Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00171)

On Sat, 5 Sep 1998 10:45:15 +0100, you wrote:

>
>Re duality.
>
>Is duality simply (or not so simply) an illusion?

The latest books on quantum physics would suggest that duality is our
way of coping in the world and was taught to us by Aristotle. At the
Quantum level there is no duality and as this is the basis of all that
we deal with every day, it makes for some interesting thoughts. 
I read that "consciousness can be seen to be that which divides what
is otherwise a seamless Whole. It is the function of consciousness to
divide subject from object - that is, to create parts or fragments out
of what is otherwise a whole. Concepts are mere appearances resulting
from the workings of consciousness. Our most grave, albeit our most
common error, is to take these objects for Reality. " P182-3
How the World can be the Way it Is by Steve Hagan
General Semantics have been saying that the map is not the territory
for some time now and if we were to stop and perceive directly, we
would see a wonderful world. We perceive but we immediately have
concepts and ideas on what it is we have perceived and this is where
our problem comes in. 
The mystics and seers have perceived and SEEN and then tried to turn
it into concepts for others to try to understand. There is no
substitute for direct perception. It appears that there is no duality
in direct perception. Everything is right the way it is. 
Cheers Bee
>Oneness IS.
>
>Paul.
>
>> Just some thoughts on duality:
>>
>> Are we certain dual means "two polar things ..."
>>
>> OE Dictionary defenition: "Of or pertaining to two. Two-fold, double.
>> ....Truth is often of a dual character. Tyndall"
>>
>> Spirit and matter, but matter is spirit.
>>
>> absolute abstract Space and absolute Abstract Motion can be seen as two
>> aspects of this "Be-ness." (SD.I,p.14).  Both essential to each other, but
>> do they have to be seen as opposite poles?
>>
>> Key, page 92: "The future state and the Karmic destiny of man depend on
>> whether Manas gravitates more downward to Kama rupa, the seat of
>> the animal
>> passions, or upwards to *Buddhi,* the Spiritual *Ego.*"
>>
>> Could it be said here that Manas (its dual nature) is polarizing in Kama
>> rupa or Buddhi.  Not necessarily.  More downward ...or upward.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> >>HPB as I read her, makes this duality between the INDIVIDUALITY
>> >>(Atma-Buddhi-Manas) and the Personality (kama-prana-astral and physical
>> >>bodies)
>> >>Clear not only in the KEY  but in the S D.
>> >>
>> >
>> >