Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00146)

Eldon wrote:

> > In a truly infinite multiverse, there are really
> > an infinite number of increasingly higher relative
> > Absolutes. One system with its Absolute exists
> > within a bigger system that also has its Absolute.
> > That bigger system exists in yet a bigger scheme.
> > Going bigger and bigger in scale, there is no
> > biggest, no top. There is always a higher scheme
> > of things giving birth to the one that we would
> > consider topmost.

IHarling@aol.com commented:

> Hi All. Am I getting the wrong end of the stick in
> what's being said here? 
> Their is only one Absolute, containing all
> dimensions of every kind. Ther can 
> only be one Ultimate. Is the problem here that the
> writers consider that the 
> Absolute only functions and is a base for *this*
> Universe and that there is 
> an Absolute for each subsequent Universe? As *the*
> Absolute is beyond every 
> time and dimension and is the basis for all of them,
> why try to introduce 
> other Absolutes? What thinking is this trying to fit
> in with - it's certainly 
> not Buddhist or Hindu.

Daniel replies:

Yes, I agree: "why try to introduce other Absolutes? 
In this kind of thinking, is the mind just speculating
in a rather loose and fanciful way?

It reminds me of one of my friends who is always
redefining terms in his own unique way. It makes for
interesting conversation but does it lead to any real
new insights?

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

=====
Daniel H. Caldwell
info@blavatskyarchives.com
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com
You can always access BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES 
by simply typing into the URL address bar 
the following 6 characters: hpb.cc

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com