Page Content (OCR)
however those subconscious processes are never by this means oriented and aligned with respect to the conscious channel and thus the awakened value of mind—body unity, they necessarily slip back from their "optimized" degree of meditative rest under strain of compulsive ego—resurgence, bounding back from the ordinary (non-transformed) level of habitual functioning. It's as if, rather than the subconscious processes being intentionally turned in integrative amplification toward the spark of consciousness abiding in the "central channel", so as to kindle it with their combined energies of coaxial intensification to full flame, that conscious spark is instead lowered down into the well of those subconscious processes themselves (in displacement from its central, axial locus) loaning them its integrative light to be used at their ordinary, low-level of interaction until it's altogether extinguished in the slumber of their depths. This has the effect of temporarily "unifying" the subconscious processes so as to make them a suitably receptive vehicle only deprived of the spark of consciousness belonging to their own central axis, putting them inferentially in a position prime for the structural invitation of a "Conscious Light" not part of the specific integrity of that axis but finding an adequately airtight vessel, accommodatingly empty of "driver"! Thus the "goodness" of the personality is, at such a common level of mind—body integration, strictly subject to the specific tolerances of the axial harmony thus far established through the consciousness—systems. It is strictly a function of egoic habit, not the condition of a realized integral ground. The shallow state of mind-body integration from which the channel—meditator assumes the "appropriate" passivity to receive, functions through a volitional axis that is effectually empty, the value of consciousness—in—itself being chronically displaced into the subconscious habit—channels of the frontal or vagus—current. The "goodness" which may seem to formally extend the invitation is a shifting, unstable value based on egoic estimate rather than unitive congruence with the Divine Order; the real constant presiding over any such invitation is the effectual emptiness of the Conscious axis displaced into reflective, subconscious habit channels, that would otherwise serve as illuminated instrument of that Order. The response which is elicited from such a passively oriented invitation therefore answers to the real constant, the actually consistent factor presiding over the whole proposition. The real invitation doesn't issue from any well-meaning attitude based on personal self—estimate but from the operative emptiness of the (relatively unintegrated) axis of will implicitly requesting a replacement—filament of volition from a Source superseding its own technical level. Such assumed passivity as preparation for the receipt of an anticipated, Otherworldly Beneficence, thus amounts to an invitation for that empty volitional channel to be filled. This is, in fact, a very contingent and vulnerable orientation. Any Intelligence of high integration and proportionately powerful Will functioning through the deeper densities, whether positive or negative, is in perfect position to infuse that vacuum of the volitional axis without challenge. Nor is the common counsel (cued even by the "human" authors of the Ra material) to the effect that one can invoke the protection of the Positive God—light under such circumstances so as to ensure the alignment, any sufficient corrective in itself, for in order that such an invocation carry practical weight, it's necessary that there already be a sufficiency of corresponding substance in the channeler. The personality in question must already be substantially committed in positive integration and alignment congruent with the value of Light called upon, in order for that Call to have any basis for effective Response. Otherwise it's an empty invocation, and needn't have anything of automatic "expectancy" about it at all. Here we may note the Gospel account in which an Apostle, purporting to cast out a demon in the name of Christ, received the retort of that very demon: "Him I know, but who are you?" (!) This same basic passivity as the implicit orientation assumed in channeling, also accounts for those odd fluctuations in the quality and character of material coming from the same—ostensible—Source. It may well be that a channeler one day receives a truly positive communication, and the next a communique which though superficially similar is exposed to subtle detection as a specifically negative source. It's as if, in other words, the channeler had glided imperceptibly over 50 T-Bird_Vs_The_Flying_saucers.htm