Rose List Follow-up

I’ve been asked about recent events on Rose Rosetree‘s blog so it seems I need to speak to this.

Back in the spring of 2013, I wrote my first article on Rose’s work. The Rose List discussed her curious Enlightenment Life List. Curious because it includes both people I’d agree were enlightened and surprises like famous people who probably didn’t consider themselves so. It would be hard for someone clearly awake not to know they were. As I said at the time, I’d keep an open mind and explore her work further.

I went on to write a series of articles on some of her excellent books and approach to various energy and empath topics.

In December 2015, Rose and I did an experiment with a series of before and after pictures of myself to read each shift in consciousness. It turned out she saw me as enlightened in her context well before I woke up. We never did check how far before. Since then, she’s rated others I know as enlightened prior to Self Realization. They have a good quality of life but have not moved into post-personal stages yet.

Rose’s model of enlightenment moved further from a stages model similar to what I use into an emphasis on two types – renunciate and householder. She equates Self Realization in consciousness as “renunciate” or “traditional” enlightenment and “Age of Awakening” enlightenment as for householders. She described the second as different from the historical process and something we can choose.

I see the process of enlightenment as distinct from the householder/ monk orientation and other styles of expression. The shifts are much deeper than the natural varieties of form they show up through. She disagreed with a take that stages in consciousness may come after her Age of Awakening enlightenment, suggesting such stages were now unnecessary for householders. However, she had no explanation for this.

In the eastern traditions (which include the householders path), the stability of Self Realization is needed to build a firm platform for refinement and the embodiment of the divine. Anything else would be like building a home without foundations. We may be able to achieve great degrees of clarity without that, but because there’s still identification with the person, equanimity can be lost. Clarity will still be swept around on the surface of the ocean.

I don’t see any shortcuts and I don’t see the divine as embodied enough in the world to change this process yet. I’m open to the potential for other styles of unfolding but have only seen the rare exception.

Occasionally, someone on Rose’s list became astrally entangled, and she removed them as no longer representing enlightenment.

Then in September this year, Rose warned me that someone I’d blogged about had become astrally entangled. This made little sense to me as that person is embodying the cosmic and is long familiar with the difference between astral and divine. Rose said she’d be OK with whatever choice I made but when I expressed doubts and kept the post up, she was clearly not OK. She removed me from her list, apparently tainted by association. She also removed other people I knew, apparently by secondary association even though these other people didn’t know the person in question. She and some of her students promptly unsubscribed from this blog and she made efforts to remove other links here from her site.

I’d only ever seen her remove links to people who were directly entangled, so this was rather a surprise. We haven’t spoken since.

I remain open to evidence of other styles but from what I’ve seen, someone can be very clear energetically and have a nice divine connection but not have become Self Realized. Identification is still at play. Inversely, someone can become Self Realized but still have a lot of work to do energetically and have no divine connection. They’ve lost identification but still lack clarity and bliss. From my perspective, these are variations in the two processes of clarity and consciousness, not different forms of enlightenment.

While Rose and I disagree on our definitions of enlightenment, I have a high regard for her work with energetic literacy, empath skills, and healing. Here’s a list of related articles.

Tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Rose List Follow-up

  1. N says:

    Very cool, David. Not an unkind word. And “astrally entangled” makes much more sense to me to describe a person in the situation.

    • Davidya says:

      Thanks, N. Tricky territory to talk about.
      I get where “spiritual addiction” comes from too but it doesn’t point directly to the issue unless you’re familiar.

      Rating systems have their own issues as well, especially for living, changing people. Easier with the dead. 🙂

  2. Alex says:

    I am totally agree and more..

  3. Alex says:

    And on the hand.. , there could be something here..
    It is happening time and again with influx of fame and money that purity could be easily corrupted 🙂

    • Davidya says:

      Hi Alex
      I don’t dispute people can be corrupted and indeed have agreed with Rose on one’s I’ve known who have been.

      What we’re talking about here isn’t about fame and money but energetic corruption.

  4. Jim says:

    1. You blogged about someone who is alleged by Rose to be energetically corrupted.

    2. Rose has blackballed you from her site, left your blog, and encouraged others to do the same, because you haven’t removed references to this person.

    This is called emotional blackmail. It has nothing to do with respective energies, and could just as easily be about parking spaces. I always give this behavior a wide berth, along with its practitioners.

    Life is too short. 🙂

    • Davidya says:

      Hi Jim
      I don’t see it as emotional blackmail but rather an excess and unfortunate reaction.

      The point of her list is primarily to give examples of people who are “enlightened” in her terms for her students exploring energetic literacy. Examples they can read to see what it looks like and help discriminate the real thing from the fakirs.

      She works hard to have her blog clearly represent her teaching. Thats not easy on the wild world web.

      I understand the point of the exercise but it does fall prey to the issues of rating things. Also, a few years after she started the list, people began to become much more seriously astrally entangled. I’ve seen examples in a couple of people I’ve known. And it has included some people on her list, so she’s ended up having to go back and reread some on the list and remove them. There are likely others she hasn’t been asked to recheck…

      It has surprised me to see people awake fall into this but I’ve realized it’s a combination of 3 things:
      1) lack of energetic literacy (refined perception) so they’re not distinguishing astral and divine.
      2) egoic entanglements still intact that allow them to be hooked. The awakening hasn’t fully matured.
      3) opportunities for power and abilities that trigger #2. Ironically, this most commonly arises in people who begin teaching. It’s also the teachers who are more likely to get nominated for her list.

      It is useful to be aware of but tricky to talk about as people not perceiving this stuff can get paranoid. Because of #3, it’s usually only people in places of influence that may get tripped up. Happily, it’s mostly an issue of this transitional period until the divine is more fully embodied and thus more obvious.

      Rose is thus challenged to keep her list “clean” but thats difficult with anyone not dead. (laughs)

      The issue of this post comes down to where you draw the line. We’ve come to disagree on the nature of enlightenment and I’ve occasionally posted references to people she now considers “fallen” that I don’t.

      Of course, I’m guessing here. She didn’t tell me why she responded like this. She told me she was OK either way. It may be that I doubted her perspective and thus came to be seen as a negative influence for her blog.

      But yes, I get your point. I’ve learned a lot from Rose and valued our friendship. But I can’t deny we’ve come to see a few things differently.

  5. Jim says:

    Thanks, David, for a tough answer. Yeah, I tend to think any rating system of this sort is flawed, only because of its uselessness. Of transient value, at best. Unity negates many conclusions like this anyway.

    I suppose one could apply some sort of rigor, but doesn’t that and five bucks get you a cup of coffee? I fail to see the practical utility of such an exercise. Life is the best teacher I have yet found for substantiating or not, the validity of my perception.

    IF successful THEN continue
    ELSE rethink the direction.


    • Davidya says:

      Hey Jim

      The practical utility is in learning to read the energy quality of a prospective teacher or business partner and thus vet them for suitability. It would avoid a lot of problems, charlatans, etc.

      I was originally intrigued by the potential to independently verify a shift. But I became less enamored when I realized it was reading a variable effect, not the shift itself. Still useful for the first but less so for the second. And as discussed, the list itself has led to other issues.

      Ha – spoken like a true programmer. 🙂

      • Jim says:

        Ah, good points, David. I was probably a little cranky from my initial take on this – lol

        I’ve had the good fortune to make simple choices and stay out of the way of anything sketchy – my ‘sensitive artist’ side, combined with a scientific pragmatism. Also a need to hit the ground running in this life precluded a lot of prep. 🙂

        IF step_up = n + 1
        THEN expand awareness, n
        ELSE stabilize in activity and silence

  6. Takuin says:

    Hello, brother…

    After all these years, I still fail to see the importance of rating systems. I can understand why someone might find them enticing, but there is too much left to the whims of the person or persons creating the list.

    I get the feeling if I were to question Rose and her abilities or motives, I would suddenly find myself ‘astrally entangled’.


    • Davidya says:

      Hi Takuin!

      I trust you’re well. As I mentioned in comments above, the point of the list wasn’t a rating system so much as a way to provide students with public examples for study.

      But clearly, that’s not how many people take it. And yes, her use of it has also evolved, like including non-public figures, which has changed it’s nature.

      And no, that’s not what I mean by “astrally entangled.” Thats a euphemism for faustian deals with manipulative entities.

      It did take some reading before I understood Rose’s approach. I found the study very valuable but I know it’s not for everybody.

      This article was mainly for people who read both blogs and wanted to understand what had changed.

  7. Lisa says:

    “And no, that’s not what I mean by “astrally entangled.” Thats a euphemism for faustian deals with manipulative entities.”

    Can you direct me to any reading material of what this may entail? I’m guessing evocation of non-angelic entities for favors/biddings.

    • Davidya says:

      Hi Lisa
      One of the reasons euphemisms are used is to avoid evoking them. This is not something you want to put your attention on.

      It’s useful to be aware of the possibility of entanglement but you don’t want to explore the mechanism because the entanglement is in the mechanism. They use unconscious desires or anything where we’re caught to capture further.

      This isn’t usually a conscious process. Nor is it advantageous in any way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *