Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00164)

Dear Friends:

Thought about, and consideration of the ' ABSOLUTE " causes me to
recoil as I do not think any one can come to any terms with it,
except to admit that IT is the final ----- ? ? ? ? ? --------
At least, that is how I see it. I have looked over many
attempted definitions, and they all come up with some kind of
COMPARISON, whether negative or positive. And on close
examination none of the "comparisons" fits the bill. But, I
guess that Lower Manas will keep on trying the impossible.


The word ABSOLUTE, or ABSOLUTENESS means there are no definitions
we can set of ay kind. There is no such thing as relation or
relativity. It is the "eternal background" and is deliberately
cast as a subject that escapes any attempt at individualized or
personalized consciousness to penetrate. It might be called the
final refuge of CAUSE, or the abode of the CAUSELESS CAUSE.

In any case it is set up for the minds of past and present,
regardless of names, as the ?

Best wishes,

Dallas.


============================

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Merriott [mailto:nous@btinternet.com]
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:10 PM
To: Theosophy Study List
Cc: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Absolute & so on.

Friends,

I don't have time at the moment to catch up with all the mails so
I can only
address some of the main points you have all raised.

Yes, Purucker does believe "Absolute" is a relative term and he
likes to use
it that way. I see Eldon and Jerry like to follow Purucker's
definition.
But it is also important to note that Purucker admits HPB does
*not* use it
in the same way as he does. (see Fountain Source - chapter on
Parabrahm/Mulaprakriti).

----