Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00274)

Zakk wrote:

<<Absolute statements are always wrong.>>

While conditionality might be seen to 
have a mayavic aspect, how could humans 
in general live in and 
experience/interpret their conditional 
world/reality without having the kind of 
worldview in which there's "enough" (per 
whatever interpretive tendency) solidity 
and dependability (where that kind of 
interpretive "enough" might even tend to 
make for some sort of "absoluteness," 
maybe, in some cases, for better or 
worse ...)that would at least appear 
"real enough" in the sense in which we 
humans generally accept/define our world 
and life in general ...

Seems to me that, in a conditional 
world, all statements have an 
exoteric/conditional interpretive/karmic 
aspect (obviously enough ...). Of course 
that doesn't stop some people (like 
students of Theosophy, one might assume 
...) from speculating and intuiting or 
directly experiencing beyond the various 
apparent/exoteric/interpretive versions 
of statements/thoughts in general 
(resulting in modified exoteric 
versions, modified universe modeling or 
whatever, in some cases) ...

Speculatively,
Mauri