on truth
can the only truth of life that you see
Be only the truth you see?
Can the only truth of life you hear
Be only the one heard
In particular moments
In different moments
In the movement of thoughts passing through,
Of disturbance, of the sensibility of the soul?
Can the truth that is imposed on the individual
ever be prone to moments of precariousness
Embodied in the nature of the same individual?
or does the truth,
as has always been said,
encompass every truth that encompasses all the truths,
The truth summarizes in itself, synthesizes in itself
All the truths of all the individuals
Of all the ages
Of all the experiences
Of all the movements
Of all the moments that each individual lives
And expresses in the valid point of view
Of his physical-earthly experience.
So can the truth of an individual,
though blessed
With the capacity to speak
With intelligence, with intellect,
With cultural intelligence ever be valid?
Can the truth of an individual be valid
For another individual
Worthy in equal form
Of the experience of life
Expressed and lived in that land
Where everyone and for everyone
An act of love, act of faith, act of pain,
Act of action is given?
how is it possible to think
beyond all logic
and human rationality
How is it possible to think that the truth,
While elevated,
While sought as a light for other men,
That the truth of man can be the truth of many
Or truth of even just one other man?
We must understand the error of this principle,
Which seemed a good principle
Which seemed a wise principle,
Which was a good and wise principle:
But now with the time coming
And in the virtual becoming,
But in the same real becoming,
Man is called upon to understand
His uniqueness of experience
His uniqueness of truth.
Here is the new man,
Here is the man who will be characteristic and symbol
Of the new era that is coming.
We will live the multiple truths together.
We will live them in respect
We will live them in communion
But we will live them in singularity.
Doubts will not be able to arise,
Certainties will not be able to emerge
That the truth of one can be the truth of many.
We see in what ways,
Although they seem wrong
They are not wrong for those who believe,
In how many ways man seeks his truth.
to seek is inherent in the human soul,
the duty to seek is inherent in the human soul.
Also inherent in the human mind is
the intellectual duty to seek.
but intellect, alas, infringes,
clashes, is obscured before the mystery of life,
that wants to give for itself the same reason:
life can not give for itself the same reason.
life is effected by other causes,
that only the intuition can reach
where only faith lies
where only love, sensibility,
are permanent residents.
rationality, the brain,
as you know it by
that form of thought working only to round off the sums,
conclude equations,
so the brain, rationality,
can conduct man
to the understanding of things
but things are nor truths
things are segments, things are pigments
things are even close to the truth,
but they are far from the truth.
rationality, the brain,
serve man for his physical passage
in a world of flesh
in a world of things
in a world of numbers
in a world of proportions
in a world of weight, of measurement, of definition.
woe if man does not manage to understand
via his rationality, his brain,
the sum of numbers,
the weight and value of physicality:
he would not be able to live
in this dimension
without his brain.
but vastly different is the thought
that brings one to the intuition of
divine existence.
we can not exclude the necessity of the brain
from intuition.
just as the extreme, decisive importance
of “lord and sovereign of the true life of the individual” intuition
cannot be excluded
from the function of the brain.
what would a human being be
without his intuition,
fruit of true thought in essence of thought?
he would be a machine
computerized
well-made,
but nothing else.
emotions, sentiments,
although burdened by fears, although burdened by pain,
are that part of man
erroneously defined conscience
as conscience is something else
but they are that part of man
that involves intuition
that involves divine thought
that involves something other than cerebral calculations.
so then does all that man strives to live for
decay?
is everything teetering on the brink,
in a position of corruption
all that man strives for
to proceed in the correction of human needs?
everything is on the edge of failure
if we maintain that what appears is the only truth.
everything is however working towards further knowledge
if we maintain that what appears
is an evident sign of a reality beyond what appears.
we often go back to this subject,
we often return to this reflection
because its good to assimilate
its good to investigate
its good to understand
the unifying principle of existence.
the mind receives.
but thought must acknowledge
and give anew to the mind the understood
in the form of awareness applied
to the daily life of each of you
to the daily life of everyone,
so that for whatever truth exists,
in the time given by moments
in the time given by season
in the time given by eras
man can apply the content of his conscience
to everything that is happening before him
involving him in rights-duties of decision,
of manipulation, of exhortation,
of elimination, of conclusion of that moment
that seems treated by limits
but is instead treated by eternity.
to what must one cling,
to what must we cling
after the teaching we have had
after all that has been given?
the arrival point is not indicative
as a point of reference
in a toponomastic way:
the arrival point is inside each of us.
the arrival point is inside you who speaks
the arrival point is inside you who listens.
no-one can tell you what it is
or what your arrival point could be.
you yourself will see
you yourself will recognise
you yourself will understand what,
point after point,
what your true arrival points are.
only in the recognising ones own path
does ones own path exist.
spiritual teaching
exhorts the individual to the attention of himself
exhorts the individual to attention towards the next
exhorts the individual to attention
towards all that happens socially,
towards all events
be they humanistic, political, war-mongering,
that define history in which the individual
Is seen to live his historic moment.
nothing is extrapolative from the truth.
all the truths that you see,
all the truths that you manage to perceive
are integral, inseparable parts
of “your truth that is nothing other
than the comprehension of your moment
in all existence.”
does man really know
the meaning of the word truth?
does man really understand
the content of this simple word,
which is as simple as its content is complex?
what instead do we,
who talk to you, mean by
truth?
by truth man means
whatever pleases him.
anything that does not accompany him
in bearing weight,
effort, economy, interest,
love, affection,
man understands as an act corrupted
by injustice, by misfortune.
man understands the truth as
sublime reality
that cannot be attacked by evil,
even though evil truths can be told
even though truths of suffering are told,
it is a truth corrupted for man,
because the truth should not contain
evil or suffering or pain.
what sad truth
is the truth that contains pain,
what sad truth
is the truth that contains
the end of a time,
the effort of a moment,
the disappointment of a hope,
the doubt of a certain conviction.
thus truth is understood by man
as an illuminating light,
as a means of clarification,
as a watershed between good and evil:
evil truth is not evil truth,
it is corruption, it is misfortune,
it is injustice for man.
the truth is that idea
sublimated by the desire for non-suffering
sublimated by the desire for recognition
sublimated by the will to succeed in not suffering,
by the will to succeed in defining
the will to arrive at the state of things,
and thus of soul,
of security totally removed from precariousness.
this is the meaning
in mans understanding
of the word truth.
man is always enlightened
hearing the word truth
even when improperly pronounced.
but truth, for us who talk to you,
what does it mean, what does it contain?
where is the graspable and
definable limit of this simple sound?
truth
as man thinks believes supposes
and in his defined necessity, defines,
truth does not exist.
man tends to define
out of his spatial-temporal necessity
and thus also for conceptual and conscientious necessity,
but not everything can be defined.
such is the word truth,
as man understands it, it doesnt exist.
everything is an interweaving of happenings,
of realities working in time
and outside time,
everything is an interweaving of sensibility
everything is an interweaving of understanding
everything is an interweaving of mystification
given by visible manifestations.
the truth of which we speak
which encompasses all human truths
is something other than what man understands
as the content of the word.
so then does teaching
aim to give clarity
or does it aim to obscure?
does teaching point towards growth or
does it bring sadness?
what points towards growth
can not always console.
what points towards growth
brings vision.
the vision that imposes itself
on those who receive spiritual teaching
cannot be an earthly consolatory vision.
if we take the concept of truth
outside human logic
it is because he who receives teaching
must be able to consider
not only the co-existing opposites,
“but he must be able to also consider
the extra-sensory hidden
and non-revealable on an earthly plane,
in the human dimension,
but acting in an irrefutable way
in the earthly dimension and in the human dimension.”
the extra sensory, the invisible,
which cannot have definable connotations,
they act on events,
they act on presumed truths,
the act on the institutions of people,
they act to give the possibility
of a collective advancement
but to add to the necessity
of an individual advancement.
where truth must be heard
in a supernatural way
and it cant be circumscribed by the observable
and it cant be circumscribed by the visible
and it cant be circumscribed by a sensibility qualifi ed
by individual form;
where the truth of which we speak
is something other than the truth
that man understands as an enlightening concept.