On Alan Watts' differentiation between universal and general.

[Sebastian Lundh]

In "The Supreme Identity", Alan Watts writes
"It is important to distinguish the universal from the general, for this will save endless confusion seeing that the terms are used interchangeably in modern speech. By 'universal' we do not mean any summation or collectivity of all particular things, just as the infinite is not even approached by indefinite summation of the finite, nor eternity by the indefinite extension of time. To say that the ultimate Reality is the universal is not to subscribe to the pantheistic proposition that it is the universe, for the universe is, properly speaking, the sum of all finite and individual things. Guénon uses the following scheme to show the difference and the relation between the universal and the general:
Universal 

Individual {General
                {particular
" The Supreme Identity, p. 32-33
Now, what exactly does Alan mean? I can't really wrap my head around it. I guess I'll have to keep reading to find out, but if anyone of yoiu could anser it would be most helpful. 

[Dana Lomas]

I would take it to mean 'Ultimate Reality', by whatever name, should not be conceived of, or confused with, being the collective sum of all the individual or particular aspects of some universal whole, as any such sum would have to be finite. Mind you, it could be said that Ultimate Reality defies even the definition of being so-called Ultimate Reality.