The Greater Wisdom

05 Apr, 2024

“There are six sparks in the sky, each with six spheres. The sphere of the sphere is the sphere of the sphere.”

Thus says The Greater Wisdom of the Age of Ages. A portentous statement, to be certain—one agreed to be of the utmost significance—but far more difficult to explicate. It is little wonder then that so many schools of thought have arisen to explain it.

The Blödelberg school see the key as lying in classical astronomy, with the six sparks in the sky and their corresponding spheres to be associated with the classical planets and heavenly spheres; six, that is, excluding the Sun. And why should the Sun be so excluded? They say that it is obvious that a minuscule thing like a spark, while acceptable for such as even the Evening Star, would be grossly unsuited for the Sun. Then what of the Moon their critics ask? On that they are unclear.

By contrast, the Dummköpfe school see it as possessing an astrological significance. Six and six together make twelve, as of the signs of the Zodiac. A spark is fire, the sky is air, and spheres, like the sphere of the earth and its waters. The four elements, just as the signs are divided. Such an interpretation finds little favor in other corners.

The Dwaaskerk school, departing from those other schools and conceiving of it as an eschatological text, interpret the passage as signifying the coming of the End. They are, of course, not so foolish as to think it is meant literally, recounting the events of Armageddon, but only as employing a common sparks and spheres imagery.¹

Other schools, such as the Baladí, believe that any such exoteric interpretations do the great work a tremendous disservice, focusing on such physical phenomena as they do. They would ridicule those who think that the sky must refer to an earthly sky. For, surely, to suppose that such a meaningful treatise could be referring to such mundanity is laughable. No, they would have it, the sky refers to the above—to upward motion—toward spiritual perfection; the spark, the animating essence; six to the six states of the perfection of the great soul toward the greater power.²

The Panzana-Fola school, while agreeing with Baladí criticisms of the exoteric schools, rather see the sky as the walls of the prison of the soul; the sparks the hostile powers, the matter which confines the spirits of the greater light; the spheres as the arenas of limitation, the realms of separation. For the likewise esoteric Lögnarestad school, the sparks would denote the lost light of the realms above, preserved, such as it is, in the material of the emptiness. To them, the sky denotes this greater above, doubly, as we are striving, upwards, lost children of the lost, to return to the rightful place of our great power.

But, then, what of “the sphere of the sphere is the sphere of the sphere”? For surely the true importance of the passage must lie within that most tantalizingly difficult of sentences.

Some within both the Blödelberg and Dummköpfe schools hold that the sphere of the sphere passage refers to nothing more than the realm of the earthly sphere; they argue thus that the realm of human experience is the experience of the earthly realm. Again, the esoteric schools would scoff at such “childish farcical scribbling”.³

One such interpretation, common to the Panzana-Fola school, would have it that the sphere of the sphere refers to the great pleroma beyond all to which we prisoners of the nothing aspire; thus the fullness is the fullness, beyond essences, beyond attributes. Words cannot but fail.

Many in such schools as the Baladí and Lögnarestad, however, would argue that the sphere is to be understood as the perfection and perfecting of the great soul; that is, that the perfection of the great soul is in the perfecting of the great soul. Others would disagree and see the spheres as the embodiment of the Darkness. For them the implication of the passage is dire, for the Darkness is in the Realm of Darkness, to be in the Darkness is to be of the Darkness. We are lost because we are lost.

There are even those, in all schools, who contend that it is beyond the current state of exegesis to furnish a serious explanation.

The Rien school, breaking with all others, see the whole of the verse as being meaningless. Suffice it to say, theirs is a rare position amongst scholars of the great work. No, it is agreed, the passage must mean something. It must mean something.

As for myself, I can say only that significance of the text lies in its greater significance; for truly it is the case, that mankind remains a mystery to mankind.