Theos-Talk Archives (October 2003 Message tt00164)

HPB wrote: <<But modern science believes not 
in the “soul of things,” and hence will 
reject the whole system of ancient cosmogony.>>

And she even used quotes (italics, or 
whatever), so ... In other words, as I tend 
to see "it" (^:-/) there's a key difference 
between "understanding" (with quotes!) what 
she called the "soul of things" (with 
quotes!) and understanding (without quotes!),
in that if the understanding is done without 
some way of, in a sense, qualifying and 
"mystifying" that word "understanding," then 
the kind of "understanding" that she's 
referring to per "soul of things" isn't 
particularly explainable/understandable, in 
general, seems to me, in "essentially 
dualistic" terms---or, one might say, it's 
explainable (without quotes!), but not so 
"explainable" (when with quotes, italics or 
whatever modifiers!), in general.

So those who don't "understand" don't 
"understand" because they're trying to 
understand without ... uh, "quotes," in 
effect, in a sense. Got it? Believe it or 
not, I'm trying to be helpful/"helpful," 
here, in my way, kind of all in a row, even 
though ... But, then, maybe the problem here 
is just that: with SOME things, being 
"helpful all in a row" might not do much, so 
... ^:-/ ...But what if one tried to, 
somehow, transcend a few of those 
troublesome, confusing, mayavic rows, 
dualities, dependent arisings, karmic 
tendencies, then, maybe ... Sorry, just 
speculating aloud again.

Yes, Dallas, you told me already (ie, without 
quotes) that there are no short cuts. While I 
tend to agree with you about that, in those 
terms ...but don't you think that one might 
wonder (or some one, maybe?) if such 
"exoteric terms" (in a sense!) and short cuts 
might be among the very instruments that 
nidanic, karmic, mayavic reality (or 
Hinayanic reality, in a sense?) would tend 
to, in effect, blind and bind us humans in 
general to this plane ... Not that ... !!! 
So ... ??? Sorry, seems to me that "some 
things" (like the "soul of things" that HPB 
referred to) can't be put into so many words 
too well. So, in other words, I suspect that 
you're right about the short cuts in your 
way, Dallas, but/"but" ... "Still," "not 
that"/not that ... !!! What do I mean by 
that last sentence? Seems to me that, to find 
out (at least in exoteric terms), one need 
only read all about such as "Theosophy as 
brought to us by H.P. Blavatsky," eg.

Speculatively,
Mauri