Theos-Talk Archives (May 2003 Message tt00135)

Dallas wrote: <<I think you err. Theosophy starts 
with REALTY ( see the 3 FUNDAMENTALS) The 
rest is "maya" and constantly changing.>>

Do some people prefer to "believe," by way of 
whatever karmic tendency, that Theosophy can 
(optionally?) be seen to somewhow "start with 
REALITY" in the sense that that "start" could be 
(somehow?) seen to "represent REALITY" as 
compared to ... what? So is there a Start/Beness 
(say?) that's transcendental, yet "Theosophic," yet 
transcends karma/maya? That's not being a little 
presumptuous, in a way? What am I overlooking 
here?

Seems to me as if you might be saying, Dallas, that you 
might tend to prefer to "START " your 
knowledge-base of (not just "study of"?) Theosophy 
with some kind of (somewhat ready-made?) 
"REALITY beliefs" (more or less right off some kind 
of bat, without so much as ... ?)... 

In other words, one might wonder (?) if that kind of 
"START" (in one's mind) might be seen to somehow 
"get going" before one has even as much as had a 
chance to define/interpret (by way of whatever 
karmic/mayavic tendency) that kind of "STARTING 
REALITY"... 

Or could one "sensibly enough" refer to or believe in 
some kind of "Theosophic" "STARTING REALITY" 
(by way of some kind of "intuitive tendency," say?), 
which kind of "STARTING REALITY" (might be 
seen to?) somewhow, in some sense, transcend 
karma/maya (in spite of being karmic and mayavic, at 
the same time?)? Or ... And if by "REALTY"
one refers to some form of "REAL-TY," say ... Hmm ...

Speculatively,
Mauri