There are two virtually opposing models of truth – the Philosophical, which is human-centric, where the self is anchored to its own certainties; and the Religious, which allows a divine authority or an authoritative word to impose itself on human thinking and determine what is truth.

‘Philosophical truth’ (through self-questioning and self-discovery), as encouraged by Socrates, is in sharp contrast with ‘religious truth’, as propounded by various prophets. For eg., while Socrates suggested: ‘Man know yourself’, the Hebrew prophet Samuel submitted: ‘Speak, Lord your servant is listening.’

While the inherent ‘truth of philosophy’ is found within the self, the main feature of ‘religious truth’ is that its source and origin are not the self but another. For this reason, it is often labelled as ‘revealed’ truth – as it’s not discovered but received. Its end-product is not fulfilment through self-discovery but the conversion of the self.

Philosophical Vs Religious Truth: Philosophy sees self-dialogue as the begetter of truth, though it can foster ignorance or isolation. Religion, however, maintains truth emerges through divine revelation and sincere faith. In Orthodox Judaism, it dwells in the sacred Hebrew Bible and authoritative Talmudic wisdom; likewise, Islam, meaning ‘submission’, honours the will of Allah. Religious views on truth vary both between and within religions. The most universal concept of religion that holds true in every case is the inseparable nature of truth and religious belief. Each religion sees itself as the only path to truth. Religious truth, therefore, is never relative, always absolute.

Absolute Vs subjective Truth: Debate over whether truth is absolute or subjective spans centuries. Some argue that context shapes truth: universal truths – like mathematical principles, scientific laws like gravity, and accepted moral tenets – are absolute, existing independently of beliefs or culture. Other truths rest on personal perspective: tastes, opinions and experiences that vary with individual biases and backgrounds.

Recognizing this duality enriches our understanding: absolute truths offer stability and reality, while subjective truths reflect diversity and nuance. Distinguishing between them is vital across philosophy, ethics, and science guiding us in assessing scope and validity of knowledge. This insight fosters clearer dialogue and informed judgment overall.

What Is Truth?

Before his crucifixion, Jesus engaged Pilate in a dialogue about truth (John 18:37–38). When Pilate asked, “Are you a king?”, Jesus affirmed his purpose was to bear witness to truth and that, “everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” Pilate’s challenge, “What is truth?”, went unanswered. Jesus, who later declared “I am the truth” (John 14:6), likely saw no point debating a ruler more concerned with order than understanding. As the adage reminds us, “For believers, no explanation is necessary; for non-believers, no explanation suffices,” underscoring the faith divide. Faith trusts the unseen while truth aims at verifiable fact; devotion can foster deeper awareness.

Albert Einstein observed that defining ‘scientific truth’ is elusive, as truth varies across empirical facts, mathematical propositions and theoretical models. Our existence involves interplay between our given nature and our capacity for transcendence, shaping how we pursue and embody truth. From a Zoroastrian standpoint, truth is not abstract but lived… our essence and reality emerge through conscious choices and deeds.

Across civilizations, sages contemplated truth’s nature. The Upanishads assert that truth rests within the heart, urging individuals to dispel avidya (ignorance) so vidya (wisdom) may illuminate the mind. In ancient Greece, Socrates counselled, ‘Man, know yourself,’ likening teachers to midwives who assist but do not impart truth. Thus, each person is a seeker and source of truth, responsible for self-discovery.

The Ultimate Truth Is Indescribable

Gautama Buddha’s enlightenment was a profoundly personal act of self-discovery. Buddhist philosophy holds that this ultimate truth – Nirvana – is ineffable, eluding capture by language or concepts. Enlightenment transcends ordinary thought, offering a direct, non-conceptual experience of reality. Words fall short of conveying such subjective transformations; thus, the Buddha’s teachings serve as guides to spark individual realization rather than definitive portrayals.

Passed down orally and later inscribed, they encourage practitioners toward mindful awareness and direct insight. Emphasizing experiential wisdom over intellectualization, Buddha’s path resembles Zarathustra’s quest for inner truth, underscoring the universal value of self-realization. It highlights the power of transformation through awareness.

Four Truths Of Buddhism

The Four Noble Truths are the most fundamental Buddhist teachings and appear frequently throughout most ancient Buddhist texts (the Pali Canon.) They arose as a result of Buddha’s enlightenment and must not be confused as a narrative of Buddha’s actual experience of Nirvana. The Four Noble Truths are regarded in Buddhism as deep spiritual insight, not as philosophical theory. As the Samyutta Nikāya declares, these are:

Dukkha (Suffering): Life inevitably involves stress, pain, and dissatisfaction.

Samudaya (Origin): Arising out of taṇhā or craving and attachment, which fuel our suffering.

Nirodha (Cessation/Ending): By relinquishing taṇhā or desire, dukkha or suffering can end.

Marga (Path or the Noble Eightfold Path) is the path leading to renouncement of tanha and cessation of dukkha.

The Noble Eightfold Path: comprises eight interrelated practices guiding practitioners toward ending suffering and cultivating harmony. Right Understanding involves grasping the Four Noble Truths and reality’s true nature; Right Thought fosters compassion and kindness; Right Speech commits to truthful, constructive communication; Right Action emphasizes conduct that avoids harm; Right Livelihood encourages earning a living without injuring self or others; Right Effort focuses on nurturing positive qualities and eliminating negatives; Right Mindfulness calls for awareness of body, feelings, mind and phenomena; and Right Concentration develops discipline through meditation. These eight aspects are interconnected practices that support and reinforce each other. The goal is to cultivate a balanced and harmonious way of living that leads to the cessation of suffering. Interestingly, the Noble eightfold path has a lot of similarity with the path of Asha as propounded by Asho Zarathushtra.

Zoroastrian Understanding Of Truth

In the Ahunavaiti Gatha, Zarathushtra speaks of twin mentalities and choices we all must make, using our ‘sucha managha’ or ‘clear and illuminated mind’. In this Gatha, Zarathushtra says: “I will speak of the Spirits Twain at the first beginning of Life, of whom the Holier Spake thus to the wicked one: Never shall our minds harmonize, nor our doctrines; neither our aspirations, nor yet our beliefs; neither our words nor yet our actions”. This elaborates the ethical duality we observe in this world and in our lives.

The Gatha refer to both, cosmic as well as individual mainyu (Sanskrit man for mind) mentalities. While at the macro level there is a cosmic battle between the forces of good and evil, at the micro level too we have our own daily battle at the individual mental level, to choose between good and evil or between truth and falsehood or right and wrong.

The Ahunavaiti Gatha advises: “Hear with your ears the highest Truths, consider them with clear thought, before deciding between the two paths, Man by man, each one for himself”. Zarathushtra speaks here about the moral and ethical choices each one of us must exercise with clear thought or an illuminated mind. And, once we make a decision, we have to be responsible for its consequences.

No savior can come to our rescue except our own truthful, righteous and good thoughts, words and deeds. And hence the Prophet in reference to these two paths states: “And of these two the wise do choose what’s right; the unwise choose not thus.”