".But its transcendence is of a different nature from the inconclusive transcendence of the divine of archaic religion. the divine was initially grasped in terms of intimacy (of violence, of the scream, of being in eruption, blind and unintelligible, of the dark and malefic sacred); if it was transcendent , this was in a provisional way, for man who acted in the real order but was ritually restored to the intimate order. this secondary transcendence was profoundly different from that of the intelligible world, which remains forever separated from the world of the senses. the transcendence of a more radical dualism is the passage from one world to the other. more exactly, it is the leaving of this world, the leaving of the world, period - for, opposite the sensuous world, the intelligible world is not so much a different world as it is outside the world.But man of the dualistic conception is opposite to archaic man in that there is no longer any intimacy between him and this world."96