Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00003)

Leon, guys, I've had some "second thoughts," 
speculations about what might be called attempts to 
explain about "what is really going on" in "reality." In 
other words, I'm referring to "attempts to explain" as in: 
to "exoterize" in dualistic/mainstream (if mayavic) 
"somewhat-understandable" terms.

Considering that HPB used blinds in the attempt to bring 
certain teachings to a "more understandable" level (ie, 
like all of us, in her writings/teachings she had to resort to 
the use of the exoteric/dualistic medium of thought/reality 
that comprises our mainstream worldview, obviously 
enough?), and so, if those blinds could be seen for what 
they really were, essentially: symptomatic of the 
contraints and guidelines of the kind of apparent 
every-day reality that manas is basically grounded in 
(which, as I see it, is mayavic duality), then (of course?) 
by that kind of extension, inter-connection ANY 
explanation about "essential or esoteric Theosophy" (as I 
see it) tends to get (is?) compromised by that kind of 
medium of expression, and so in that sense would tend to 
be ("is," "essentially"?) a blind, in a core sense, in its 
entirety.

In other words, if, in this world, the ONLY POSSIBLE 
way to present or or think about any kind of Theosophic 
view is by way of concessions to the mayavic principles 
involved within this duality world, then ... Doesn't that 
kind of scenario ring a bell? 

In other words, Leon, while your ABC's, etc, may elicit 
much adulation from various sources, for various reasons, 
I don't see any way how the "you of your ABC's" (that 
mayavic/apparent "version of you") can transcend that 
dualistic/mayavic medium for as long as "you" (a karmic 
variable appearing to be "you") continue to use that "you 
of your ABC's" medium of expression/reality that you're 
confined to (or "prefer" to be confined to?) within this 
duality world.

Speculatively,
Mauri