Written by David Hall

Category: Non-duality

Published: 03 October 2025

If you really want to know what Truth is then it's a good start to recognise what it isn't. Many things that we've accepted as true aren't really true. Many things we believe are just not true. Truth is simple, but don't take my word for it.

You see, all that we think of as true isn't true. I call the things that are accepted as true 'relative truths'. For example, let's consider the statement, "The sun is bright." That sounds true, but it's not wholly accurate. We can all agree what the sun is and what bright is, and indeed the sun is bright. But neither of these is really defined. They are kind of defined, but not wholly and accurately, so really they are not defined at al.

Let's start with the sun. We mean the star that is the centre of our solar system. But it's not accurate to consider that any object is discrete; no object is wholly separate and defined. With the sun, there is no clear definition of what is and what isn't the sun. It may seem to be fairly spherical, but it's not wholly contained. It emanates out into the universe. It radiates, and we cannot clearly define where the sun ends and its radiation begins, because there really isn't a divide between the sun and its rays. Separation itself is a flawed concept.

We can't really say what the sun is, and it can't really be wholly singled out and separated from the rest of the universe. We can name it vaguely, but we can't wholly and accurately define it. So too with 'bright': it isn't a clearly defined description. Okay, we all know what 'bright' means. It means 'shining' or 'giving off light'. But we aren't really giving it a clear definition. We can't really say where bright ends and dull begins. Take for instance if the sun was to start to become less bright: at what point is it no longer bright. We can't really define that point. The term 'bright' is a vague definition in contrast to dark or dull.

So, "The sun is bright," is a relative truth. It seems true but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Take any statement and really analyse it, and you will find that at best it is a relative truth. But relative truth is really not truth. It's a sort of agreed truth. And there are some sorts of agreed untruths, like, "The sun is rectangular." That's clearly not true at all, relatively or otherwise. Relative truths are fine and useful, but it's important to know that they are not absolute Truth.

Ultimately all statements are untrue, even this one. All words fail to portray truth. Take for instance, the Truth of who you are. You could say, "I'm a human being." I could say, "No, you're not. You're Infinite Consciousness perceiving the human experience from a localised perspective." But both are wrong. The words can never be as accurate as the reality. A description or expression of who you are can never be as accurate as being who you are.

It's important to break that down. The description uses words to point to the truth. The expression uses a different form to point to the truth. But they aren't the truth. They can't be the truth. Being as you are is the Truth. So to get back to the main point, we cannot find truth in words. Words can only point to Truth. The Truth is right here as we are. It is beyond words. Yet words, being untrue, can reflect back to the unspoken Truth that is always here. If we believe in the words we lose sight of the real Truth. If we recognise that the words can only at best point to Truth then the recognition of Truth is close by.

Written by David Hall

Category: Non-duality

Published: 26 September 2025

I've mentioned the video game analogy previously, where open world video games can give insight into this human experience, as I call it. An open world video game is one where you control a character in a 3D world that you can explore however you like, with different challenges and experiences along the way. Although it seems that 'you' are a character in a 3D world, really it is all one. It's all the computer or central processing unit within the games console. There aren't really other characters, buildings, mountains, animals and vehicles. It appears on a screen as though there are these separate characters and objects, but it is all one appearance on the screen. It appears to move and change, but the screen remains as it is.

The analogy is that this human experience of the world is one. There are not many people, animals, buildings and mountains. It's all one appearance in Consciousness. One Being appearing as though it is many. Movement and change appearing in the timeless Stillness of Being.

We can go further in exploring the video game analogy. In open world video games there are usually NPCs. These are Non-Playable Characters, characters that are controlled by the central processing unit. They have their own functionality. They may present challenges or be helpful to the main character. As video games advance, these NPCs can become more advanced. They can learn. They can adapt. They can have their own storage of information that influences their character, personality and actions. On a basic level, their fighting ability can improve by learning how others attack them, learning patterns and responding to these. On a more advanced level, they can develop interactions with other characters, recognise friends and foes, stay away from dangers, and explore.

We call this Artificial Intelligence, where technology learns and adapts, building its store of data/intelligence to become more effective. So consider these NPCs in an open world video game where this develops. It's possible at some point that the character's understanding of its world can develop to a sense of self-awareness. I don't mean consciousness. I mean developing knowledge and understanding to consider itself. It's all data, but this adaptive data could develop a strong foundation of 'this is me', 'I need this', 'be cautious of others', 'those are friends', 'those are enemies', and so on, developing a sense of identity separate from the world.

The character, its knowledge, the other characters, the world - it's all data handled by the one root processing unit. But the AI NPC can develop a sense of being a separate being. It can develop some kind of mistaken identity based on the appearance of its world. For the NPC the world is real. It's made of the world and lives in the world. So its development of understanding is based on that and helps it to function better in the video game world.

Bringing this analogy home, we can understand the human experience. Each human experience has its own path and development. We might think that we are a person separate from the world, but we are not. There is only One, and in this One there is the appearance of many. As each human grows it develops a sense of itself: what is me, what is mine, what I like, what I don't like, etc. But this is all a play of separate individuality through mental reasoning. The reasoning in the human mind is copied in its creation of Artificial Intelligence. It's a flow of data/information that builds up structures of belief based on experiences in its world. But the human mind has built up many different beliefs based on a core mistaken belief of separation. This world is really One Being expressed as many whilst remaining one, infinitely one.

There's not really a true identity for the video game character. There is only that in which it appears. There's not really a true human identity. There is only That in which it appears. At the heart of our human experience, where we look for who we really are, is the recognition that there is just This, an infinite oneness of being. We are not a character in a game, or a person in a world. We are That Which Is. We don't die when the person dies. The core of who we are is timelessly present. The human experiences come and go, whilst we remain as we are.