Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00522)

Daniel H. Caldwell wrote:
> Mauri,
>
> I would try to reply to your two postings but
> I am not at all sure exactly what your point
> is in relationship to the subject matter of
> the original post.
>
> Could you clarify what you are trying to
> present?
>
> Daniel
Yes I purposely refrained from 
commenting about which side of which 
tracks or trends I might see myself as 
even speculatively standing on because, 
to my way of speculating, it's as if 
there's an Abyss between the various 
interpretetive trends re Theosophy out 
there. Seems to me as if there might be 
some people out there who, while having 
taken some sort of interest in 
Theosophy, might nevertheless have a 
closer affinity with some sort of what 
might be called "orthodox/literal 
religious views" ("comparatively 
speaking" ...)---though one might not 
want to lose sight of various 
interpretive overlaps, on the other 
hand, or same hand ... Anyway, the way I 
tend to see it, if it weren't for those 
"overlaps," (however 
interpretive/variable and challenging 
they might seem, at times), I don't see 
how there would be much point in having 
a public discussion list on the topic of 
Theosophy. And while we humans might 
not generally be able to read each 
other's minds and hearts about which 
side of which "more specific" 
interpretive trends we might be standing 
on, in all cases, (speculatively or 
otherwise), I tend to see a kind of hope 
out there, and I keep speculating that 
that hope might play some sort of role 
in bridging some gaps between the 
"literal/orthodox" interpretive 
tendencies, on the one hand 
("comparatively speaking"...), and the 
"more intuitive/gnostic/esoteric" 
interpretive tendencies on the other 
hand. We humans generally seem to keep 
on "trying," at least, one way of 
another, for better or worse, so ...

^:-/ ...
Mauri