Why was the Microcosmic Interpretation Not Pursued?

 Why was the microcosm or the microcosmic interpretation not pursued? It may be because scholars and writers delving into the Puranic passages found such an interpretation to be outlandish. Even if some of it seemed likely to them, they were perhaps skeptical of such a reading measuring up to the full range and breadth of the tales contained in the epics and Puranas. Or, even if that was plausible, maybe they were simply unnerved by the largeness of such an undertaking. Or, maybe they possessed not the necessary intellectual wherewithal (adequate knowledge of the anatomy and physiology of the human body, primarily) to muster confidence. 

All these (and more) may have been the reasons behind the neglect to the point of oblivion of the microcosmic interpretation of these ancient texts. But, I will argue, the greatest reason has been the absence in the general religious life of India of a spiritual  discourse centered on the immanence of God. There has not grown religious and cultural traditions, at the popular level at least, which would orient the mass-mind towards a immanent God. Exposure to those texts and commentaries which would produce in the mind a natural affinity for a microcosmic reading, and an intuitive understanding of the implied microcosmic meaning, are also missing. Not that they do not exist, but they have not been made popular enough to exert an influence, intellectually, that is. Instead, other things have been made popular.