Philosophical Discussion Group discussion

When I first saw this quote, I thought that it meant truth is everywhere, that there was no particular way in which to garner truth from. Also, that truth is subjective in which if there was a path, that would mean that there is only one truth etc.

But to hear it from the man himself: "Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or to coerce people along any particular path..."

http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/about-kr...

I guess then it to mean that truth is always, eternal and ever present. Whether you seek it or not, it is there.

Even when looking for "it", you cannot find it because it's too vast. Maybe a limitless ocean would be more apt.

If the choices are 1) truth is unattainable or 2) it is ubiquitous and thus everything is true, regardless of what one believes or thinks, seems like nihilism would be the result in either case. Both would end in indifference or at least ambivalence. Subjective caprice would be the only rule.

At least it seems that way to me.

If "personal truth" is given as an analogue for "relative truth", then it means essentially the same thing, i.e. subjective caprice and thus nihilism. In other words, if my simply believing it makes it true, then it is simply left to my whim as to what is true. It is true simply because I say so. That is no measure for gauging truth.

If it is used to mean having a personal acquaintance with the truth, then I would have no issue with the notion at all.