Theos-Talk Archives (October 2003 Message tt00177)

Dallas, this is in response to your "where 
does duality come from" post of Oct 17/03. 
For whatever reason, you seem to want to 
persist in offering the kinds of posts, info 
that you (apparently?) seem to feel would be 
helpful (per whatever interpretive variant 
that I seem to occasionally have some trouble 
pinning down "more specifically," as you 
know) ... so you seem to want to persist in 
offering the kinds of posts, info that you 
(apparently?) seem to feel would be helpful 
to student's of life and Theosophy (at least, 
that's how things "tend to appear to me"). 
So I thought I'd try and see (again ^:-/ ) if 
I might get something or other across to you 
about what might be seen (by some?) as a 
couple of ways of looking at (what might be 
called, in a sense, in rough, speculative, 
"exoteric terms") one's "basic approach" (to 
an extent that might be seen as "mostly 
exoteric," at any rate?) to these 
"Theosophical" discussion lists:

On second thought I think I'll backtrack 
some. I WAS going to offer some speculations 
about "possible basic notions" or "possible 
basic karmic trends" that "might be out 
there," in general, about life and Theosophy 
in general, but I had second thoughts 
because, haven't I already made so many 
attempts along those lines that, as I see it, 
seem to have often boiled down to some kind 
of interpretations, on my part, about 
"exoteric/esoteric," so ... ^:-/ ... Anyway, 
that's why (because of my repeated apparent 
failures to "explain" anything much around 
here) ... so that's why in one recent post I 
mentioned something about how a Zen master 
might react to the kinds of stuff that you 
and I, Dallas, and so many others seem to (as 
I see it, in a sense, at any rate) often 
offer on these lists. But, as usual, 
(apparently in keeping with your "basic 
approach," or something like it, maybe, in a 
sense, to an extent, Dallas?), you seem to 
have (as I tend to see it, at any rate ...) 
"exoterized," or sort of glossed over, in a 
sense, to an extent (maybe?), "even" my 
reference to how a Zen master might react and 
how that kind of reaction might relate toward 
the topics of "exoteric/esoteric" and "the 
study of Theosophy". ^:-/ That's my symbol 
for a confused guy who thought he had 
something relevant to say, but/"but" ... 
still tends to be kind of confused. Of 
course (?), on the other hand (?), one might 
assume (?), optionally (?), that you, Dallas, 
might have intentionally, (strategically, 
say, possibly---or am I stretching my 
speculations even more than usual?) ... that 
you might've, (possibly?), offered what you 
did in that post and in so many other posts 
as a kind of technique, (possibly?), that you 
might've seen as amounting to a kind of 
emailed form of ("exoteric") "Zen-like stick 
wielding" (ie, by persistently offering 
"exoterics," or, in a sense, repeated, 
emailed Zen slaps with a stick, in effect, 
instead of making attempts toward offering 
wording that "might be seen" as "attempting 
to get around one's exoteric limitations." 
So, to continue that line of speculation, 
then there was the splitting of "Monads," as 
well, and ... What's next, Dallas? ^:-/ 
Anyway, what with all those "exoteric 
lessons" from you and others over the years, 
if I ever visited a Zen monastery I don't 
think I'd have much to say in there. Thank 
you, Dallas, for that, in a sense, I think ...
But/"but" ...

Speculatively,
Mauri

Speculatively, and with best wishes,
Mauri