by Robert Wilkinson
Yesterday we began to examine the issues around “telling the truth,” and what “truth” to tell if we’re confronted with a dilemma where telling that “truth” could hurt someone.
As I mentioned yesterday, truth is often in the eye of the beholder, much like "reality." And there are unconditional truths, conditional truths, and untruths. For example, what is true here and now may or may not be true in other circumstances. Gravity is an unconditional truth for our Earth, though it may not be on other worlds, just like we know "Life" to be carbon-based, though it may not be across the galaxy.
When examining conditional truths and untruths, I raised the issue of how “true” is a perception, or opinion? Are we telling an “untruth” when we compliment someone’s clothes, even though they may not appeal to us? I also raised the possibility that in many circumstances, “truth” is a judgment call at best. Should we express “the truth” even if it unnecessarily hurts another?
Picking up from yesterday, I believe our conception of “the truth” is bent by perception. Is "the truth" to be used as a bludgeon to press our point and force another into submission? Must the truth be cruel and destructive?
What is "the whole truth?" We can always tell "the whole truth" in ways that either hurt another, or do not hurt another. It is all how we frame "the whole truth." And realistically, who among us really knows "the whole truth?"
Telling someone "the truth" is often a far cry from some of the examples cited in the questions that prompted this response. As I told the questioner, I believe that most of the examples posed at the beginning of part one are more statements of opinion than fact.
Addressing an example raised yesterday, telling someone that smoking cigarettes WILL kill you is absolutely the wrong way to go. That’s because smoking cigarettes MAY kill you, or it may lead to other diseases that will kill you. Or you could enlist, go to war, and be blown up by an IED, whether you smoke or not.
While smoking cigarettes may be bad for our health, there are many who have a stroke, or a heart attack, or have emphysema, or some form of cancer even if they don't smoke. A dear friend of mine was a meditator, macrobiotic, and genuinely altruistic guy who died of rare bone marrow cancer in his mid-40s because of a drug the doctors told his mom to take in 1945 before he was born.
I agree we need to stress all the negatives of smoking, and some are so vivid that they'll make more of an impression than "it will kill you," a statement of an absolute which may or may not be true. "Your breath will stink, you'll waste your money, few will want you around, your health insurance will be more expensive than others," and so forth, depending on the developmental level.
Here we have to remember that teenagers don't care. And they may even do it just to bug you, so they have to be handled a certain way. Like cutting off their money.
One of the examples raised yesterday involved a situation of a mom telling her 4 year old daughter to stay away from the edge of the pool because she will drown if she falls in. The questioner believed that “half-truth” could spare someone (her daughter) from drowning.
I believe that is a far different example than telling a teenager not to smoke cigarettes. A mom telling a 4 year old she could drown is a clear case of using FEAR to scare someone to death about water. Better that she find some other way to persuade her child not to go near the pool while teaching her how to swim! Then if the child falls into water she WON'T drown!
I used to teach very young children in Florida when in my teens, and they pick it up pdq. I told the questioner I believe that mom is shirking her duty to teach her children a skill that will help them survive, and even make their lives more enjoyable!
We should never mislead a child if there is any way to be truthful in what we say, and fear is never a good thing to cultivate. We want to be firm with young children (a 4 year old should NEVER be unsupervised near a pool!) but at the same time not tell them something factually suspect, or they'll doubt our veracity in more important things later on. ("Smoking pot will lead to heroin addiction.")
The questioner raised the issue about a mom not telling her children that dad is a raging alcoholic so that the children grow up in a secure environment where it's okay to love dad. They felt that omission of truth allows a household to grow up with a reasonable amount of love.
I responded that regarding children of alcoholics. it's usually better to have a dad than not, unless he's physically abusive. Moms too.
Regardless of what we endure at the hands of our parents, it was an agreement by all in the family system to do the drama before any of us were born. While that doesn’t let adults off the hook when it comes to appropriate parenting, thank heaven that our free will allows us to pursue the destiny we choose, and not stay trapped in our family illusions, rules, and dysfunctions.
Though many are raised in somewhat dysfunctional situations and we have our crazy and extreme moments this life, it doesn't have to permanently damage our psyche. Many of us may be weird, but it doesn't make us bad guys.
Everyone's parents have blind spots, weaknesses, and psychological baggage. We just learn who we're not, go our own way in life, and do the best we can to love them with all our hearts in their weaknesses and their strengths.
What else is there to do with our parents' flaws? They weren't raised by saints or sages either, and when I think of the "gods that walked the earth" when mine were young - Stalin, Hitler, the Great Depression, etc. - I have great compassion that they survived with their sense of humor intact.
As for the issue about Sages holding back a truth from their students, I have found that all great Sages only illuminate a part of the Truth they know, since not all things can be said all at once to everyone. That's just discrimination. When in a college town in the 70s you speak one way. When you're working in a courthouse in 2015 you speak another.
Blavatsky gave the world a great gift in "The Secret Doctrine." Yet she made it clear that it was a translation of only 2 of the 33 Sacred Volumes. The rest were deemed too heavy for humanity to handle by those who were and are the custodians of the records. Get the first two volumes down, THEN you get to go to grad school!
Believe me, if truth seekers want more, they will find it. Guaranteed! To the degree they are able to handle it and then some, it challenges their creative imagination, perseverance, and faith in themselves, the Divine process, and the Eternal Connection to the Great Ones.
Without those, it's all vanity, since ALL "Spiritual" practices further the Oneness We All Are Together. Anything less would feed separateness, and that is an illusion when viewed from the higher angle.
Then there were the questions addressed to me personally. Does the fact that truth is hard to determine bother me? Sometimes more than others, especially when people have asked me what I think the "truth" of a thing is. I know I'm going to offend some, confuse others, disappoint others, and seldom communicate it to anyone's satisfaction. Who can put the ocean in a teacup?
The very things we all can agree on may lead some to major spiritual breakthroughs and world service, while others will run their lives into a ditch with the same information and intention. Not all Truth fits for all people all the time.
We’ll close with the quote that introduced this topic yesterday. I've been in situations where I felt like Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men" in telling someone "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" And there have been times when I've had to name the truth in the face of the whirlwind, and suffered the inevitable consequences of standing for something good and true in the midst of liars and thieves.
Seldom do the ends justify the means, since using wrong means never leads to a good end or karma. Think the "Sorcerer's Apprentice" here. That example can be applied in 10,000 ways.
So I try to "tell the truth" as I see it, remembering always that like us all, I can be totally misperceiving a situation. Or not. As to "telling the truth," well, we must always "tell the Truth." The trick is which Truth to tell.
© Copyright 2007, 2015 Robert Wilkinson
Thank you for this, but in last few days I had conversation with some astrologers friends and main theme was "be positive", "don't tell ugly things", "keep your karma clean" and so...
But thinking about it (for a long time now) how can someone be so "shallow". What if you, no better - I, I had a client, woman for instance who is sick of cancer (this is hipotetical situation). And woman came to me, not to hear spiritual words, cosmic philosophy, but to get strait answer what to do with money. She has a small amount of money, she is single mother of two kids and she has cancer. And the only thing why she came to astrologer is one question - should I spend my money on my healing? Will it get me out of this mess fast so I can take care of my kids?
Or... should I leave this money to my kids so they can survive or pay for their education when I die?
What is better option for me?
That is the situation I'm afraid in reality. That is the situation you can't say - Well, I'm not going to talk abouth death, because I just talk about life. Or - Well, I'm doing wrong to my karma, so I'll tell that woman to find another astrologer. And when I meet with the One, we will look each other in the eyes and the One will tell me - why didn't you helped me when I came to you as sick woman?
Finally, my question about the truth could be - how do we stay moral (not just truthful, but rightful) dealing with real situations?
Posted by: Yzse | April 23, 2015 at 08:08 AM
On occasion, I have found that giving an authoritative answer, "the truth", with the suggestion that the questioner explore other points of view is interpreted as I don't know. That can be frustrating.
Posted by: Jo Garceau | April 23, 2015 at 02:08 PM
It is ultimately the questioner's decision, is it not? I see nothing wrong with saying, this is what I'm getting, or this is what I am hearing you say, but the decision is yours. It seems to be a matter of helping the person find their own answer. The final decision is the responsibility of the individual doing the acting, to my thinking. I tend to ask more questions than give answers when someone asks for my input. But then again I'm not an astrologer.
Posted by: caliban | April 24, 2015 at 05:40 AM