Considered from a profound sameness point of view, truth must be singular. In other words, truth is not dipolar and thus rest in the stillness beyond words and names. To paraphrase chapter 1’s first two lines…
Yet, we have this word “truth”. At most, I can honestly do is say something about the direction in which I look to sense truth.
If, in my observations, I perceive similarity between apparent differences, then I feel I’m approaching truth. Conversely, if I believe the differences I perceive are genuine, then I feel I’m receding from truth. Simply put, similarity = truth; difference = illusion. Biology naturally employs taking perceptions of difference much more seriously than perceptions of similarity. The biological dynamics of life rely on the illusion of difference. In the wild, this isn’t a problem for any species. For us, human imagination amplifies the illusion of difference and leaves us feeling a unique and deep sense of disconnection. We loose much of the sense of reality’s singularity that other animals experience.
Ironically, we elucidate any truth we sense by pinning it down with words and names and thereby lose its singularity—its truth. Believing the veracity of names and descriptions insures that truth remains beyond reach. Only when pondering life through the unifying lens of profound sameness can we begin to sense truth… although never be able to describe it, obviously.
Now, try perceiving the similarities between two apparent opposites like liberal vs. conservative, love vs. hate, near vs. far, life vs. death, etc. Of course, any truth you perceive will be beyond description, and only accessible in the moment of contemplation, i.e., you can’t wrap truth up in a tidy describable and memorable bundle.