I first became aware of Rose Rosetree through her interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump (Batgap). She’s all about subtle perception and healing and developing skills for same. Her tag-line is “Reading People Deeper and Healing with Energy Spirituality“
As I’m exploring models of awakening, I was fascinated by the idea that her “energetic literacy” allows a person to read if someone is enlightened or not. I know a small number of people who can see this and can help people past their last barriers. As this is a potent way to support others and opens the door to objective ways to study post-personal development, the ability to learn it was intriguing. But evaluating such a unique vision is not a simple matter.
She sees the stages very similarly to how I do. But she determines the shift quite differently, through auras. By auras though, she don’t necessarily mean coloured light around the body but rather energetic signatures. Light is only one aspect of that.
She describes an enlightened person as having a “stabilized, habitual state of consciousness with certain characteristics that would be easy to identify for someone with Stage Three Energy Literacy.” She refers to “databanks” in each chakra and said they’d all be working well, are relatively balanced, and are free of “stuff” – her term for astral or emotional debris. The aura will also be permeated with the divine in some way and there will be a value of joy from that connection.
In other words, the personal crud is cleared and they are feeling the divine. A dry Self Realization would not make the cut.
She’s rather fearless about calling a spade a spade and tells it like she sees it. A few teachers she mentions as being enlightened but having messed up (including ones she’s studied with). A few others she mentions as awake but not enlightened, even if they say otherwise. I’d agree there are some who have recognized the Self but not become it yet. I was such for many years. And there’s a difference between Self Realization and its mature state, sat chit ananda (absolute bliss consciousness).
At first, I wondered if she was reading sattva development rather than atman. But her comments suggest more. “Permeated with the divine in some way” suggests a deep perception. Earlier, I had the impression that there was a standard underlying energetic process in enlightenment. The chakras are awakened and we connect with source in the crown. Advanced stages unfold during a decent. Some teachers and kundalini traditions follow this model. However, others experience the stages during the rise and there are kundalini traditions that support that as well. And so on. She has apparently recognized this variety in the results.
The result of her reads is her Enlightenment Life List, people she’s rated as Enlightened by the above criteria. Unexpectedly, it includes some famous people like Obama, the Clintons, and George Clooney. Shades of Men in Black! (laughs) From comments, it would seem that being in the larger public eye can raise someones consciousness. (a group consciousness effect?) But I’ve never explored that. In most cases I’ve seen, people who are enlightened know they are. I have met a few who were unsure. But once verified, their progress accelerated.
Rose indicates that when she started expanding the edge of energetic literacy into enlightenment, she didn’t meet the standard herself. Also, as she’s more heart driven, there is less conceptual precision. Plus it’s kind of an organic unfolding like this blog, rather than a presentation of a fully formed teaching. But as Rick Archer (Batgap) said to me, “she’s a sweetheart, making her much-needed contribution.“
Of course, making pronouncements about others is tricky territory. David Hawkins, of Power vs Force fame, is notorious for having rated many famous teachers, all of whom he rated as lower than himself, save Jesus. His ratings are considered infallible by himself & adherents. (he’s a no on Rose’s list) There are also some guru rating sites that are essentially trash-em lists.
Rose’s approach doesn’t fall into these traps but is instead a simple is or isn’t (yet). She says it’s about clarity rather than judgment. And offering examples for students to read. But a few issues still come to mind. For example, it’s not the person who is enlightened. It is the Self that wakes up to itself, through an apparent person. Making a list of names points to the person. But addressing that requires only a caveat. She talks about some of this here.
It’s useful to note here that she differentiates Householder and Renunciate enlightenment. A renunciate is Neti Neti (not this, not this) oriented whereas a householder still very much engages their person as an aspect of their expression. If this difference isn’t clear and a householder tries to play a middle ground, they succeed at neither. I’ll write more on this later.
Secondly, her process is by perception which can be fallible. The perception is also reading the effects of awakening not the awakening itself. She does however mention a few exceptions who appear to meet criteria but have issues that overshadow that development. She also notes it’s her read and opinion. No absolutes stated. That’s a good sign.
Clearly, it depends on the skill and experience of the reader. As I don’t have these skills, I’m keeping an open mind to get a better sense of what this is. I’ve bought her book Aura Reading Through All Your Senses but have just started it. She’s since recommended more recent books to me, like Read People Deeper. Thus, this article is more a work in progress than a review.
Here’s a good article on how her outlook evolved. She also talks about what she sees as the 10 most significant things about enlightenment there.
I’ll do some more reading & exploring before I have better handle on the techniques she teaches. She certainly has a unique vision and some excellent insights. If her processes are as effective as she suggests, they could be quite useful in a number of ways.
Meanwhile, we’ve exchanged blogroll links. 😉