Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00252)

>"Duration" is eternal, but 'time' is limited by its own
>"beginning."
>
>St. A. also tied himself into knots over the question of
>"duality", but seems to have forgotten that it takes a third
>position for "opposites" to be seen and reconciled -- the 3rd
>position, being one of non-involvement. Theosophically, in
>'man' - the position of the HIGHER SELF.
>
>That is it as I understand it.
>Dallas
>

Dallas, I don't follow your logic here at all. You seem to be implying
that a "third" is the subjective self or observer. This can't be so
because the seer or self is itself part of a duality (subjective-
object, etc).
As far as I know, the only way of "non-involvement" or of
reconciliation is non-duality. In non-duality, the dualities no longer
exist as such. Good is transcended along with evil, and ugly
along with beautiful, and so on. The area or mental state of
non-duality is nirvkalpa-samadhi or a very high mystical
experience which can not be put into words except in the form
of a paradox. To split duality into a trinity doesn't help much,
but I amy be missing what you are saying here.

Jerry S.