Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00916)

Correction/clarification about my: <<And should I 
mention the "maya that's, itself, mayavic" . . . <<

That was my failed attempt (I suspect) to a reference to 
the kind of manasic processing that "separates/identifies 
forms of maya," but as if the result were somehow 
elicitive of something "less mayavic," so the quotes in 
that sentence were intended to imply that, while that 
identifying is going on, there might often be plenty of 
maya left over that hasn't been addressed.

Rewrite: And should I mention the "maya that, when 
identified, (in whatever sense), might be often seen, from 
a b/Broader perspective, as no more than a part of the 
story.

Spec,
Mauri