Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00284)

Leon wrote: <<Actually, I was talking 
in multidimensional terms.>>


After I wrote that post in which I 
wrote: "but if that's talking in 
two-dimensional terms," it occurred to 
me that you might come back with 
something like: <<Actually, I was 
talking in multidimensional terms.>> 
and, sure enough, you did just that.

My attempt to clarify: When I have a 
number of times used the words 
"essentially dualistic," on these lists, 
that's been my way of saying that no 
matter how "multidimensional" one might 
want one's model or worldview to be, 
it's still, in my humble speculative 
opinion, an "essentially dualistic" 
view, and, as such, is karmic, mayavic, 
and without end, as such. And so, 
IMHSO, the Esoteric Tradition has been 
pointing the way out of such karma/maya. 
Not that I have anything against 
models that are helpful, as your ABC's 
might be, Leon, to some people, 
including myself, and as Gerald's models 
might be seen as helpful. But I suspect 
that, at a certain point, one has to 
transcend essentially dualistic models 
of reality, no matter how 
"multidimentional" they may be seen to 
be. Seems to me, based on my 
interpretation of Theosophy/HBP, that 
there's an Abyss between essentially 
dualistic reality and the Reality that's 
experiential and nondualistic. That's 
basically the kind of thing I have been 
trying to get across for some time. 
Sorry about the misunderstandings.

Speculatively,
Mauri