Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00522)

>Jerry,
>I can't tell you how much I appreciate your discourse.
>

Thanks, Mark.

>My awareness is: Manifestation = limitation = evolution.
>

OK.

>My experience of Monadic life is, as I've said, from a dualistic
>"flip-flop point of view. I see as simultaneously One and (one of) Many.

I had a very mystical experience a long time ago in which I "saw"
a monad. But this vision was accompanied by the realization that
I had no way to know if I was seeing only one monad or a billion,
because they all look alike and all occupy the same space at the
same time. It was pretty mind-boggling.

>This is, I believe, part and parcel of experience in manifestation. In
>unitive expression: I completely agree and can only mystically affirm "I
>AM THAT I AM." This is form, but formless form (having all form as
>form.) In individualized expression: I function subordinately and
>independantly as I AM, yet fully aware that "you and I (and others - in
>the Unity of ALL)" are "not two." I personify. I wake. I lovingly
>embrace mayavic form. I hold a mailing address, eat food, carry a wallet
>and even subscribe to magazines! I make my appearance as the "coat man."
>
OK. As the monad falls beneath the great Ring-Pass-Not into
this 7-plane solar system, it divides itself (somehow?) into a
self and not-self. These two are connected by a mysterious
force called Fohat. Anyway, as it decends the planes into
manifestation, it tries to define this not-self or Not-I around it,
and eventually sees other I's or selves within it.

>
>Acknowledging the apparent distinction between the Cosmic ONE and all
>that subsequently issues forth from and within IT [as subordinate
>multiple individualities], I hold true that all of these subsequent
>individual monadic posits are also mayavic and consentual identic
>limits, from a certain point of view. One and Many. Duality
>simultaneously manifest.
>

Agreed.

>Exactly (from their viewpoint). The fact that The MONAD is manifest (as
>One or as Many) is evidence of Maya. Any "perfection" is relative to the
>unmanifest potential of the Boundless, at least from our point of view.
>

Perfection implies lack of characteristic features (i.e, not an
aggragate and thus anything monadic).

>> >I hold the view that the only absolute perfection is the Boundless
>> >Unmanifest. Any Logoic manifestation (i.e., Cosmic Monas Monadum) is
>> >still a limited being, albeit cosmic in proportion. Therefore, it is
>> >still subject to evolution, even though it is the apogee for all that
>> >subsequently issues forth into and occurs within its system.
>> >
>>

OK.

Jerry S.