Theos-Talk Archives (March 2005 Message tt00265)

The way I tend to see it, the heart of 
Theosophy might be seen as being in the 
heart of Theosophy rather than in 
whatever somebody did or didn't do or 
say or write or prove or demonstrate or 
whatever. Seems to me that the various 
historical characters in Theosophical 
writings might not only be interpreted 
as being representative or 
unrepresentative of various "exoteric 
versions" (which could be misleading in 
various senses especially if interpreted 
literally, seems to me), but might be 
seen, in a sense, as incidental, 
mayavic, karmic interpretations, in 
effect, (in the sense that or 
inasmuchasif people might be seen as 
having to be interpreted as to meaning 
that they might be seen to represent 
...)... interpretations that, as I tend 
to see it, might not be seen to be at 
the heart of Theosophy (if "heart of 
Theosophy" is associated with "esoteric 
[direct/experiential] aspects" 
representing transcendence of karma/maya 
along with some some sort of 
cultivating/modeling of whatever might 
be seen as "applicable/helpful within 
karmic limits"...). But, at the same 
time, don't all student's of Theosophy 
(ranging from speculators to Dallas, I 
guess) wonder about just what exactly is 
meant by "reading between the lines" (of 
Theosophical writings, eg ...) ... Or do 
those interested in the topic of 
Theosophy (or "related topics" ...) all 
assume or tend to think that, inasmuchas 
they might think of themelves as being 
(in some sense ...) as "student's of 
Theosophy," then, to some extent, such 
reading might be ... ^:-/ ... Sorry, I 
couldn't help scratching my head, there, 
when speculating about what might be 
going on in various heads and hearts in 
connection with "reading between the 
lines in general or particular" (which 
might be where that "then" was supposed 
to lead up to, I think). Not that my 
efforts to be more specific to myself 
about the meaning of "heart" in that 
context hasn't led me to scratch my head 
a few times, as well.

And what if there are interpretations 
with references to Theosophy out there 
from the perpspective of those who, 
being unable to read between the lines, 
(except maybe in "shoreline terms" ...) 
might then nevertheless go on to 
construct various rather literal 
interpretations "about Theosophy"... Not 
that being literal might not be seen to 
have a rather unavoidable tie-in (excuse 
for whatever ...) with karmic/mayavic 
existence on this plane, generally 
speaking, I suspect, but then I suppose 
we all tend to define "heart of 
Theosophy" in our own way, don't we ... 
(per whatever karmic/mayavic tendency, 
generally speaking ...), so what can we 
say ... And inasmuchas "heart of 
Theosophy" can't be described in so many 
words ... but seems to me that "heart of 
Theosophy" might have something to do 
with what might be described 
("exoterized," in a sense ...) as 
"direct experience." Not that one 
person's "direct experiences" might not 
be another's whatever.

^:-/ ...
Mauri