can be distinct sources of light and they can be quite compatible with one another. But luminous is light.

The day-star gives light, so does the oil lamp. Truth is no different. If expressed by an all-knowing or an ignorant person, exactness is truth. There can be a difference only in degree.

From http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/speaking_tree/infinite_tr~.cms