"Being of Service" is a sub-topic cited within several Threads. Positions vary as do capability, and applicability. For a Higher reference, I am quoting some insight from a disceiple of the Kabbalist R. Israel Baal Shem --- Perhaps [our] collective interest in "being of service" comes from this perspective.



What is the Great Work?

The term "the Great Work" has many definitions, and is not a term from traditional Kabbalah, but it has a modern usage among some Kabbalists. The quotation above, from a disciple of the Kabbalist R. Israel Baal Shem Tov, is a traditional Kabbalistic view: that the creation is in a damaged and imperfect state, and the Kabbalist, by virtue of his or her state of consciousness, can bring about a real healing. A name for this is "tikkun" (restoration). There are many traditional forms of "tikkun", most of them prescriptions for essentially magical acts designed to bring about a healing in the creation.

This view of the Great Work also exists outside of Judaic Kabbalah and survives today, namely that the creation is in a "fallen" state, and each person has an individual role to play in bringing about a general restoration.

This is a modern restatement of an old Kabbalistic idea. In this view, God gives life to the Creation: from second to second the Creation is sustained by this giving, and if it were to cease even for an instant, the Creation would be no more. If someone wants to know God then they have to resemble God, and this means they must give to others. Kabbalah is not a self-centred pursuit; it pivots around the Kabbalist's relationship with all living beings.

I find it difficult to grasp what you’re saying, Christian. Perhaps my thinking is sluggish after Christmas Day’s food and drink! :(

“For whatever you lack, the Divine Presence also lacks”. Does this bring the Divine Presence down to the level of the common murderer?

“You should therefore pray for the Whole.” Who or what is going to answer this prayer? The Whole? Why should the Whole have to wait for ‘my’ prayer? The Omnipotent Omnipresent Divine Whole has to wait for me to point out a need, or a lack, and then responds with alacrity? This would be a strange Cosmos!

As for “being of service”, are you saying that this equates with prayer? I would like to suggest that service has a much wider definition.

I am more comfortable with the idea of the individual working on restoring his own state of perfection/divinity, and in theosophical terms this can be achieved by attuning to the divine plan, by acting with wisdom and compassion, by serving others.

Christian,

I agree, when we become 'beings of service,' we have risen to the highest level of humanity.

"...the creation is in a damaged and imperfect state, and the Kabbalist, by virtue of his or her state of consciousness, can bring about a real healing."

--> I am not so sure I agree with such an idea. Perhaps it is because I do not have a Christian/Jewish monotheistic view of 'creation'? (The idea of being 'damaged' sounds so much like the idea of Original Sin.) I prefer the idea that we are immature and selfish 'sparks' that have been given free choice, and we do dumb/bad things with this free choice. Therefore, I do not see it as a damaged state, but rather an immature state. We are all on the path from immaturity to enlightenment.

But your ideas are common to many monotheists. Fortunately, Theosophy welcomes all monotheists as well as all non-monotheists.

Not sure which part of that sentence you are disagreeing with. To me the Planes of Consciousness are individually imperfect as they are one aspect of the collective. Consciousness is imperfect in the lowest Plane and achieves perfection (to a degree) as he climbs through the levels of consciousness.

Nonetheless, the choice of terms were that of the author, not mine.

I should think there is a connection to "original sin," yes, from a monotheistic point of view. Agreed, all would not follow monotheisim.

As to immature and selfish sparks, I would also call those sparks "Divine Fragments", and they are perfect before the fall into matter, in my opinion. Our perfection would be a restoration of that state; however, we will have added one quality, "The EXPERIENCE of Knowing." We had the "knowing" at the onset, and lost it in the density, to reveal itself through the unfolding process, however, there was NO "Experience" of what we knew/know ... in my opinion.

So, I might say the difference of states as Divine Fragments, Sparks, is one of "Knowledge," vs. "Knowing" after "life" and evolution through the Planes.

Curiously, I came across this passage as I was reading an unrelated article while catching up on the Theosophy-Forum in the background.

It is interesting to me.

It's curious to me that it is difficult to grasp. Although deeply philosophical it still seems intuitively clear and obvious to me. You would be thinking there is no [RISK] to the Divine Presence in allowing [us.] However, when you remove our real-world context, and allow the experience of comprehension of an ever-ensuing development of Man by the Divine Presence (and even without anthropromorphisizing), we are metaphorically speaking a child growing up, and the Divine Presence is the Father. IT [the process of us] has meaning, ... as above so below ... and just as a Father in this realm or state would take meaning from the growing up of his child.

:) I try and view things from many schools of thought, not sure that works for everyone. My meger attempts to humanize the philosophy of Theosophy.

Christian,

The word I have an issue with is 'damaged.' The Christian/Judaic idea is that we 'fell' from heaven and 'fell' from grace, that we are somehow bad for having done this (and have committed original sin). (I remember once being told by a Christian minister that we are all basically bad, that we are basically sinners, and we are going to go to hell if we don't change our ways.) I disagree with the whole damaged/fell/bad/sinner/original sin idea.

Christian,

I think what Harvey is trying to say is, we do not agree with the idea that the Divine Mind lacks anything. Would the Divine Mind have been any less if we had not emerged from it and populated the earth? It is hard to say. The basic question is, why did the Divine Mind bother to have us come forth in the first place? One Theosophist answered by saying we don't know, we may never know, and perhaps we shouldn't worry about it. Another thought on the idea is that we are trying to use our finite minds to understand the infinite (and decide what it 'lacks'), which is impossible.

I haven't got from Theosophy that [anything] is purposeless. In fact, to me, all is quintessential. We must (to me) be purposeful in this Divine Ideation. I would not be leaning towards the Divine mind therefore having a "lack" of anything, just that we don't appreciate how the difference we make expands It.

Just as with "EST" of the '80's, I can't fathom a concept of "It just is."

[We] consider the Divine Mind, the Absoluteness or whatever is the preferred term for this particular Thread to be unmanifested, in contrast to [our] manifestation, we could be making "unmanifested" [relative] to OUR "manifestation," (although, granted we prefer to think of [directions] differently.) If accepting that it is a concept that more simply allows us to hold the Absoluteness as "unknowable," then, how can we make presumptions on It/of It?

If unknowable, said Absoluteness would always have been unknowable, and unknowable to everyone and everything ... directly.

As the human mind HAS to know [things?] in some way, some how, to some point of resolving a problem, ... we derive a presumptious understanding we can hold to the satisfaction of our individual minds. This will vary from person to person, intellect to intellect, philosophy to philosophy ... and like the Sacred texts, all will want to claim the Truth. But, logically, it seems no one can ever "know." That provides a great deal of opportunity for theorizing, rationalizing, speculating, sensing, inferring, perceiving or imagining. I have this strange sense about the workings of "mind," such that instead of everyone being wrong, everyone might just be "right;" [we] just don't know how to reconcile it (collective).

... or so it goes with me. Not totally Theosophical, but the degree to which [I] can "think" through the issue. It is cool to me that there can be other perceptions, and definetly will, [since] I think they too are relative to the actual (or perhaps, collective) Truth.

Yes, I too disagree with the fall as being something bad. I equate density with the polarity opposite lightness, not evil and good, ... although existence within this range could derive our expression as such.

I think Christianity, and allowing that it borrowed its early philosophy and learning from every other known source in their part of the world at their time, had the purpose of delivering distinct messages for the influence and control of the masses of the time, location and culture.

I thought the Bible was a dreadful horror story when having to read it as a child. When having to grow up through many different religions, through family circumstances, I came across the question of "who is right" early on. This allowed me the freedom to explore for myself.

Christian,

It is a fascinating question, how does the Divine Mind 'profit' or become more 'fulfilled' by us being here? (I don't have the answer.) But I must admit I take more of a Buddhism approach to such a question, and I just do not worry about such things.

Christian,

You said,

"...Divine Mind, the Absoluteness or whatever is the preferred term for this particular Thread to be unmanifested..."

--> The Divine Mind is not the Absolute, it is one of the five aspects of the Absolute.

-- The Absolute --

[The Absolute is] “ ... the ONE LIFE, eternal, invisible, yet Omnipresent, without beginning or end, yet periodical in its regular manifestations, between which periods reigns the dark mystery of non-Being; unconscious, yet absolute Consciousness; unrealisable, yet the one self-existing reality; truly, ‘a chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason.’ ” (SD vol 1 p 2)

-- Five Aspects of the Absolute --

It has been said the Absolute is unknowable, and has no attributes that we can understand. However, we are told that the Absolute has five attributes: Space, Duration (Time), The Great Breath (Motion), Primordial Matter (Mulaprakriti), and Divine Thought.

(1) Space

“Space is called in the esoteric symbolism ‘the Seven-Skinned Eternal Mother-Father.’ It is composed from its undifferentiated to its differentiated surface of seven layers. ‘What is that which was, is, and will be, whether there is a Universe or not; whether there be gods or none?’ asks the esoteric Senzar Catechism. And the answer made is — SPACE.” (SD vol 1 p 9)

(2) Duration (Time)

Time does not exist within a Pralaya, but there is something called Duration.

“Kronos stands for endless (hence immovable) Duration, without beginning, without an end, beyond divided Time and beyond Space.” (SD vol 1 p 418)

The phrase “limitless Time” is used.

“The Circle was with every nation the symbol of the Unknown — ‘Boundless Space,’ the abstract garb of an ever present abstraction — the Incognisable Deity. It represents limitless Time in Eternity.” (SD vol 1 p 113)

Time does not exist during a Pralaya. However, a periodic measurement called “Seven Eternities” passes and ends.

“The Eternal Parent (Space) wrapped in Her ever invisible robes had slumbered once again for seven eternities.” (Stanza i-1-1)

(3) Great Breath (Motion)

The Great Breath is the name of Eternal Motion, a Motion that continues even during a Pralaya.

[The Absolute's] “...one absolute attribute, which is ITSELF, eternal, ceaseless Motion, is called in esoteric parlance the ‘Great Breath,’ which is the perpetual motion of the universe, in the sense of limitless, ever-present SPACE.” (SD vol 1 p 2)

(4) Primordial Matter (Mulaprakriti)

Undifferentiated Mulaprakriti (Father-Mother) “exists” even during a Pralaya.

“...precosmic root-substance (Mulaprakriti) is that aspect of the Absolute which underlies all the objective planes of Nature.” (SD vol 1 p 15)

(5) Divine Thought

Divine Thought is a term used often in The Secret Doctrine.

“...the whole Kosmos has sprung from the DIVINE THOUGHT. This thought impregnates matter, which is co-eternal with the ONE REALITY....” (SD vol 1 p 340)

“...during the prologue, so to say, of the drama of Creation, or the beginning of cosmic evolution, the Universe or the "Son" lies still concealed "in the Divine Thought," which had not yet penetrated "into the Divine Bosom." ” (SD vol 1 p 61)

“The solitary ray dropping into the mother deep may be taken as meaning Divine Thought or Intelligence, impregnating chaos.” (SD vol 1 p 65)

Divine Thought is never defined, but it is an aspect of the Absolute.

“Divine thought cannot be defined, or its meaning explained, except by the numberless manifestations of Cosmic Substance in which the former is sensed spiritually by those who can do so.” (SD vol 1 p 327)

Divine Thought is not similar to conscious, human-like thought.

“The Absolute cannot be said to have a consciousness, or, at any rate, a consciousness such as we have here. It has neither consciousness, nor desire, nor wish, nor thought, because it is absolute thought, absolute desire, absolute consciousness, absolute ‘all.’ ” (SD vol 1 p 15)

Divine Thought is eternal, while Divine Ideation is periodical.

“In the ABSOLUTE or Divine Thought everything exists and there has been no time when it did not so exist; but Divine Ideation is limited by the Universal Manvantaras.” (Transactions, vol 2 pp. 10-11)

Here are some equivalent names for Divine Thought.

• Absolute Consciousness

“It is absolute consciousness eternally, which consciousness becomes relative consciousness periodically, at every "Manvantaric dawn." ” (Transactions, vol 2 p 18)

• Absolute Mind

“A distinction had to be made between the Absolute Mind, which is ever present, and its reflection and manifestation in the Ah-hi, who, being on the highest plane, reflect the universal mind collectively at the first flutter of Manvantara.” (Transactions, vol 1 p 17)

• Absolute Thought

“In the ABSOLUTE or Divine Thought everything exists and there has been no time when it did not so exist; but Divine Ideation is limited by the Universal Manvantaras.” (Transactions, vol 2 p 10)

• Divine Mind

“The Logos is the mirror reflecting DIVINE MIND, and the Universe is the mirror of the Logos, though the latter is the esse of that Universe.” (SD vol 2 p 25)

“As the Logos reflects the Universe in the Divine Mind, and the manifested Universe reflects itself in each of its Monads, as Leibnitz put it, repeating an Eastern teaching, so the MONAD has, during the cycle of its incarnations, to reflect in itself every root-form of each kingdom.” (SD vol 2 p 186)

• Mind

“Here it is evident that "Mind" (the primeval universal Divine Thought) is neither the Unknown unmanifested One, since it abounds in both sexes (is male and female), nor yet the Christian Father....” (SD vol 2 p 237)

• Pre-cosmic Ideation

“...pre-Cosmic Ideation is the root of all individual consciousness....” (SD vol 1 p 15)

See also Cosmic Ideation.

• Thought Divine

“...the ‘Blazing Dragon of Wisdom,’ ... is that which the Greek philosophers called the Logos, the Verbum of the Thought Divine....” SD vol 1 p 71)

• Universal Mind

“Universal Mind was not, for there were no Ah-hi (Celestial Beings) to contain (hence to manifest) it.” (Stanza i-1-3)

“Universal or Absolute Mind always is during Pralaya as well as Manvantara; it is immutable.” (Transactions, vol 2 p 8)

“Simultaneously with the evolution of the Universal Mind, the concealed Wisdom of Adi-Buddha — the One Supreme and eternal — manifests itself as Avalokiteshwara (or manifested Iswara), which is the Osiris of the Egyptians, the Ahura-Mazda of the Zoroastrians, the Heavenly Man of the Hermetic philosopher, the Logos of the Platonists, and the Atman of the Vedantins. By the action of the manifested Wisdom, or Mahat, represented by these innumerable centres of spiritual Energy in the Kosmos, the reflection of the Universal Mind, which is Cosmic Ideation and the intellectual Force accompanying such ideation, becomes objectively the Fohat of the Buddhist esoteric philosopher. Fohat, running along the seven principles of AKASA, acts upon manifested substance or the One Element, as declared above, and by differentiating it into various centres of Energy, sets in motion the law of Cosmic Evolution, which, in obedience to the Ideation of the Universal Mind, brings into existence all the various states of being in the manifested Solar System.” SD vol 1 p 110)

It is important to note that Prem and Ashish in their book, Man the Measure of All Things, use the term Universal Mind to refer to Mahat (The Son, The Third Logos, the manifested universe). It is my contention that Universal Mind more correctly refers to an aspect of the Absolute, rather than Mahat (The Son), as Prem and Ashish suggest.

Thank you for the last post. I had considered the Divine Mind and Divine Ideation as separate things. I will enjoy re-reading the organized analysis repeatedly.

To my recollection H.P.B. made a analytical point of correction from the reference of "the Absolute," to the Absoluteness, ... is that right? Given the reference, I can presume this was after the SD.

I believe the analysis was that [absolute] could be considered a "thing" by some means of argument, and the term "Absoluteness" avoided the potential erroneous inference.

I would not make a very good Buddhist, me thinks, ... the analyst in me is attracted to the [fact] --- in comparison to other religions and spiritual philosophies --- that the wisdom of the [all] ,which we can comprehend, can be presented completely. It's a big jig-saw puzzle, but it IS all there.

It is also, rather interesting, that these [pieces] can themselves still be subject to interpretation and STILL fit; 5 Planes of Consciousness vs. 7 Planes, for example (to which I have already suggested in the past may be 12 - and some may say 13. The latter two is rather special in that it allows the Theosophical concept to be expressed by scientific theory, too.)

Frankly, anything in Theosophy that has a number or date to it I ALLOW to be relativistic for the purposes of human comprehension; and as H.P.B. has herself suggested, and perhaps it was in the Mahatma Letters too. To me, this give's Theosophists license to think outside the otherwise restrictiveness of presented Theosophy. One can wonder if that [implied] license could be the basis for the neo-Theosphical variants?

Hmmm. I wouldn't have been inclinded to equate "the Great Breath (motion)" with the Absolute-ness.

Do you consider this statement to be referencing a "thing", or [THAT] which is behind the Great Breath?

This isn't working for me. The prior wording appealed better to my senses. These [attributes] are all TOO relative to the expression of the Absoluteness in a [manifested] Universe. They are easily distinguishable, for me, from the Absoluteness. I should think each and every one of these attributes could become non-existent, and then STILL there would be a [complete] Absoluteness. These attributes, as I read them, serve [a purpose.] We are a factor of that purpose, yet we are not comprehensible of it in it's entirety.

Tthere must be [choice] in the Ideation,... and given the consistent [order] in all things, there being a choice in [their] being is indicated. And it follows that just as we CANNOT know the Absoluteness, we cannot know the volition behind [That] Ideation [OF] the Absolute-ness (I consider Ideation an arbitrary intent of the Absoluteness, nor definitive of It,) within which we are a manifested part.

I consider Space and Time varients of the same thing, and that thing is itself a varient of "matter" (at some level).

To explain: I could concieve of "Space" as the paver stones in a walkway. And "time" would be the morter holding the stones (Space) together.

I thought about that for almost a year now- and somehow I am starting wonder if the Absoluteness is developing as well? I mean, if the Absoluteness is unknowable- is the Absoluteness in the process of acquiring the 'knowing'?

Maybe I should not assume this- but I figure that the Absoluteness isn't just forcing change in the development of Human Consciousness for the pure fun of it. So there must be a point to it.

But then again, that thought alone sounds awfully anthropomorphic- but then again, I thought Theosophy might expand consciousness to more than just human consciousness- and then the danger of anthropomorphic analogy is wiped away. Wouldn't 'the whole' include more than just human consciousness? Isn't that reason for Blavatsky or Alice Bailey bringing the Deva Kingdom back into our conscious thoughts? (no pun intended)

I'm still stewing over the Deva Kingdom, somehow the magical connection seems rather reasonable. So nothing against some practical magic in the name of Ascension? That may sound rather flippant, but it was just a consideration. Aren't we essentially healing ourselves anyway?

As in Sephirot? The Absoluteness' own Self split itself into vessels/sparks? My understanding of Kabbalah is still that of a bloody amateur- but could we see Human Consciousness in that angle?

Knowledge, ... doesn't seem likely to me. Perhaps "experience." Some might say "So God knows Himself," speaking a bit figuratively. This would all be speculation since there is not a way of knowing, other than inspirational mediumship, connecting to one's Higher Self, Channeling, certain meditative states ... but none of these would actually reach the Absoluteness, ... just some inference through the Higher levels of consciousness manifested within the 7 Planes of [this] Universe. I would allow, too, that since it is possible to [connect] to consciousness beyond the Earth (if Consciousness raised to the mid-point of the Mental Plane, which has Universal similarity) it may be possible to gain greater insight from [others]. This latter comment would not be part of conventional Theosophy as usually argued within these forums, but it is actually a Theosophical writing.

For what it's worth, Modulating Light ... Human kind has had a pattern of acknowledging those of higher consciousness, and they too a more select group possessing even Higher wisdom, ... and so on. Such that, we have had our Prophets, Masters, and those by Higher names to hand down guidance and inference. We too, however, are thinkers, and relatively, have abilities to intuit at least a direction to follow. So, there are a couple of approaches one can take.

Christian

I have some notable familiarity with the Deva Kingdom, but could not determine from your words what the "issue" is you are stewing over. Could you state it more directly for me?

I'm trying to put some weird hunches into some sort of verbal direction that I can actually write down.

The interconnectivity of the term consciousness. I mean, I read all about the 'builders of form' and then, again, the term 'magic' shows up. Why the 'Magical Kingdom'. You mentioned 'tikkun' and 'magical acts' to bring upon healing in creation.

So I am probably trying to figure out all the meaning of magic in all this. Magic seems to show up an awful lot in all of this. The Absoluteness must be rather fond of magic.

Sorry, I am still rambling. I often start thinking about a particular issue because all of a sudden a certain issue seems like a hint to me, to attempt something bigger, like a missing link to something bigger. I start looking at something from such a 'macro' angle that it becomes very difficult to put the actual 'issue' into a 'micro' angle that can be explained in human language. Right now that to me is magic and why it shows up again.

I am often being shown symbols that upon digging deeper turn out to be of Kabbalah origin- or could be interpreted as such. Black and White checkered floors etc. Or had a 'conversation' with someone in the Astral over the Ascension of Mankind (I know, might seem rather off the wall)- and some of them seem rather fond of Kabbalah and Magic to make themselves understood.

So I am just taking the magnifying glass and hope to uncover a few more correlations of Kabbalah, Magic and the Ascension of Mankind.

>>> Fine. I might suggest something to take the hesitancy out of you hunches: When you wish to connect with OR communicate with [that] which is beyond our present positioning in the lower four (4) sub-planes of the Physical Plane, consider that your MIND (that is to say what you mind interprets and perceives, and this BTW is done in unison with the sub-conscious mind ̶ which you will come to understand is quintessentially important, in time) IS ITSELF oriented to a 3-dimensional perception to match your position in the Physical. When you are “trying” or “interpreting” on top of the obscurity that your mind has already presented, you are both [blocking] and “getting in the way.” If you do not understand what you are [getting], but perhaps sense the color blue, or hear a certain sound, or feel different, then present it [that] way, as it is the closest thing to truth. In time, as your subconscious mind [accepts] you wish to perceive beyond the limits of the peer-pressure programming developed since child-hood, you will get more. AND, as your knowledge base grows, the collectively, your interpretation will be more accurate, and you will find it easier to communicate the facts.

>>> “Magic,” isn’t quite the magic that Hollywood, paganistic history, nor our imaginations suggest. There is something sensible and practical behind the mechanics of it. But first, let me give you a thought to help you be receptive to how and why magic works (I am speaking to the [actual] activity we would consider magic, not the spirit-imbued kind, which is actually something else ̶ I’ll speak to that at the end, if I remember to.)

Intelligible, communicating and recording man is a mere 40,000 years old. We can trace back that man that our DNA reflects for 300,000 years. However, the scientifically indicated forms of man that DNA can trace as our source goes back 7.5 million years. (I am going to set aside the Theosophical philosophical concept of Atlantean, Lumerian, Hyperboarian etc., … and Astral or Aetheric man for the moment.) Therefore, for 7.5 million years, since we can relatively ignore this tiny blip of scientific practical reality we find ourselves in currently for this point of the topic, … man has managed to function SO WELL, that we did indeed manage to evolve to current form and intelligence (I’m going to skip something special that happened 300,000 years ago that caused us to suddenly be intelligent for now, since it is outside the scope of magic.) Recap, for 7.5 million years we functioned without practical, provable, factual, 3-dimensional science; except for the last instance of time. HOW?

Man did not have the conditioning he currently experiences. That conditioning blocks (reasons away) our sensitivity to natural forces. There are seven great forces expressed in the Universe, yet our awareness of electricity, gravity, light are all reflections of only one force. This is a theosophical concept that Blavatsky has spoken to, but don’t expect everyone to acknowledge this. So, what am I saying? WHAT WE NEED to exist occurs naturally, through forces. I am not using the complicated Theosophical terms of these, to keep it simple. The further back we go, the more we had the innate ability to use these forces. Currently, all but the one is lost to us. However, if you research “Druids,” you will see that they are the last remnants of our mystics [as a culture] that used at least one other force (and through various variants). THESE are the basis of magic.

To give you some relation, consider that the upper three sub-planes of our Physical Plane are not being actively used by us, currently (by choice, but actually by the imposition of the density on our constitutions). Also consider, there ARE those other Planes above our Physical that potentially available to us (some more than others, the Astral far-far more easily than those above it.)

These realms, and the forces available through all the Planes and their sub-planes are a basis for magical forces, for to use them would come across to those not accustomed to their properties, as magical. (You might want to look up the term “magi,” and in theosophical resources too.) One [ability] that is possible, which I will point out now, is “glamore.” It would be behind those literary and historical accounts of “invisibility.” Now, here’s where it gets technical. Nothing becomes invisible, but [one’s] and this could be collective, ability to perceive that which is visible, is blocked, hindered or mis-directed.

To now introduce your Deva topic, I want to make note that Theosophy probably made the biggest contribution in bringing the concept of Deva, which can be an individual [form] of life, or a Kingdom, that either can include “angels,” or not, … and nature people/spirits, or not. These variants are also indicated in Eastern religions. In fact, the term Deva is so old, there is no longer a clear interpretation from Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, … or even older cultures. They were more evident [forms] of life in the past, and this has to do with the comparison of their “involutionary cycle” to our “evolutionary cycle” if you want to look up a theosophical rationale. In short, this parallel kingdom of life was MORE visible than it is today. So prevalent was its experience, that the same expressions of life are made note of in art, myth (an “unknown”), legend and art of every culture and peoples in the world, EVER.

This kingdom is not just a [form] or sets of forms in and of themselves, [they], all of them, are “builders of form.” The “shining ones,” or Devas, could be any class of life of this parallel level of life, our just the nature people/spirits to some cultures, can include angels to others, can just be a class above angels in yet another, or can refer to all of the above. As builders of form, they INDUCE form. Imagine atoms coming together to make the many different elements. Also, imagine this happening on various sub-planes of our Physical, AND on Planes above us. This latter is important to consider because it is ONLY man who is generally limited to one plane; elsewhere, everywhere else, we can traverse above and below our level … this is a theosophical concept, but you may have to research it in neo-theosophical literature.

Imagine the primordial gasses in the vast Universe before it took shape as galaxies, planets and inhabitants. That swirling cycling effect, which I would say cool be a root understanding of “cycle” in Theosophy, you might see as the process of forms taking place. You will also see in it the deva consciousness likened to “salamanders,” the ancient wisdom nature spirit consciousness … and a basis for much of what we call magic today. It is the process of [action.] It lacks only correspondence [purpose] to lead to manifestation. At this level, you will go beyond what Theosophy would explain, except through inference; you would have to go to old Assyrian text, early Babylonian works, even esoteric Kabala (today’s Kabala is not identical to the old,) Sumerian art and cuneiform writings, and the symbology of all, and early Egyptian cultures to see how magic came about. You could pick up a lot of insight, however, from H. P. Blavatsky’s first great work, “Isis Unveiled.”

So, if you put this all together, which is precisely what magic is, you have your answers. Magic draws from natural forces (just forgotten,) it can cross sub-planes and planes (which gives it much of its razzle dazzle), AND [can] employ the Deva kingdom to include nature people/spirits and angels (which have characteristics, proclivities and purpose ̶. And they are very real.)

When magic or mystical processes would take advantage of consciousness and beings outside of the Deva Kingdom, say from the lower or mid-levels of the Astral, then I would say you are entering into dangerous territory … It will be the realm most often used in the dark arts, dark magic. I caution against traversing there most strenuously because the human mind of today has simply lost touch with the level of consciousness one would have to deal with, and as an active participant here in the Physical, you have virtually NO were-with-all to understand those realms for [practical] purposes. Basically, you would lose, in the end.
Going above the mid-level of the Astral, and into the Mental Plane probably goes beyond what most would call magic, and enters the realm of intuition, and miracles and manifestation. Technically, one is taking advantage of the “ring-pass-not” concept H.P.B. speaks to in her Theosophical writings. Since the energies that life forms draw to themselves from other Planes (and we all have such a draw to all seven Planes), one is making an opportunity of the fact that there is gradiation of energy/consciousness once we leave the physical. Said in reverse, ONLY in the physical are these energies interpolated, intertwined, dynamic, in motion, merged, and in kaos.

>>> Not sure I see that magic, per se, shows up [in all of this] as pertains the preceding topic, but it would be a natural occurrence there in a pointed or purposeful way, but exists as easily as anything else. I, frankly, do not believe there are many that have a real clue about magic now, … and only slightly more so during the time of the aforementioned writer’s time. As regards “the Absoluteness’” fondness of magic, NOT to suggest any being-ness, [that] which serves to form a basis for magic has occurred as naturally as anything and everything else. Evolution has tended to [direct] us down avenues like water down a channel, however, so we don’t avail ourselves to all that the Absoluteness makes available. Consider that prior races DID. And, consider too as we move away from the densest part of human existence, we AGAIN will take advantage of what is before us, because we simply will remember ALL of what we learned in our [total] existences, and not this mere lifetime. That spiritual ascension takes advantage of our life through Kingdoms, although that too you will find better illustrated in the post Blavatsky literature.

>>> Actually, to be a bit more precise, it is simply that you perceive above the four lower physical sub-planes. Technically, it is dimensionally different. You may enter another Plane or two, as well. Each and every sub-plane and Plane has a bigger context than we are familiar with. So very great is the dimensional difference that one cannot usually put into words the experience. But, [experience] is in itself the answer. If experience occurs, than the knowledge and words will follow – in time. If these occurrences are happening naturally for you, than proceed by gaining knowledge as you can. If these are forced occurrences, than I would caution you away from them because you will not be able to draw from wisdom you’ve gained in past lives – basically, to adopt a [currently] classical theosophical methodology, “you are not ready.”

>>> Not of the wall, quite understandable. This is psychism, though, and not magic. The perception of things that are graphic, such as the floors above, are unavoidable perceptions. The [conversation], however, you want to consider carefully. Since you do not yet have the knowledge behind you, (I am presuming), then [listen], as you won’t have much choice, but do not [invoke] or initiate. And do NOT act on anything you get. Also, and importantly, you must show NO EMOTION. In time you will see if emotions are necessary, then you are connection “too low.” It is simply unwise to connect beneath your own level of consciousness. One thing HAS to occur, you will rise eventually to your highest proclivity – remember, if emotion is required for these connections, than you should NOT trust them as beneficial. And, make things stand the test of time … lower consciousness is [quite] impatient. Always practice and work towards reaching your Higher self first, and as often as you can, as this [actually] raises the level of your constitution, and is self-protective. If these things are inevitable for you, than above all learn all you can. Theosophy is a great foundation – it however, tends to group the level of human consciousness the same way as religion would; ergo, we can be “the masses.” Only you can decide where you belong. Err on the side of caution, however.

>>> Well, Kabbalah would include Magic. Ascension would be far beyond it. If you are pursuing magic you are drawing yourself to other aspects of this realm, and the past. If your course is ascension, then, you might consider Yoga, meditation, and connecting to your Higher Self, or Higher Mind (there is a Theosophical difference to some) as the more direct route.

Consider that this inclination you currently have towards magic, or even the psychic realms could be a remembrance of the past such that you are meant to go beyond them in this life time, and not repeat them. Making this determination has historically occurred traditionally between ages 30 – 45; which might be helpful information. Ages 0-7, and 13-19 are the ages of concern for those who have both psychic and magical inclinations … and considerable caution is advisable because you will not understand that inter-connectivity you talked about in your opening question.



On the side, you might want to consider first reading Isis Unveiled. Then Besant and Leadbeater's small boos, as they are targetted towards specific subjects. They tackle the Secret Doctrine. These should help you find your way in the theosophical world.

^^^ Thank you, lots to ponder as usual.

I started out with Besant/Leadbeater etc, because I found the orientation on specific topics helpful before moving onto the 'whole'.

Happy New Year!

Theosophy does speak to seven Great Planes of Consciousness, that is at least large enought to consider the Planets also evolving through it.

As regards the Deva Kingdom, if you would be speaking to the Nature Kingdom, they are first of all, a part of this Physical Plane ... they simply occupy three sub-planes we are not using. Some would theosophically consider them a whole three Planes below us (which would allow that there are Planes above the core Planes), but Theosophy tends to focus on that core 7, and not 12 or 13. Seven tends to be the emphisis in literature, but Theosophy does have a focus to explain consciousness with humanity as the central character, so we can relate to it.

I think it is safe to say, that Theosophy would consider all consciousness in a Manifested Universe to be evolving.

I believe Blavatsky wanted to introduce us to the Deva Kingdom first, because being part of the physical, that is in its three sub-planes we do not currently resonate with, they are THE EASIEST life other than physical to see, hear and comprehend. This is going to be far more true for nature people/spirits than for Angels, or a strict Deva-class above angels - but they too have a connection. Gnomes are not hard to see. Elves are more difficult. Fairies are selectively seen. Leprechauns are very selective. Most people don't see Salamanders, but there is a way. Angels are not hard to see. Deva's (literal ones) are more difficult because their form isn't anthropromorphic accept by choice, and thus more bright orb like.) Within that kingdom are many types, perhaps even thousands, compared to a solitary human consciousness. Blavatsky as well as Bessant/Leadbeater could see this realm of life. It was Blavatsky's hope that if we could see this readily available parallel series of life, THEN, we could more easily accept that our own consciousness evolves to bodies in higher spheres, which ARE perceptable ... at least, that's how I interpret her intent. I should think people, Theosophists can and will choose not to see it that way, though, given the later changes in the society's agenda away from clairvoyance.

Sephiroth. Which is Kabbalistic, and serves your magicl interests too speaks to spheres in slight difference to Theosophy's Planes of Existence, or Consciousness. There are parallels. Blavatsky also speaks of it, and presents that Kabbalistic view that this tree grows downwards out of Heaven. The Tree is kabbalistically, the pathways to God. Although presented with a different organization, and for a different culture, it is a counter to Theosophy in many ways.

Where you mention sparks, you may at first be speaking to the sphere of Kether, the crown, the creative act of God --- such being the first separation (separating light from dark) and producing Chokhmah and Binah, the FIRST PAIR OF OPPOSITES. Therefore, it speaks to polarity and duality, and Kether being part of the first Triangle finds its counterpart in Theosophy's first Trinity. The Chokhmah and Binah spheres are the first duality, but within the Triangle.

Now there, the tension between Binah (God's passive understanding) and Chokhmah (God's active wisdom) produces the Divine creative spark. That spark becomes the seed of life and generates all [form] in the Universe. This too has its counterpart in Theosophy.

Theosophy is more a presentation on a collection of Ancient Wisdom, in my opinion, and not a source. So, it will have taken into account the Kaballah, and other schools of thought. Its amalumation of the Ancient Wisdom might be its own, but the tenets of its philosophy draws from the ancients collectively.

This is somewhat what religions have done too. To your above questions, consider Islam. It would speak to the Deva Kingdom as separate from Angels, and Humans, but it would include Devas along with Humans as the target of their scriptures ... as both would have free will, karma and evolution.

Theosophy will structure evolution (and involution where the Deva Kingdom is involved) (although, since man fell into matter, it all seems like involution at this stage). That structure suggests the path of progress humans make would be different from Nature People/Nature Spirits, Angels and Devas ... yet similar in concept. And, too, would suggest even the highest planets traverse this course. It tends to skip the animal and plant kingdom, but not entirely, (out of intent to focus on humans) where the neu Theosophy will present that evolution openly.

Yes, I will typically sit there, eyes wide open, 'sensing' something between imagery and some rather inexplicable "how did that get in my head" perception. Usually I can figure out one or two or even three meanings on a personal level- but I always know there are more meanings behind it- and I know it usually takes 2 or 3 months and then I have a strange epiphany, hand touches forehand and says, duuuuh!

Interesting you mentioned druids, wizards and magi. I'm precisely talking to one who identified as Druid and Wizard in past lifes. Some rather interesting conversations- and visuals! (dragons included!)

I noticed the visuals ranging culturally all over the place, Sumer and Egypt among them, 'greekefied' Egypt views included. (and beyond humans, said Druid has some FUNKY looking ET guides, lol- this is probably the point where most would declare me nuts :ph43r: )

That would makes a lot of sense. (to me)

Sometimes I thinking I am connecting way above my head, as long as they are patient and hysterically funny, I feel alright with that. No invocations, just 'informational talks' if you will.

Lots of miracle talk, as in "just ask for it, you know you have to ask for one". So I think all is well. I've seen a few being 'dispensed' after asking, so I guess that was a good divider between magic and miracles.

Thanks for the reminder to talk to Higher Self more often, admittedly one gets lazy about that when one gets distracted by blurry angels and cute dragons.