The Nature of Reality |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
I propose here that Consciousness, in manifesting, takes on a four-fold structure, which Jung refers to as the Quaternity, with the Centre being the transcedent Origin (which contains within itself an even more transcendent origin - hence the dot in the middle). Four Archetypes designate the four fundamental units of manifestation. These are drawn here according to the convention of the I Ching of representing the positive polarity ("yang") by an unbroken line, and the negative polarity ("yin") by a brokn line. I suggest that rather than the four-fold being derived from the two-fold (yin yang, Shiva-Shakti) polarity, the two-fold dichotomy is a special case of the four-fold quaternity, and that the original manifestation of the Absolute Reality was as four principle archetypes.
This hypothesis is based on the universality of the quaternity as the primary paradigm of cosmology and cosmogony. Some correspondences are indicated by the following two tables, the first of which gives a few examples from selected esoteric teachings, and the second from science and contemporary psychology.
|
based on I Ching bi-grams |
elements |
(tattwas) |
|
(Vajrayana) |
|
Etheric Formative forces |
four emanations of the Supreme Mother |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(+mandala) |
|
|
|
|
centre) |
|
|
|
En Sof |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atzilut |
(centrifugal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beriah |
(centrifugal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yetzirah |
(centripedal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asiyah |
(centripedal) |
Mahasaraswati |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(consciousness) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(goal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(movement) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(focus on centre) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a few discrepencies, which increase the futrther into the minutae of symbolism one goes. But on the whole it comes together quite well
![]()
Regarding the sequence of the first four numbers, here are some notes I drew up in 1992/93 on this subject. Click on the image for a larger (possibly more readable) version
Finally, having said (and written up) all this, I might add as a post-script, regarding this hypothesis, that choice of the number four, rather than three, five, seven, ten, or any other number probably represents an arbitrary quirk of my personality. Numerologically fours feature highly in my life, so I am probably doing nothing but reflecting my own self in this metaphysic; just as Blavatsky reflected herself in the number seven, the Chinese Taoists in the numbers two and five, and so on.
So there, you don't have to take anything seriously ;-)
(and be wary of anyone who propounds any doctrine with too much seriousness!)

images not loading? | error messages? | broken links? | suggestions? | criticism?