Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00903)

from Gerald:<< Most Theosophists are of the opinion 
that maya is simply sensory illusion as taught in modern 
science classes. I have been trying to show that is it much
more than this, but only a few seem to understand.>>

Somebody: <<It is a very difficult idea to get.>>

One might wonder if one has got it, or wonder what one 
"thinks" one has got, and what one "thinks" one hasn't 
got . . . after (or before . . .) sorting out something or 
other about what one's "thinking" "is" "in relation to" 
"maya" . . . after (or before . . .) sorting out something or 
other about . . whatever that's seen as "relevant" . . .

My speculative explanation about "maya" (ie, complete 
with 3 dots at the end of it!): "Maya" might be
some kind of dualistic/exoteric "explanation" ("version")
that manas (or some manasians . . . ?) might be inclined 
to "adopt" as a result of what might seem like a fairly 
straightforward comparativeness: ie, those of us who feel 
that they have a handle on the "basic meaning" of 
"duality," as a unific/mainstream "basic premise,"
might go on to feel that "maya" is (obviously enough?) 
dualisticity with respect to non-dualisticity (at whatever 
level of dual/non-dual "h/Higher b/Being ". . .) . . . Or 
did I over- or underlook something . . . And should I 
mention the "maya that's, itself, mayavic" . . . 

This kind of speculation reminds me about a dream I had 
last night. In this dream, I was in a large cave , and saw 
at least two people sitting crosslegged high up on the very 
edges of small ledges in the cave, and a third person (if I 
remember right) was sitting corsslegged in what seemed 
(?) like a suspended, small, plain basket (somewhat like 
the kind that flower pots are decoratively suspended 
from). But what was remarkable about those three was 
that I had the impression that they were covered in the 
dust of the cave, as if they had been in those positions for 
many, many years, without moving a muscle, apparently.
>From my somewhat distant vantage point they appeared 
to be protectively wrapped up in a light tan-gray 
cloth-like material. They all seemed as if they were 
shockingly dead to duality, to the extent that it was 
almost as if they were corpses. 

To me, that dream dramatically displayed (thinking back 
on it) a kind of "likely left-over scenario" of those who 
have entered any substantially less dualistic reality.

PS Seeing as the replies to my posts (other than from a 
few respondents) have been kind of few and far between,
(generally speaking, apparently . . .) I have begun to 
wonder if there might be something in my posts that 
might (among other things . . . ?) tend to make some 
people somewhat squirrely-like, maybe . . . What brings 
that to mind? Well, I used to read some Wm. Faulkner 
many years ago, and I always felt kind of squirrely 
reading him. (Of course, if I were to read some Faulkner 
NOW, well . . .)

Another PS, here, if I may: I'm wondering why it might 
be that the general theme of Theosophy seems, to me, to 
be so full of potential for a kind of combination of 
"deeper meaning" and funnies . . . I think I might be 
beginning to know how Victor Borge might've felt when 
he studied "serious," classical music . . .

PPS This discussion originated on Theos-1