Our book:
Defensive Design for the Web: How To Improve Error Messages, Help, Forms, and Other Crisis Points
Available Now ($16.99)
Most Popular (last 15 days)
Looking for old posts?
37signals Mailing List
37signals Services
Syndicate
Truth is a Pathless Land
06 Mar 2003 by Matthew Linderman
I recently began reading “Total Freedom: The Essential Krishnamurti” — a collection of the writings and speeches of the Indian philosopher (“one of the greatest thinkers of the age” according to the Dalai Lama). He was selected at the age of 13 to become the leader of the Order of the Star, a religious group. In 1929, he dissolved the group before it’s 3,000 members and explained in this speech that he did not want to belong to any organization of a spiritual kind because “no organization can lead man to spirituality.”
I maintain that Truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my point of view, and I adhere to that absolutely and unconditionally. Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or coerce people along any particular path. If you first understand that, then you will see how impossible it is to organize belief. A belief is purely an individual matter, and you cannot and must not organize it. If you do, it becomes dead, crystallized; it becomes a creed, a sect, a religion, to be imposed on others. This is what everyone throughout the world is trying to do. Truth is narrowed down and made a plaything for those who are weak, for those who are only momentarily discontented. Truth cannot be brought down; rather the individual must make the effort to ascend to it. You cannot bring the mountaintop to the valley. If you would attain to the mountaintop you must pass through the valley, climb the steeps, unafraid of the dangerous precipices. You must climb toward the Truth, it cannot be “stepped down” or organized for you.
Later on he gives his take on the compassion of straight talk:
If I speak strongly, please do not misunderstand me; it is not through lack of compassion. If you go to a surgeon for an operation, is it not kindness on his part to operate even if he causes you pain? So, in like manner, if I speak straightly, it is not through lack of real affection, on the contrary.
9 comments so far (Post a Comment)
06 Mar 2003 | fajalar said...
I wish I could use that second excerpt here at work. I tend to be pretty direct here, and so far people generally don't take too kindly to that.
So I am working on being less direct, but still being honest. I am told it will make me more successful. We shall see.
I just prefer to say, "It's ugly," or "It's crap," and follow it up with, "Here are some ways to fix it." Instead I have to strive for, "What other options did you consider during design." Which is probably better because, in the words of my boss, "People don't like being told their baby is ugly."
06 Mar 2003 | Mathew said...
What about the risk that every person finds a different 'truth'? If every person finds their own way, and ends up in a different place, then the whole concept of 'truth' is pointless.
That said, congratulations to him for standing up for what he believes and acting in a way consistent with his belief. Too many people are corrupted by the power of leadership.
06 Mar 2003 | indi said...
Mathew: I don't believe he was saying that everyone will find their own truth, but rather that everyone must find the truth in their own way.
"There is no path to truth, it must come to you. Truth can come to you only when your mind and heart are simple, clear, and there is love in your heart; not if your heart is filled with the things of the mind."
07 Mar 2003 | boysen said...
If truth was difficult to attain, for those who couldn't find it (or it them) life would be meaningless. That is a proposition I can not accept.
I take Roman 1:20 to mean that we all know something of God by observing nature around us. Maybe that's part of the pathless plains on which we live?
08 Mar 2003 | James said...
"If truth was difficult to attain, for those who couldn't find it (or it them) life would be meaningless. "
I think it's more the quest for truth that mattered. As he said
"Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever"
It's not whether you reach the destination, but the journey you take and the fact your looking. Some things can never be reached, it's the act of striving that matters and bears results.
10 Mar 2003 | Paul said...
Why wait? Dissolve into light. Now.
12 Mar 2003 | alisha said...
hes right. and Paul, you are a very dark being...
23 Mar 2003 | Paul said...
...very dark being...? Sorry, the intention of my remark was to relay the message of Buddha which is to work towards the extinguishing (nirvana) of endless cyclic existence (samsara) and to pass out of this world of suffering. In the Tibetan tradition, adepts have been known to do this by dissolving into rainbow light, leaving no corpse.
Discussions on the nature of truth in general do not contribute to a person's accomplishment of this ultimate goal.
I didn't mean to sound like such a smart-ars. I should have stated my meaning clearly. I appologise.
Peace...
14 May 2003 | wne4 said...
Aldous Huxley said of Krishnamurti that we'd have "to go back to the Buddha himself to find someone who spoke with such beauty, such intrinsic authority" [my close paraphrase]. When I read (past and present) the transcripts of Krishnamurti's dialogues--many with famous leaders and scientists (such as quantum physicist David Bohm), as well as ordinary people--the sheer elegance and directness of Krishnamurti affected and still affects me profoundly.
Some of his dialogues are available on videotape as well as in book format (see http://www.kfa.org/).
To listen to Krishnamurti is not to listen to a theorizer, but to engage in an incredibly difficult process, requiring real energy and steadfastness, of paying attention to what's right before one, without evasion. To follow his talks is to engage in this process, and it is NOT easy. Its difficulty lies precisely in its concreteness and not in its abstraction. As someone once said about the words of Christ: he's difficult to follow because if his words were any more concrete, they'd be life itself. Some say they were, as were Krishnamurti's.
