Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00177)

Sept 12th

Dear Bee:

Philosophically and mathematically you cannot have duality by
itself, all lonesome - since 2 emanates from ONE.  The ONE
remains, and hence there are ONE,  TWO,  and  THREE  As I recall
it Pythagoras was reputed to have said that the "Duad" was
abhorred because it made infinite divergence, and this divergence
could never be terminated or resolved except through a return to
their common  origin, in the ONE.

In symbolism one passes from the circle (or Orb) into the
Triangle ( or Tetragrammaton - 4 equilateral triangles inclosing
a space with 6 common sides. )

There is no figure with only two sides unless you take into
account the lenticular shape where the arcs of 2 circles
intersect (or two spheres).

Thus the 3 merge into the 4 when, from a "surface" one passes
into a "solid."

Is this any help ?

Dallas

>From: Bee Brown
> Sent:	Friday, September 11, 1998 1:10 PM
> Subject: Re: A few zingers

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.