Theos-Talk Archives (May 2003 Message tt00022)

Dallas wrote: <<I am not sure what is being asked.>>

I'm tempted to say "I know," but, being a speculator, 
in a sense, well ... Anyway, things might be worse. 
Not being sure of something, in a sense, is how I got to 
be a speculator, myself, so your "not sure," Dallas, 
tends to pique my interest, tending to make me feel 
(unlike Wry, apparantly ...?) that there might be 
"hope" for you, yet, Dallas, in a way, to use Wry's 
"hope" terminology (in reverse of Wry's "no hope"), if I 
may ... It's when people are "sure" of themselves that I 
start getting a little worried, in a way (not that I 
particularly expect you to "understand" what I mean 
by that "more specifically," but/"but"... ) ... ^:-) ... 
Anyway, at least you, Dallas, seem to be making much 
more "sense" to people, in your way, unlike me, in my 
way, eh? After all ... Even though ... Oh, well, it's all 
karma, so ... Not that ...

<<KARMA is simply the LAW OF EXISTENCE, of 
BEING. All is included n it. It is an aspect of the 
ABSOLUTE.>>

As I tend to see it, "karma" is an exoteric 
version/explanation or karmic explanation 
("explanation" evolving out of karmic effects) re the 
dualistic/multiplistic reality/life of this plane, and so, 
as such, it can be collectively (and thereby 
individually, or vice versa, in a sense ...) modelized as 
... whatever, but/"but"... 

Apparently I'm unable to explain my perspective much 
better, with or without the use of more quotes, 
additional qualifiers, etc. But your choice of words, 
Dallas, re "it is an aspect of the ABSOLUTE" makes 
me wonder, since that statement would see to suggest 
(?) that "ABSOLUTE" (whatever might be meant by 
that "more specifically" ...) is somehow another aspect 
or version of karmic effects. I've been under the 
impression that "Absolute" is beyond karmic effects, 
and something that might be transcended to, or 
toward, (in some sense ...), after karma is transcended.

Speculatively,
Mauri