Theos-Talk Archives (November 1995 Message tl00125)

There has been a lively and interesting discussion about the monad as it travel
through the 'kingdoms" etc.
I suggested that angels are subhuman in that they don't have a monad as such but
share a group monad as animals do. I could be wrong in my reading. It seems
there are varying views in the literature

An example of the discussion:

"Not one of these kingdoms ever passes through evolution or
development or unfolding into the next higher kingdom never
because these kingdoms refer to the rupas which shelter the
monads. For instance the animal kingdom never becomes a human
kingdom. the mineral never the plant and so on.

JHE
One of GdeP more important statements and a wonderful
clarification of HPB's teachings concerning monads. As you get
to know HPB's writings better I recommend that you take some
time to compare this statement back to HPB's. One reason that I
find GdeP's statement so important here is because he is clearly
making a distinction he between this and the neo-theosophical
teachings concerning the "descending and ascending monads" that
you will find outlined in CWL's and Hodson's writings. See for
instance ~Kingdom of the Gods.~

Jerry HE
END QUOTATION

Keith: I would like to mention an interesting movie; "Wings of Desire" by
Werner Herzog German. In the film the actor who plays Columbo I foget his
name is an angel who is attracted to the problems of a couple. Unlike most
"guardian angel" films like "It's a Wonderful Life" "Angels in the Outfield"
etc. the angel trades his higher wings for a human desire nature after
experiencing an embodiment or temporary incarnation. He decides not to meddle
like a Polyanna but embraces the totality of the human experience. He isn't a
nirmankaya but consciously devolves or perhaps enters the human kingdom as
possibly all of us did because we left the clear perfect light for the maya of
incarnation and now must strive to get back through wisdom-experience-intuition
Sophia. Does this sound like Gnosticism? You bet! It is a quite
interesting film for theosophists I think.

Keith Price