--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@...> wrote:

> Yep, just conjecturing here too. Though one could perhaps make a case for 
> rishi as being predominant in the enlivenment of C.C., devata in G.C. and 
> chhandas in U.C. (as I have done with my 9-chakra-model system of the 27 
> states of being, consciousness, and bliss), and thus in that sense 
> sequential, it is after all just another model and you know I don't really 
> hold with sequential milestones being de rigeur anyhow :-)
>
(If we used that model, though, the Father would really not be the Rishi, as He 
is Transcendence in the crown, the Absolute (T.C.); the Son would represent the 
Witness (C.C), the Rishi in the brow or third-eye -- perhaps the quote "if 
thine eye be single, thy body shall be full of light" is applicable here -- and 
the Holy Spirit would represent -- as you have it -- the Devata value: Akasha, 
the
vibrating space, the divine Breath (Spiritus; Atman) in the throat chakra, the 
bliss of G.C. Then Chhandas would probably end up being the finest-feeling 
level of U.C. and Air, Nous or Buddhi, the Intuitive intellect, the Higher Soul 
in the heart chakra.)

(But to really manifest the states of consciousness, each of these would be 
paired with its converse, across the mid-line of the Solar Plexus or Sacred 
Heart: thus T.C. would engage both the Father-Purusha in the crown ("Heaven") 
and the Mother-Prakriti in the foot ("Hell"); C.C. ("Birth") would involve both 
the Son in the
brow (Witness) and the Daughter in the earthy base (organs of action); G.C. 
("Baptism") would engage both the Holy Spirit in the throat (bliss of space) 
and the Holy (Subtle) Body in the sex (senses; the waters), and U.C. 
("Transfiguration") would involve
both the Higher Soul in the heart (airy intuition) and the Lower Soul in the 
navel (fiery concrete mind) -- the downward male and upward female forces 
finally meeting across the Crucifixion-midpoint at the Solar Plexus of the I 
AM, releasing the heretofore unconscious identification with the I-point into 
the paradoxical alchemical marriage of Brahman...)

 

Reply via email to