theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World A Question for the New Year

Jan 09, 2005 04:50 PM
by Cass Silva


Dear Mark
 
When we talk about " Absolute" or "Absoluteness"we are talking about abstract thinking. Beyond intellectualisation. By labelling it "The Absolute"we have already given it an existence as "the something" the something we can intellectualise", but as Leon says if there is no such "thing" as "The Absolute" we cannot talk about it as being comprehended.
 
 
However, when we try to discuss with others, abstract concepts or views at an intellectual level, we employ the tools of the intellect, i.e. words, definitions, etc. to try to clarify the point we are making. When you saythe Absolute has no terms, then you have answered your question, and cannot be relative.ergo, we cannot discuss it at an intellectual level, as thereare no terms we can use. We cannot discuss it at an abstract level becauseagain there are no words involved. An abstraction (separated from matter)cannot be explored through matter.
 
I simplify the teaching by labelling Absoluteness, NOT THAT. I dont know what it is but I know that it is not THAT. It is something beyond our comprehension with our limited intelligence.
 
For me, THAT implies something that exists, and can be intellectually explored as we are evolving in the environment created by THAT, and we are also the effects created by THAT.
 
Anything Relative to me implies "a relationship with" therefore as we are not in relationship with absoluteness we can never understand it, by deduction, we know IT must BE because we and the universe we live in would not behere without IT.
 
We can only be in relationship with the SEEN universe. From the point of manifestation, Prior to the first manifestation is God's business. We label it The Causeless Cause.
 
When I try to think about NOT THAT, I come up blank, probably the only timemy mind is empty of questions. "Don't know" is the best I can come up with. If I ever understand what NOT THAT is, then not only will I be in relationship with it, I will be able to create my own universes, but I will never be able to create myself, as NOT THAT did.
 
God, this is hard to describe in words, I hope I am not causing you too much mental knitting of the brows.  
 
Regards
Cass

Cass Silva <silva_cass@yahoo.com> wrote:


Do you mean, THAT and NOT THAT?
Cass

Zakk Duffany wrote:

View does not mean a literal sight. A concept is a view. The Absolute has no 
terms.
One must take into consideration a direction of meaning from the use of 
words.
It is like the word "THAT". "THAT" represents a "thing". The Absolute is not 
a "thing".
One goes beyond the literal meaning of "THAT" in order to grasp the concept.
"View" can also be taken in the same manner. One can substitute 
"relationship" for
"view". As an example :

The Absolute is Relative in the view of the Relative.

CASS; If the Absolute is unknowable, undefinable, then it is not relative "in relationship with anything" It is All unto itself. The Relative may think it is relative to the Absolute, but it is wishful thinking.


The Relative is Absolute in the view of the Absolute.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: 
To: 
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 3:48 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World A Question for the New Year



Right. There is no such THING as THE Absolute. So how can we talk about it
viewing or being viewed?

In a message dated 01/09/05 12:32:51 AM, silva_cass@yahoo.com writes:

Perhaps the only thing that is Absolute, is THAT beyond the zero point.
PRALAYA?


Zakk Duffany wrote:


The Absolute is Relative when viewed by the Relative.

The Relative is Absolute when viewed by the Absolute.


Perspectives change with the standpoint of viewing.


----- Original Message ----- 

From:

To:

Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 9:48 PM

Subject: Re: Theos-World A Question for the New Year





In a message dated 01/08/05 3:38:29 PM, krishtar_a@brturbo.com writes:


>If the absolute evolves. it is not absolute.

>The absolute cannot evolve, or itīd be relative, and when there is

relativeness,

>we are not dealing with the absolute anymore.(qwack!)

>

>Krishtar


But, "The Absolute is Relative, and the Relative is Absolute." Didn't you

know that? It comes straught from the mouth of the Buddha, and was verified

later by HPB.


Leonardo

>



Yahoo! Groups Links










Yahoo! Groups Links









---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links









		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! – What will yours do?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application