If you want to join the discussion, just click here..
Back up to Mutant's Home
Subject:
Ring Thing
Date:
Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:44:46 -0700
From:
"Joe Steve Swick III"
BCC:
"Nicholas S. Literski" ,
"Stephen Escobedo" ,
"Tim Rathbone" , "Brian Irwin" ,
"Rich Hiltbrunn" ,
"Curtis Porritt" ,
"Gail Porritt"
Hello Friends:
On two separate occasions that I am aware of, Joseph Smith used a ring as an
image of eternity --of an "eternal round" which has no beginning and no end.
The first time was in 1841, and the second in 1844 (TPJS, p. 181, 354).
In relation to this, I though you might enjoy the following Ring Service
from the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. In one of the
high points of the Scottish Rite degrees, the Brother is presented with a
gold band, which he is told to always wear. Upon his death, there is a
ceremony in which this ring is presented to a close family member or friend.
Note the emphasis on the eternity of our relationships with those we love:
"As a part to the solemn and impressive ceremonies...while he was kneeling
at the sacred altar...and surrounded by Brethren of the Rite, he was
presented with a gold ring, which was placed upon the wedding finger of his
left hand, as a symbol of the alliance that he had that evening contracted
with Virtue and the Virtuous. This ring had inscribed within it the
legend --'Whom virtue unites, death cannot separate.'
"The ring, being endless, is an emblem of eternity, and with its motto
symbolizes the eternal nature of Virtue and Truth. He was charged never to
part with it, during his life, and at death only to his wife, his eldest
son, or his dearest friend. And now, in accordance with that covenant. and
the solemn usages of our Order, it becomes my duty to perform the last ...
ceremony connected with this ring.
"...in the name of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry,
and in the name of your dear departed.... I present you with this memento
and with it ...[the] condolence of his brethren, with whom, in life, he was
united. I trust that when you look upon this ring, you will always be
reminded of the great truth contained in the legend: 'Whom Virtue unites,
death cannot separate.' ("Offices of a Lodge of Sorrow and Ring Service of
the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry," pp. 21-2).
The above wording is from the ceremony as it was performed in the late
1800's. However, please keep in mind that the degree in which the ring is
bestowed was a part of the Morin working and is found in the Francken
manuscript (1783), with a charge to the Brother almost identical to that
given in the ring ceremony above. Further, the degree is mentioned in
Bernard's _Light on Masonry_ (1829, Utica). My suspicion is that the Ring
Ceremony is at least as old as the early 1800's, although I have not yet
traced it back.
Regards,
Joe Steve Swick III
32° A&ASR, Valley of Salt Lake, Orient of Utah
-----
Below are Joseph Smith's own comments regarding the ring as a symbol of
eternity, as related in the various extant accounts of the 7 April 1844
discourse:
I am dwelling on the immutibility of the spirit of man, is it logic to say
the spirit of man had a begining & yet had no end, it does not have a
begining or end, my ring is like the Exhistanc of man it has no begining or
end, if cut into their would be a begining & end, so with man if it had a
begining it will have an end, if I am right I might say God never had power
to create the spirit of man, God himself could not create himself.
Intelligence is Eternal & it is self exhisting, (Joseph Smith, as quoted,
WWJ, 7 April 1844)
-----
I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man, the
im[mor]t. Sp. bec. it has no beging. Suppose you cut it into but as the
D[evil] lives there wod. be an end all the fools & wise men from the beging.
of creation who say that man had begin—they must have an end & then the doc
of annihilitn. wod. be true—but if I am right I mit. with boldness proclaim
from the housetop that God never had power to create the Sp of Man at all—it
is ne God himself cod. not create himself—intelligence is self existent it
is a sp. from age to end & there is no creatn abt. it (Joseph Smith, as
quoted, Thomas Bullock Report, 7 April 1844)
-----
Is it logic to say that a spirit is immortal and yet have a beginning
because if a spirit have a beginning it will have an end—good
logic—illustrated by his ring. All the fools learned & wise men that comes
and tells that man has a beginning proves that [p.360] he must have an end
and if that doctrine is true then the doctrine of annihilation is true. But
if I am right then I might be bold to say that God never did have power to
create the spirit of man at all. He could not create himself—Intelligence
exists upon a selfexistent principle—is a spirit from age to age & no
creation about it (Joseph Smith, as quoted, William Clayton Report, 7 April
1844)
-----
I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man—the
immortal part, because it has no beginning. Suppose you cut it in two; then
it has a beginning and an end; but join it again, and it continues one
eternal round. So with the spirit of man. As the Lord liveth, if it has a
beginning it will have an end. All the fools and learned and wise men from
the beginning of creation, who say that the spirit of man had a beginning,
prove that it must have an end: and if that doctrine is true, then the
doctrine of annihilation would be true But if I am right, I might with
boldness proclaim from the house tops that God never had the power to create
the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself. Intelligence
is eternal, and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from
age to age, and there is no creation about it. (Joseph Smith, Standard
Amalgamation, 7 April 1844)
ERASTUS SNOW
The course of God, we are told by the prophet Nephi, is one eternal round;
that, like eternity, it has neither beginning nor end, and is illustrated in
the Book of Abraham by the hieroglyphic of the circle. You may start upon
this ring at any given point, and in traversing it you will come to the same
point--it is without beginning, without end.. (JD 2:23; October 1879)
Subject:
Re: [Fwd: Rings and Eternal Relationships]
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 01:32:51 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
Andy Mcguire ,
Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" ,
"Theurgus@aol.com" ,
"jswick@cris.com" ,
"rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
References:
1
Thanx for that, Joe. It really resonates with my recent experiences.
Whenever I here this analogy, though, I always think of reincarnation.
People say that Joseph secretly believed in reincarnation. This is also
not at odds with my recent experiences, but I balk at it because of my
long Mormon indoctrination. I feel safe in that, because Mormonism has
never disappointed me in the way that it clarifies the most basic and
the most radical insights. (Uh, thats Mormonism #1=). The economy of
my universe says that bodies are scarce, not spirits. Any thoughts out there?
proclus
> Subject: Rings and Eternal Relationships
> Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 17:48:05 -0800
> From: Joe Steve Swick III
> To: Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com,
> Andy Mcguire , Kathleen McGuire ,
> "R. Trent Reynolds" , rds@acsu.buffalo.edu,
> rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
>
> A letter I sent to the History List. Thought you might like to see it here.
>
> Cheers,
> JSW
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ring Thing.emlName: Ring Thing.eml
> Type: message/rfc822
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
[Fwd: remember kento?]
Date:
Sun, 15 Nov 1998 15:49:31 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
"proclus@mac.com"
Subject:
Subject:
remember kento?
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 02:13:48 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
Andy Mcguire , Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" , "Theurgus@aol.com" ,
"jswick@cris.com" , "rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" , "dcombe@rain.org"
I think that I have found his website on eagle-net. Maybe some of you
have already visited it. There is some wonderful golden ratio stuff
there. Here is that address.
http://eagle-net.org/phikent/phi.html
Also, I found a charming little site called Mother in Heaven. Here is
that address.
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/5092/
Many RE:gards
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
Mormon Reincarnation
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 09:04:04 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
Hail Mutants,
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that "reincarnation"
was being refered to in the New Testament, i.e. The man born
blind, ect., as well as rumors that Joseph Smith was "ordaining"
people to be Adams and "Christs" on other planets.
If we take Lurianic Kabbalah as the basic model for Joseph's
theology and metaphysics we have to come to grips with
Kabbalahs insistance that souls go through "Gilgul" (reinincarnation)
until they are "Tikkun" (rectified).
The Sufis don't want to talk about reincarnation at all because they
see it as a stimulant of the imagination, and they consider imagination
to be an out of control monster in most people.
For what it's worth,
Ken Shaw
Subject:
Take a look
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 09:04:47 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
Subj: Jewish Meditation: The Next Step
Date: 11/11/98 12:20:20 PM Central Standard Time
From: rweisz@SWCP.COM (swcp)
Sender: DEVEKUT@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU (Jewish Meditation Discussion List)
Reply-to: DEVEKUT@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU (Jewish Meditation Discussion List)
To: DEVEKUT@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Chochmat HaLev presents a
"Jewish Meditation Conference: The Next Step".
Location:
Congregation Emanu-El
2 Lake Street
San Francisco, CA 94118
Dates:
February 13-14
Co-Sposnors:
Congregation Emanu-El, San Francisco
Metivta, Los Angeles
Teachers: Sylvia Boorstein, Rabbi David Cooper,
Dr. Avram Davis, Rabbi Ted Falcon,
Dr. Nan Fink Gefen, Estelle Frankel,
Rabbi Shefa Gold, Rabbi Alan Lew,
Rabbi Jonathan Omer-Man, Rabbi Rami Shapiro,
Rabbi David Zeller, Rabbi Helen Cohn, Shoshana Cooper,
Rabbi Lavey Derbey, Rabbi Steven Fisdel, Etiel Herring,
Daniel Lev, Rabbi Jeff Roth, Jhos and Bon Singer, and
K'vod Wieder.
Workshops include: Daily Contemplative Morning Practice,
Spiritual Intelligence -- Midot-ation, The heart of Listening,
A covenant of Silence, God is a Verb, Meditations of the Mothers,
Hitkavut and Devekut, Beginning the Journey,
Ecstasy and Discipline: Applying the Power of Chant,
Basic Meditation ... for Beginners, Bring Me Your Broken Heart,
Mesirah; Letting Go Into Our Deepest Truth,
Holy Melody: Breaking the Brain Barrier,
The Mystic Path f Reb Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev,
Similarities and Differences Between Meditation Traditions,
Burning for God: The Practice of Hitlahavut,
Meditation as Healing, Creative Borrowing: Using Non-Jewish
Meditation to Enhance Jewish Spirituality,
Minyan: Ten Practices for Living Life with Integrity.
For additional information, you may
call Chochmat HaLev (510) 704-9687 or visit www.chochmat.org
Reuven
--------------------
Chochmat HaLev presents a
"Jewish Meditation Conference: The Next Step".
Location:
Congregation Emanu-El
2 Lake Street
San Francisco, CA 94118
Dates:
February 13-14
Co-Sposnors:
Congregation Emanu-El, San Francisco
Metivta, Los Angeles
Teachers: Sylvia Boorstein,
Rabbi David Cooper,
Dr. Avram Davis, Rabbi Ted Falcon,
Dr. Nan Fink Gefen, Estelle Frankel,
Rabbi Shefa Gold, Rabbi Alan Lew,
Rabbi Jonathan Omer-Man, Rabbi Rami Shapiro,
Rabbi David Zeller, Rabbi Helen Cohn, Shoshana Cooper,
Rabbi Lavey Derbey, Rabbi Steven Fisdel, Etiel Herring,
Daniel Lev, Rabbi Jeff Roth, Jhos and Bon Singer, and
K'vod Wieder.
Workshops include: Daily
Contemplative Morning Practice,
Spiritual Intelligence -- Midot-ation, The heart of Listening,
A covenant of Silence, God is a Verb, Meditations of the Mothers,
Hitkavut and Devekut, Beginning the Journey,
Ecstasy and Discipline: Applying the Power of Chant,
Basic Meditation ... for Beginners, Bring Me Your Broken Heart,
Mesirah; Letting Go Into Our Deepest Truth,
Holy Melody: Breaking the Brain Barrier,
The Mystic Path f Reb Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev,
Similarities and Differences Between Meditation Traditions,
Burning for God: The Practice of Hitlahavut,
Meditation as Healing, Creative Borrowing: Using Non-Jewish
Meditation to Enhance Jewish Spirituality,
Minyan: Ten Practices for Living Life with Integrity.
For additional information, you may
call Chochmat HaLev (510) 704-9687 or visit
www.chochmat.org
Reuven
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by
air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v51.16) with SMTP; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 13:20:20 -0500
Received: from LIME.EASE.LSOFT.COM (lime.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.1.41])
by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id NAA17886;
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 13:20:09 - 0500 (EST)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.19) by LIME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
(LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id ?.000906AA@LIME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 13:20:20 -0500
Received: from MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU by MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8c) with spool id 13356180 for
DEVEKUT@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 10:39:22 -0400
Received: from kitsune.swcp.com (198.59.115.2) by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP
for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id ?.C62A8B1D@maelstrom.stjohns.edu>
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 10:37:41 -0500
Received: from computer (dpm2-01.swcp.com [204.134.5.66]) by kitsune.swcp.com
(8.8.8/1.2.3) with SMTP id IAA17185 for
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 08:37:33 -0700
(MST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002E_01BE0D4E.24565380"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Message-ID: ?a01be0d89$eecdd4e0$420586cc@computer>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 08:34:48 -0700
Reply-To: Jewish Meditation Discussion List
Sender: Jewish Meditation Discussion List
From: swcp
Subject: Jewish Meditation: The Next Step
To: DEVEKUT@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject:
Re: Mormon Reincarnation
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 10:46:32 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
Andy Mcguire , Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" , "Theurgus@aol.com" ,
"jswick@cris.com" , "rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
References:
1
Theurgus@aol.com wrote:
>
> Hail Mutants,
>
> There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that "reincarnation"
> was being refered to in the New Testament, i.e. The man born
> blind, ect., as well as rumors that Joseph Smith was "ordaining"
> people to be Adams and "Christs" on other planets.
Whoa, I hadn't heard that rumor, but it makes sense in terms of JSW's
Adam-God explanation... I think. I cannot rule out the possibility of
reincarnating on other worlds, if the need arises. It also makes sense,
if you consider incarnation as uploading in the extropian sense of the
word. It also sounds like a great vacation, a la Total Recall.
I've always wondered why many reincarnation believers insist that we
continually reincarnate on this planet only. It is a wide and wonderous
universe out there. Earth is a mote in God's eye.
> If we take Lurianic Kabbalah as the basic model for Joseph's
> theology and metaphysics we have to come to grips with
> Kabbalahs insistance that souls go through "Gilgul" (reinincarnation)
> until they are "Tikkun" (rectified).
Here I'll take exception. This assumes that Joseph was merely
recreating kabbalah within Mormonism. Even yer basic mormon should
automatically suggest that Kabbalah was an apostate branch and that
Joseph simply extracted the truth that was left within it. There are
plenty of other examples of Joseph seeking out the best truths in the
world, and making them his own. He also tends not to incorporate
teachings wholesale, but rather to take the kernal and cast away the
chaff. He keeps peeling the onion (proclus looks at Andy ;-).
Don't take me wrong, Ken. I have always thought that the interesting
work we have done on this list must somehow enter the mainstream. If
that is to happen, we have to deal with the Ricky Mormon questions too.
> The Sufis don't want to talk about reincarnation at all because they
> see it as a stimulant of the imagination, and they consider imagination
> to be an out of control monster in most people.
Can I praise the Sufis in a word... maybe two? How about clarity and
objectivity? What is the opposite of superstition? If it weren't for
the Sufis, I think that we would still be looking for God in a stick.
But, the stick would be in our minds, and we wouldn't know it.
Why imagine other worlds? Look at the sky with your eyes, and you are
looking right at them. We don't need better analogies. We just need to
explore, and ACT. The map is not the territory. As I said in my Gawain
essay, "We have untied Solomon's knot, but the star did not fall from
the sky." Thank you, Ken, for rekindling my interest in the Sufis,
which we now share. Let's go swimming!
Regards,
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
Re: Mormon Reincarnation
Date:
Fri, 13 Nov 1998 23:26:02 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
CC:
Yahu007@aol.com, Sefirot1@aol.com, CYeshua@aol.com
Proclus said-
>>Don't take me wrong, Ken. I have always thought that the interesting
>>work we have done on this list must somehow enter the mainstream. If
>>that is to happen, we have to deal with the Ricky Mormon questions too.
I started out in all this in an effort to find a way to make the religion of
my
youth "operative" again. It is obvious that some vital element slipped away
after the passing of those men and women who recieved the "transmission"
directly from Joseph. All this time I've been looking for the way back to the
source of the teaching. The trail started from the masonic marks on my
underwear and lead from Freemasonry to Ritual Magic, to the Zoharic
Kabbalah of Muslim Spain, to the Templars, to the Isma'ilis and Sufis of
Islam, to the Tantric Yogis of Tibet and China, to Terence McKenna and
the "Gospel" of Meso-American Shamanism, and finally to the enigma
of the so-called "UFO" experience.
What a long strange trip it's been. What I've learned is that "Mormonism"
is none of my business, and that I can only make in "operative" in myself.
I believe that Joseph left us a trail of crumbs to follow back home in true
Isma'ili style, but it is for individuals to find their way out of the box.
I believe that "Mormonism" is still holding a potent "charge", kind of like
a storage battery, and will yet play an important role in the crisis to come,
but not in the way they expect. The "Mormon" reality tunnel is a powerful
as Judaism's or Islam's, and when push comes to shove there will be a
whole lot of True Believers loading their shit in trucks and heading for the
mountains. The "powers-that-be" will be facing an American version of
the Afghan Resistance.
For what it's worth,
Ken Shaw
Subject:
Islam and Mormonism
Date:
Sat, 14 Nov 1998 11:06:31 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
CC:
Sefirot1@aol.com, CYeshua@aol.com
"The Church's doctrinal posture toward Islam has also gone through phases.
Islam is not mentioned in either the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and
Covenants. Yet articles in Times and Seasons suggest that some LDS spokesmen
initially echoed medieval Christian views of Islam as fanatical heresy
(Editorial, 3 [15 Apr. 1842]; "Last Hour of the False Prophet," 5 [Apr. 1,
1844]; "Mahometanism," 6 [Jan. 15, 1845]). But speeches by apostles George A.
Smith and Parley P. Pratt in 1855 evoked more positive traditional
interpretations: that Islam, fulfilling biblical promises made to Ishmael
(Gen. 21), was divinely instigated to "scourge" apostate Christianity and to
curb idolatry. Perhaps unknowingly paraphrasing Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (d.
1792), George A. Smith applied historical judgment to Islam's experience: "As
they abode in the teachings which Mahomet gave them,…they were united and
prospered; but when they ceased to do this, they lost their power and
influence" (pp. 34-35)"
Subject:
Re: Mormon Reincarnation
Date:
Sat, 14 Nov 1998 13:08:35 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
Andy Mcguire , Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" , "Theurgus@aol.com" ,
"jswick@cris.com" , "rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
References:
1
Theurgus@aol.com wrote:
>
> Proclus said-
>
> >>Don't take me wrong, Ken. I have always thought that the interesting
> >>work we have done on this list must somehow enter the mainstream. If
> >>that is to happen, we have to deal with the Ricky Mormon questions too.
>
> I started out in all this in an effort to find a way to make the religion of
> my
> youth "operative" again. It is obvious that some vital element slipped away
> after the passing of those men and women who recieved the "transmission"
> directly from Joseph. All this time I've been looking for the way back to the
> source of the teaching. The trail started from the masonic marks on my
> underwear and lead from Freemasonry to Ritual Magic, to the Zoharic
> Kabbalah of Muslim Spain, to the Templars, to the Isma'ilis and Sufis of
> Islam, to the Tantric Yogis of Tibet and China, to Terence McKenna and
> the "Gospel" of Meso-American Shamanism, and finally to the enigma
> of the so-called "UFO" experience.
The people I most admire on this list are the ones who are still peeling
the onion, as it were. They are in good company, IMHO, as they
fearlessly follow through on the implications of what they learn. You
are one of those people that I admire, Ken.
> What a long strange trip it's been. What I've learned is that "Mormonism"
> is none of my business, and that I can only make in "operative" in myself.
>
> I believe that Joseph left us a trail of crumbs to follow back home in true
> Isma'ili style, but it is for individuals to find their way out of the box.
I can't say the Mormonism is none of my business, as it is my heretage.
In fact, the business analogy is still a little strange to me. My
experience in the online communities of Mormons has taught me that we
should build a highway along that "trail of crumbs". The hearts of the
children can only turn to the fathers, if we embrace our wonderful
heretage. Indeed, this is a personal, internal matter, and it is done
one individual at a time.
> I believe that "Mormonism" is still holding a potent "charge", kind of like
> a storage battery, and will yet play an important role in the crisis to come,
> but not in the way they expect. The "Mormon" reality tunnel is a powerful
> as Judaism's or Islam's, and when push comes to shove there will be a
> whole lot of True Believers loading their shit in trucks and heading for the
> mountains. The "powers-that-be" will be facing an American version of
> the Afghan Resistance.
This is certainly a scenario that any "powers that be" usurper in the
west will have to face. Since WWI these true believers are also
patriots. I would not want to be at war with _that_ tribe!
And the river opens for the righteous...
Regards,
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
Re: Mormon Reincarnation
Date:
Sun, 15 Nov 1998 13:01:16 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
Proclus-
>>I can't say the Mormonism is none of my business, as it is my heretage.
>>In fact, the business analogy is still a little strange to me
I used to think that somehow it was my job to "fix" the Church. Now I see
that everything is just as it should be, and that the so called
"Fundamentalists"
as well as the proffessional "anti-Mormons" will keep the old stuff in
rembrance.
As for me, I'm finding my way back to the simple love of God.
You da' man!
Ken Shaw
Subject:
Re: gawainEssay
Date:
Mon, 16 Nov 1998 01:13:49 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
"D.N.Samson" ,
"proclus@mac.com"
References:
1
Thank your for your interesting questions, which are the best that I
have yet received.
"D.N.Samson" wrote:
>
> --
> ------------
> D.N.Samson sou02e@bangor.ac.uk
>
> I found your essay most interesting and feel there is a valid argument in
> the reflections of Adam and Eve, however, the arguement ignores the
> following:
>
> If the Green Knight mirrors Lucifer, why does he carry a holly branch of
> peace - is this an act of deception?
I am unfamiliar with the tradition of holly as the bough of peace. In
the text, it doesn't seem to signify much, as the real signposts are
given many pointers. I'm merely an amatuer neoplatonic medievalist, so
I hope you will forgive me, if I am ignorant in this matter. Still,
peace is a word not foreign to the deceiver's lips. ;-}
> If so why is the Green Knight/Lucifer
> not punished?
Yes, Lucifer is cursed in Eden. As the tradition has it, he continues
to reign with blood and horror on this earth. I have a poor concept of
the punishment of Lucifer. This may be where the analogy breaks down.
I really don't know.
I would point out that Gawain becomes Bercilak's vassal, but not his
slave. Gawain is not retained, but rides back to Arthur's court.
Still, this is a misfortune for the knight. We are informed that the
court bemoans his bad luck. I feel that they are glad not to be the
ones who had to face this ill-fated journey.
> Finally, if Arthur and Camelot mirror God and heaven than
> why do they dismiss the seriousness of Gawain's repentence and just rejoice
> in his return.
> They take to wearing sashes as a mark of pride rather than
> knowledge of sin.
Rather, I think that they are simply trying to make him feel better, to
welcome him back home. The sash cannot be a mark of pride, but rather
an emblem of Gawain's misfortune. In taking the sash unto themselves,
they become like Christ, bearing one another's burdens. Bercilak has
succeeded in humbling Arthur's "puffed up" court. In the neoplatonic
sense of the story, the whole court has become a divided image of
Christ. Check the final stanza of the poem. It mirrors the last scene
in Arthur's court. Men's deeds come to naught, but Christ brings them
home to bliss.
This analogy makes sense, if you consider that Arthur's court is a
_lesser_ image of God's court. In the opener, they are called "the most
noble knights _under_ Christ". The author then clarifies the point, as
I quote in the essay.
Happiest of mortal kind
King noblest famed of will
You would now go far to fin d
So hardy a host on a hill.
Finally, the neoplatonic underpinnings of the text are undeniable. The
parallel to God's court would be apparent to medieval readers, even if
it were not so clearly implied within the text.
Thanks for stretching the mental muscles for me. It has been a while
since I had to crack the binding. This has been a pleasure, and if you
would like to discuss it further, please feel free.
Regards,
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
mormon atheist
Date:
Tue, 01 Dec 1998 00:16:34 -0500
From:
proclus
To:
Andy Mcguire ,
Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" ,
"Theurgus@aol.com" , "jswick@cris.com" ,
"rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"onandagus@webtv.net" ,
"Neoptolmus@aol.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
Heyers Mutants! You all know that I have long been kicking around the
idea of god as the ultimate transhumanist. I was just perusing a very
interesting transhumanist website. Here is the link.
http://members.wbs.net/homepages/c/r/y/cryonic4life/enlightenment.html
Anyway, I was thinking of a conversation with a theology student I had
recently. I was reminded that mormon teachings on the godhead are 100%
alien to any medieval theology. In fact, the very idea of theology is
antithetical to the mormon concept of god as human.
Mormons are atheists. Our Exemplar is a man who became godlike. We are
the same kind of being, with the same potential. Many humans incarnated
before the redeemer. Adam is our father and a god. No where is
Joseph's materialism more apparent than in his conception of the
abrahamic covenant. There is no God, just gods. Every man and woman is
a star. This is completely at odds with anything the theists have given
us. Mormonism can be rewritten as science fancy.
I realize that this is a little shrill. I was wondering if you all had
any thoughts about this strange territory that I find myself in. Can it
be tempered? You've all been kind of silent about it.
Best Regards,
proclus
Subject:
mutant bundel2
Date:
Wed, 02 Dec 1998 10:39:16 -0500
From:
proclus
To:
"proclus@mac.com"
Subject:
Sufi stuff
Date:
Fri, 20 Nov 1998 01:29:52 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
Tonight my youngest son Jacob and I met with a representative of
the Naqshbhandi Sufi order. I made the contact through the publisher
of Omar Ali-Shah's (brother of the late Idris Shah) books, Alef Press.
He is just a plain old American guy, but when he looks at you there
is an kind of cystaline or "icy" clarity. I has a different quality from
the very "churchy" Shia piety of the Iranian bunch we've been working
with.
These people are the real deal. I'll let you know if anything come of it.
Ken
Subject:
of possible interest
Date:
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:11:42 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
BOOK:Noetic Magic by Dr. Daniel L. Wick
Book
Noetic Magic and the Coming Transformation in Human Consciousness
NoeticMagicReviews.
This is a book for those with genuine interest in the transformative potential
of the human mind. You will find much in the following pages that will
interest and intrigue you.
Noetic Magic is divided into two parts:
Part One: explores Magic Past, tracing the Western magical tradition from its
originator, Pythagoras, through Platonism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, Gnosticism,
Hermetism, the Cabala, Sufism, and the Renaissance Neo-Platonists to the
modern era of the Order of the Golden Dawn, W.B. Yeats and Aleister Crowley.
In addition to outlining the key ideas of Western magic, Part One explores the
lives of such famous magi as Apollonius of Tyana, Dr. John Dee and Cagliostro.
Part Two: investigates Magic Future, articulating the principles of Noetic
Magic, outlining its philosophical basis, its relationship to modern
psychology, and its potential for assisting in the "Global Mind Change" that
Willis Harman has so eloquently described in his book of the same name. The
penultimate chapter, Exercises in Noetic Magic, contains a description of
suggested noetic and meditative exercises, including self-remembering, the
phenomenological reduction, and Jungian meditations on the Tarot.
Depending on your interests and knowledge, you may start with either of the
book's two parts.
Bibliographical essays and references for quotations will be found at the end.
Published by The Mirandola Press, 37, Miguel, Suite 3, San Francisco, CA
94131. ISBN # 0-9660714-0-9, 319 pages.
About the author: Dr. Daniel L. Wick.
Dr.Daniel L. Wick received his Ph.D. in history from the University of
California. He has taught history and literature at the College of Marin, San
Francisco State University, and the University of California at Davis. Dr.
Wick is the international award winning author of a book on the French
Revolution, a play about Lord Byron, and more than one hundred scholarly
articles, essays and reviews.
Author's E.mail dlwick@ucdavis.edu Tel: (530)-752-9546
Visit Dr. Wick's other site and obtain information on; how to order his book
and how to receive a sample chapter through the E.mail:
www.triSphere.com/NoeticMagic/
Read Reviews: NoeticMagicReviews.
Outcry Magazine Home: index.
Subject:
of possible interest-2
Date:
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:13:22 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
Noetic Magic home | order Noetic Magic | sample a chapter | about the author |
contact the author
Noetic Magic Contents
Introduction: The Meanings of Magic
BOOK ONE: MAGIC PAST
Part One: The Magus as Hero
1. The Birth of Dualism
and the Spirit of Magic
2. The Magic of Greece
3. Pythagoras and Pythagoreanism
4. Plato and the Magical Universe
5. Tales of the Magi I:
Apollonius of Tyana
6. Simon Magus and Gnosticism
7. Neo-Pythagoreanism and Theurgy
8. Hermes Trismegistus
Part Two: The Magus as Heretic
9. Magic in the Middle Ages
10. The Cabal
11. Sufism
Part Three: The Magus as Christian Humanist
12. Magic in the Renaissance
13. Tales of the Magi II:
John Dee: Renaissance Magus and Royal Spy
14. The Discovery of the Impossible
Part Four: The Magus as Charlatan
15. Tales of the Magi III:
The Comte de St. Germain: Enigma of the Enlightenment
16. Tales of the Magi IV:
Cagliostro:
Friend of Humanity or Quack of Quacks
Part Five: The Magus as Monster
17. Magic in the 19th Century
18. Tales of the Magi V:
The Anti-Victorians: Yeats,Crowley, and the Golden Dawn
19. Tales of the Magi VI:
Rasputin, the Holy Devil
BOOK TWO: MAGIC FUTURE
20. Introduction
21. Tales of the Magi VII:
Gurdjieff, the Magus as Trickster
22. The Magus as Media Maven: Carlos Castaneda and Deepak Chopra
23. The Coming Transformation of Human Consciousness
24. Noetic Magic
25. The Mind as an Active Force
26. Will and Imagination
27. Exploring the Antipodes of the Mind
28. Noetic Magic and the Other
29. Exercises in Noetic Magic
30. Conclusion
References and Bibliography
Noetic Magic home | order Noetic Magic | sample a chapter | about the author |
contact the author
Subject:
Proclus for Proclus-1
Date:
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:20:13 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
CC:
kshaw@dalsemi.com
Proclus and his On the Sacred Art
© Stephen Ronan, 1998
Introduction
On the Sacred Art is a beautiful piece of Pagan religious writing which
elegantly explains the basis for a theurgic understanding of the ‘spiritual
mechanics’ behind religious ritual. Theurgy has often —but mistakenly, in my
opinion—been identified with magic. I plan to discuss this text in much more
detail soon, and also clarify the relationship of theurgy to magic and
religion on these pages. Stay tuned!
This work, like On the Signs of Divine Possession, is an extract from a lost
work of Proclus Diadochus (412-485 AD), which is almost certainly his
compendious Commentary on the Chaldean Oracles. This text, On the Sacred Art
(Peri tês hieratikês technês) has been translated from the edition of the
Greek text published by Joseph Bidez in his Catalogue des manuscrits
alchimiques Grecs VI (Brussels: Maurice Lambertin 1928), pp 139-151 (text pp
148-151). Until recently, the only English version of Proclus’ Sacred Art was
Thomas Taylor’s translation of the Latin paraphrase of Marsilio Ficino De
sacrificio et magia (Opera [Basel 1576] pp. 1,928-29) in his edition of
Iamblichus’ On the Mysteries (pp 343-347 of the 1895 edition). Ficino's
published edition was the only version generally known until Bidez unearthed
the Greek original. When I published my translations of these pieces in the
Chthonios edition of Iamblichus’ On the Mysteries (London: Chthonios Books
1989 pp 145-150) —it’s out-of-print and no, sorry, I haven’t got any spare
copies! — I was under the impression that I had done the first English
translation from the Greek of Proclus’ On the Sacred Art. But I had been
preceded by Brian Copenhaver who translated and commented on it in his Hermes
Trismegistus, Proclus, and a Philosophy of Magic (pp 79-110 of Merkel and
Debus [edd.] Hermeticism and the Renaissance [Associated University Presses:
1988 —now also o/p]).
Copenhaver’s edition contains some interesting notes and background materials,
but I do not agree with his assumption (shared by many) that theurgy equals
magic—though it certainly became an essential ingredient in the noble Divine
Magic pursued so eagerly by Ficino and many of his contemporaries in the
Renaissance.
In the translation which follows, square brackets like this [ ] indicate
editorial additions, which are there to clarify the meaning of the text.
….to d’ atrekes en bathei esti.
Chaldean Oracles 183 (ed. Des Places)
Stephen Ronan
Hastings UK, September 1988
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Proclus Diadochus
ON THE SACRED ART
(Bidez, p. 148) Just as [true] lovers move on beyond the beauty perceived
through the senses until they reach the Sole Cause of all beauty and all
perception (noêtôn), so too, the experts in sacred matters (hoi hieratikoi),
starting with the Sympathy connecting visible things both to one another and
to the Invisible Powers, and having understood that all things are to be found
in all things, they established the Sacred Science (tên epistêmên tên
hieratikên). They marvelled at seeing those things which come last in those
which come first, and vice-versa; earthly things in the heavens in a causal
and celestial manner, and heavenly things on the earth in a terrestrial way.
How else could it be that the sunflower (hêliotropia) moves in accordance with
the sun and the moonflower (selênotropia) with the moon, each, according to
its ability, turning around with the luminaries of the world? For all things
pray according to the rank they occupy and hymn the Leaders who preside over
the whole of their ‘chains' (tôn seirôn), either spiritually (noerôs),
rationally, naturally (phusikôs) or in a sensory manner (aisthêtôs) So the
sunflower moves with what makes it open as much as it can, and if one could
hear how it makes the air vibrate (plêssontos) as it turns around, one would
realise from the sound that it is making a hymn to its King, of the kind that
a plant can sing.
Thus there are to be seen on the earth suns and moons in a terrestrial form,
and in the heavens all the plants, stones and animals after a celestial
manner, alive in a spiritual way (zônta noerôs).
Having contemplated these things, the wise men of old (hoi palai sophoi)
brought together various things down here with their heavenly counterparts,
and brought down Divine Powers into this mortal place, having drawn them down
through Similarity (homoiotêtos): for Similarity is powerful (149) enough to
attach beings to one another. For instance, if a wick which has been heated
beforehand is placed under a lamp, not far from the flame, you will see it
light up even though it has not touched the flame, for the transmission of the
flame takes place downwards. By analogy, you may consider the heat already
there in the wick to correspond to the Sympathy between things, and its being
brought and placed below the flame to correspond to the Sacred Art (hieratikês
technês) making use of material things at the right time and in the right way.
The transmission of the flame is like the presence of the Divine Light with
those who are able to partake of it, and the lighting up of the wick is
analogous to both the deification of mortals and to the illumination of
material substances, each thing then moves towards that which remains on high
[i.e. its divine counterpart] according to its share of the Divine Seed, like
the light of the wick once it has been lit.
The lotus also demonstrates the workings of Sympathy. Its petals are closed
before the appearance of the sun's rays, but it gradually opens them as the
sun begins to rise, unfolding them as it reaches its zenith and curling them
up again as it descends. What then is the difference between the human manner
of hymning the sun, by opening and closing the mouth and lips, and that of the
lotus by opening and closing its petals? For those are its lips and that is
its natural hymn (humnos phusikos).
But why should we talk of plants where some trace of generative life still
exists? For stones as well can be seen to be infused (empneontas) with the
emanations of the luminaries, thus we see the rays of the sun reproduced in
the golden rays of the sunstone (hêlitên). The stone called the Eye of Belos,
which in form resembles the pupil of the eye, emits from the centre of its
pupil a gleaming light which leads one to think that it ought to be called the
Eye of the Sun. Moonstone (selênitên) changes both its markings and their
motions [i.e. their patterns] along with the moon. Sunmoonstone (hêlioselênon)
is just like an image of the conjunction (sunodou) of these two luminaries,
portraying the conjunctions and separations which take place in the heavens.
Thus all things are full of Gods. The earth is full of celestial Gods and the
heavens are full of supercelestial Gods. Each ‘chain’ increases in number (p.
150) as it proceeds to its final terms, and the same qualities which are
present in all the members of a ‘chain’ are there in the Unity preceding their
manifestation. Thus we get the arrangement of [human] souls, some grouped
around (sustaseis) one God, others around another. For instance, there happen
to be a large number of solar animals, like the lion and the cock, who partake
of the [solar] God, each according to their rank. The remarkable thing is that
in this particular case, the bigger and stronger fears the lesser and weaker,
for it is said that the lion shrinks back in fear at the sight of the cock.
The reason for this is not be found in their physical qualities (aisthêseôs),
but in spiritual (noeras) considerations: that is, the differences lie in the
Causes themselves. At any rate, the presence of solar symbols is more
effective in the cock. It clearly show this by its sensitivity
(sunaisthanomenos) to the course of the sun, for it crows a hymn at sunrise
and at the rest of the sun’s turning points.
For the same reason, certain solar Angels are seen in forms of this kind [i.e.
like cocks], for whilst these Angels are formless in reality, they appear by
concealing themselves in form to us who have been endowed with form
(memorphômenoi). Thus it is said that certain solar Daemons who appear with
lion-faces, disappear at once when shown the image of a cock, retreating in
fear from the superior Sigils [or Divine Signs sunthêmata]. In the same way,
many people are held back from doing something wrong, simply just by seeing
the images of divine men.
To put it all plainly, some things move in accordance with the course of a
luminary, like those plants we have spoken of. Others imitate the form of its
rays, like the palm tree. Some again have an empyrean [or fiery] essence, like
the laurel; and others imitate some other quality. From these things one can
see that the properties which are contained in the sun in a concentrated form
(sunespeiramenas) are to be found in a divided-up state amongst those entities
who partake of the sun’s qualities: Angels, Daemons, [human] souls, animals,
plants and stones.
>From these facts, the masters of the Sacred Art (hoi tês hieatikês hêgemones)
found the way to pay divine honours [or service] to the Higher Powers, by
following what lay in front of their eyes, and by mixing together some things
and removing others, as appropriate. And when they made use of a mixture of
things it was because they had observed that unmixed each thing has some
quality of the God, but taken alone was not sufficient to invoke them. So by
mixing together many different things they unified the emanations (aporrhoias)
referred to previously [149, 20] and by the production of one thing from many,
they made a likeness of that Whole which exists before every thing else comes
into being. And so they often constructed images (agalmata) (p. 151) and
incenses from these mixtures, mingling into one the divided Divine Sigils
(sunthêmata), and making by art that which a God contains essentially
(ousian). Thus they unified the multiplicity of powers which when dispersed
are weakened, but when combined lead back up to the essential Form of its
Archetype (tên tou paradeigmatos idean).
Sometimes it happens that just a single herb or stone is sufficient in a
ritual operation. So kneôron (flax-leaved daphne or spurge-flax) is sufficient
for a manifestation (autophaneian) For protection, laurel (daphnê) or a thorny
shrub (rhamnos), or the squill (skulla), or coral (kouraliou), or diamond
(adamas) or jasper (iaspis). For knowledge of the future, the heart of a mole
(hê tou asplakos kardia), and for purification, sulphur and seawater.
Working in this way, the masters of the Sacred Art attracted some things
through Sympathy and repelled others through Antipathy. For instance [as an
example of antipathy], sulphur and bitumen (asphaltos) purify through the
sharpness of their smell, and one sprinkles seawater because it partakes of
the empyrean (or fiery) power And so in their Initiations [or Consecrations]
and other Divine Ceremonies (tais teletais de kai tais allais peri tous theous
therapeias) they would choose the appropriate animals and other materials.
Longing to go beyond these and similar things [that is, they wanted to go
beyond the powers inherent in physical objects], they came to know the
Daemonic Powers which are essentially linked to the activities of nature and
physical bodies, and by this means they drew down (epêgagonto) these Powers in
order to communicate (sunousian) with them. From the Daemonic Powers they
moved straight up towards the actual Doings of the Gods (autas…tas tôn
theôn…poiêseis), instructed in some matters by the Gods themselves, but in
others moved by their own efforts to an accurate conception of the appropriate
symbols. And so, leaving nature and physical operations below, they came to
directly experience (echrêsanto) the Primordial (prôtourgois) and Divine
Powers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Subject:
Proclus for Proclus-2
Date:
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:22:16 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
Proclus Diadochus
On the Signs of Divine Possession
© Stephen Ronan, 1998
ON THE SIGNS OF DIVINE POSSESSION is my title for an extract from Proclus
preserved in a work by the Byzantine Christian Neoplatonist, Michael Psellus,
in his Accusation against Michael Cerularius before the Synod (Pros tên
sunodon katêgoria tou archiros) ed. by É. des Places Oracles Chaldaiques Paris
(Les Belles Lettres) 1971. ( pp 219, 14 - 220, 32). It has not, to my
knowledge, been translated into English before.
This extract, brief though it is, gives crucial information on how the later
Pagan tradition experienced and understood the phenomena of divine possession.
It has obvious importance for studies on trance and possession, and for
theurgy, that much-misunderstood ritual practice of late antiquity. But it is
also relevant for the study of consecration and invocation in ritual, as well
as mediums and mediumship in general, spiritualism, gossolalia, and states of
trance in magical and healing contexts. I plan to discuss this text, and
theurgy in general, in much more detail on these pages. Stay tuned!
In the translation which follows, square brackets like this [ ] indicate
editorial additions, which are there to clarify the meaning of the text.
….to d’ atrekes en bathei esti.
Chaldean Oracles 183 (ed. Des Places)
Stephen Ronan
Hastings UK, September 1988
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Proclus Diadochus
On the Signs of Divine Possession
(From: Psellus’ Accusation against Michael Cerularius before the Synod)
He [i.e. Proclus] speaks first about the differences which separate the so-
called Divine Powers, how some are more material and others more immaterial,
some joyous (hilarai) and others solemn (embritheis), some arrive along with
daemons and others arrive pure. Straight afterwards he goes on to the proper
conditions for invocation: the places in which it occurs, about those men and
women who see the Divine Light, and about the divine gestures (schêmatôn) and
signs (sunthêmatôn) they display. In this way he gets around to the Theagogies
of divine inspiration (tas entheastikas theagôgias)[a theagôgia is a drawing
in or drawing down of the divine]. "Of which, " he says "some act on inanimate
objects and others on animate beings: some on those which are rational, others
on the irrational ones. Inanimate objects, " he continues "are often filled
with Divine Light, like the statues which give oracles under the inspiration
(epipnoias) of one of the Gods or Good Daemons. So too, there are men who are
possessed and who receive a Divine Spirit (pneuma theion). Some receive it
spontaneously, like those who are said to be ‘seized by God’ (theolêptoi),
either at particular times, or intermittently and on occasion. There are
others who work themselves up into a state of inspiration (entheasmôn) by
deliberate actions, like the prophetess at Delphi when she sits over the
chasm, and others who drink from divinatory water". Next, after having said
what they have to do [i. e. to gain divine inspiration], he continues "When
these things occur, then in order for a Theagogy and an inspiration
(epipnoian) to take effect, they must be accompanied by a change in
consciousness (parallaxia tês dianoias). When divine inspiration (entheasmôn)
comes there are some cases where the possessed (tôn katochôn) become
completely besides themselves and unconscious of themselves (existamenôn…kai
oudamôs heautois parakolouthountôn). But there are others where, in some
remarkable manner, they maintain consciousness. In these cases it is possible
for the subject to work the Theagogy on himself, and when he receives the
inspiration (epipnoian), is aware of what it [i.e. the Divine Power] does and
what it says, and what he has to do release the mechanism [of
possession](pothen dei apoluein to kinoun). However, when the loss of
consciousness (ekstaseôs) is total, it is essential that someone in full
command of his faculties assists the possessed". Then, after many details
about the different kinds of Theagogy, he finally concludes: "It is necessary
to begin by removing all the obstacles blocking the arrival of the Gods and to
impose an absolute calm around ourselves in order that the manifestation of
the Spirits (pneumata) we invoke takes place without tumult and in peace
(atarachos kai meta galênês)". He adds further "The manifestations of the Gods
are often accompanied by material Spirits which arrive and move with a certain
degree of violence, and which the weaker mediums cannot withstand."
Subject:
Iamblichus on the Mysteries
Date:
Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:24:25 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
CC:
kshaw@dalsemi.com
Porphyry’s Letter to Anebo
&
Iamblichus’ On the Mysteries
An analysis
© Stephen Ronan, 1998
Introduction
Porphyry of Tyre’s (c. 232/3-305 AD) Letter to Anebo (Epistula ad Anebonem)
and Iamblichus of Chalcis’ (c. 242-325 AD) On the Mysteries (De mysteriis) are
two of the most important religious and philosophical documents of Late
Antiquity. Porphyry and Iamblichus were both highly esteemed and influential
Pagan Neoplatonic philosophers whose views, especially their religious views,
have not tended to receive a fair and unprejudiced treatment, and this is true
of Iamblichus most of all. Oddly enough, despite the reputations of these
documents, a careful analysis will show that neither of them are primarily
concerned with magic. What they are concerned with is traditional Pagan
religion, its apparent contradictions, and its relationship to philosophy.
Neoplatonism, 'irrationalism' and magic
Anybody who has read almost anything on Neoplatonism will be familiar with the
popular view that the later Neoplatonists were ‘sliding downwards’ towards
irrationalism and magic. It is certainly true that terms like ‘superstition’,
‘irrationality’, ‘magic’ and ‘lower forces’ have been, and still are, bandied
around with gay abandon by many of those who write on Neoplatonism. But I feel
that a careful and unprejudiced reading of the sources will reveal that
theurgy involves no more ‘magical’ assumptions than any other religion which
believes its rituals to have real efficacy. And that position was, of course,
shared by Christian, Jew and Pagan alike.
As for the terms ‘superstition’ and ‘irrationality,’ one looks in vain for
anything in the way of examples in modern commentators on Neoplatonism
explaining just what views the Pagan Neoplatonists held which were more
‘superstitious’ or ‘irrational’ (from the point of view of modern rationalism)
than their Christian contemporaries. I plan to discuss these interesting
points in much more detail, and give more background on Porphyry and
Iamblichus, at a future date on these pages. Stay tuned!
On the Mysteries and Porphyry's Letter
The De mysteriis takes the form of a point-by-point refutation of the Letter
to Anebo. Since the Letter to Anebo was ostensibly written to an Egyptian
priest, Iamblichus replied in the guise of Anebo's superior, Abammon. The best
way to understand the De mysteriis then, is to look at the points Porphyry
raises and the arguments used by Iamblichus in refuting them. What I have done
here is try to provide a lucid analysis of the points under discussion, as far
as possible in modern English, and referenced to the original documents (see
the bibliography at the end). In the analysis which follows the numbers in
parentheses ( ) are either references to Parthey’s sections of the Letter to
Anebo, or to Parthey/des Places’ pagination, together with the Book/Chapter
divisions, of the De mysteriis, for example: (39-40). (I, 11).
….to d’ atrekes en bathei esti.
Chaldean Oracles 183 (ed. Des Places)
Stephen Ronan
Hastings UK, September 1988
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Notes are indicated like this: (n. #).
Porphyry’s questions and Iamblichus’ answers (n. 1)
Porphyry’s Questions : (Letter to Anebo section 2 Parthey) What are the
distinctions between the Superior Races (i.e. Gods, Angels, Daemons (n. 2)
etc.)? Are they based on their different degrees of activity and passivity, or
on what sort of bodies they have?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Active and passive do not apply in the Divine realm
(p.12 Parthey/des Places). Different kinds of bodies are the result of
distinctions on a higher level, not the causes of them. Nothing physical
limits or defines the Gods (pp. 23-9) (De mysteriis Book I, Chapters 3-8)
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 3) Since the Gods are unlimited, undivided and
uncircumscribed in power, how does it happen that religion and ritual treat
them as allotted to different spheres of influence?
Iamblichus’ Replies : The differences do not lie in the Gods, but in the
recipients and their varying capacity the receive different types of Divine
power (30-3: cf. n.3). (I, 9)
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 4) Why are shocking and obscene events and
language used in the Mysteries?
Iamblichus’ Replies : (a) Because this is the correct way of worshipping the
generative forces (38-9), (b) because it ‘inoculates’ those elements in matter
seeking order, showing them the better by demonstrating the worse (39). (c)
Repressing emotions makes them more destructive, moderate release is cathartic
(39-40). (I, 11).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 4 & 5) Why are so many things at Sacred Rites
performed as though they were directed to beings who are swayed by emotions?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Prayer and invocation do not mean that the Gods are
persuaded to come down to us, but rather that by their means we adhere to and
become like them (42, 46-9). The ‘anger’ of the Gods is not their turning away
and desertion of us by them. The situation is rather that we render ourselves
incapable of receiving their beneficence. And the same argument holds true for
expiatory sacrifices (43-4). (I, 12-15; VIII, 8).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 6) How is it that some (planetary) Gods are
givers of good things, but others of evil?
Iamblichus’ Replies : These things arise from a misunderstanding of Astrology,
which talks of benefics and malefics. All the Gods are good, but material
conditions may distort that which emanated from the Divine in a state of
harmony and lead to conflict. (53-7). (1-18).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 8) What is the difference between Gods and
Daemons?
Iamblichus’ Replies : The governance of the Gods is all-embracing and
unrestricted. That of the Daemons is limited in time and place; Daemons do not
completely transcend that which they rule (63-4). (1, 20).
[Porphyry’s Questions : (For section 9: What are the differences between
Daemons, Heroes and Souls? (See 69-70 = II, 1-2. For section 10: What signs of
their presence do the different orders of Divine beings give? See 69-70 = II,
1 – 2. Cf. 70 – 90 = II, 3-9)].
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 10) All Divine beings speak boastfully
(periantologein) and present illusory images.
Iamblichus’ Replies : No they do not. Such manifestations are due to faulty
technique on behalf of the practitioner and the consequent appearance of
inferior grades of entity (91-4). (II, 10).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 12) What is the origin of divination?
Iamblichus’ Replies : It comes from the Gods and is not the product of the
realm of generation (99-102). (III, 1)
[Porphyry’s Questions : (For section 12: On divination through dreams. See
103-9 + III, 2-3. For section 13: On Divine possession in general, see 109-III
III, 4. For section 14: On the conditions, signs and varieties of Divine
possession, see 111-136 = III, 5-15)]
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 15) How could any Divine being be so
subservient to man as to be manipulated even by those who divine by something
so lowly as barley-meal (alphitomanteia)?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Divine power is not brought down under human control in
divination: rather this power uses all things as its tools. The fact that it
can make active agents out of even lifeless materials is evidence of
supremacy, not subservience. (139-143). (III, 17).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 16) Can Divine beings really be present at
religious rituals—what power do human beings have that could draw them down?
Iamblichus’ Replies : In fact, it is not possible for rituals to work without
the presence of such beings (144). They are naturally present whenever the
circumstances are right, but they are not forced to be there in any way.
(145-7). (III, 18-19).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 17) Is religious experience generated by
inherent faculties of the human mind? (n.4)
Iamblichus’ Replies : Divine experience is brought about by the Divine alone,
not by the mechanical operation of inferior causes. Like causes like, and the
superior cannot be produced by the inferior. (148-150 cf.151). (III, 20).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 18) Or is religious experience brought about
by mixing Divine and human faculties?
Iamblichus’ Replies : This view is superficially attractive but misleading. It
must be rejected because the Divine is unchanging and cannot be mixed with the
changeable. Another objection is that this view tends to make the soul an
equal partner with the Gods and implies that the Divine can become subjected
to human conditions (150-2). (III, 21).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 19) Another possibility is that the faculty of
prediction is generated by the activities of the human soul, or that
predictive Daemons are generated from forces inherent in animals.
Iamblichus’ Replies : Daemons are not generated and perishable things. Primary
natures cannot be generated from those which are secondary. (152-4). (III,
22).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 21) That divination is caused by the
subjective state of the recipient is evidenced by (a) the loss of sensory
awareness during trance, (b) the use of incense and invocations, and (c) the
use of simple-minded and young people as mediums.
Iamblichus’ Replies : Why should subjective states of mind qualify for Divine
knowledge when even higher states of mind cannot achieve it (156)? Subjective
states are tied to the things of the sensory world (157). Loss of sensory
awareness during trance indicates that the imagination and other human
faculties are not active. (b) Incense and invocations are directly connected
to the Gods, not the recipient. (c) Simplicity and youth are evidence of
receptivity to the external Divine force. (156-8). (III, 24).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 22) Isn’t divination caused by diseased or
aberrant states of mind, and aren’t visionary experiences like the illusions
produced by sorcery?
Iamblichus’ Replies : No. The causes of mental disturbances and illusions are
opposite to those Divine inspiration. These latter rise above normal
consciousness whereas the former fall below it (158-162). (III, 25-26).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 23-4) Can’t divination be attributed to the
actions of Sympathy, one thing affecting another? Isn’t the notion of Sympathy
evident in the substances and actions made use of in ritual?
Iamblichus’ Replies : The force of Sympathy certainly operates, since all
things are ultimately derived from the Gods, (and are therefore inherently
related). But indications drawn from sympathetic relations are somewhat
obscure due to their distance from the Divine. They cannot be used to judge
the higher causes. The examples from ritual which Porphyry uses demonstrate
the existence of external powers, and not just inherent sympathies (162-7)
(III, 26-7).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 25) The makers of working images (drastikôn
eidôlôn) are not be despised….(n. 5)
Iamblichus’ Replies : Image-making uses the lowest degrees of matter and,
unlike other human arts such as medicine and gymnastics, it does not even act
in accordance with Nature. No good or truth can possibly come of it.
(167-175). (III, 28-30).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 26) Is divination caused by delusive evil
Daemons?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Those in contact with the Gods can only receive goodness
and truth. However, there are men who because of their impurity, lack of power
and faulty technique cannot contact the forces of Good: instead they become
utterly corrupted by evil spirits (175-180). (III, 31)
[Porphyry’s Questions : (For section 27: attacks by frauds, see 287 = X, 2;
cf. III, 31)]
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 28) How can superior beings be commanded as
though they were inferiors?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Because (a) the entities which are invoked as superiors
but commanded as inferiors are forces that - though they are more powerful
than human beings in specific fields - are nevertheless inferior because they
are limited to those fields (183). (b) The practitioner invokes them as a
human being, but commands them as inferiors because he is invested with Divine
power. (184). (IV, 1-3).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 28) Why do the Gods demand justice and purity
from their worshippers, but do unjust and impure things when requested?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Because (a) The Gods’ view of justice is not that of men
– they may be punishing the sins of a former lifetime (168-8). (b) Evil
Daemons may pose as Gods, demanding justice and purity as part of their deceit
(190-1). (c) In the imperfect material world, individuals must sometimes
suffer for the good of the whole (191-3). (d) The forces of Sympathy may be
put to perverse uses by black magicians and evil Daemons (193-9). (IV, 4-13).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 28a-29) What is the use of sacrifices? And
why do men have to abstain from meat to be pure, although the Gods are allured
by animal sacrifices?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Although physical things can be injurious to human
beings, they are not so to the Gods (200-201). Abstinence from meat has
nothing to do with polluting the Gods (201-20). Higher beings cannot be
affected in any way through matter (205-5). There are many benefits for us
through sacrifice (206: cf. 232). The principle of Sympathy is not the reason
for sacrifices (207-8). Sacrifices are not food for Gods or Daemons (212-14).
The fire of sacrifices spiritualises matter (212-18). A material form of
worship is necessary to material human beings (219-20). Every link in the
‘chain’ connecting a God with the physical world must be honoured otherwise
discord results, just as missing notes can make music inharmonious (288-31:
cf. 237). Pure matter is an appropriate receptacle for the Gods (232-34). The
function of prayer (237-40) (V passim).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 29a) Why must the worshipper be pure from
contact with the dead things, although the Divine rites themselves are made
effective by dead animals?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Because (a) touching or not touching a dead body depends
on whether or not the body has been consecrated (241) (b) Dead bodies may
produce a stain since death is the opposite of life (242). (VI, 1-4)
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 30-31) What is the meaning of threats to the
God? How can a Divine being be forced to tell the truth by means of lies? What
sort of ‘Gods’ would be swayed by such groundless fears?
Iamblichus’ Replies : The explanation is that (a) the threats are not directed
towards the Gods but towards low-grade irrational powers which are naturally
led by forcible utterances (246: cf. 182). (b) The threats emphasise the
identity of the practitioner with the supreme power of Gods (246-7: cf. 184).
(c) Daemons cannot bear to hear any threat to the Divine order which sustains
them (247-8). A pure language, dedicated to the Gods alone, does not need
threats (249). (VI, 5-7).
[Porphyry’s Questions : (On sections 32-3: On the symbolism of the phases of
the sun, see 249-54 + VII, 1-3.)].
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 33-4) Why does ritual make use of meaningless
sounds and foreign words, as though the Gods only understood certain
languages? Surely it’s the intention that counts with the Gods and not the
terms used, so isn’t this all just mystification by sorcerers?
Iamblichus’ Replies : ‘Barbarous names’ may be unintelligible to us, but they
are meaningful at the Divine level (254-6). The precise terms used do count,
because they are not formed by conventional agreement and, unlike human
language, actually resemble Divine realities (257). The languages of Sacred
Nations are to be preferred because they preserve ancient and hallowed forms
inviolate, whereas Greek forms may be spoiled through innovation (256-9).
(VII, 4-5).
[Porphyry’s Questions : (For sections 35-37: Porphyry’s questions on Egyptian
philosophy see 260-68 = Viii, 1-5)]
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 38) Why do the Egyptians say that we are
completely under the sway of Fate but nevertheless worship Gods as the
dissolvers of Fate?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Only the lower soul is under the sway of Fate. The
higher soul, which is not, can liberate the lower (268-9). Fate only comes
from the lowest powers of the Gods and is dissolved as we rise above the
constraints of the earthly world of generative existence (270-72). (VIII,
6-8).
[Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 39-45: For answers to Porphyry’s questions
about the Guardian Daemon, see 272-285 = IX passim.)].
Porphyry’s Questions : (Section 46) Isn’t there some other way to happiness
and fulfilment than through (the worship) of the Gods? Can’t the soul achieve
great things by remoulding what it has been allotted by chance?(n. 6) Aren’t
there methods, other than those of ritual, for divining the future?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Since the Gods must be the source of everything
beneficial, no true Good can be attained without them or their rituals
(268-7). Prediction of the future through other methods bears no comparison
with Divine inspiration (287-290). (X, 1-4).
Porphyry’s Questions : (Sections 48-49) Don’t those who consult the Divine
Mind do so in relation to trivial matters, passing over important affairs like
Truth and Fulfilment?
Iamblichus’ Replies : Important spiritual matters are not passed over by
Egyptian priests, not do theurgists call upon the Divine Mind for trivial
reasons (293). (X, 7).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Notes
1. A few of Porphyry’s questions have been omitted because their problems are
tackled within the context of other questions.
2. ‘Daemons’ (daimones) were, by Porphyry and Iamblichus’ day, considered to
be middle-ranking divine forces which were an essential part of the divine
order, and were not usually considered evil. They were not ‘Demons’ in the
Christian sense, and it is usually very misleading to translate the Greek
daimôn (plural daimones) as ‘Demon’ in Pagan literature. Where D(a)emons were
considered evil, the essential difference between Christian and Pagan thinkers
was that Christians would tend to view them as members of an infernal
hierarchy, essentially opposed to the Divine. But for Pagans, they were the
products of the turbulent, disorderly and distorted conditions which, of
necessity, accompanied the limited and inferior realm of the material world.
3. Religion and ritual, since they are based in the physical world, must
necessarily deal with the recipients.
4. These ‘inherent faculties’ are referred to as ‘small sparks’ aithugmata
mikra. See des Places Jamblique p128 n.1.
5. The makers of working images (drastikôn eidôlôn) are not be despised….
There seems to be a misunderstanding here on the part of Iamblichus’ editors
and translators, based on the ambiguity of the phrase drastikôn eidôlôn
‘working images’ (or ‘models’), and the fact that Porphyry’s argument is
particularly truncated here. Porphyry’s argument seems to require that these
drastikôn eidôlôn are ‘working models’; probably he particularly had in mind
the mechanised statues of the Gods. For Porphyry can hardly, in the middle of
a highly critical analysis of religion, have started to suggest that some of
its practitioners were admirable. I would suggest he was arguing along the
lines of: "If you’re inclined to admire those who can produce effects by means
of Sympathy, then why not admire those who make working models of things,
since these also work by sympathetic relations ; they look like the things
they’re modelled after, and work a bit like them." Porphyry also perhaps had
in mind working models of the heavens, such as that designed by Archimedes (on
which see T. Heath A History of Greek Mathematics Oxford 1921, vol.2, p17 and
notes). The point of that example would be that these contrivances are able to
predict what will happen in a purely mechanical way, without the need for
invocations. Hence they must be as worthy of respect as divinatory techniques.
However, in his refutation, Iamblichus also takes the opportunity to castigate
‘producers of illusions’ as black magicians involved in creating low-grade
mirages. Hence the editorial confusion mentioned above.
6. hê psuchê ek tou tuchontos anaplattei megala. This phrase has been
misunderstood by des Places and Sodano as well as by both English translators.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
BIBLIOGRAPHY
NOTE : The works below are just a selection of materials referred to in this
piece and not a complete Bibliography. Most of them are out-of-print and very
difficult to find. However, Thomas Taylor’s Iamblichus is due to be reprinted
very soon and Chthonios will have copies. If I find copies of the other works,
I will put them up on this Website, so stay tuned! See other pages on this
Website for related books on Neoplatonism, Pagan religion, early Christianity,
etc.
Ronan, S. (ed.) Iamblichus On the Mysteries London (Chthonios Books) 1989.
(Sorry, this is o/p and I don’t have any spare copies). Besides running
Taylor’s and Wilder’s translations side by side, this edition has many
additional materials, some of which are available on this Website.
TAYLOR = Thomas Taylor Iamblichus On the Mysteries 1821. 2nd edition: London
(Bertram Dobell) 1895.
PARTHEY = G. Parthey Jamblichi De Mysteriis Liber Berlin 1857. Reprint:
Amsterdam (Hakkert) 1965. The text used by Wilder.
WILDER = Alexander Wilder Theurgia or the Egyptian Mysteries by Iamblichos
London (Rider) 1911
DES PLACES = É. des Places
Jamblique Les mysteres d’Égypte Paris (Les Belles Lettres) 1966. The standard
modern edition with Greek text and French translation.
Oracles Chaldaiques Paris (Les Belles Lettres) 1971. The standard modern
edition with Greek text and French translation. English readers can find a
concordance to des Places’ numeration of the fragments and to the English
translations in my edition of G. R. S. Mead Complete Echoes from the Gnosis
London (Chthonios Books) 1987 (Sorry, now o/p)
SODANO = A. R. Sodano
Porfirio: Lettera ad Anebo Naples (L’Arte Tipografica) 1958. Modern edition of
the Letter to Anebo with Greek text and Italian translations. However, I have
preferred to use Parthey’s edition in my analysis of Porphyry’s Letter, even
though it is not very well put together, because I feel Sodano introduces some
things which Porphyry didn’t actually say.
(b) Giamblico: I Misteri Egiziani Milan (Rusconi) 1984. A good Italian
translation with an abundance of notes and indexes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject:
mutant bundel
Date:
Mon, 23 Nov 1998 18:11:20 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
proclus
Subject:
Re: Paul the Jewish Mystic
Date:
Thu, 19 Nov 1998 00:19:26 -0500
From:
Michael Love
To:
Andy Mcguire , Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" , Joe Steve Swick III ,
ArtdeHoyos , Randall Shortridge ,
Beth any , proclus ,
rpc man , "onandagus@webtv.net" ,
"Neoptolmus@aol.com" , Dave ,
"Robert R. Black" <74277.3365@compuserve.com>, Theurgus
References:
1
I'm going to point out a more literal interpretation of these statements
of Paul and others. We are agree that the goal here is to become god,
as god, godlike, or some such. I'll take as my definition of God one
which I favor. I heard it from Robert Anton Wilson. A god is someone
who lives forever, and can go anywhere they want just as fast as they
want. Such a being would be glorious indeed. God is human, as we are
taught by JS.
The anthropomorphic god is what distinguishes us from the theologians.
Given the above, clothing ourselves in immortality is a great analogy
for uploading. Gradually, as we become more and more godlike, uploading
to an immortal body becomes a possibility. In this interpretation, the
throne of god is something that we will sit our divine butts in one of
these days. It is not internal. In I loved the part about the tent.
"we wish not to be unclothed but to be further clothed." This is the
ideal uploading experience. Nothing is lost. Everything is gained. We
are litarally transformed into the immortal body of God. We are one in
that we are peers of God, like Moses and Abraham, our brothers.
I'm not fond of the Gospel of Thomas. I think that the writings of Paul
can all be interpreted in this very literal way.
Regards,
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s:+ a C++ UULI++$ P L+ E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
Paul the Jewish Mystic
Date:
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 02:41:17 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
The Gnostic Theology of Paul - or- Paul: The Jewish Mystic
The Arians risked imperial wrath when they taught people to become Sons of
God. The Origenists were expelled from their monasteries for
practicing union with God. But now, some scholars are concluding that ideas
like these could have been an original part of Christianity. A case
could be made that Paul taught union with God and that he used images from
Jewish mysticism. I have already posted on medieval Jewish
mystics, and I am finding some scholars who believe the same mystical ideas
about union with God that are part of medieval Kabbalah also
influenced Paul and possibly Jesus.
The world in which Christianity was born nurtured a variety of ideas about
divine union. In Jewish mysticism, as well as in Greek, Roman, and
Egyptian mystery religions, people sought personal identification with God.
They tried to accomplish this in several ways, one of which was the
practice of a spiritual journey known as an ascent. ( See James D. Tabor,
Things Unutterable: Paul's Ascent to Paradise in Its Greco-Roman,
Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts)
The mystics sometimes described the ascent not as journey upward into heaven
but rather inward, into the sacred spaces of the heart ( cf. my
comments about Paul's and Peter's references to the "inward man" above).
Usually the ascent culminated in either a vision of a divine being or in
the experience of being transformed into a divine being. Being seated on a
throne or clothed in new garments often symbolized the transformation.
One example of this belief and practice comes from the first century Jewish
mystic Philo, a contemporary of Jesus. He believed human beings
could also become divine beings like Moses. Philo calls Moses not only a "sort
of God" but also " a model for those who were inclined to imitate
him." Moses, Philo tells us, was not created divine; he gradually became
divine. Philo presents Moses' divinity as a goal for everyone: "Happy are
they who have been able to take, or have even diligently labored to take, a
faithful copy of this excellence in their own souls."
Other examples of this are found in the _First Enoch_ , from the first to
third century B.C., and in the Jewish mystical text _2 Baruch _ written
sometime between A.D. 70 and 130 -- but relying on earlier sources.
There is some evidence in the Gospels that Jesus may have been influenced by
the tradition of the ascents, but there is even more evidence in
Paul's letters. In fact, the Epistles have convinced many scholars that Jewish
mysticism impacted Christianity.
In 2 Corinthians, Paul describes a journey to the "third heaven," where he
received " visions and revelations of the Lord." It bears the earmarks of
ascent mysticism.
" I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third
heaven-- whether in the body or out of the body, I do not know, God
knows. And I know that this man was caught up into Paradise -- whether in the
body or out of the body I do not know, God knows -- and he
heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter." (2 Cor 12: 2-4
Revise Standard Version)
Other passages in Paul's letters provide further evidence that he was a Jewish
mystic. In them he teaches Christians to identify with Christ in the
same way Jewish mystics identified with the enthroned divine being. In 2
Corinthians, Paul describes a process of glorification that parallels one
recorded in _2 Enoch_. Enoch is brought before "the Lord", a divine being
seated on a throne. In the vision, the Archangel Michael "extracts"
Enoch from his " earthly clothing," annoits him with oil and puts him into
"clothes of glory." After this, Enoch tells us that he looked at himself and
he had become "like one of the glorious ones, and there was no observable
difference."
In Corinthians, Paul uses the same metaphor for transformation Enoch does --
exchanging earthly clothing for heavenly clothing. . He contrasts
living in an "earthly tent" ( the mortal body) with living in an eternal
heavenly dwelling. He compares the two modes of existence with clothing:
"For in this tent we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly
dwelling....because we wish not to be unclothed but to be further clothed (in
the
heavenly dwelling), so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life."(2
Cor, 5:1,2,4) Paul has simply exchanged the divine being of Jewish
mysticism with Christ. Thus we can conclude that when Paul taught people to be
clothed in a heavenly dwelling, he meant that they should seek
oneness with the divine being -- with the Christ, the universal Logos.
The passages in which Paul describes being "in Christ" give further support to
the argument that Paul was exhorting us to seek union with Christ.
The traditional interpretation is that being "in Christ" means being a
Christian, one with the body of Christians on earth. but it could have a
deeper
meaning -- I believe it refers to the state of being identified with Christ
through a mystical experience.
My interpretation fits Paul's usage of the term. For example, he calls himself
a man "in Christ". He tells us that "as all die in Adam, so all will be
made alive in Christ." he describes those who are in Christ as "one body,"
"members one of another and says that someone who is in Christ is
part of " a new creation." (2 Cor. 12:2 KJV; I Cor. 15:22; Rom 12:5; 2 Cor.
5:17) The definition that best fits Paul's descriptions is that being in
Christ means being identified with Christ.
Through analyzing Paul's use of the term "in Christ", scholar Alan Segal,
professor of religion at Barnard College, concludes that Paul is indeed
referring to the process of identification, or union, with a divine being. "
Being in Christ in fact appears to mean being united with Christ's heavenly
image." (Segal, Paul the Covert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the
Parisee, Yale University Press, 1990, p. 64) Transformation into
Christ, therefore, is an integral part of Paul's theology. The Christ has
taken on the role of the enthroned divine being of Jewish mysticism.
(13751-13754 July14,1997-)
Part II The Gnostic Paul or Paul: The Jewish Mystic
In Judaism, the enthroned being came to symbolize the "ideal and immortal man"
(Segal. p.42), the *prototype* from which all have descended
and to which all are destined to return. In other words, the divine being
represents the higher part of ourselves that did not take part in the fall
into
mortal bodies. This call this being the Divine Self, or Real Self.
Three Epistles describe the Christian's transformation from a state of soul
bondage to reunion with the Divine Self ( Real Self).
Ephesians : "God,...even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us
alive together with Christ...and raised us up with him and seated
us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus." (Eph., 2:4,5,6).
*Second Corinthians: "For while we live, we are always being given up to death
for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus may be made visible in
our mortal flesh." (2 Cor. 4:11)
Galatians: "It is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me." (
Gal 2:20)
When the Pauline Epistles tell us we are being seated in "heavenly places in
Christ" and that Jesus' life is " made visible in our mortal flesh,"
they are describing the process by which we too can be transformed into the
Christ. Remember, the Christ is not simply the man Jesus who
lived on earth. The Christ is the Logos, the Divine Word that he became, the
Divine Self of all of us.
The most important message that we can get from Paul's letters is that Jesus
was the *prototype* for every Christian. As Paul says in Romans,
"They are the ones [God] chose specially long ago and intended to become true
images of his Son, so that his Son might be the eldest of many
brothers."
( Romans 8:29 JB) Here Paul is saying that it is the destiny for every
Christian to be transformed into a divine being, a sibling of Jesus, who is
the
firstborn.
In the above passage from Romans, Paul uses the word *Image*: "conformed to
the IMAGE of his Son." This word had a special meaning in
Merkabah mysticism. As Segul tells us, the image of God, or *eikon*, was "an
especially glorious and splendid form that humanity lost when
Adam sinned." ( Segul. p. 41)
We can now understand the grand scope of Paul's theology when he says that
"all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord asthough
reflected in a mirror, ARE BEING TRANSFORMED INTO THE SAME IMAGE, from one
degree of glory to another" (2Cor 3:18)-- from
glory unto glory. This verse is the blueprint of your own spiritual journey.
You are destined to be transformed into your own lost divine image,
becoming more like him every day.
Paul's use of the term IMAGE is the key to interpreting his famous passage
from I Corinthians, chapter 15. In it, Paul tells us we are meant to
bear the image of Christ. He compares Adam ["the first man"] with Christ ["the
last Adam"]. "Just as we have born the image of the man of
dust[Adam]," he tells us, "we will also bear the image of the man of heaven
[Christ]." (I Cor 15:45, 49)
The Gnostics, who emerged out of Jewish mysticism, also saw the image as our
Divine Self, the Higher Self ( or Real Self) with which we were
once united. The Gnostics believed that the Divine Self, our true identity, is
something already inside us.
In the Gospel of Thomas, replacing the human image with the divine image is
the prerequisite for entering the kingdom: "When you make the two
into one, when you make the inner like the outer...when you make...an image in
place of an image, then you will enter the kingdom." (saying 22)
Possible interpretation: When you transform the human image into the divine
image, when you make the outer man conform to the inner man, and
when you replace the mortal image with the immortal image, then you will enter
the kingdom; for you will have transcended duality.
Thus the goal of spiritual development is transformation into a divine being.
Paul, the Jewish mystics and the Gnostics agree on this concept. If
you think I am reading too much into Paul, go back and read his letters with a
mystical interpretation in mind and see if they don't become clearer
in this new light. "For now we see through a glass, darkly, But then face to
face." ( I Cor 13:12 KJV)
Did Paul's mysticism reflect Jesus' original theology? Or was it some wild
fantasy he introduced on his own? He said he got his message directly
"through a revelation of Christ" ( Gal 1:12) Paul himself tells us that the
other apostles did not contest his interpretations. ( Gal 2:9) It would
have been difficult for Paul to have inserted mysticism into Christianity
unless it had already been part of Jesus' teaching. If it wasn't Paul who
introduced mysticism, it almost has to have been Jesus.
As Segal observes: "Ultimately, someone Jewish must have brought [the heavenly
visions of Jewish mysticism] into Christianity, and there is not
much time between the end of Jesus' ministry and the beginning of Paul's."
(Segal, Paul the Convert, p. 37)
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-yc05.mail.aol.com (rly-yc05.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.37])
by air-yc02.mail.aol.com (v51.26) with SMTP; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 23:19:19 1900
Received: from vector.dalsemi.com (vector.DALSEMI.COM [198.3.123.1])
by rly-yc05.mail.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id XAA26849;
Tue, 17 Nov 1998 23:19:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cruise.dalsemi.com (cruise.dalsemi.com [180.0.35.25]) by
vector.dalsemi.com (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA22105; Tue, 17 Nov 1998
22:19:16 -0600 (CST)
Received: by cruise.dalsemi.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA06397; Tue, 17 Nov 98 22:18:27 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 98 22:18:27 CST
From: kshaw@dalsemi.com (Ken Shaw)
Message-Id: <9811180418.AA06397@cruise.dalsemi.com>
Subject:
My ravings from another list
Date:
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:45:13 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com, trent@goodnet.com,
jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com, dcombe@rain.org
Subj: Branch=Davidic Servant?
Date: 11/17/98 7:49:47 PM Central Standard Time
From: Yahu007
To: shulemna@troubador.com
Gary,
The first followers of Jesus were called "N'Tzarim" (Nazarenes) which means
"Branchites"...followers of the Branch. The whole of the Bible is an account
of how one of the Elohim who called Himself YHUH selected a certain family
line as His own possession, to train and cultivate for a specific purpose.
The whole story of the Bible is about the struggle to keep the bloodline alive
and seperated from outsiders. The Tradition teaches that Seth was fathered
by YHUH Himself, as was Issac and later Jesus, such that the bloodline was
elevated at certain critical turning points.
All this happens in the context of "The War in Heaven" as it continues to be
played
out on earth, with some of the darkened B'nai Elohim (sons of gods) selecting
their
own humans to train and mate with to act as their agents in this sphere.
(If you want to learn more about this stuff just use a good search engine and
enter the word "Nephilim".)
Jesus was understood by his followers to be the Branch promissed in Isaiah,
and they based that understanding on his carefully preserved geneology.
The Branch that the Mormons are looking for is a decendant of Jesus in whom
the potentials of the bloodline are fully activated. He will reveal the
"Sealed
Portion" of the BoM which will contain the "mysteries" in their fullest sense,
the hidden history of the world, and how "reality" operates...the scientific
description of how miracles and "magic" really operate.
The BoM promises of the coming Branch seem to focus on the destiny of the
"Indians", and I have no clear idea of how that fits with the Davidic Servant
who
rebuilds the Jerusalem Temple and slays the "Anti-Christ". (Yes Judaism has
a doctrine of an "anti-Christ" whos must be defeated by the Messiah).
Kenneth Shaw
Subject:
Grail stuff
Date:
Sat, 28 Nov 1998 11:19:29 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
Theurgus@aol.com, proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
dcombe@rain.org
Of Dragons and Witches and the Holy Grail
© Edward J. Green, 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a detective story that began one Sunday afternoon as I was exploring
Indian mounds in Georgia. I could not help noting the similarity between the
mound and the pyramid of the moon in Mexico City. Artifacts unearthed at the
site had been fashioned by artisans in Mexico City from copper mined from near
St. Louis for people who lived in what is now Cartersville, Georgia. Obviously
the history of these people is not what we learned either in school or from
old Tom Mix movies.
I started by tracing the hidden side of recorded history. One of the best
places to look for important clues are the languages in which history is
written. One can trace the extent of the incursion of the Roman legions into
Britain by reading place names derived from the Latin. (4) More subtle is the
legacy of value judgments that comes from a later conquest of Britain. That
fateful day in 1066, the language of the noble Alfred became vulgar, the
language of the commons. After that date, the court language was of the new
nobility, the Normans. The phrase, "four letter Anglo-Saxon words" is a
euphemism for dirty language. Both Normans and Saxons shared a common biology.
Each used comparable sexual organs to breed the English speaking world. If
Harold had been the victor instead of William, polite speech might today make
unabashed use of good old fashioned Saxon words instead of "obscene and
vulgar" Latinisms as defecation and urination.
According to the Whorf-Sapir linguistic hypothesis, we can conceive only of
those things for we have words. Not only does language give us the structure
of our thoughts; it carries emotional content as well. It is the stuff of our
dreams. It is no accident that the generation that avidly followed the
adventures of Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon was the one that began the
exploration of space. Our dreams shaped the future.
Tyrants fear ideas, and they fear words that frame those ideas. Words are
always subversive. Sometimes it has been the Cross, at another, the three dots
and a dash, the Morse International Code letter V, represented by the opening
bars of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. Resistance fighters adopted this as a
symbol of coming victory in World War II. Historical records are untrustworthy
tools, since public statements are "sanitized" by those in power. It was while
I was musing on these things that I was struck by the possibility that
sanitizing might have been behind one of the most intractable problems of
psychology.
Philosophers, as well as the psychologists who followed them, have been
plagued by a contradiction that has spawned an almost endless series of
"systems", "theories", or "schools" of psychology. It is one of the reasons
that psychology has failed to achieve full scientific status. Contemporary
psychologists still wrestle with the semantic issue of what psychology is. On
the one hand, psychology is Psyche Logos, discourse on the mind. On the other
hand, every confused college Freshman has been taught that there is no such
thing as "mind." If he has taken an introductory psychology course, he is
familiar with John B. Watson. He has learned that Watson abolished mind, and
he probably learns why he did.
Mind is a noun, the name of a person, place, or thing. Since mind is a thing,
things take up space somewhere. An enormous amount of time, effort, and money
has hunted for where it is. It is not the brain or any part of either the
central or autonomic nervous systems. It doesn't even equate with the
operation of those organs. The issue become tense when mind is mixed up with
theology, for it looks suspiciously like the soul.
In the process of sorting out clues in language, a startling number of things
have fallen into place that may account for a number of historical oddities.
They may explain diverse matters such as why Hitler tried to exterminate the
Jews and the Gypsies; why the Romans committed genocide against neighbors in
Etruria; and why a Pope commissioned a painting of a contemporary political
figure hanging upside down with one foot tied to a gallows. We may see where
the mind/body problem came from and what it really means. Therein, we may even
find a clue to why civilization seems bent upon its own destruction.
The charge that we are a decadent, materialistic society is not unique to our
own. Although Julius Caesar praised one of the Gallic tribes, the Belgae, for
their bravery, he explained it by their remoteness from traders whose imported
luxuries would have corrupted them. The implication was that even the Belgae
would have become worthless had they been corrupted by material comforts.
Caesar should have known. No one disputes that our is a materialistic society.
No nation has produced and indulged itself in so many "things." Position and
worth are indexed by the car we drive, how many TV sets or videocasette
recorders we own. Even those who live at the official poverty level today
enjoy material comforts that would have been the envy of the Medici. Our
single minded dedication to these things is evidence for some that we worship
false Gods.
The root of the word materialism is the same as that from which we also derive
the words matter and mother. Who would dare imply that good old Mom is the
cause of all our godlessness? Oddly enough, we have been saying exactly that
for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Was it not Mother Eve who screwed up
the deal in the Garden of Eden, cavorting around with a snake? In Eastern
religions, the masculine element is explicitly considered spiritual. Spirit
comes from a masculine Latin noun. One ought not base an argument on just a
couple of words to which the appropriate genders happen to have been assigned,
for matter and spirit may be just linguistic accidents, yet happy accidents
they are. Fortunately, there is more.
Philosophy, is the love of wisdom. Wisdom is derived from the same root as the
German wissen, which means to know. From the same root, we get the word witch.
Where else do we look for information about knowledge? In French, to know is
connaitre and savoir. The French, as do our Teutonic cousins, distinguish
between two kinds of knowing. To know a fact in French involves the word
savoir, as it does the word wissen in German. To know a person in French
involves connaitre, and in German, kennen. English is sloppier in its
distinctions, although we do have a less well used term, acquaintance, by
which we designate someone known to us, but ordinarily we let it pass.
Oddly enough, acquaintance turned out to be the key. While reading the
Canterbury Tales, I was struck by one particular word. The word queynte as its
modern form today, was not only a term of opprobrium for the female genitalia,
it was also used in the same context with which we are familiar today. I
consulted Webster's New International dictionary, and it turns out that quaint
has to do with knowledge. Sure enough, quaint is the root for the word
acquaintance. Its relation to the female pudendum is more problematic. But
tracing knowledge back through the Western branch of the Indo-European family
of languages is straightforward enough. One goes from the French connaitre to
the Latin cognoscere, and from there to the Greek gignoskein, which means to
come to know, to perceive. Immediately adjacent to gignoskein in the lexicon
is the verb gignosthai, which means to beget. It is to this latter word that
the Greek for woman, gyne is related. As gyne is related to gignosthai, so is
gnosis to gignoskein. Gnosis, of course, means knowledge.
When the vowel is inserted between g and n of gnosis, we are but one step from
the vowel the Greeks placed between the g and n of the word gyne. It is
apparent that there is a connection between the sexual function of woman and
knowledge. Consider the words genus and genius, kin and ken. To be kind is to
be gentle, and Kind is the German word for a child. All at once, the origin of
the obscene epithet is clear, queynte and its contemporary English spelling
come from the Greek gyne by way of the Latin derivative cunnus, from which, in
addition to the obvious, we also derive a more noble term, queen.
To check that there was not something peculiar about Western Indo-European
languages, I consulted the Russian dictionary. Znat' means to know. Zhenit'
means to marry. The word for woman in Russian is zhena. The fact that common
relationships between knowledge and sex exist in both the Eastern and Western
branches of the Indo-European languages family means that the relationship
predated the time that the two branches separated. The Egyptian language was
next consulted to see if anything resembling this relationship was to be found
in hieroglyphic writing. In Egyptian one finds three kinds of hieroglyphic
symbols. The first is alphabetic, where the symbols have a phonetic equivalent
not unlike our alphabet. The second is syllabic, where phonemes are combined
to insure proper pronunciation through redundancy. The third kind of
hieroglyph, the determinative, is added to denote the class of things to which
a word refers.
The end of my search came with the Egyptian word rekh, which is used in two
ways. The spelling is the same in both cases, The phonetic symbols for r and
kh are accompanied by one of two determinative symbols. When a scroll follows,
the word means knowledge; when a phallus follows, the word means to beget.(3)
Unquestionably, the ancient Egyptians also equated sex with knowledge. Woman
was accorded such a status that her name was cognate with knowledge itself.
Whoever made that equation did not condemn Eve for the Fall.
The Old Testament tells us that the poisonous fruit which Eve ate came from
the tree of "knowledge." This anti-intellectual theme reverses the value we
pretend to place on enlightenment. In this tale, the equation of woman with
knowledge meant that both were bad. This treatment of the story is unique in
the folklore of the world. Among the Greeks, Hermes, was the messenger of the
Gods who carried a winged staff around which were twined two serpents, the
caduceus. Today the caduceus is a symbol of medicine, and the serpents of
wisdom are benign.
The feathered wings on the staff with the serpents reminds us of another
legend, that of the "plumed serpent." To natives of Central America, the
plumed serpent brought civilization. When the ships of Cortez and De Soto
arrived, they and their men were welcomed by those who should have driven them
back into the sea because they looked like what their legends had told them of
Quetzalcoatl. Quetzalcoatl, or Kukulkan, was conceived when a quetzal bird
dropped a feather on his mother's head as she walked in the rain forest. When
Kukulkan was born he had a twin half brother, who was a dog! Kukulkan later
took the Mayan Goddess of fertility as his consort. Her name was
transliterated by the Spaniards as Ixchel.
Clang association next took me northward to another legend. that of the Irish
hero, Cu Chulain. Cu Chulain's original name was Sedanta. He acquired the name
Cu Chulain after having killed a dog belonging to the smith Chulann. The owner
was naturally miffed, and to avoid a brouhaha, the young man indentured
himself to the smith for seven years as his dog! Cu is Gaelic for dog. Cu
Chulain, was the dog of Chulain.(7) Later in his career, he angered the Celtic
triple goddess of war and fertility known as the Morrigan, when he declined
her invitation to become her/their lover. Matters with her/them worsened when
his boon companion, Ailil, killed her/their pet bull. This tale is reminiscent
of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh also declined a proposal from the
Goddess of War and fertility, Inanna. Her ill will was further exacerbated
when Gilgamesh's friend, Enlil, slew her pet bull and brought on the flood.
The ancient Sumerian goddess was known by many names, one of which was Ishtar.
The Spaniards did not spell the Mayan sounds as an English speaking person
would do. The name they rendered as Ixchel is equivalent to the English
spelling by the word Ishtyel. The equation of Ishtyel and Ishtar is
compelling. R's and l's are sounds that are often interchanged; certainly they
were among the Egyptians, and native speaking Japanese have difficulty
pronouncing l's. They come out r's.
We know Cu Chulain not only as Sir Gawain of the Round Table, but also Wotan
of Teutonic fame. Wotan is the Germanic counterpart of the Greek Hermes. Even
more interesting is that the mother of Hermes is one of the Plaeides, Maya.
Her father was the Titan Atlas. In Egyptian mythology, Hermes is Thoth, whose
mother Maat is represented by the hieroglyph of a seated woman over whose head
is a feather!
Circumstantial evidence then links people in the Yucatan, Ireland, Wales, and
the eastern Mediterranean. The name of the ancient homeland of the Aztecs,
Aztlan, is similar to the name of Maya's father, Atlas, or to the continent of
Atlantis. When Central American Indians point to where their ancient homeland
sank beneath the waves, they point eastward from the Yucatan. The Welsh, for
whom Gawain was known as Gwalchmai, point southward into the Atlantic to where
their ancient homeland, Avalon, sank.
The golden apples of the sun were to be found in the Isles of the Hesperides,
named for the Evening Star. The Evening Star is Venus, or Hesperus. From
Hesperides we derive the word paradise. According to Plato, Atlantis sank west
of the Gates of Hercules. Interestingly enough, Venus, when it appears as the
Morning Star was known as Lucifer, the bearer of light!
Webster informs us that paradise originally meant orchard, and the Welsh
Avalon was originally Aballach. Aballach is from the Goidelic root whence
comes our word apple. It would seem, therefore, that we have found that the
original Garden of Eden was out there thataway somewhere in the middle of the
Atlantic Ocean. Not only that, but the Mayan name, Ixtlan, pronounced Ishtlan,
identifies the place with Ishtyel, and perhaps Ishtar. The recurrence of
reference to Venus, or Ishtar, suggests that whoever named an island or a
continent after a goddess would also accord women a status that would have
been remarkable even in the last century before ours.
What happened then? War, according to Plato, a war so bitter that the citizens
of that land were expunged from history. Plato gives his ancestors an edge
though, for even he acknowledges that the real demise was brought about by
violent geological disasters. Nevertheless, one suspects that the culture was
a long time dying. Accounts of later events such as surround good Queen Esther
may also be corruptions of historical fact. The Hebrews preempted Ishtar
making her a heroine, but her rituals were abominations in the eyes of the
patriarchal God who supplanted her, so they were destroyed. Her lunar calendar
was changed to a solar calendar. A seafaring people might have adopted a lunar
calendar, since tides are important. The lunar cycle corresponds to the human
menstrual cycle, and when the solar deity replaced Ishtar, time was reckoned
by solar cycles, or years. Such a switch in reckoning time would account for
the disappearance of really old folks like Methuselah. If we divide the years
of the lives of those ancients by thirteen, the number of lunar cycles in one
solar cycle, the life spans of Methuselah and his colleagues are not at all
remarkable either for their time or for ours.
An entire value system replaced what had been before. The serpent became the
symbol of evil as it represented the defeated nation. Perhaps the plumed
serpent was a national symbol such as a flag. What an emblem of power! The
Golden Eagle is our national bird; the Romans also used the eagle. Why not a
dragon? What more ancient traditions might the Vikings have been following
when they built their dragon ships? A dragon was a flying reptile;
paleontologists call it a pteranadon. Yet , despite Jurassic Park, no
dinosaurs walked the earth with humans. We are very egocentric to think that
we were the first to discover fossil remains of those great animals.
With these changes, the status of women became a casualty of war. Under the
new regime, woman took her place at the foot of the male. She was belabored
for her sinful character, and her new status enshrined in Holy Writ. The
mother became identified with the sinful body, and the masculine spirit was in
the ascendant. The split between mind and body not only resulted but here was
the beginning of shame for women blamed for the Fall of Eden.
Repression in the service of religious belief, is justified to protect the
faithful against heresy. One of the greatest heresies was that of the
Gnostics. It has only been in the past few years that the books found at Nag
Hammadi have told us something about what they were really like. In the fifth
century, they were an early Christian sect, given to individual worship. They
revered, in addition to the canonical gospels, writings attributed to Thomas,
the supposed twin brother of Jesus, and to Mary Magdalene. They accorded women
equal status and drew lots to select who should lead them in their devotions,
and women sometimes did so. In so doing, they challenged the political
hierarchy of the Church. These things, along with a certain corrosive style of
invective among their more articulate spokesmen, earned them the implacable
hatred of the religious establishment, and they were eventually eradicated.
(9)
We don't know whether the Gnostics went underground, or whether their ideas
were simply re-invented, but a sect calling itself the Bogomils appeared in
the Balkans somewhere in the Twelfth Century. The Bogomils were the
intellectual descendants of the Gnostics, and they sent representatives to the
Languedoc where they established communion with other neo-gnostics known as
the Albigensians, or Cathars. As the Cathar's form of Christianity spread
throughout the region, the power, prestige, and influence of Rome waned.
Finally Pope Innocent IV, with the aid of a warlord by the name of Simon de
Montfort undertook once again to stamp out the heresy. The "Albigensian
Crusade" came to a gory but mysterious end with the fall of the castle of
Montsegur on March 14, 1244. The events surrounding the fall of Montsegur have
provided fertile grounds for speculation, archaeology, and fantasy for the
past seven hundred years.
The besieged Cathars allegedly smuggled something out of the castle the night
before it surrendered to de Montfort. It was recorded, however, that, many
weeks earlier, the material wealth of the defenders was loaded onto a ship
belonging to the Order of the Knights Templar. One of the contemporary secrets
of the Order of DeMolay is what became of the treasures of the Templars.
Whatever was smuggled out that Easter night was likely to have been something
of religious, not material, importance. An interesting sidelight that the
mercenary soldiers who aided in the defense of the castle were promised a safe
conduct provided they were not Cathars. That guarantee was honored, allowing
mercenaries to leave safely with their weapons. But a few of them converted to
Catharism the day before the surrender. They had attended the Easter services,
and late that night two men slipped down the walls carrying the mysterious
treasure to safety.
We are not the first to seek treasure from those events. The castle of
Montsegur is the castle of Monsalvat in Lohengrin where the Holy Grail was
supposed to be. Parsival and Hitler are unlikely partners in the search for
the lost relic, but Hitler commissioned the Ahnenerbe - the historical section
of the SS to explore the environs of Montsegur with the presumed objective of
recovering some valuable relic.(1) Hitler and the philosophers of the SS
thought that they spirited away some kind of talisman, perhaps a rune stone.
The SS sealed off and mined the area, and shot several trespassers, all to no
avail. The Grail never turned up at Berchtesgaden. Whatever it was, the Nazis
believed it was the Holy Grail, and this was years before Steven Spielberg.
Exactly what the Grail is supposed to have been has long been a subject of
debate. Opinions are that it was the cup from which Jesus drank at the last
supper, others claim that the word refers to the "gradual," a part of the
Communion service, and yet others contend that it had to do with pagan
tradition, the cauldron of Bran, for example. Recently, a view has been
proposed that one name, Sangraal, is a corruption of Sangre Real, the royal
blood line of Jesus. (2) The same authors speculate that what was smuggled out
of the castle was some a religious relic. They speculate that it might have
been a book of Gnostic symbols, a fair approximation to Hitler's hunch about
runes.
The mystery deepened further with the persecution of the Knights Templar.
Templars accumulated remarkable treasures, possibly including the Shroud of
Turin. De Molay was roasted over a slow fire in 1314, but some members of the
Order survived. One of its offshoots, the Order of Teutonic Knights two
hundred years later supported Martin Luther and the Reformation. Among their
other accomplishments, the Templars were responsible for importing banking to
Europe, so some of their influence survived in the great banking houses of
Italy and Germany. Relatives of the last Grand Masters of the Order were among
the most powerful and wealthy families of France and Italy.
Bernabo Visconti, Duke of Milan, was famous not only for his ruthlessness in
putting down challenges to his authority, but also for his patronage of the
arts and literature. The Visconti family commissioned one of the loveliest
Books of Hours that the illuminator's craft has created. (8) A less notable,
but more curious commission given the Visconti illuminators was for a deck of
playing cards, a Tarot deck, to be exact. The Visconti-Sforza deck is one of
the decks of cards in existence.(6) It dates from about 1400, and one version
in the Yale University library clearly shows the Visconti heraldic device.
Perhaps one of the most interesting of the cards is one designated the "High
Priestess." It is a portrait of a member of the Visconti family, a sister
Manfreda. Sister Manfreda was a member of a religious sect called the
Guglielmites, named after one Guglielmo of Bohemia. Members of the sect would
elect from among their members those who would lead them in worship! Sister
Manfreda appears on the deck resplendently clad in papal robes. The Visconti-
Sforza clan was sufficiently strong both militarily and financially to get
away with an open gesture of defiance. Later the Duke of Milan was denounced
as a heretic from the displaced See at Avignon. A final incident with the
Tarot occured when Sforza changed sides against the anti-Pope John XXIII. John
commissioned a caricature of Sforza dangling by one leg like a hanged traitor.
It is the Hanged Man of the Tarot deck. It is clear that John used the deck to
communicate that he had gotten the message, and not happily so either. This
was an era that would see the emergence of the Inquisition. Savonarola would
be martyred, and yet the powerful duchy of Milan openly flouted symbols of
heresy. The Visconti family had ties to some of the wealthiest families in
southern France, and many of these had been Cathars. The Albigensian Crusade
massacred thousands, but some survived and challenged Rome itself.
It is tempting to speculate that the "book" of Gnostic symbols smuggled out of
Montsegur might have been the Tarot deck itself. Early versions of the Tarot
include representations of the card called "The Universe" where the picture is
framed by Ourobouros, the snake swallowing its tail, a Gnostic symbol. The
holy cord of the Templars appears about the waist of the high priestess.
At the time of the Cathars' eclipse, many itinerant beggars and other outcasts
lived on the edges of what was the most affluent and civilized center of
culture in Europe. The French called these people "Bohemians," for that is
nowhere they originally came from. Today, the word means "Gypsy" in French.
Whether Guglielmo of Bohemia was a Gypsy is not clear. It may be only
coincidental that one of the illuminators commissioned by Visconti was named
Bembo and that the name of one of the major Gypsy is the Bimbos. It is
possible that members of the Bogomils who went to France fit the character of
Bohemians. If Gypsies made up a segment, no matter how depressed, of the
Cathar community, they would have been welcomed to full communion and
participated in religious services. When the "crusaders" of de Montfort
arrived looking for loot, few escaped, certainly not wealthy and influential
Cathars. The poorest and most despised are likely to have been the only ones
who might have slipped through unnoticed. They would have taken with them what
they understood. A mysterious artifact of the Merovingian priest/kings seems
to have slipped out of France and remained with the Gypsies. Crystal balls
turned up in the excavation of Merovingian graves. No one knows their purpose,
but crystal balls turn up as a part of the arcanum of the Gypsy bujo woman,
along with the Tarot.
Perhaps they are remnants of something but dimly understood that has been
brought into the Twentieth Century by members of a kind of cargo cult. Gypsies
themselves have little understanding of these matters, being for the most part
illiterate and ignorant of their own history. But in one series of
conversations this writer had with a bujo woman, she explained in her words a
cosmology which was an amazingly accurate rendition of the Manichean theory of
the creation, a full blown gnostic dualism in place in the middle of midtown
Manhattan in a dingy Gypsy offisa.
Hitler was obsessed with acquiring symbols of martial power. He had taken the
Holy Lance from the Reichsmuseum in Vienna, for whoever possessed it
supposedly could never be defeated in battle. (10) Hitler once explained that
by his phrase, the New Order, he meant the black shirted SS to be the Nazi
counterpart to the Society of Jesus, a new Holy Order. The symbols of the new
order included the Grail. If he thought the Gypsies had any knowledge of the
power he sought, they were doomed. He persecuted the Gypsies as viciously as
he did the Jews.
The founders of the Nazi party were a strange lot. Max Amann had been
affiliated with a group calling itself the Society of the Vrill, which in turn
was associated with the Germanen Orden. The Society of the Golden Dawn was in
touch with their German cousins, and the Tarot cards were of great interest to
Crowley. What value might all or any of this nonsense have for us? Are we to
believe that there is some arcane truth which will be our salvation? Not
hardly.
The Gnostic sects throughout history have been an intolerable digression, not
so much from Christian theology as such as from the implicit assumptions that
are the basis of our Western heritage. Christianity, as an emergent form of
Judaism perpetuated the anti-feminine bias of the patriarchal sun cults of
Central Asia. If it seems far fetched to equate Judaism with early pagan
beliefs, consider the central deity of the Greeks, Jove, the hurler of
thunderbolts. Pronounce the name Jove by the rules of high school Latin, and
the Hebrew god emerges from behind the Jovian beard. The new patriarchal Gods
had every reason to despise the old, if we are to credit Plato's account. The
feminine principle so exalted in Atlantis was forced into exile.
One sees in the collective the psychological processes of the individual. When
a man is so far out of touch with himself as to deny what are essentially
feminine characteristics in himself, he grotesquely postures an insecure
masculinity. The political, religious, and military posturings of Western
civilization for the past thousands of years are those of sick men. Since He
Gods took charge, bloody carnage has been the story of mankind. It is may be
fair to say that Western civilization has existed with half of its collective
psyche bound in perpetual submission. It is ridden by anxiety and fueled by
shame. War is one outcome. Another was the burning of millions of women as
witches. (5)
Efforts have been made throughout history to redress the gender imbalance.
Veneration of the Virgin Mary has been the healthiest sign that we acknowledge
the feminine principle. Our civilization needs anything but another shot of
testosterone poisoning. We must return to a continuing search for "knowledge"
with all that the word implies. If we have to surrender ancient prejudices
about womankind in the process; good riddance. We must accept of ourselves,
body and soul, as the indispensable carriers of life itself. It is psychotic
for leaders to commit a nation to war. No theory of government, of economics,
or of religion has such a right, but mankind has lived and died by it for
millennia. It is immoral to kill a man to "save his soul," and the body is not
obscene. The real obscenity is the destruction of human life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
References
1. Angebert, Jean-Michel, The Occult and the Third Reich. New York: Macmillan
Publishing Company, 1974.
2. Baigent, M., Leigh, R., and Lincoln, H., Holy Blood, Holy Grail. New York:
Delacorte Press, 1982.
3. Budge, E.A. Wallis, An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary New York: Dover
Publications, 1978.
4. Churchill, Winston, A History of the English Speaking Peoples. New York:
Dood, Mead & Company, 1956.
5. Jong, Erika, Witches. New York: New American Library, 1981.
6. Kaplan, S. R., Encyclopedia of Tarot. New York: U. S. Games Systems,
Publishers, 1978.
7. MacCana, P., Celtic Mythology. London: Hamlyn Publishing Group, 1970.
8. Meiss, M., and Kirsch, E. W., The Visconti Hours. New York: George
Braziller, Inc., 1972.
9. Pagels, E. The Gnostic Gospels. New York: Random House, Inc., 1979.
10. Ravenscroft, T., The Spear of Destiny. New York: Putnam's, 1973.
Subject:
Re: [shulemna] What is the highest truth ???
Date:
Sun, 06 Dec 1998 01:24:53 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
onandagus@webtv.net, dcombe@rain.org
CC:
m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Jahnihah,
I'll throw in my two bits on this. We get confused by the many layers
of tradition that came together to make up "Mormonism". As we peel
back the layers to try to undertand them better we realize that each
layer is a whole tradition all by itself, and could be practiced as a
"religion".
I've been working on this project of peeling back the layers for twenty years,
and the more I learn the more it looks like Joseph Smith really was
"restoring"
the original "Jesus movement". The problem is that the original "Jesus
movement"
was nothing like what the "Orthodox Catholic Church" or its mutated spawn
"Protestantism" imagine it to have been. The original "Jesus movement" is
much better represented by Islam than it is by Christianity, since Islam grew
out of the Jewish-Christianity (Ebionites, Nazarenes) that followed the
authority
of the family of Jesus (James the brother of Jesus, ect.) instead of Paul and
the gentile "Bishops".
I believe that the "Highest Truth" was taught by Jesus AND Muhammed;
The Absolute Unity of Existance..."Hear of Israel, Yahuveh your Gods,
Yahuveh is One"..."There is no god but the One God".
Who is the God of the gods? Who do all the Elohim worship even in their
exaltation? That is the highest truth and the mystery of mysteries.
Unity makes it plain what Jesus meant when He said, "whatever you do
to anyone, you are doing it to Me". He meant it quite literaly. The doctrine
of Unity not only says "God is One" it also says "There is none other except
He".
In other words, God is the only Being that exists AT ALL...the only "thing"
that
exists AT ALL. We are little "bits" of Him floating about in His Mind. All
these
worlds are being "dreamed" into existance in His own Mind. Each one of us IS
HE.
Like a playwrite who must act out all the parts on the stage as well as being
the audience at the same time, we have to "lose ourselves" in the part in
order to make the "story" seem "real."
This is the "Highest Truth".
Ken Shaw
Subject:
RE: mormon atheist
Date:
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 02:14:29 -0500
From:
proclus
To:
Andy Mcguire ,
Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" ,
"Theurgus@aol.com" , "jswick@cris.com" ,
"rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"onandagus@webtv.net" ,
"Neoptolmus@aol.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
Sorry, I've been a little out of it lately. Things are moving fast now
at school, and it is likely to continue for a few months at least.
Anyway, some of you may have noticed that I sometimes find time to
answer email on Thursday night. Here goes.
> Mike,
>
> Ooooh. This really stretches a few concepts to the straining point.
>
> Reality check.
> "If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, and floats like a duck, it
> must be a duck."
Unless of course it is a rubber ducky! quack quack! Hey, what is this
chip inside ducky's brain?
> So call *IT* 'a god' instead of 'The GOD'. Does the essence of the
> relationship change? At first blush, no. *IT* is still seen as the PRIME
> CAUSE, worshipped, feared (for all the wrong reasons) and supplicated for
> divine favor. So while the definition of the IT may change, the superficial
> relationship between the *IT* and the *US* does not change in substance.
++++++... and later+++++++
> In spite of all this, it still flies in the face of Traditional Atheism,
> which simply states: "There is Nothing Out There"
>
> So maybe the Mormons believe in a Goose that does a dang good Duck
> impersonation.
You know there are some fine atheists on the extropian list. I
sometimes wonder if they will still be atheists if they realize their
dreams and become gods. There are no atheists in a heaven ;-}. You may
know that they typically believe in the immanent Singularity. Near as I
can tell this is a little like McKenna's jump into Hyperspace, or the
Omega Point. Essential information is accellerating at such a rate that
we will achieve full human apotheosis very soon, probably within our
lifetimes.
I don't have to remind this group that we would be as gods, to earlier,
less advanced, civilizations. Heck, if I visited myself in the past,
I'd probably scare myself to death!
The upshot is that "There is Nothing Out There" seems like a pretty
shallow definition of atheism to me. What happens if we are the ones
who are "out there"? What if UFO's are real? How many different kinds
of gods can there be inside of an infinite material universe? This is
why I say that we are peers of God. If we believe that human potential
is infinite, then we believe in god. _However_, and this is the main
point, this is not the transcendent god of the monotheists. By their
definition,
****** Mormons are atheists. ******
The king follet sermon is anti-monotheistic. God is plural, not meta.
> But dig a little deeper...
>
> What changes when you replace the *IT* of tradition with the *IT* of Joseph
> and Brigham?
> -The PRIME CAUSE factor becomes localized and diminished.
yes.
> -The causes for FEAR go away (at least for the level headed).
Yes.
> -Worship is demoted from the level of absolute awe to a level of really
> bodacious respect. (Oh gads. I just said 'bodacious'.)
YES
> -Supplication becomes something of a contractual relationship. Instead of
> reliance on capricious favor, there is more of a cause and effect.
YES!!!!!
My current feeling is that the earth is a consciousness manifold,
ejecting little divinities all over the place. We have a share in this
manifold, and everytime we become more divine, our share is validated.
This is why I am doing science, because technology is one of the primary
drivers of human evolution. This is why I am in a life extension
program, so I can live to see the day.
Be the advanced tribe. Aerospacers overran the orchards, and now we
have Silicon Valley. Beat your plowshares into nanotech. Win a prize.
>
> -AJ
>
> "Fear is the Father of the Gods" -Lucretius
Who am I to argue with the illustrious Lucretius, the lover of Lady
Wisdom ;-}. LVX=inflationary theory. Thank gods for MIT.
Regards,
proclus
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Subject:
for mutant
Date:
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 02:15:32 -0500
From:
proclus
To:
"proclus@mac.com"
Subject:
RE: mormon atheist
Date:
Tue, 01 Dec 1998 12:31:40 -0500
From:
"McGuire, Andy"
To:
'proclus' , Andy Mcguire ,
Kathleen McGuire , "R. Trent Reynolds" ,
Theurgus@aol.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
onandagus@webtv.net, Neoptolmus@aol.com, dcombe@rain.org
Mike,
Ooooh. This really stretches a few concepts to the straining point.
Reality check.
"If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, and floats like a duck, it
must be a duck."
So call *IT* 'a god' instead of 'The GOD'. Does the essence of the
relationship change? At first blush, no. *IT* is still seen as the PRIME
CAUSE, worshipped, feared (for all the wrong reasons) and supplicated for
divine favor. So while the definition of the IT may change, the superficial
relationship between the *IT* and the *US* does not change in substance.
But dig a little deeper...
What changes when you replace the *IT* of tradition with the *IT* of Joseph
and Brigham?
-The PRIME CAUSE factor becomes localized and diminished.
-The causes for FEAR go away (at least for the level headed).
-Worship is demoted from the level of absolute awe to a level of really
bodacious respect. (Oh gads. I just said 'bodacious'.)
-Supplication becomes something of a contractual relationship. Instead of
reliance on capricious favor, there is more of a cause and effect.
In spite of all this, it still flies in the face of Traditional Atheism,
which simply states: "There is Nothing Out There"
So maybe the Mormons believe in a Goose that does a dang good Duck
impersonation.
-AJ
"Fear is the Father of the Gods" -Lucretius
> -----Original Message-----
> From: proclus [SMTP:proclus@mac.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 1998 10:17 PM
> To: Andy Mcguire; Kathleen McGuire; R. Trent Reynolds; Theurgus@aol.com;
> jswick@cris.com; rds@acsu.buffalo.edu; proclus@mac.com;
> rpcman@hotmail.com; onandagus@webtv.net; Neoptolmus@aol.com;
> dcombe@rain.org
> Subject: mormon atheist
>
> Heyers Mutants! You all know that I have long been kicking around the
> idea of god as the ultimate transhumanist. I was just perusing a very
> interesting transhumanist website. Here is the link.
>
> http://members.wbs.net/homepages/c/r/y/cryonic4life/enlightenment.html
>
> Anyway, I was thinking of a conversation with a theology student I had
> recently. I was reminded that mormon teachings on the godhead are 100%
> alien to any medieval theology. In fact, the very idea of theology is
> antithetical to the mormon concept of god as human.
>
> Mormons are atheists. Our Exemplar is a man who became godlike. We are
> the same kind of being, with the same potential. Many humans incarnated
> before the redeemer. Adam is our father and a god. No where is
> Joseph's materialism more apparent than in his conception of the
> abrahamic covenant. There is no God, just gods. Every man and woman is
> a star. This is completely at odds with anything the theists have given
> us. Mormonism can be rewritten as science fancy.
>
> I realize that this is a little shrill. I was wondering if you all had
> any thoughts about this strange territory that I find myself in. Can it
> be tempered? You've all been kind of silent about it.
>
> Best Regards,
> proclus
Subject:
Forward from Jewish BoM list
Date:
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 02:28:33 -0500 (EST)
From:
Theurgus@aol.com
To:
proclus@mac.com, MCGUIREA@a1.bellhow.com, kathleen@enol.com,
trent@goodnet.com, jswick@cris.com, rds@acsu.buffalo.edu, rpcman@hotmail.com,
onandagus@webtv.net, dcombe@rain.org
Subj: [m-kabbalah] Re: What is the highest truth ???
Date: 12/11/98 12:45:27 AM Central Standard Time
From: Theurgus@aol.com
Reply-to: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Mark,
The Ebionite-Islam connection has been clearly demonstrated by many
scholars. I first found it in Henry Corbin's "Ismaili Gnosis and Cyclical
Time"
in which he describes the "Adamology" of the Jewish-Christian Ebionites,
how there is a chain of "Adams" that reaches back into eternity, and how
Jesus was the "reincarnation" of our own Adam who came back to rescue his
own children. Robert Eisenman recently wrote a book entitled "James the
Brother of Jesus" in which he discusses the connection between James the
Just, John the Baptist, Qumran and the Rechabites who were decendants
of Jethro who followed Moses but who had a seperate covenant with El Elyon
through the legendary Melchezedek. The Rechabites refused to live in cities
or take up farming, never cut their hair or beards and refused to touch wine.
They lived the Bedouin life of their Midianite ancestors and were reputed to
be
the heirs and transmitters of ancient knowledge "from before the flood" that
gave
them certain "miracle powers" that included raising the dead.
There is an argument that the name "Nazerene" could have come from the hebrew
word that means "keeper of secrets". The Rechabites had close connections
with
Qumran and together they seemed to share a kind of esoteric "Freemasonry".
The inner meaning of Judaism is Kabbalah and the inner meaning of Islam is the
Sufi tariqa. They both are radical non-dualist, which means they both say
that
"God" is the only Being that exists AT ALL...period. This is the same
position as
Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism. It seems that the teaching from "before the
flood"
survived better in India than in the Levant.
Ken Shaw
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't lose your email when you move, change jobs, or switch ISP's.
Click here to get free and permanent email from NET@DDRESS!
http://ads.egroups.com/click/156/0
Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by
air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v53.20) with SMTP; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:45:27 -0500
Received: from findmail.com (mi.findmail.com [209.185.96.145])
by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with SMTP id BAA07606 for ;
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:45:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: (qmail 15852 invoked by uid 505); 11 Dec 1998 06:44:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact m-kabbalah-owner@egroups.com
Precedence: list
X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/m-kabbalah/
X-Mailing-List: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Reply-To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Received: (qmail 20747 invoked by uid 7770); 11 Dec 1998 06:43:56 -0000
Received: from imo16.mx.aol.com (198.81.17.6)
by vault.findmail.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 1998 06:43:56 -0000
Received: from Theurgus@aol.com
by imo16.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id 0ULYa22778
for ; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:39:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Theurgus@aol.com
Message-ID: <5867d497.3670be0d@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:39:09 EST
To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 224
Subject: [m-kabbalah] Re: What is the highest truth ???
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject:
Re: Forward from Jewish BoM list
Date:
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 10:11:05 -0500
From:
proclus
To:
Andy Mcguire ,
Kathleen McGuire ,
"R. Trent Reynolds" ,
"Theurgus@aol.com" ,
"jswick@cris.com" ,
"rds@acsu.buffalo.edu" ,
"proclus@mac.com" ,
"rpcman@hotmail.com" ,
"onandagus@webtv.net" ,
"Neoptolmus@aol.com" ,
"dcombe@rain.org"
References:
1
Ken, thank you for your interesting posts. Let me just remind you that
monotheism is a recent development. As you know, elohim is plural, and
JHVH had consort originally.
It is just my point of view, but when I look out, I see a universe of
infinite manifold diversity. There is room for many gods, and
independent creations.
> They lived the Bedouin life of their Midianite ancestors and were reputed to
> be
> the heirs and transmitters of ancient knowledge "from before the flood" that
> gave
> them certain "miracle powers" that included raising the dead.
>
> There is an argument that the name "Nazerene" could have come from the hebrew
> word that means "keeper of secrets". The Rechabites had close connections
> with
> Qumran and together they seemed to share a kind of esoteric "Freemasonry".
In this connection, I read a recent story about a fellow who was able to
identify 200 more words from obscured dead sea scrolls. Greg Bearman, a
NASA physicist, used an infrared technique which was developed for
planetary observations. The text was hopelessly obscured, essentially a
blank page, but he was able to decipher some of it. "The passages
revealed by Bearman offer the earliest known mention of the practice of
laying hands on the sick." I loved that. Thank goodness that Bearman
layed his hands on the scrolls!
Here is a passage from Abraham that I cherish.
"Thus I , Abraham, talked with the Lord, face to face, as one man
talketh to another; and he told me of the works which his hands had
made. He said unto me: My son, my son (and his had was stretched out),
He put his hand upon mine eyes, and I saw those things which his hands
had made, which were many; and they multiplied before mine eyes, and I
could not see the end thereof."
This reminds me that Jesus healed the blind by laying his hands on their
eyes. I think that this passage clearly implies that the earth was made
by a man. Further, I'm sure that you realize that this is the basis of
the promise to Abraham. We are as the stars of heaven, as the sands of
the sea, not one, but many.
> The inner meaning of Judaism is Kabbalah and the inner meaning of Islam is the
> Sufi tariqa. They both are radical non-dualist, which means they both say
> that
> "God" is the only Being that exists AT ALL...period. This is the same
> position as
> Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism. It seems that the teaching from "before the
> flood"
> survived better in India than in the Levant.
This is one interpretation. One of the most powerful and enduring
polytheisms comes out of India, and it is also very ancient, in fact,
probably older.
There are a couple of things going on here. It is impossible to
logically determine if the world is really out there, or just in our
heads. I can't tell if my dreams are real or not. Similarly, I can't
tell if my reality is real or not. Now, if it is all a dream, and I am
God, then the universe exists in the mind of God. The problem is that
it is impossible to demonstrate this. Nevertheless, some great minds
came to this conclusion based on a bogus assumption of economy, and some
troubling self-referential logic.
On the other hand, I am constantly surprised by how vastly disjoint, and
deeply complex the universe seems to be. It seems like an impossible
projection, except perhaps for a transcendent outsider god. That god
would be separate from the creation. Here is some basic logic for you.
Nothing exists but God.
Thus, I am God.
My wife is God.
Therefore, I am my wife.
I'm sure that you can relate to the fact that this seems completely
impossible, even in a dream. My wife sometimes rakes me over for what I
do in _her_ dreams. Fancy that! We are independent intelligences. At
least, that seems like a good bet, based on a rejection of economy.
Look at the infinite superfluous complexity. It is symbolized in the
very archetecture of the SLC temple. Universes exists in a bough of
grapes, in an unnecessary lacey fringe, in a crowning edge of diversion
and its reflection. There is no economy here.
Finally, monotheism leads to intolerance. Structures erode. The center
flys apart. Castles are washed away by a vast complexity called the
sea. What is "out there" is unknown, but it beckons because it is
other. I'm sure that you will agree that intolerance is absurd.
Regards,
proclus
Theurgus@aol.com wrote:
>
> Subj: [m-kabbalah] Re: What is the highest truth ???
> Date: 12/11/98 12:45:27 AM Central Standard Time
> From: Theurgus@aol.com
> Reply-to: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
> To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
>
> Mark,
>
> The Ebionite-Islam connection has been clearly demonstrated by many
> scholars. I first found it in Henry Corbin's "Ismaili Gnosis and Cyclical
> Time"
> in which he describes the "Adamology" of the Jewish-Christian Ebionites,
> how there is a chain of "Adams" that reaches back into eternity, and how
> Jesus was the "reincarnation" of our own Adam who came back to rescue his
> own children. Robert Eisenman recently wrote a book entitled "James the
> Brother of Jesus" in which he discusses the connection between James the
> Just, John the Baptist, Qumran and the Rechabites who were decendants
> of Jethro who followed Moses but who had a seperate covenant with El Elyon
> through the legendary Melchezedek. The Rechabites refused to live in cities
> or take up farming, never cut their hair or beards and refused to touch wine.
> They lived the Bedouin life of their Midianite ancestors and were reputed to
> be
> the heirs and transmitters of ancient knowledge "from before the flood" that
> gave
> them certain "miracle powers" that included raising the dead.
>
> There is an argument that the name "Nazerene" could have come from the hebrew
> word that means "keeper of secrets". The Rechabites had close connections
> with
> Qumran and together they seemed to share a kind of esoteric "Freemasonry".
>
> The inner meaning of Judaism is Kabbalah and the inner meaning of Islam is the
> Sufi tariqa. They both are radical non-dualist, which means they both say
> that
> "God" is the only Being that exists AT ALL...period. This is the same
> position as
> Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism. It seems that the teaching from "before the
> flood"
> survived better in India than in the Levant.
>
> Ken Shaw
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Don't lose your email when you move, change jobs, or switch ISP's.
> Click here to get free and permanent email from NET@DDRESS!
> http://ads.egroups.com/click/156/0
>
> Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
>
> ----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
> Return-Path:
> Received: from rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by
> air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v53.20) with SMTP; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:45:27 -0500
> Received: from findmail.com (mi.findmail.com [209.185.96.145])
> by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
> with SMTP id BAA07606 for ;
> Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:45:25 -0500 (EST)
> Received: (qmail 15852 invoked by uid 505); 11 Dec 1998 06:44:00 -0000
> Mailing-List: contact m-kabbalah-owner@egroups.com
> Precedence: list
> X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/m-kabbalah/
> X-Mailing-List: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
> Reply-To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
> Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-m-kabbalah@egroups.com
> Received: (qmail 20747 invoked by uid 7770); 11 Dec 1998 06:43:56 -0000
> Received: from imo16.mx.aol.com (198.81.17.6)
> by vault.findmail.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 1998 06:43:56 -0000
> Received: from Theurgus@aol.com
> by imo16.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id 0ULYa22778
> for ; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:39:09 -0500 (EST)
> From: Theurgus@aol.com
> Message-ID: <5867d497.3670be0d@aol.com>
> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:39:09 EST
> To: m-kabbalah@egroups.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 224
> Subject: [m-kabbalah] Re: What is the highest truth ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
--
Visit proclus' realm! http://www.proclus-realm.com/home.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/S d+@ s: a C++ UUI++$ P L E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++ V--
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-@ b !DI D- G e++>++++ h---
r+++ y++++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
If you want to join the discussion, just click here..
Back up to Mutant's Home
More discussion here!
Visit