This is an occult topic you do not hear about often - even among very educated people. It was a discipline examined by a few scholars in the Middle Ages, but has not really been examined since then. I assume the effort to re-establish it as a discipline would get one laughed at in today's times. There is even a modern satire about it - "how many angels could fit on the head of a needle?" - yet I feel a discussion of this can be very productive, and can help us get a better view of the world.
If angelology is the study of angels, the first question to ask here is: what is an angel? In art, angels are portrayed as humanlike creatures with wings. We see them portrayed often in Christian, Islamic, and Jewish art. They are God's attendants, and are seen as powerful, immortal, intelligent creatures. They do not age or experience the infirmities of humans. Often, they intervene in human affairs as guides or helpers to the prophets and seers of history.
There are a couple of interesting questions here.
1. I think the first danger with angels is the extent to which we anthropomorphize them. By thinking of them as men with wings we limit our comprehension of what these entities would actually be. We think of them as being the same or very similar to us as physical humans, when in practice they would not be.
2. Thomas Aquinas' satirized question, "can multiple angels exist in the same place?" represents the danger of discussing angels. It is important whenever discussing them to keep an open mind because they would be very different from us. Perhaps the idea of "place" is not even appropriate here. (For more on this, I recommend Carl Sagan's explanation of "The Fourth Dimension.")
3. I think a useful exercise when discussing angels is to start with the "hierarchy of animals" we see in nature. This lets us speculate on how this hierarchy could go further from what we experience.
*Plants - Alive, but not "aware"
*Insects - Alive and aware, but lacking emotion and reason
*Animals (Sheep, dogs) - Alive and aware, with emotion but lacking reason
*Humans - Alive and aware, with emotion and reason
There is a clear hierarchy of animals in nature. At the "base" we have creatures that are physically alive but not conscious (plants); while at the top we have creatures that possess both physical life as well as "intellectual life" (humans).
So, the idea here with angels is there is another step beyond human.
*Angels - Alive and aware, with emotion and reason, but lacking physical form
It is hard to apprehend what an angel is because it transcends all the ideas we are familiar with. Yet by listing these we can see that the concept does make logical sense. I think that perhaps the best way to explain an angel is that it is a creature that would consist of "pure intellect."
4. I first opened my mind to the idea of angels when I wrapped my head around this. I thought of them as being "pure formless intelligence," beyond body, matter, or time.
5. Yet as I thought more about this, and read some accounts of OOB writers, I began to alter my perspective. I decided that if an angel is indeed "pure intellect," then nothing prevents it from assuming a form - any form. An angel could take on the form of a lion, man, eagle, or anything. Its ultimate nature is beyond form, but nothing prevents it from becoming any of these for a time.
6. The two big sources on angelology are the Christian theologians Pseudo-Dionysius (late 500s) and Thomas Aquinas (1200s).
7. Pseudo-Dionysius is famous for his hierarchy of angels. He ranked them as follows.
*Lowest - Angels, Archangels, Principalities
*Middle - Powers, Virtues, Dominations
*Highest - Thrones, Cherubim, Seraphim
So, Pseudo-Dionysius thought there were nine ranks of angels. There were other theologians who came up with similar lists; although their numbers would sometimes be different. It seems the most common numbers of angel "ranks" were seven, eight, or nine.
I find there are some interesting corollaries here. The first is to Buddhism, where the Buddha listed eight ranks of deva which he corresponded with the eight jhanas. I also think of the Prophet Mohammed, who in the Koran makes reference to "seven heavens." It is just interesting to me that each of these sources is coming to approximately the same number (~7-9).
8. That said, based on William Buhlman's account, it seems these perspectives may only be partly correct. Buhlman argues in favor of a vast multidimensional universe. "Why seven?" he asks. I have personally come to adopt this view.
9. I think the purpose of the "seven" number is to show there is a shift in these beings. That is, the "lower" angels are much closer in nature to humans. They may be immortal, but may still possess the forms of humans, or at least act out their existences in this way. The "higher" angels on the other hand would be increasingly formless.
A Few More Thoughts on the Topic
10. One issue with angels - which seems to be a product of the medieval mind - is the idea that angels cannot have sex. No doubt that over the centuries this caused many to lose all interest in theology. :)
I think that this idea would be true for the "higher" angels that are beyond form (and here we would say the pleasure they experience is superior to physical sex)... yet this would be quite wrong to say for the "lower" angels, as they would be capable of sex (and in fact sex in a much superior form to that of human beings). Here I am thinking of the devas of Hinduism and Buddhism - in which the sexual prowess of the gods is often alluded to.
11. Another question of angels is over the necessity of them. I have thought about this for many years and I have begun to incline to the idea that they are necessary in order to have a "just" cosmos. The idea here is that in order for karma to function effectively, one must be able to become one of these beings. It is simply not possible to fulfill so many aspects of karma with the limits of the physical world. This is a question you will have to answer on your own, but this is my thought on it.
12. Related to this is the "empty universe" problem. This is often posed by astronomers when they look at the physical cosmos and question why human life seems to be alone. By this perspective the universe only seems "empty" because most everyone is not here in the physical world but rather is in the nonphysical cosmos.
13. How angels would relate to reincarnation and enlightenment I cannot claim to know all the answers to. Having read Robert Monroe's books, it would seem there is a distinction between an "angel" that has had no prior existence as a human and an "angel" that has had a prior existence as a human. Monroe suggested that the latter was "wiser" as a result, but that in every other way their powers were the same.
14. In the west, the goal of one's spiritual life is to join the ranks of these creatures. In the east however, the Buddha offers an alternative perspective. According to the Buddha, one's existence as one of these formless intelligences is temporary, and thus the highest spiritual goal is to reach the transcendent state of Nirvana.
The dualists who favor angelic rebirth would say that this type of existence is eternal, so the idea an angel can come to an end raises the question of how. The Buddhist scriptures say that "eventually one's good karma exhausts itself" but I do not follow what this means.
15. There are tales in OOB writings of people seeing or recalling "descents" - that is, these intelligences taking on human forms. A human incarnation would end all one's knowledge of this mode of existence. Once incarnated as a human, one would forget everything and have to go through all the work required in order to join their ranks again.
16. A final question is if it is possible to achieve enlightenment as one of these creatures. If one does not finish one's spiritual work in a human life, can one complete it as one of these creatures? The Buddha seems to suggest that the answer to this is "yes." This is the concept of the "nonreturners" who go on to the "pure abodes." Do these "pure abodes" perhaps refer to the state of the "higher" angels? It is hard to say.
If angelology is the study of angels, the first question to ask here is: what is an angel? In art, angels are portrayed as humanlike creatures with wings. We see them portrayed often in Christian, Islamic, and Jewish art. They are God's attendants, and are seen as powerful, immortal, intelligent creatures. They do not age or experience the infirmities of humans. Often, they intervene in human affairs as guides or helpers to the prophets and seers of history.
There are a couple of interesting questions here.
1. I think the first danger with angels is the extent to which we anthropomorphize them. By thinking of them as men with wings we limit our comprehension of what these entities would actually be. We think of them as being the same or very similar to us as physical humans, when in practice they would not be.
2. Thomas Aquinas' satirized question, "can multiple angels exist in the same place?" represents the danger of discussing angels. It is important whenever discussing them to keep an open mind because they would be very different from us. Perhaps the idea of "place" is not even appropriate here. (For more on this, I recommend Carl Sagan's explanation of "The Fourth Dimension.")
3. I think a useful exercise when discussing angels is to start with the "hierarchy of animals" we see in nature. This lets us speculate on how this hierarchy could go further from what we experience.
*Plants - Alive, but not "aware"
*Insects - Alive and aware, but lacking emotion and reason
*Animals (Sheep, dogs) - Alive and aware, with emotion but lacking reason
*Humans - Alive and aware, with emotion and reason
There is a clear hierarchy of animals in nature. At the "base" we have creatures that are physically alive but not conscious (plants); while at the top we have creatures that possess both physical life as well as "intellectual life" (humans).
So, the idea here with angels is there is another step beyond human.
*Angels - Alive and aware, with emotion and reason, but lacking physical form
It is hard to apprehend what an angel is because it transcends all the ideas we are familiar with. Yet by listing these we can see that the concept does make logical sense. I think that perhaps the best way to explain an angel is that it is a creature that would consist of "pure intellect."
4. I first opened my mind to the idea of angels when I wrapped my head around this. I thought of them as being "pure formless intelligence," beyond body, matter, or time.
5. Yet as I thought more about this, and read some accounts of OOB writers, I began to alter my perspective. I decided that if an angel is indeed "pure intellect," then nothing prevents it from assuming a form - any form. An angel could take on the form of a lion, man, eagle, or anything. Its ultimate nature is beyond form, but nothing prevents it from becoming any of these for a time.
6. The two big sources on angelology are the Christian theologians Pseudo-Dionysius (late 500s) and Thomas Aquinas (1200s).
7. Pseudo-Dionysius is famous for his hierarchy of angels. He ranked them as follows.
*Lowest - Angels, Archangels, Principalities
*Middle - Powers, Virtues, Dominations
*Highest - Thrones, Cherubim, Seraphim
So, Pseudo-Dionysius thought there were nine ranks of angels. There were other theologians who came up with similar lists; although their numbers would sometimes be different. It seems the most common numbers of angel "ranks" were seven, eight, or nine.
I find there are some interesting corollaries here. The first is to Buddhism, where the Buddha listed eight ranks of deva which he corresponded with the eight jhanas. I also think of the Prophet Mohammed, who in the Koran makes reference to "seven heavens." It is just interesting to me that each of these sources is coming to approximately the same number (~7-9).
8. That said, based on William Buhlman's account, it seems these perspectives may only be partly correct. Buhlman argues in favor of a vast multidimensional universe. "Why seven?" he asks. I have personally come to adopt this view.
9. I think the purpose of the "seven" number is to show there is a shift in these beings. That is, the "lower" angels are much closer in nature to humans. They may be immortal, but may still possess the forms of humans, or at least act out their existences in this way. The "higher" angels on the other hand would be increasingly formless.
A Few More Thoughts on the Topic
10. One issue with angels - which seems to be a product of the medieval mind - is the idea that angels cannot have sex. No doubt that over the centuries this caused many to lose all interest in theology. :)
I think that this idea would be true for the "higher" angels that are beyond form (and here we would say the pleasure they experience is superior to physical sex)... yet this would be quite wrong to say for the "lower" angels, as they would be capable of sex (and in fact sex in a much superior form to that of human beings). Here I am thinking of the devas of Hinduism and Buddhism - in which the sexual prowess of the gods is often alluded to.
11. Another question of angels is over the necessity of them. I have thought about this for many years and I have begun to incline to the idea that they are necessary in order to have a "just" cosmos. The idea here is that in order for karma to function effectively, one must be able to become one of these beings. It is simply not possible to fulfill so many aspects of karma with the limits of the physical world. This is a question you will have to answer on your own, but this is my thought on it.
12. Related to this is the "empty universe" problem. This is often posed by astronomers when they look at the physical cosmos and question why human life seems to be alone. By this perspective the universe only seems "empty" because most everyone is not here in the physical world but rather is in the nonphysical cosmos.
13. How angels would relate to reincarnation and enlightenment I cannot claim to know all the answers to. Having read Robert Monroe's books, it would seem there is a distinction between an "angel" that has had no prior existence as a human and an "angel" that has had a prior existence as a human. Monroe suggested that the latter was "wiser" as a result, but that in every other way their powers were the same.
14. In the west, the goal of one's spiritual life is to join the ranks of these creatures. In the east however, the Buddha offers an alternative perspective. According to the Buddha, one's existence as one of these formless intelligences is temporary, and thus the highest spiritual goal is to reach the transcendent state of Nirvana.
The dualists who favor angelic rebirth would say that this type of existence is eternal, so the idea an angel can come to an end raises the question of how. The Buddhist scriptures say that "eventually one's good karma exhausts itself" but I do not follow what this means.
15. There are tales in OOB writings of people seeing or recalling "descents" - that is, these intelligences taking on human forms. A human incarnation would end all one's knowledge of this mode of existence. Once incarnated as a human, one would forget everything and have to go through all the work required in order to join their ranks again.
16. A final question is if it is possible to achieve enlightenment as one of these creatures. If one does not finish one's spiritual work in a human life, can one complete it as one of these creatures? The Buddha seems to suggest that the answer to this is "yes." This is the concept of the "nonreturners" who go on to the "pure abodes." Do these "pure abodes" perhaps refer to the state of the "higher" angels? It is hard to say.