Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: John_bilodeau@hotmail.com (John B) Newsgroups: alt.magick Subject: Re: Eastern LBRP Date: 1 Jun 2003 07:24:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 101 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.68.227.193 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1054477486 11731 127.0.0.1 (1 Jun 2003 14:24:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Jun 2003 14:24:46 GMT Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick:347539 "Jason Michael Rubino" wrote in message news:... > >"John B" > > wrote in message > news:b200936a.0305310441.7a684 > d88@posting.google.com... > > >>"Jason Michael Rubino" gm rubino@yahoo.com> wrote in > message > news: uy.com>... > Ritual has > its purpose and in that > purpose is meant limitation. > Having said that, and having > my mistake corrected by you, > what would your thoughts be if > I put Vishnu as Tipareth and > the creative, the Ch'ien of > the I-Ching and collective > Soul; Brahma as the Lord of > the Waters of all aspects of > the triune Soul; and Shiva as > the Lord of Annihilation in > the Abyss of the Vishuddha > Chakra? I'm not that familiar with the I-Ching so I can't comment on your correspondences to that system. All I can really say is that having moved beyond traditional associations, you are free to make whatever correspondences you like, or work best for you, I think. Typically, in reference to the trimurti, Brahma is associated with the creative. Brahman is the underlying unity from which the creator(Brahma), preserver(Visnu), and destroyer(Siva) arise. Your use of Siva's name, in the above, seems to be, superficially, sound. It should be stated that beyond the trimurti both Siva and Visnu have their own cults in which they function as the supreme deities responsible for the entire cycle, relegating the other two to minor roles. Yama is the Lord of > Death to annihilate the > Annihilator seated in the Ajna > Chakra and as such would be > the ruler of what is above the > Abyss; is of the element of > Fire and sight: Chochmah > proper. Om would of course > illuminate Yama that all is, > was, illusion ( Maya) and that > sound is the source of God's > creation. > > Isn't it said that Gotama > Buddha was the incarnation of > Vishnu? One could see then how > the authors of the New > Testament laid the mystical > foundation for Christian > Mystics and later Rosicrucians > by giving the quote in the New > Testament: "No one gets to > the Father but by me," from > Vedic Metaphysics. The Buddha is an avatar of Visnu because the folklore surrounding him emphasizes his role as a teacher of the dharma. Visnu's role as preserver in the trimurti is often referred to as the 'maintainer of the dharma' although Buddhists meant something quite different by 'dharma' than orthodox Hindus* do, the connection was close enough for the Buddha to be associated with the preserver of the cosmic order. That's the danger of a name, identity in name is not necessarily identity in kind, but it's usually enough for those caught up on superficial appearances to see a connection. Whether these connections are accurate or not depends on whether you value historical specificity over abstract constructions. Obviously the mage is better served by exploring the abstract liaisons that may exist, as historical specificity has little value to individual practice. JB * just an aside for those who may read this who are familiar enough with Hinduism to think applying the term 'orthodox' to Hinduism is foolish, I'm just trying to highlight the difference between those forms of religion in India that recognise the Vedas legitimacy, and those, like Buddhism, that rejected it. I don't mean orthodoxy in the sence of a rigid central hierarchy of specific dogmatic and ritual forms as in the West.