Theos-Talk Archives (August 1995 Message tl00446)

Alan,

>> An angel according to KABBALAH FOR THE LAYMAN is a being who entirely
>> exists within the right-hand side of the Sephirothal tree. The only function
>> available to an angel is the use of the energy called "Desire to Impart."
>> Whereas man is blessed to be Microcosm, so angels are blessed to
>> participate in the radiance of light.

> The idea of
>a "right-hand" side is a human convenience to help us understand
>the Kabalist Wisdom Tradition, and has no actual location
>whatever, other than a symbolic association of ideas in human
>minds, all of which will change when we go on to become angels
>ourselves [so we are told in the tradition]. In 39 years as a
>student of Kabala, I have never come across such a daft idea.
>

Alan,

You are right in a way. I wrote this so hurriedly and couldn't find the
exact quote I was looking for that I did present it pretty badly.

Does your next post "re: concern" mean that you DO get the meaning of the
first one?

Eldon was saying that he couldn't believe the angelic kingdom is a parallel
evolution to man.

I was trying to put an idea into words when saying that angels only deal
with the "Desire to Impart." This whole concept is discussed in depth within
the book and maybe I should have preceded my discussion of "objective" with
a few premises.

"The motivating Thought of Creation, which was to impart beneficence to man,
through the Desire to Receive, influenced the emergence of the multiform
degrees of the Desire to Receive. This is due to the fundamental
characteristic of the Light, which could fill and nourish these vessels with
an infinite quantity of abundance. In other words the Light, in its infinite
Desire to Impart, necessitated and caused the manifestation of a
correspondingly infinite number of souls which would desire this
beneficence. Thus this first and primary world, the world of En Sof (the
Infinite), is given this symbolic name in accordance with the endless
variety of degree of receiving that took place within the union of the Light
with the Kingdom of the En Sof."
 "We can compare this process of undiminished imparting to other
varieties of power and energy - the endless waterfall, which can fill an
infinite number of vessels without being affected, or an electric current
that can supply power for a wide range of appliances ... without affecting
the source of the energy." (P. 114-115)

If man is a combination of both energy and vessel, as the sephirothal tree
is both left and right sided, then what is an angel? It isn't exactly a
parallel evolution at all, but angels could be seen existing alongside man,
animal, plant, and stone or within them.

Angels are messengers and according to what I have read here, they do not
participate in the "desire to receive." They are strictly associated with
God's light, not the vessels, and would be a developed being that lives
within the "Desire to Impart" of God and man. When we bless others with
light, the angel does the work and lives in this activity.

Also, "It is a law of the metaphysical realm that the first vessels to
develop after the Tsimtsum were those with a greater degree of purity and a
consequently lesser degree of the Desire to Receive. The opposite is true of
the Lights; here we find that the first Lights to emerge are those with a
lesser degree of the Desire to Impart, and a consequently smaller amount of
energy." (p. 107)

Remember, judgement (Gevurah) and emptiness (Din) on the left, mercy(Hesed)
and glory(Hod, also known as Netzah-Victory) on the right.
Only these four are considered because Kether, Hokmah and Binah all conduct
the Light and this is their only affect on the physical world. (This is why
there are four doors in the home????)

Here's an interesting quote: "The other nations are ruled by prevailing
influences, by the instincts that are indicated by the angels, while Israel
has chosen to bind itself to the Almighty Himself. " (p. 99) Could explain
why they take no masters.

On another subject: What more suitable fate for Mars than to "slaughter it."

Anyway, I wrote some of this because Eldon was writing so selfishly about
"what people could get out of the books they were reading" and it's more
theosophical to think (which he does in a later writing admit) also what we
can give to the authors and others who are our fellow travellers on the
path. After reading a book, we don't just keep everything for ourselves, we
try to practice, develop, or share what we learned.