Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone

Expand Messages
  • Jahnets
    J2: Regan, you seem to be the one being muddled or confused. R2: Well, Jahnets, when I am told - without explanation, justification, or substantiation - that
    Message 1 of 24 , Apr 27, 2006
      J2: Regan, you seem to be the one being muddled or confused.

      R2: Well, Jahnets, when I am told - without explanation, justification, or
      substantiation - that the Ultimate Being is not God but is the Goddess
      instead, that the cosmic deities Nephthys and Hera are in fact Gaia, the
      spirit of the earth-planet, that the Grail of Arthurian legend is actually
      the goddess of the earth (and so, by implication, is the Philosopher's
      Stone), that the Greeks got the name of their goddess of wisdom wrong when
      they called her Sophia and that when the alchemists and Grail-seekers of
      yore thought they were uniting with God, they were actually copulating with
      a priestess and still failing to unite even with her, then yes, I suppose I
      am being a bit muddled and confused - by you - because none of this accords
      with the facts as most of the human race has always understood them to be!
      Not long ago you were expressing doubts that husbands could become their
      wives, but it would seem that in your system of thought, everybody has
      already become everybody else! Your thoughts and beliefs about these things
      seem to have no rhyme or reason to them that I, at least, can follow. You
      should not blame me for being muddled and confused about what you are saying
      and doing.

      J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation you are just incapabile of
      understanding my thoughts or do not want to. The he-man races facts and
      their understanding of them from time immortal is more than likely the
      reason they are so screwed up today. That along with an inability to see the
      same history in a new light that is different from their present
      understanding, as you so graciously pointed out above, even when the
      differences are coming at them from a many different directions.

      1.The Goddess rather than God is only logical as the maternal DNA is
      needed, the grays found this out. They were already cloning and going
      extinct in the process without it.

      2. The same four main gods have been called many different names with
      different peoples. That is obvious to anyone doing the least little bit of
      research.

      3. I said "I" believe that the name Sophia was a translation error and that
      it is wrong, and I still do. I think the "a" at the end was added. Whats
      more to them Sophi is the goddess of the earth and the first born and fallen
      so I am not saying anything new here, that was not in the article.

      4. Had you read the article in the first place, and if you could comprehend
      anyone other than yourself you might have noticed that what he was stating
      was that the stone and that the rites were all looking for the same thing,
      the graal. I didn't have to infer anything..." The lumen naturae was the
      Grail Stone, the Elixir. Not atmospheric light, but the soft white
      luminosity of the primary substance body of the
      Goddess."

      5. These are your thoughts Regan..."Not long ago you were expressing doubts
      that husbands could become their wives, but it would seem that in your
      system of thought, everybody has already become everybody else! If they
      truly unite with their wives, then I would say that they automatically
      become them."

      What I said was that when husbands have sex with their wifes they do not
      become them. I still feel this way. You are using words I have used in one
      respect towards another part of the conversation. Here is what he said in
      the article..."(Jung stated that identification of the Self with God-in
      mystical terms, union with the Godhead-was and ever is the supreme spiritual
      realization of the human psyche, but it carries the risk of ego inflation. I
      would argue that the God-Self equation is nothing but ego inflation, no
      matter how you cut it.)"
      I would agree with him there...

      R1: OK, so stop boasting about your capabilities and show us. Where is
      this glorious tapestry of which you speak?

      J2: I said I was a seamstress, not that I had a tapestry. I have however
      made dresses for people who were bigger in front than in back, so very hard
      to fit, I've made wedding dresses for my first psychic development teacher,
      mens suits, silk ties,coats, just about anything I have ever put my mind to
      and many without patterns other than what I wanted it to look like. I worked
      at a fabric store for over four years during which time just to give the
      customers a kick the girls would yell at me across the store holding two
      spools of thread and a piece of fabric and I would tell them which matched
      better. I was always right...

      R2: Bully for you, then! But that's all in the past, isn't it? The
      "challenge" which you have given yourself now is to correlate various
      esoteric symbol-systems together, is it not?

      J3: No not at all, that is just one you are trying to dump on me. I can see
      how they correlate already in many cases, and have long since learned that
      many do not want to learn because that would mean change, so you will have
      to figure them out for yourself Regan.

      R2:I say you will have great
      difficulty in doing that, not because of any inherent weakness in your
      capability as a weaver of threads, but simply because the different systems
      themselves do not match-up in any simple, one-to-one set of correspondences.
      You've heard of "squaring the circle". Well, this exercise is more akin to
      "cubing the sphere", or perhaps even "hypercubing the hypersphere"! These
      things may be done, but not easily.

      J3: Still giving up before you begin, I am surprized anyone would get
      anything done with you sabotaging their efforts so. Keep putting that energy
      out there, it will come back around to you one of these days.

      J2: My point was that possibly some time in the past someone pointed out the
      soul that is always with the mother symbolically as a peacock. Since the
      soul does grow how would they know that the peacock was not a immature soul?
      All they would be seeing is a peacock and being full grown does not
      constitute maturity in consciousness. Thus if it is following the mother
      around it more than likely is waiting to be incarnated next and is an
      immature soul. However personally I still believe it is representative of
      her magic always being with her rather than a soul and it was more than
      likely a superstious idea of a soul flying away(loosing your soul) thus
      being a bird that got it started.

      R2: I was unaware that anyone believed the Peacock was representative of a
      "soul that is always with the mother" before you mentioned it, so I have no
      idea why they would form that association in their minds. Thanks for
      explaining your own line of reasoning more fully though. I can't say that I
      concur with it fully, but I can accept it as what you believe.

      J3: Who do you think the Queen of the gods is?Hera- The peacock is always
      with her. Or Lady of the house(earth)?Nephthys Why do you think it was so
      important for her to keep her marriage contract with Zeus? Even while he was
      going out on her? For that matter why was there a marriage contract in the
      first place? Merging two political families, a physical(earth) goddess and a
      spirit(heavens) god. Because she was made to feel guilty like she caused
      what Set did to Osiris because she slept with him. Of course had Osiris not
      dropped his flowers there and had Set not been trying to own her it probably
      would have never happened. Imagine that. He gave up his life so that men
      could rule over women on Earth through marriage. Further she became the
      jealous one due to her inability to understand Set's jealousy of Osiris and
      leaving him. No one on Earth is able to be outside of Karma, even the gods.

      J2: Regan, I do not think he actually set out to find out what the graal was
      with this article, rather he was pointing out that the two systems, even
      though they did not state it, were looking for the same thing. They were in
      fact two different ways of looking for the graal or so he thought. He is
      saying that the radiant wisdom stone and the graal are one in the same, just
      called different things.

      R2: Yes, that is my point. He has equated the Graal and the Radiant Wisdom
      Stone. But he still has not been able to tell us what these symbols
      actually stand for. And that, I submit, is what everyone wishes to know. I
      think symbols have value only in so far as they can lead us to the
      perception of reality and that is their proper function. But they become an
      obstacle to our enlightenment when they are accepted permanently in place of
      the reality for which they stand. Then I think it is best for us to ditch
      the whole bag of symbols and try to get back to direct experience, like the
      Renaissance thinkers did when they realised that all the symbolic
      paraphernalia and mummery of the Roman Catholic religion had completely
      blocked everyone's direct access to the divine reality. The movement
      towards empirical science was founded on this newly-reawakened need for
      direct contact with reality. As we know, science eventually fell foul of
      the same pitfall of obsession with symbols itself and has ended up in the
      same bizarre mess that the medieval church was in before the Renaissance.
      So a great, revolutionary/evolutionary return to direct perception of
      reality seems to be called for there too now. But re-introducing old
      religious symbolic thought-systems into the scientific process, as many
      so-called "new paradigm scholars" and many self-styled "New Age" thinkers
      are attempting to do, seems unlikely to be capable of bringing that off, to
      me. To get through to reality, we need to forget all about the symbols,
      beautiful as they may be, and experience it - consciously.

      Regan
      _____
      J3: Yes Regan well good luck getting someone to believe you are experiencing
      it or them consciously...

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:51 AM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone







      J1: You would give up before I begin...

      R1: Not at all. I am just saying that I think you need to understand the
      various symbolic systems thoroughly before you try to correlate them
      together, that is all. Otherwise you will just get them muddled up when you
      try to do it. But by all means go ahead and muddle them up as you will. I
      won't try to stop you. It is your mental universe that will get muddled,
      not mine.

      J2: Regan, you seem to be the one being muddled or confused.

      J1: ....Yes you do have to weave things together not tie them to make a
      tapestry and since I've been a seamstress all my life in more ways than one
      I am sure I am up to the challenge. Besides that I am shown the pathways
      through broad and deep vision......

      R1: OK, so stop boasting about your capabilities and show us. Where is
      this glorious tapestry of which you speak?

      J2: I said I was a seamstress, not that I had a tapestry. I have however
      made dresses for people who were bigger in front than in back, so very hard
      to fit, I've made wedding dresses for my first psychic development teacher,
      mens suits, silk ties,coats, just about anything I have ever put my mind to
      and many without patterns other than what I wanted it to look like. I worked
      at a fabric store for over four years during which time just to give the
      customers a kick the girls would yell at me across the store holding two
      spools of thread and a piece of fabric and I would tell them which matched
      better. I was always right...

      J1: ......Things are as complicated as you make them for yourself Regan,
      the spirit knows, the ego questions...

      R1: In the case we are discussing, Jahnets, the various esoteric systems
      are as complicated as their authors have made them. I've had no say in the
      matter.


      R: As we both know, the alchemists take a different view. To them, the
      Peacock represents the fully-developed individual soul, not an immature ego.

      J1: Possibly because it is always with the mother(graal),since that is where
      our soul came from...

      R1: I don't follow your argument, but I agree that the Graal corresponds
      with the Divine Mother.

      J2: My point was that possibly some time in the past someone pointed out the
      soul that is always with the mother symbolically as a peacock. Since the
      soul does grow how would they know that the peacock was not a immature soul?
      All they would be seeing is a peacock and being full grown does not
      constitute maturity in consciousness. Thus if it is following the mother
      around it more than likely is waiting to be incarnated next and is an
      immature soul. However personally I still believe it is representative of
      her magic always being with her rather than a soul and it was more than
      likely a superstious idea of a soul flying away(loosing your soul) thus
      being a bird that got it started.

      R: This is very interesting, Jahnets. However, I fear it digresses from
      the subject of alchemy which we were discussing, so I'll leave it there for
      now.

      J1: The article was not just on Alchemy Regan, maybe you should read it
      again... I was not discussing Alchemy but the Graal and what it is.

      R1: I think maybe it is you who should do the re-reading, Jahnets. I
      referred to what we were discussing, not to what the article was discussing
      or what you were discussing. But you have been discussing alchemy with me!
      You asked the original questions about it which I endeavoured to answer and
      which you then took up. I observed that you were also trying to discuss the
      Graal, but I did not want to get into that for purely practical reasons of
      time-constraints.


      J1: .......He also used various practices and beliefs to make his point and
      yet did not end up in knots... Imagine that...

      R1: True, but he didn't get to the point of stating definitively what the
      Radiant Wisdom Stone and the Graal actually are either. He remained stuck
      at the symbolic level and did not go beyond it to the reality which the
      symbols represent. I think he demonstrated rather nicely how, by itself,
      interrelating different symbolic systems just gives you a grand unified
      symbolic system without telling you anything more about the nature of the
      reality which it is supposed to represent. It may be an interesting and
      entertaining intellectual exercise to perform, but it hardly constitutes
      research or truth-seeking, because it doesn't take us any closer to the
      objective truth than where we started from, in spite of giving us the
      illusion of doing precisely that.

      J2: Regan, I do not think he actually set out to find out what the graal was
      with this article, rather he was pointing out that the two systems, even
      though they did not state it, were looking for the same thing. They were in
      fact two different ways of looking for the graal or so he thought. He is
      saying that the radiant wisdom stone and the graal are one in the same, just
      called different things.

      _____


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:38 PM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone





      J: "......I figure if you can tie as many systems together as possible
      meaning the same thing, that it is more likely to be that, rather than using
      one of the many that may have been changed through time perhaps........."

      R: I think it can be a good idea to use one system as a check against
      another in this way, so long as you know what you are doing. But there are
      many difficulties to be overcome with it before you can do that. For one
      thing, the different esoteric systems are different systems precisely
      because they are conceived in different terms and operate according to their
      own internal rules. It is not normally a simple matter of transposing names
      from one set of terms onto another, simply because the terms of one system
      don't usually correspond point-for-point with the terms of another. For
      example, even with something as basic as the chakra-system, you find that
      different esoteric schools work with different numbers of chakras. Likewise
      with the colours of the rainbow. So when you want to relate the colours of
      the rainbow to the chakras, how will you do it? It's the same with the gods
      and goddesses of ancient mythologies and religions. Different cultures had
      different numbers of deities in their pantheons. They don't correspond with
      one another in any simple way. Tieing them all in together produces a
      tangled web, not a beautifully ordered tapestry. Alchemy is an entire,
      complicated tapestry in itself, as is the system underlying the
      goddess-mysteries. If you can tie those two systems together in an orderly,
      coherent and meaningful way, then good luck to you. But it's an enormous
      project, I hope you realise.

      J1: You would give up before I begin... Yes you do have to weave things
      together not tie them to make a tapestry and since I've been a seamstress
      all my life in more ways than one I am sure I am up to the challenge.
      Besides that I am shown the pathways through broad and deep vision. Things
      are as complicated as you make them for yourself Regan, the spirit knows,
      the ego questions...

      J: ".......I think rather than the Phoenix representing the risen
      transformed perfected soul, I see it as representative of reincarnation of
      the spirit until the soul becomes perfect. Only because the bird comes back
      looking the same as before rather than evolving to a new form. Where spirits
      do shapeshift they also have a main form of their choice they normally
      appear as, and the other forms are with respect to their lineage. The soul
      creates the personality (mask) that does indeed burn up on death but then it
      creates a new one in the next life. They do not normally look alike."

      R: I would agree that the Phoenix does not just symbolise the final stage
      of the soul's development. Rather I think it represents the soul in all its
      stages of development, because the Phoenix is said to undergo a recurrent
      cycle of self-transformation, from the egg-state to the bird-state and back
      again. I think it does symbolise the soul rather than the spirit though,
      because the soul is individual, like the Phoenix, whereas the spirit
      transcends all, including individuality. But the difference is really one
      of emphasis and is not absolute, since the soul is itself an expression of
      the spirit.


      J: "The peacock struts it's stuff and is more representative of the young
      ego of the soul in humans...."

      R: As we both know, the alchemists take a different view. To them, the
      Peacock represents the fully-developed individual soul, not an immature ego.

      J1: Possibly because it is always with the mother(graal),since that is where
      our soul came from...


      J: ......It is also more representative of beauty(she is the goddess of
      beauty) and the vibrations of it's tail more the equivalent of the magic
      Nephthys(Hera) performed. She was known for great magic words or
      vibrations. The vibration of the tail also shows how the dimensional doors
      open up with vibrations of magic. The many eyes showing how she could see
      everywhere at once being the earth as she turns around can see in any
      direction, and how intuition can see through solid objects.

      R: This is very interesting, Jahnets. However, I fear it digresses from
      the subject of alchemy which we were discussing, so I'll leave it there for
      now.

      J1: The article was not just on Alchemy Regan, maybe you should read it
      again... I was not discussing Alchemy but the Graal and what it is. He also
      used various practices and beliefs to make his point and yet did not end up
      in knots... Imagine that...


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 7:12 PM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


      Touch�... I did make that point Regan, that is true. I was being facetious
      since I felt he made such a broad jump (lol literally)...to becoming God. If
      I am expounding my knowledge of them, it is only because others expounding
      their knowledge seems to be lacking in tying all of the symbology together.
      Numerology is another way of symbolically viewing something, whether you
      believe it or not. I figure if you can tie as many systems together as
      possible meaning the same thing, that it is more likely to be that, rather
      than using one of the many that may have been changed through time perhaps.
      I think rather than the Phoenix representing the risen transformed perfected
      soul, I see it as representative of reincarnation of the spirit until the
      soul becomes perfect. Only because the bird comes back looking the same as
      before rather than evolving to a new form. Where spirits do shapeshift they
      also have a main form of their choice they normally appear as, and the other
      forms are with respect to their lineage. The soul creates the personality
      (mask) that does indeed burn up on death but then it creates a new one in
      the next life. They do not normally look alike.

      The peacock struts it's stuff and is more representative of the young ego
      of the soul in humans. It is also more representative of beauty(she is the
      goddess of beauty) and the vibrations of it's tail more the equivalent of
      the magic Nephthys(Hera) performed. She was known for great magic words or
      vibrations. The vibration of the tail also shows how the dimensional doors
      open up with vibrations of magic. The many eyes showing how she could see
      everywhere at once being the earth as she turns around can see in any
      direction, and how intuition can see through solid objects.

      Most importantly the article was about the graal. It is my feeling that the
      graal if it were a physical object would be her as she reincarnates into
      different lives. Furthering a line of maternal DNA or lineage.



      -----Original Message-----
      From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Regan Power
      Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 6:48 AM
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


      No, Jahnets, I was not "discussing the English language". Quite
      simply, I was discussing the question which you had raised of how one can
      "get from union with God, to being God". It is true that you had raised it
      in response to the article about alchemy, but I don't think that expounding
      your understanding of Who's Who in the pantheon of western alchemical
      deities and what the numerological signifance of their names is, actually
      relates to my answer to your original question about union and becoming or
      explains why "(you) don't think so".

      You now ask me: "Why do you think seeing the peacock was the final
      phase of alchemy as he said???" I appreciate that you are making a point
      here rather than asking a question, but I will answer it anyway from my
      perspective on alchemy and spiritual realization, which may be different to
      yours. I believe the Peacock was used by the alchemists as an alternative
      symbol to the mythical Phoenix for the risen, transformed, perfected soul.
      They chose the Peacock because, for one reason, it is a living "firebird",
      whose irridescent colours express every colour of the rainbow that is
      implicit in the pure, "white light" of the Spirit. The liberated soul does
      the same thing, expressing the "white light" of pure consciousness on every
      individual level of frequency, to produce a continuous, multi-coloured
      waveform of consciousness. But I think a second reason for their choosing
      this symbol has to be the male Peacock's magnificent tail, which depicts the
      ultimate form of all creation. The "eyes" on the tail-feathers are arranged
      in a pattern of contra-rotating spirals which can be found throughout
      nature, in snail-shells, pine-cones, galaxies, whirlpools, deer-antlers,
      tree-structures, beehives and seemingly everywhere. The "eyes" themselves
      symbolise centres of consciousness. And the tail vibrates!

      Is the Peacock not a fitting symbol for the realization that awaits
      the spiritual alchemist at the end of his quest? To observe the Peacock in
      full display is to gaze upon the form of heaven.

      Regan
      _____


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 3:49 AM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


      "The Philosopher's Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into
      gold, to cure all diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its
      possessor. It also stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest
      and most perfect conceivable, which was the state of union with God or
      virtually being God."

      J: The paragraph above and the earlier part of his article was speaking
      about the goddess in Ireland and the rites that turned men into Kings, then
      he turned it into Alchemy of the west to show how he thought the graal and
      they were the same thing. The paragraph above is what I was refering to. You
      agreed with him that you thought they were the same words or meant the same
      thing, I beleive you said surely??? I said I didn't think so and why. So if
      we we're talking about different topics I'm not sure where...

      He thinks the graal is the philosophers stone and I think it is the goddess
      of Earth, Gaia, Hera, Nephythys or what ever name you want to give her. Why
      do you think seeing the peacock was the final phase of alchemy as he said???
      It was always with her...or that the Pope batted the doves away that flew
      back in the window to him... Good example of the church denying her
      symbolically since the dove was also one of her birds, but then they would
      see her as Lucifer right? The fallen one, first born, buried in the core of
      the planet. It's rather humerous to think that the sun in the center of
      earth is seen by them as hell when it is lifegiving to those who live inside
      earth, their sun. I'm looking at all the symbols he used in his article and
      stating how I can see it meaning something equally plauzable but different,
      I think you were talking about the English language... ;-)




      J: I do not think so. I think union with God or in this case the Goddess was
      a sexual act with a spirit. The spirit may have come into or used a
      priestess's body as a vehicle, but it was truly the Goddess. That would not
      make them God...lol. Like in the picture of Nephythys her hands I believe
      are showing something. The right is crossed fingers showing 10 and her left
      is the thumb under the four fingers showing 4. If you look up fourteen in a
      Kabala book you will find Gold, abundance is the message here. Meaning the
      earth is abundance for all. This is why the grail is suppose to give
      abundance, she does. As twin to Isis she is beauty and magic, the mistress
      of the house or the spirit of the earth. People are looking for an object
      when the object is her. She heals all, she imparts all, she can give or take
      energy or life force. I truely abhor the name Sophia, and I totaled it up
      and it comes to 229 when it should be 228 so maybe that is why??? Did they
      add the A maybe?

      R: Clearly, you and I are discussing different topics and it would be
      pointless for me to reply.

      Regan
      _____


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 6:51 PM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


      J: I do not think so. I think union with God or in this case the Goddess was
      a sexual act with a spirit. The spirit may have come into or used a
      priestess's body as a vehicle, but it was truly the Goddess. That would not
      make them God...lol Like in the picture of Nephythys her hands I believe
      are showing something. The right is crossed fingers showing 10 and her left
      is the thumb under the four fingers showing 4. If you look up fourteen in a
      Kabala book you will find Gold, abundance is the message here. Meaning the
      earth is abundance for all. This is why the grail is suppose to give
      abundance, she does. As twin to Isis she is beauty and magic, the mistress
      of the house or the spirit of the earth. People are looking for an object
      when the object is her. She heals all, she imparts all, she can give or take
      energy or life force. I truely abhor the name Sophia, and I totaled it up
      and it comes to 229 when it should be 228 so maybe that is why??? Did they
      add the A maybe?

      I just found out something interesting on Easter. My mothers mother was
      Eastern Star and my father's grandfather was Mason, so it's on both sides of
      the family. I never knew that. I knew it was on my fathers but not my
      mothers. My mother's maternal grand father was Armenian also which has many
      more interesting ideas with it. I find it interesting that I am studying all
      this on my own yet have never got into the organizations. I was asked once
      to join Rocrucians,but Kundalini had already risen and the two young people
      asking me wanted me to start at the beginning. Right... It is interesting
      what Dogma looses...



      -----Original Message-----
      From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Regan Power
      Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 7:25 AM
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


      J: Now how does one get from union with God, to being God? Do men become
      their wives from union with them?

      R: Aren't "union with God" and "being God" just different words to describe
      the same state or process? If you "unite" with something truly, then how
      can you avoid "becoming" it? You are one with it and no longer possess a
      separate identity to theirs. You and they have become one being and you
      only have one, single, common identity. You are them and they are you.

      Do men become their wives from union with them? If they truly unite
      with their wives, then I would say that they automatically become them. But
      of course, many marriages are shams, in which no real union of individual
      husband and wife takes place, or is ever really intended to by either party.
      In those, neither party has become the other in reality, but only in name as
      recognised by society.

      Regan
      _____


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jahnets
      To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 5:46 AM
      Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone






      The Philosopher's Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into
      gold, to cure all diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its
      possessor. It also stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest
      and most perfect conceivable, which was the state of union with God or
      virtually being God.

      J: Now how does one get from union with God, to being God? Do men become
      their wives from union with them?

      Instead of divinity manifest in the flesh in Jesus Christ�a theological
      dogma rejected by Sethian Gnostics as deviant �they experienced "Divine
      Presence" in the presence of the Earth itself, in the Goddess revealed as a
      humble planet.

      J:I have stated this over and over again for months now, all the planets
      have spirits including earth. Earths spirit is Hera, Nephythys, Gaia, Mary
      and I would be willing to bet that there are 8 more lifes this spirit has
      lived or incarnated on earth. Whats more, during those incarnations she
      chose certain males lines to be with. Thus those lines are in her cup. If
      you look at this picture of Nephythys, she is sitting on the symbol for
      gold, she wears her crown, the sign for house(earth being her house, body)
      and note the bowl or cup on her head.

      The dove has always been the symbol of divine compassion. It was a bird
      sacred to the Goddess and it passed into the panoply of the Shekinah where
      it symbolized God's Holy Spirit. Within Christianity the Holy Spirit's
      doubtful gender has been obscured by its symbolization as a dove: the
      promise of ultimate redemption, the perfect indwelling of God...

      [J:] After reading the above description of the Dove, I couldn't help but
      remember tha last Pope letting a dove go and it flying back into the room
      and them thinking it was bad luck and meant death.


      with no other bodily sustenance than that derived, by an osmosis-like
      process, from air and water and sunlight, similar to the process whereby a
      plant produces chlorophyll (P. xii).


      J:This is not a difficult thing to do, but a human can not live on it for
      any length of time without harming the body. The physical body was not meant
      to work in this manner.

      The Green Lion is a naive symbol indicating how sunlight converts to
      chlorophyll and thus provides vital energy in the form of edible plants.

      J: Another point for vegetarians...

      Seeking to delve into the secrets of nature, they were regarded by the
      Church as heretics who colluded with the evil spirits believed to animate
      the natural world

      J: Curious that they would see it as heretical when they animate the
      world... Rather their own egos could not handle the fact that they were not
      in complete control, that the spirits created the world for them based on
      the egos thoughts for this they call them demons. They blame them for their
      own thoughts... How sad...


      Dear Friends,

      Click the link if you don't receive the images.

      http://www.metahistory.org/StoneWise.php

      Love and Light.

      David

      The Radiant Wisdom Stone

      Mystery Wisdom in the Grail Legend
      Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung (1875 - 1961) was almost singlehandedly
      responsible for the modern revival of interest in alchemy. (Jung was
      initially "turned on" to alchemy by his patient, protege, and mistress,
      Sabina Spielrein, who�until recently�had been written out of the story.)
      Jung and all who followed him regarded Western alchemy as originating with
      the work of Zosimos, an Alexandrian mystic from Panopolis (a town on the
      Egyptian delta). Textual evidence of Zosimos dates from the 3rd Century CE,
      but scholars agree that the roots of the Art are far more ancient, going
      back to the secret schools of the Egyptian Mysteries.

      Alchemical Peacock, associated with the cauda pavonis,
      "the peacock's tail," the final stage of the Great Work.

      Jung's work on alchemy was complemented by The Grail Legend, written by
      his wife, Emma Jung, and his close colleague, Marie-Louise von Franz. The
      authors argue that

      the Grail's many wonderful attributes, which qualify it as 'a treasure
      hard to attain,' and its analogy to the alchemical Stone, which in Wolfram
      actually goes as far as identification, justify its being taken as a symbol
      of the Self. (p. 155-6)
      But such justification only makes sense within the tautological system
      of Jungian theory "in which the unconscious explains itself" (p. 142). To
      Wolfram von Eschenbach and those of his time, the Grail was not symbol of
      the Self or of anything else. It was a magical and mysterious object of some
      kind, a numen described in pre-Christian mythology of Celtic and Irish
      origin. One French commentary on the Grail Legend, the "Elucidation," says
      C'est del Graal dont nus ne doit
      Le secr� dire ne conter.

      This is about the Graal, of whose mystery
      None may speak or tell. This language calls to mind some lines from the
      Homeric hymn to Demeter, referring to the secret of the Eleusinian
      Mysteries:
      She taught them the ministry of her rites,
      And revealed to them her beautiful Mysteries,
      Which are impossible to transgress, or pry into, or divulge,
      For so great is one�s awe of the gods that it halts the tongue.
      An aura of secrecy similar to that applied to the Mysteries also applied
      to the Grail, raising the question, Had the Grail been revealed to ancient
      initiates before the medieval Legend took form, and before alchemy appeared
      in the West?



      A Significant Near Miss

      Anyone who delves into Grail studies will encounter a single, supremely
      influential book: From Ritual to Romance by Jessie L. Weston. As already
      noted, this book (published in 1920) figured in the writing of the famous
      Modernist poem, The Wasteland, by T. S. Eliot. Avidly discussed by Eliot and
      other literati of the time, and later featured among the reading material of
      the deranged Colonel Kurtz played by Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, From
      Ritual to Romance asserts that the Grail Quest derived from ancient Pagan
      Mysteries. Weston was quite explicit with her central thesis. In the
      Introduction she wrote, "We can now prove by printed texts the parallels
      existing between each and every feature of the Grail story and the recorded
      symbolism of the Mystery cults."

      That statement may be the greatest near miss of modern scholarship on the
      Mysteries. But a near miss is also a near hit. Weston was right in tracing
      the Grail Legend to "Mystery cults," but she was mistaken in her view of
      what transpired in those cults. Scholars note that there were two levels of
      the Mysteries, the popular and the elite. This is evident in the Eleusinian
      tradition of celebrating the Lesser Mysteries in the Spring, and the Greater
      Mysteries in the Fall. The former were popular, presenting rites of seasonal
      renewal and ecstatic immersion in nature for the general public. The latter
      involved elite practices with the kykeon, the entheogenic brew that induced
      perception of "a marvellous light." When the Mysteries fell into decline,
      the rites got confused (or subverted) and the kykeon came to be used as a
      recreational libation (as seen in the case of Socrates' charismatic young
      friend Alcibiades, one of the few people known to have been accused of
      desecrating the
      Mysteries.)

      Elsewhere I have argued that no one who lacks first-hand mystical
      experience equivalent to that of initiation in the Mysteries is qualified to
      comment in a reliable way on such arcane matters. Apparently, Weston did not
      have such experience. In fact, like a good many other scholars, she failed
      to preserve a clear distinction between the popular and elite rites. She
      assumed that the Pagan Mysteries involved "fertility rites." True, but this
      is a near miss, because it does not take into account the elite rites that
      had nothing to do with fertility. This is such an important point that I
      would like to take a few minutes to clarify it in more detail.
      Chrismation

      In the archaic model of royal empowerment in the ancient Near East, the
      male candidate underwent sexual initiation with a woman who represented one
      or another Goddess identified with the Earth. For instance, the
      Assyro-Babylonian Goddess Ishtar (the Sumerian Inana) and her human lover,
      Tammuz (the Sumerian Dumuzi), the shepherd king. In this rite, the priestess
      represented Ishtar, and Tammuz was no particular man, no single historical
      person, but the ritual name of the candidate who would be king. The man's
      mastery in the hunt and his strength as a warrior were measured against his
      capacity to surrender and become totally vulnerable to the pleasures
      afforded by a woman's body. It was known to people in those times that
      pleasure makes us weak, as one can be weak in the knees from a good sexual
      encounter. For the royal candidate to accept being weak was not regarded as
      a sign of weakness, however. Rather, it was taken as evidence of his
      capacity to give and receive
      tenderness�evidence of his compassion. Candidates for kingship had to pass
      the test of tenderness to prove they had "female" qualities to balance their
      male prowess and temper their masculine lust for lording it over others.
      These sacred conjugal rites conducted by the Goddess cults were of
      course enacted privately, but they were also reflected in public
      celebrations where the king was represented as mating with the earth to
      insure the fertility of the land. In popular imagination, the "fertility
      rites" of theocracy appeared to be a means of sympathetic magic to insure
      the cycles of nature, but they had nothing to do with human fertility. It
      was never the role of the anointed man to impregnate the anointed
      priestess�indeed, this would have been an abomination, a sacrilege against
      the Goddess. The anointing priestesses were always virgins, or viragos�
      words derived from the Indo-European root vir- ,"heroic force, strength,"
      also the basis of the word virility. Originally, virgin (Greek parthenos)
      denoted, not the woman who never had sexual intercourse, but the woman who
      did not procreate. Her womb was virginal because she did not conceive, not
      because she did not copulate. (Concern with
      intactness of the hymen is symptomatic of patriarchal societies where
      women are viewed as property and/or breeding stock.)
      At the deeper level understood in the inner sanctum of the Mysteries,
      conjugal initiation was a tantric rite of empowerment in which a female
      adept in Kundalini yoga initiated a man who thereby gained paranormal
      faculties. (See She Who Anoints.) The popular rite concealed another, deeper
      meaning, and within that meaning, still another. Like most scholars, Weston
      saw only the first level of meaning. She thought initiation in the Mysteries
      was a ritualization of primitive fertility rites which, in turn, came to be
      reflected in the two dominant mofits of the Grail Legend: the bleeding Lance
      (phallic symbol) and the Grail (vagina or womb symbol). As the leading
      Arthurian scholar Loomis points out, "Miss Weston's fascinating theory of a
      lost mystery cult, conveyed by Eastern merchants from the Mediterranean to
      Britain, and of secret initiation rites enacted in remote ages is
      discredited by the absence of such a cult in the mass of medieval testimony
      on heresy" (The Grail -From
      Celtic Myth to Christian Symbol, p. 49)�and, I would add, by similar lack
      of evidence of any such spear-and-chalice mumbo-jumbo in the ancient Near
      East or Egypt.

      Most scholars reject the thesis of From Ritual to Romance, yet they
      perpetuate a specious inference related to Weston's half-miss: the anointing
      rite of theocracy was an external and popular enactment of what initiates
      experienced in the inner sanctum of the Mysteries. This interpretation
      touches on the entheogenic theory of religion, which asserts that Pagan
      initiates underwent altered states by the use of sacred potions such as the
      fermented barley potion (kykeon) of Eleusis. This is a fact that can be
      evidentially supported. It has been argued that entheogenic initiation
      provided the basis for anointing sacred kings in a ritual exercise that
      repeated before the eyes of the world what the illumined ones experienced in
      the telesterion, the inner chamber of initiation. This is an inference, and
      no more than an inference. There is no evidence that supports the assertion
      that initiates did any such thing.
      This inference is another half-miss, a shade closer to the bullseye than
      Weston got. In the first place, it recognizes the true nature of the secret
      entheogenic rites practiced at Eleusis and elsewhere. This recognition goes
      deeper than the widely accepted theory of ancient fertility ritual as
      related to sacred kingship, but it still does not go to the core of the
      Mystery experience. Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy (The Jesus Mysteries)
      claim that initiation provided the model for sacred kingship, without a word
      on the entheogenic practices. Carl Ruck (The Apples of Apollo) makes a
      similar claim, and does assert the entheogenic factor. In both cases, these
      learned scholars confound empowerment rites for sacred kingship with the
      mystical initiatory experience, or they construe those rites as an exoteric
      expression, and extension, of such experience. In his conflation of
      entheogenic lore with Judeo-Christian religion, Ruck writes:
      Iesous was the name of the mythical hero Iason (Jason), for Iason was so
      named for the ceremonial chrismation or anointing that made him a shaman. In
      the Hebrew tradition, Messiah is the name for the "anointed," who in Greek
      is called Christos... The ritual of chrismation had become a validation for
      the authority of kings and prophets; but the unguent of anointment
      originally conferred its power through the entheogen that made the
      recepients consubstantial with the sacred plant of their shamanism. (The
      Apples of Apollo, p. 146-7)
      In other words, sacred kingship "originally" involved entheogenic
      initiation of the royal candidate by shaman-priests who administered a
      psychoactive sacrament. There is no evidence that theocracy originated with
      such rites, and to infer that it did so is, I maintain, a serious error.
      Conflation of this sort is particularly devious because it gives the
      impression that there is, or originally was, some kind of valid shamanic
      entheogenic rite behind sacred kingship and even behind Jesus, the Christos.
      Likewise, Freke and Gandy argue for a type of Pagan apologism in which they
      confer value on Pagan Mysteries by regarding them as the "true basis" of
      Jesus' teachings and Christianity. In other words, the Mysteries were a
      means to an end. And because the end was good, we can assume that the means
      were also good. In this approach. Paganism (whatever that was) becomes
      acceptable because it provided the basis for Christianity.
      Fine, but the problem here is, it didn't. Christianity stole some window
      dressing from Paganism�the babe in the manger, for instance, was an infant
      version of the Sumerian shepherd Tammuz�and it co-opted Mithraic rites to
      concoct the sacraments, but its ethics and ideology came from elsewhere. The
      historical basis of Christianity lies in the Zaddikim cult of the Dead Sea.
      From the time of the Patriarch Samuel, the entire Jewish community was
      pulled into theocratic politics by the machinations of the Zaddikim whose
      obsession with a messiah culminated in the Christ of Saint Paul. The messiah
      is the "anointed one," christos in Greek, formed from the verb echrisa, "to
      anoint." In both ancient Near Eastern theocracies and Judeo-Christian
      tradition alike, anointing was the key ritual of investiture, central to the
      entire ideological construct of divine power, but there is not a shred of
      evidence that Pagan religion in Europa, North Africa, and the Levant
      followed this custom.
      Entheogenic shamanism in the Mysteries was never used to set up and
      legitimate either patriarchal rule or patriarchal religion. Telestic rites
      were not a means to a mundane political end. Initiation had nothing to do
      with empowerment, except empowerment through knowledge, if that be allowed.
      It had nothing to do with secular, political power games as exemplified in
      the public enthronement of theocrats in the ancient Near East and Palestine.
      No genuine, uncorrupted adept in the Mysteries would have consented to
      confer initiatory power on a politician or patriarchal authority figure. And
      no ceremony conferring such power could have reflected what happened at the
      third and deepest level of initiation.

      A Garbled Secret

      To avoid further digression, I let this subject drop for now, but we will
      return to the specious interpretations of theocratic empowerment later in
      Mythbusting 101. Clarity on this issue is essential in confronting and
      defeating the Paternal Lie and its current resurgence in terrorist-supported
      global theocracy. For now, let's return to the "three currents" from the
      Grail, and come around to the subject of this lesson, "the Stone of the
      Wise."
      As explained in Lesson Three, one of the currents flows in the direction
      of social enlightenment, after the model of Lohengrin. This current can be
      traced ahead from the 10th Century to Renaissance humanism in the 15th.
      Humanism was the mundane, socially oriented expression of the generosity of
      the medieval Nobility who served the Grail.
      Two other currents proceed from Parzival's attainment of the Grail in
      968 CE. The direct encounter with the supreme numen of indigenous magic is
      deeply mystical and does not find expression in social life, but in hidden,
      anti-social trends, in esotericism, counterculture, and underground
      movements of a cryptic and cultic character. As noted, both of these hidden
      currents deeply inform the plot of alternative history. They operate behind
      the scenes throughout the Middle Age, but they arose in far earlier times.
      Unlike the Western initiative of social altruism and philanthropy
      represented by Lohengrin, these other two currents have an ancient
      provenance in the pre-Christian Mysteries.

      The current that gives rise to Western alchemy is intimately related to
      the third and deepest level of initiation. Behind the popular
      seasonal-sexual rites, and even behind the delicious tantric rites of sacred
      mating, there was the supreme ritual experience: instruction by the Light.
      Alchemy preserved a vestigial memory of this experience, but not the ancient
      method for transmitting the experience itself. In other words, with the end
      of the Mystery network throughout Pagan Europa and the Near East, continuity
      of access to the Organic Light was disrupted. The supreme initiatory
      experience became inconsistent and incoherent, almost a matter of
      chance�which may explain the strange motif attached to the Castle of the
      Grail, namely that "no knight who sought it would find that place unless
      chance led him there" (The Prose Tristan, cited by Loomis, The Grail - From
      Celtic Myth to Christian Symbol, p 206). Even when the Grail was revealed,
      witnesses could not make out what it was
      because they did not have the guiding framework of the Mysteries to assist
      them. From the 4th century CE onward, instruction by the Light became
      precarious and aleatory.
      The problem with alchemy, which all those who explore it know well, much
      to their exasperation, is its daunting and often impenetrable obscurity.
      Again and again, the alchemists allude to something they have the privilege
      of knowing about, without saying exactly what it is. They do this because
      they don't know what it is. This was certainly the case in those
      instances�and that would be almost all instances attested by surviving
      material�where alchemists appear to be covering up what they know, when in
      fact they don't essentially understand what they are attempting to conceal.

      It is as if I told you a secret in garbled form, and I entrusted you to
      keep it. Intent on honoring the vow, you would do everything possible to
      conceal the secret, without in fact knowing what it really, precisely was.
      Wolfram calls the Gral a stone, and alchemists universally used this
      term for the ultimate secret of "the Art." The alchemical dictionary of Dom
      Pernety (18th C., France) gives over 600 definitions for the Stone. Well,
      there you go. The amazing thing is, all of them are in some sense correct.
      But not one of them is valid for unmediated access to the experience of the
      Stone.
      Quant ele fu laiens entree a tot le graal qu'ele tint,
      Un si grans clartez i vint...
      Thus Chretien de Troies, Perceval, 3224-5, in Medieval French
      octosyllabic rhyming couplets. In plain English, "As she walked into the
      hall, the graal she held gave forth a radiance so great and clear...." This
      is written from unmediated access to the experience of the Stone. In King
      Arthur and the Grail (the best single introduction), Richard Cavendish
      writes:
      The Grail is clearly no ordinary object. It is surrounded with
      mystery; it is holy and it emanates blazing light. (p. 137) ... The Grail in
      Parzival is not remotely adequately explained as a symbol of humility
      [theory of R. S. Loomis, the eminence gris of Arthurian studies. JLL]. It is
      much closer to the Philosopher's Stone of alchemy, which is both a
      mysterious object of gigantic size and a spiritual state. The Philosopher's
      Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into gold, to cure all
      diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its possessor. It also
      stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest and most perfect
      conceivable, which was the state of union with God or virtually being God.

      Like the Grail hero, the alchemist trod his own path to salvation,
      independently of the Church, and consequently suspect. Alchemy first
      attracted attention in the Western Europe in the twelfth century and
      Parzival was written early in the thirteenth. (p. 161)

      I would say that Chretien preserves genuine first-hand testimony of the
      Mystery experience, but "blazing" is too strong a word. The Organic Light is
      soft and substantial, like nothing so much as luminous marshmallow.
      Cavendish makes the connection between the Gral and the Stone of the Wise,
      but attaches to it an in appropriate theological inference. The state of
      perfection associated with beholding the Gral�for no one could possess
      it�might be construed as "union with God or virtually being God," but this
      interpretation opens the old trap of deification, which was not the aim of
      the Mysteries, although inflation (to use Jungian jargon) was certainly a
      risk of initiation. (Jung stated that identification of the Self with God�in
      mystical terms, union with the Godhead�was and ever is the supreme spiritual
      realization of the human psyche, but it carries the risk of ego inflation. I
      would argue that the God-Self equation is nothing but ego inflation, no
      matter how you cut it.)

      The Wisdom Light

      The Pagan telestai did not seek to become God, although initiation made
      them in some measure God-like because they came to know the world as God
      knows it. Or more presicely, as the Goddess knows it. As explained in A
      Cheaf of Cut Wheat, they attained Her Mind.

      Cavendish comes very close to an intuition of the Gral as the corporeal
      revelation of the Goddess: "whether the light shines from the Grail itself
      or from the maiden who carries it, is not absolutely clear" (p. 137). But
      neither he nor any other author writing on the Grail makes the direct
      identification of its luminosity with a divine feminine presence. When the
      Grail is associated with a "Divine Presence," it is assumed to be God, or
      Christ, due to the thick filter of Christianization laid on the legend.
      Nevertheless, all the archaic and folk-loric material that supports the
      Grail Legend points to the Great Goddess, not to the Father God or his
      only-begotten Son. In the Irish and Welsh sources of the Legend, the Grail
      was the magical cauldron of the underworld goddess, Keridwen, or Erui-Erin,
      identified bioregionally with Ireland (source of the arcahic levels of Grail
      material). For the archaic, participatory imagination, the jump from the
      goddess who guards the cauldron
      to goddess as cauldron would have been natural and effortless.
      In her essay, "Sophia, Companion to the Quest," Grail scholar and
      Mystery revivalist Caitlin Matthews makes the important observation that the
      Quest for the Grail is "more concerned with the land than the glories of
      kingship," (At the Table of the Grail, p. 116. This remark is consistent
      with the above digression.) To put all this in Gaian terms, the Quest is
      concerned with the Earth and the powers of the living planet, rather than
      paternal rites of empowerment. Matthews makes pretty work of sorting out the
      garbled secret. Commenting on the dove emblem worn by the members of the
      Grail Family, she says:
      The dove has always been the symbol of divine compassion. It was a
      bird sacred to the Goddess and it passed into the panoply of the Shekinah
      where it symbolized God's Holy Spirit. Within Christianity the Holy Spirit's
      doubtful gender has been obscured by its symbolization as a dove: the
      promise of ultimate redemption, the perfect indwelling of God... However the
      Holy Spirit is theologically understood today, it stems from its origins as
      part of the Divine Feminine: the holy Motherhood of God. In this tangle of
      symbolism Christ has assumed the attributes of Wisdom. (Ibid., p. 123)
      In other words, the attributes of Sophia. To the adepts of the Pagan
      Mysteries, the source of "radiance so great and clear" was neither the male
      God nor his offspring, Christ, but the Divine Sophia. Instead of divinity
      manifest in the flesh in Jesus Christ�a theological dogma rejected by
      Sethian Gnostics as deviant �they experienced "Divine Presence" in the
      presence of the Earth itself, in the Goddess revealed as a humble planet. In
      Parzival and other Arthurian legends related to the Grail, the hideous hag
      Cundrie (the Loathly Damsel) announces the hero's mission, and is
      enigmatically identified with the Grail Maiden. In earlier Irish lore, a
      Cundrie-like faery is the first to offer the Grail and pose the test
      question, as explained in Gaia and Gnosis, One where we considered the Irish
      tale called The Prophetic Ecstasy of the Phantom. The "hag" represents
      nature, or the natural form of the Goddess, Her planetary body.
      The Radiant Wisdom Stone is Sophia's supernatural body.
      Numerous late alchemical and Rosicrucian engravings depict Sophia as
      Lady Alkimia, Lady Nature, or simply the Virgin, who is graphically
      identified with the Earth. She nourishes infant humanity on Lac Virginis,
      Milk of the Virgin�a metaphor for the Organic Light. (Emblem II in Atalanta
      Fugiens by Michael Maier, 1618. Nutrix ejus terra est: "The Earth is its
      nurse.")

      Comparison of the Organic Light to milk is widespread, not only in the
      European arcana but also in world-wide mythology. In a classic work of
      comparative mythology, Myths of Pre-Columbian America, Donald A. Mackenzie
      devotes along chapter to the "The Milk Goddess and Her Pot," citing dozens
      of examples of a white goddess associated with "milk elixir" from sacred
      milk-yielding trees and plants. In many ancient cultures around the world,
      the primordial religious orientation of entheogenic shamanism afforded
      access to the Organic Light, but in the Mysteries access was systematically
      preserved for transmission through the generations by organized cells
      consisting of sixteen initiates, eight male and eight female. When this
      system was destroyed, the supreme mystical encounter continued in an erratic
      manner.
      Grail literature drew on archaic Irish mythology (as R. S. Loomis has
      shown, extensively) which in many respects reflects shamanic experience of
      the Organic Light among the bards and seers of the Emerald Isle. Alchemical
      literature reflects the ambivalent mindset of those who had neither the
      Mysteries to guide them, nor ancient shamanic traditoin with psychoactive
      plants to direct them to the presence of the Light, but were nevertheless
      erratically inspired and deeply mystified by a vague intuiton that the
      mysterious Light existed, and could be accessed directly, given the right
      conditions.

      First-hand testimony of initiationin the Pagan Mysteries has been
      preserved in the so-called fragment of Themistios: �The soul at the point of
      death has the same experience as those who are being initiated into the
      Mysteries. One is struck with a marvellous light.� In the Nag Hammadi
      material, revelation texts such the Discourse on the Eighth and the Ninth
      (NHC VI, 6) attest to this experience and give unmistakable evidence that
      initiates received knowledge directly from the Divine Light. In that text
      the hierophant declares: �Rejoice over this revelation! For already from the
      Pleroma [the Godhead] comes the power that is Light, flowing over us. For I
      see it! I see the indescribable depth� (57.25-30).

      The mysterious lost Light of the Pagan Mysteries was the Wisdom Stone, the
      radiance of the Grail.

      I have proposed the term "Organic Light" for the soft white brilliance of
      the primary substance body of the Goddess Sophia, contrasted to her
      planetary body, consisting of the elements of the atmosphere and the
      terrestrial globe. In the Pagan Mysteries, it was forbidden to describe this
      Light in such an explicit manner, or to disclose that initiates received
      instruction directly from it. That was the secret vow that remained unbroken

      for thousands of years�but some vows are meant to be broken, eventually, so
      that the secret behind them can survive. All those who took the vow knew
      that in some future time it would be broken, but the power of that future
      disclosure depended on the vow being kept in the first place. It was simply
      not meant to be kept forever.
      Organic Light, Divine Light, Mystery Light, Supernal Light�such are some
      of the terms for the Stone of the Wise, the luminous substance that confers
      intimate knowledge of the Goddess. To this list we can add Wisdom Light, the
      epiplany of Sophia. Access to this Light was the secret the alchemists
      protected, without knowing clearly and explicitly how to attain and maintain
      that access. But some alchemists did know. In Parzival there is evidence of
      surviving knowledge of first-hand experience of Sophianic illumination.
      Wolfram even offers a garbled version of the origin of the Gral-Stone: it is
      the lapsit exillis that fell from the crown of Lucifer when he plunged from
      Heaven. This motif recalls the plunge of the Goddess Sophia from the
      Pleroma. She is the supreme Luciferic figure, the divine Light-giver.

      Atmospheric Mystics
      In their voluminous writings, alchemists often give the impression of
      looking for something that is right in front of their noses, yet they cannot
      set eyes on it. The Mystery Light was, you could say, as clear as the gnosis
      on their faces, but still it eluded them. Wilhelm Reich was fond of citing
      some lines of Goethe:
      What is the hardest things of all?
      That which seems the easiest:
      For your eyes to see
      That which lies before your eyes.
      Without benefit of being guided to the Organic Light, Alchemists
      scrutinized the natural light for signs of supernatural activity. Their
      scrutiny must have been extraordinary, because it allowed them to perceive
      the intimate operations of nature. They detected both oxygen and nitrogen in
      the atmosphere before these elements were observed with the aid of
      instruments and quantified in chemical language. Oxygen they called Prima
      Materia, the First Matter, because all that lives materially, even minerals,
      reacts to it before anything else. Today we know that oxygen is a highly
      reactive, unstable gas. The constant level of atmospheric oxygen at 20
      percent is an anomaly of the Earth, making life possible. This observation
      is essential to the understanding of terrestrial homeostasis in Gaia theory,
      and, in fact, led to the formation of the theory.
      "The Stone is projected upon the Earth, and exalted upon the mountains,
      and dwells in the air, and feeds in the river..." Thus runs the commentary
      for Emblem XXXVI (pictured above) in Michael Maier's Atalanta Fugiens, one
      of the most influential of 17th Century alchemical tests. The cubes on the
      road, in the water, and in the air, suggest how the mysterious Stone, though
      it is present everywhere, conceals itself in the natural elements: earth,
      water, air. (Its relation to fire is more complex and obscure.) Evidence of
      knowledge of atmospheric physics in not predominant in alchemical writings,
      but it is there nonetheless.

      Gaia theory depends on our knowledge of the ensemble of atmospheric gases,
      defined and measured in modern terms, according to the advances made in
      chemistry since the 17th Century. But at the moment when modern chemistry
      emerged�signalled by the establishment of the Academia de Cimento in
      Florence in 1667�European alchemists were in the process of handing over
      what they knew to budding scientists who neither understood nor respected
      the secret art from to which their materialistic science was heir.

      Johann Baptiste von Helmont (1577-1644) was not only a prominent chemist
      of the 17th century, he was also an accomplished alchemist, one of the rare
      few to let it be known publicly that he had "attained the Stone." Von
      Helmont (on left) discovered the atmospheric gas carbon dioxide, which is
      breathed out by humans and absorbed by plants for conversion to oxygen. He
      called it gas sylvestre in reference to the Alchemical Tree, a primary
      symbol of the Art. Did von Helmont make this apt association by chance, or
      did he somehow know that trees absorb carbon dioxide? He ascertained the
      presence and action of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere before it was
      detected and measured with instruments. But how?
      Nitrogen, which is proponderant in the atmosphere at close to 80
      percent, was also discovered by alchemists. They called it Azoth. Along with
      oxygen, we breathe nitrogen with every breath, but as it is an "inert gas,"
      we do not normally sense anything from it. It is possible, however, to be
      somatically conscious of breathing atmospheric nitrogen. The effect is a
      kind of light delirium, comparable to the effect nitrous oxide, "laughing
      gas." Psychoactive mushrooms can cause people who ingest them to become
      giddy and laugh hilariously. It is now known that the properties of such
      plants derive from their rare nitrogenous chemistry, making them exceptional
      among the millions of plant species on the Earth.
      In 1988, writing in the Anthroposophical Joural The Golden Blade, I
      proposed that some European alchemists were "atmospheric mystics" who had "a
      rare infrasensory clairvoyance of the natural elements." By infrasensoey I
      meant they were able to perceive what happened within their own senses, and,
      via that enhancement of sensory awareness, they achieved genuine objective
      knowledge of natural processes. Goethe, who drew deeply from the alchemical
      tradition, called the infrasensory faculty auschauende Urteilskraft, "the
      perceptual power of thinking." He undoubtedly experienced what he was
      talking about, for he was able to make verifiable discoveries in plant and
      animal morphology, and optics. Goethe ascertained that in the enhanced state
      thinking about what one observes merges with the processes operating in what
      is observed. When thought and perception co-operate in this manner, there is
      no need to mind-model or think abstractly about the phenomenon. In Goethe
      the Scientist,
      Rudolf Steiner aptly defined this method: "It does not summarize what is
      observed; it produces what is to be observed." In his lucid study of
      Goethe's method, The Wholeness of Nature, Henri Bo<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
    • Regan Power
      J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation...... R3: Well, that depends on what you mean by explanation , doesn t it? If, by the term, you mean the flat
      Message 2 of 24 , Apr 27, 2006
        J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation......

        R3: Well, that depends on what you mean by "explanation", doesn't it? If,
        by the term, you mean the flat assertion of your belief as though it were a
        matter of obvious fact which anyone but an idiot or a wilfully disagreeable
        person would accept and concur with unconditionally, then yes, I suppose I
        have had quite a lot of that kind of "explanation" from you.

        J3: .....you are just incapabile of understanding my thoughts or do not
        want to.

        R3: Which demonstrates exactly the point that I was just making.


        J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from time
        immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today. That
        along with an inability to see the same history in a new light that is
        different from their present understanding, as you so graciously pointed out
        above, even when the differences are coming at them from a many different
        directions.

        R3: Hey, where do you get the right to insult the entire male sub-species?
        If it was not for the males who you are deprecating, you would not be here
        today to deprecate them! What qualifies you to stand in judgement over the
        understanding of the entire male population of the earth since "time
        immortal"? Do you even know what all men since time immortal understand?
        I think you should cut the pretense of being omniscient, Jahnets. You make
        too many mistakes to carry that off here.


        J3: 1.The Goddess rather than God is only logical as the maternal DNA is
        needed, the grays found this out. They were already cloning and going
        extinct in the process without it.

        R3: It's a bit late to start explaining your reasons for making these
        radical assertions now, isn't it? We needed that when you were making them
        in the first place. And it was because you did not explain yourself
        properly at the time that I was naturally unable to understand your reasons
        for asserting them. Yet you claim that the cause of my failure to
        understand you lies wholely with me - either I am "incapabile of
        understanding (your) thoughts" or else I "do not want to". I defy anyone to
        understand your erratic and ideosyncratic thoughts, if you make no attempt
        to explain them! The failure of understanding is your own fault. I think
        you should own it and stop projecting it onto me.

        On the item which you have have just explained above, I must say
        that although I can follow your reasoning, I cannot agree with it. Both
        maternal and paternal DNA are required for sexual reproduction and it cannot
        happen unless both sexes contribute. So the maternal contribution is no
        more important than the paternal one in the overall natural scheme of
        things. And the Creator, as the source of all things, must be both Mother
        and Father, it seems to me, ie. It is both God and Goddess at the same time.
        The competition for Who is to be Top-God is entirely artificial and
        erroneous, in my view.


        J3: 2. The same four main gods have been called many different names with
        different peoples. That is obvious to anyone doing the least little bit of
        research.

        R3: No it isn't. Most Christians, Judaists, Moslems, Buddhists, Taoists,
        Shintoists, Confucians, Hindus, Indigenous Americans and Western Pagans,
        also ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians and Babylonians, would be very
        surprised to learn that there are "four main gods", by whatever names you
        are calling them.


        J3: 3. I said "I" believe that the name Sophia was a translation error and
        that it is wrong, and I still do. I think the "a" at the end was added.
        Whats more to them Sophi is the goddess of the earth and the first born and
        fallen so I am not saying anything new here, that was not in the article.

        R3: And you may be quite correct to think they got her name wrong too, for
        all I know. But the fact remains that they did call her Sophia, not Sophi,
        and they conceived of her as the universal goddess of wisdom, not as the
        individual spirit of the earth-planet. They had another goddess to fill
        that role - Gaia.


        J3: 4. Had you read the article in the first place, and if you could
        comprehend anyone other than yourself you might have noticed that what he
        was stating was that the stone and that the rites were all looking for the
        same thing, the graal. I didn't have to infer anything..." The lumen naturae
        was the Grail Stone, the Elixir. Not atmospheric light, but the soft white
        luminosity of the primary substance body of the Goddess."

        R3: "that the stone and that the rites were all looking for the same thing,
        the graal,"? No, I certainly don't comprehend that. How can a stone or a
        rite look for anything? But even if they can, we still have not been told
        what the Grail actually is in terms that really mean anything to us. What
        is "the primary substance body of the Goddess"? It is a beautiful poetic
        description of something, but what?


        J3: 5. These are your thoughts Regan..."Not long ago you were expressing
        doubts that husbands could become their wives, but it would seem that in
        your system of thought, everybody has already become everybody else! If they
        truly unite with their wives, then I would say that they automatically
        become them."

        What I said was that when husbands have sex with their wifes they do not
        become them. I still feel this way. You are using words I have used in one
        respect towards another part of the conversation. Here is what he said in
        the article..."(Jung stated that identification of the Self with God-in
        mystical terms, union with the Godhead-was and ever is the supreme spiritual
        realization of the human psyche, but it carries the risk of ego inflation. I
        would argue that the God-Self equation is nothing but ego inflation, no
        matter how you cut it.)" I would agree with him there...

        R3: I fail to see what this statement of his and your opinion about "the
        God-Self equation" has to do with my point about your mis-identifying
        deities from different esoteric systems with one another, to which you have
        just referred me above.


        R2: Bully for you, then! But that's all in the past, isn't it? The
        "challenge" which you have given yourself now is to correlate various
        esoteric symbol-systems together, is it not?

        J3: No not at all, that is just one you are trying to dump on me. I can see
        how they correlate already in many cases, and have long since learned that
        many do not want to learn because that would mean change, so you will have
        to figure them out for yourself Regan.

        R3: I am trying to "dump" it on you? That's a good one! If anyone is
        "dumping" it on you, you are doing it yourself! You are the one who's been
        arguing the case for doing it, not me! And you've been sniping at me for
        "giving up before (you've) started" on it too! Jeesh, you've got a nerve.


        R2:I say you will have great difficulty in doing that, not because of any
        inherent weakness in your capability as a weaver of threads, but simply
        because the different systems themselves do not match-up in any simple,
        one-to-one set of correspondences........

        J3: Still giving up before you begin, I am surprized anyone would get
        anything done with you sabotaging their efforts so. Keep putting that energy
        out there, it will come back around to you one of these days.

        R3: How can I possibly be "sabotaging (your) efforts" to do this project
        whilst "dumping it on (you)" at the same time? That's double talk, Jahnets.
        But how does my alleged "giving up" sabotage your efforts anyway? Just
        because I'm not committing myself to it, it doesn't mean that I'm stopping
        you from doing it. You have no grounds for accusing me of sabotaging
        anything. So why do you do it?


        R2: I was unaware that anyone believed the Peacock was representative of a
        "soul that is always with the mother" before you mentioned it, so I have no
        idea why they would form that association in their minds. Thanks for
        explaining your own line of reasoning more fully though. I can't say that I
        concur with it fully, but I can accept it as what you believe.

        J3: Who do you think the Queen of the gods is?Hera- The peacock is always
        with her. Or Lady of the house(earth)?Nephthys Why do you think it was so
        important for her to keep her marriage contract with Zeus? Even while he was
        going out on her? For that matter why was there a marriage contract in the
        first place? Merging two political families, a physical(earth) goddess and a
        spirit(heavens) god. Because she was made to feel guilty like she caused
        what Set did to Osiris because she slept with him. Of course had Osiris not
        dropped his flowers there and had Set not been trying to own her it probably
        would have never happened. Imagine that. He gave up his life so that men
        could rule over women on Earth through marriage. Further she became the
        jealous one due to her inability to understand Set's jealousy of Osiris and
        leaving him. No one on Earth is able to be outside of Karma, even the gods.

        R3: As I said, I don't concur with it fully, but I accept it as what you
        believe.


        J2: Regan, I do not think he actually set out to find out what the graal was
        with this article,..... He is saying that the radiant wisdom stone and the
        graal are one in the same, just called different things.

        R2: Yes, that is my point. He has equated the Graal and the Radiant Wisdom
        Stone. But he still has not been able to tell us what these symbols
        actually stand for. And that, I submit, is what everyone wishes to know. I
        think symbols have value only in so far...... To get through to reality, we
        need to forget all about the symbols, beautiful as they may be, and
        experience it - consciously.

        J3: Yes Regan well good luck getting someone to believe you are experiencing
        it or them consciously...

        R3: Oh, I've long outgrown the need to get anyone to believe anything at
        all about me, Jahnets. In any case, people only ever see in me what they
        project into me of themselves. You cannot know me without first becoming
        me. Until you can do that, you can only know yourself.

        Regan
        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:54 PM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone





        J2: Regan, you seem to be the one being muddled or confused.

        R2: Well, Jahnets, when I am told - without explanation, justification, or
        substantiation - that the Ultimate Being is not God but is the Goddess
        instead, that the cosmic deities Nephthys and Hera are in fact Gaia, the
        spirit of the earth-planet, that the Grail of Arthurian legend is actually
        the goddess of the earth (and so, by implication, is the Philosopher's
        Stone), that the Greeks got the name of their goddess of wisdom wrong when
        they called her Sophia and that when the alchemists and Grail-seekers of
        yore thought they were uniting with God, they were actually copulating with
        a priestess and still failing to unite even with her, then yes, I suppose I
        am being a bit muddled and confused - by you - because none of this accords
        with the facts as most of the human race has always understood them to be!
        Not long ago you were expressing doubts that husbands could become their
        wives, but it would seem that in your system of thought, everybody has
        already become everybody else! Your thoughts and beliefs about these things
        seem to have no rhyme or reason to them that I, at least, can follow. You
        should not blame me for being muddled and confused about what you are saying
        and doing.

        J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation you are just incapabile of
        understanding my thoughts or do not want to. The he-man races facts and
        their understanding of them from time immortal is more than likely the
        reason they are so screwed up today. That along with an inability to see the
        same history in a new light that is different from their present
        understanding, as you so graciously pointed out above, even when the
        differences are coming at them from a many different directions.

        1.The Goddess rather than God is only logical as the maternal DNA is
        needed, the grays found this out. They were already cloning and going
        extinct in the process without it.

        2. The same four main gods have been called many different names with
        different peoples. That is obvious to anyone doing the least little bit of
        research.

        3. I said "I" believe that the name Sophia was a translation error and that
        it is wrong, and I still do. I think the "a" at the end was added. Whats
        more to them Sophi is the goddess of the earth and the first born and fallen
        so I am not saying anything new here, that was not in the article.

        4. Had you read the article in the first place, and if you could comprehend
        anyone other than yourself you might have noticed that what he was stating
        was that the stone and that the rites were all looking for the same thing,
        the graal. I didn't have to infer anything..." The lumen naturae was the
        Grail Stone, the Elixir. Not atmospheric light, but the soft white
        luminosity of the primary substance body of the
        Goddess."

        5. These are your thoughts Regan..."Not long ago you were expressing doubts
        that husbands could become their wives, but it would seem that in your
        system of thought, everybody has already become everybody else! If they
        truly unite with their wives, then I would say that they automatically
        become them."

        What I said was that when husbands have sex with their wifes they do not
        become them. I still feel this way. You are using words I have used in one
        respect towards another part of the conversation. Here is what he said in
        the article..."(Jung stated that identification of the Self with God-in
        mystical terms, union with the Godhead-was and ever is the supreme spiritual
        realization of the human psyche, but it carries the risk of ego inflation. I
        would argue that the God-Self equation is nothing but ego inflation, no
        matter how you cut it.)"
        I would agree with him there...

        R1: OK, so stop boasting about your capabilities and show us. Where is
        this glorious tapestry of which you speak?

        J2: I said I was a seamstress, not that I had a tapestry. I have however
        made dresses for people who were bigger in front than in back, so very hard
        to fit, I've made wedding dresses for my first psychic development teacher,
        mens suits, silk ties,coats, just about anything I have ever put my mind to
        and many without patterns other than what I wanted it to look like. I worked
        at a fabric store for over four years during which time just to give the
        customers a kick the girls would yell at me across the store holding two
        spools of thread and a piece of fabric and I would tell them which matched
        better. I was always right...

        R2: Bully for you, then! But that's all in the past, isn't it? The
        "challenge" which you have given yourself now is to correlate various
        esoteric symbol-systems together, is it not?

        J3: No not at all, that is just one you are trying to dump on me. I can see
        how they correlate already in many cases, and have long since learned that
        many do not want to learn because that would mean change, so you will have
        to figure them out for yourself Regan.

        R2:I say you will have great
        difficulty in doing that, not because of any inherent weakness in your
        capability as a weaver of threads, but simply because the different systems
        themselves do not match-up in any simple, one-to-one set of correspondences.
        You've heard of "squaring the circle". Well, this exercise is more akin to
        "cubing the sphere", or perhaps even "hypercubing the hypersphere"! These
        things may be done, but not easily.

        J3: Still giving up before you begin, I am surprized anyone would get
        anything done with you sabotaging their efforts so. Keep putting that energy
        out there, it will come back around to you one of these days.

        J2: My point was that possibly some time in the past someone pointed out the
        soul that is always with the mother symbolically as a peacock. Since the
        soul does grow how would they know that the peacock was not a immature soul?
        All they would be seeing is a peacock and being full grown does not
        constitute maturity in consciousness. Thus if it is following the mother
        around it more than likely is waiting to be incarnated next and is an
        immature soul. However personally I still believe it is representative of
        her magic always being with her rather than a soul and it was more than
        likely a superstious idea of a soul flying away(loosing your soul) thus
        being a bird that got it started.

        R2: I was unaware that anyone believed the Peacock was representative of a
        "soul that is always with the mother" before you mentioned it, so I have no
        idea why they would form that association in their minds. Thanks for
        explaining your own line of reasoning more fully though. I can't say that I
        concur with it fully, but I can accept it as what you believe.

        J3: Who do you think the Queen of the gods is?Hera- The peacock is always
        with her. Or Lady of the house(earth)?Nephthys Why do you think it was so
        important for her to keep her marriage contract with Zeus? Even while he was
        going out on her? For that matter why was there a marriage contract in the
        first place? Merging two political families, a physical(earth) goddess and a
        spirit(heavens) god. Because she was made to feel guilty like she caused
        what Set did to Osiris because she slept with him. Of course had Osiris not
        dropped his flowers there and had Set not been trying to own her it probably
        would have never happened. Imagine that. He gave up his life so that men
        could rule over women on Earth through marriage. Further she became the
        jealous one due to her inability to understand Set's jealousy of Osiris and
        leaving him. No one on Earth is able to be outside of Karma, even the gods.

        J2: Regan, I do not think he actually set out to find out what the graal was
        with this article, rather he was pointing out that the two systems, even
        though they did not state it, were looking for the same thing. They were in
        fact two different ways of looking for the graal or so he thought. He is
        saying that the radiant wisdom stone and the graal are one in the same, just
        called different things.

        R2: Yes, that is my point. He has equated the Graal and the Radiant Wisdom
        Stone. But he still has not been able to tell us what these symbols
        actually stand for. And that, I submit, is what everyone wishes to know. I
        think symbols have value only in so far as they can lead us to the
        perception of reality and that is their proper function. But they become an
        obstacle to our enlightenment when they are accepted permanently in place of
        the reality for which they stand. Then I think it is best for us to ditch
        the whole bag of symbols and try to get back to direct experience, like the
        Renaissance thinkers did when they realised that all the symbolic
        paraphernalia and mummery of the Roman Catholic religion had completely
        blocked everyone's direct access to the divine reality. The movement
        towards empirical science was founded on this newly-reawakened need for
        direct contact with reality. As we know, science eventually fell foul of
        the same pitfall of obsession with symbols itself and has ended up in the
        same bizarre mess that the medieval church was in before the Renaissance.
        So a great, revolutionary/evolutionary return to direct perception of
        reality seems to be called for there too now. But re-introducing old
        religious symbolic thought-systems into the scientific process, as many
        so-called "new paradigm scholars" and many self-styled "New Age" thinkers
        are attempting to do, seems unlikely to be capable of bringing that off, to
        me. To get through to reality, we need to forget all about the symbols,
        beautiful as they may be, and experience it - consciously.

        Regan
        _____
        J3: Yes Regan well good luck getting someone to believe you are experiencing
        it or them consciously...

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 3:51 AM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone







        J1: You would give up before I begin...

        R1: Not at all. I am just saying that I think you need to understand the
        various symbolic systems thoroughly before you try to correlate them
        together, that is all. Otherwise you will just get them muddled up when you
        try to do it. But by all means go ahead and muddle them up as you will. I
        won't try to stop you. It is your mental universe that will get muddled,
        not mine.

        J2: Regan, you seem to be the one being muddled or confused.

        J1: ....Yes you do have to weave things together not tie them to make a
        tapestry and since I've been a seamstress all my life in more ways than one
        I am sure I am up to the challenge. Besides that I am shown the pathways
        through broad and deep vision......

        R1: OK, so stop boasting about your capabilities and show us. Where is
        this glorious tapestry of which you speak?

        J2: I said I was a seamstress, not that I had a tapestry. I have however
        made dresses for people who were bigger in front than in back, so very hard
        to fit, I've made wedding dresses for my first psychic development teacher,
        mens suits, silk ties,coats, just about anything I have ever put my mind to
        and many without patterns other than what I wanted it to look like. I worked
        at a fabric store for over four years during which time just to give the
        customers a kick the girls would yell at me across the store holding two
        spools of thread and a piece of fabric and I would tell them which matched
        better. I was always right...

        J1: ......Things are as complicated as you make them for yourself Regan,
        the spirit knows, the ego questions...

        R1: In the case we are discussing, Jahnets, the various esoteric systems
        are as complicated as their authors have made them. I've had no say in the
        matter.


        R: As we both know, the alchemists take a different view. To them, the
        Peacock represents the fully-developed individual soul, not an immature ego.

        J1: Possibly because it is always with the mother(graal),since that is where
        our soul came from...

        R1: I don't follow your argument, but I agree that the Graal corresponds
        with the Divine Mother.

        J2: My point was that possibly some time in the past someone pointed out the
        soul that is always with the mother symbolically as a peacock. Since the
        soul does grow how would they know that the peacock was not a immature soul?
        All they would be seeing is a peacock and being full grown does not
        constitute maturity in consciousness. Thus if it is following the mother
        around it more than likely is waiting to be incarnated next and is an
        immature soul. However personally I still believe it is representative of
        her magic always being with her rather than a soul and it was more than
        likely a superstious idea of a soul flying away(loosing your soul) thus
        being a bird that got it started.

        R: This is very interesting, Jahnets. However, I fear it digresses from
        the subject of alchemy which we were discussing, so I'll leave it there for
        now.

        J1: The article was not just on Alchemy Regan, maybe you should read it
        again... I was not discussing Alchemy but the Graal and what it is.

        R1: I think maybe it is you who should do the re-reading, Jahnets. I
        referred to what we were discussing, not to what the article was discussing
        or what you were discussing. But you have been discussing alchemy with me!
        You asked the original questions about it which I endeavoured to answer and
        which you then took up. I observed that you were also trying to discuss the
        Graal, but I did not want to get into that for purely practical reasons of
        time-constraints.


        J1: .......He also used various practices and beliefs to make his point and
        yet did not end up in knots... Imagine that...

        R1: True, but he didn't get to the point of stating definitively what the
        Radiant Wisdom Stone and the Graal actually are either. He remained stuck
        at the symbolic level and did not go beyond it to the reality which the
        symbols represent. I think he demonstrated rather nicely how, by itself,
        interrelating different symbolic systems just gives you a grand unified
        symbolic system without telling you anything more about the nature of the
        reality which it is supposed to represent. It may be an interesting and
        entertaining intellectual exercise to perform, but it hardly constitutes
        research or truth-seeking, because it doesn't take us any closer to the
        objective truth than where we started from, in spite of giving us the
        illusion of doing precisely that.

        J2: Regan, I do not think he actually set out to find out what the graal was
        with this article, rather he was pointing out that the two systems, even
        though they did not state it, were looking for the same thing. They were in
        fact two different ways of looking for the graal or so he thought. He is
        saying that the radiant wisdom stone and the graal are one in the same, just
        called different things.

        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:38 PM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone





        J: "......I figure if you can tie as many systems together as possible
        meaning the same thing, that it is more likely to be that, rather than using
        one of the many that may have been changed through time perhaps........."

        R: I think it can be a good idea to use one system as a check against
        another in this way, so long as you know what you are doing. But there are
        many difficulties to be overcome with it before you can do that. For one
        thing, the different esoteric systems are different systems precisely
        because they are conceived in different terms and operate according to their
        own internal rules. It is not normally a simple matter of transposing names
        from one set of terms onto another, simply because the terms of one system
        don't usually correspond point-for-point with the terms of another. For
        example, even with something as basic as the chakra-system, you find that
        different esoteric schools work with different numbers of chakras. Likewise
        with the colours of the rainbow. So when you want to relate the colours of
        the rainbow to the chakras, how will you do it? It's the same with the gods
        and goddesses of ancient mythologies and religions. Different cultures had
        different numbers of deities in their pantheons. They don't correspond with
        one another in any simple way. Tieing them all in together produces a
        tangled web, not a beautifully ordered tapestry. Alchemy is an entire,
        complicated tapestry in itself, as is the system underlying the
        goddess-mysteries. If you can tie those two systems together in an orderly,
        coherent and meaningful way, then good luck to you. But it's an enormous
        project, I hope you realise.

        J1: You would give up before I begin... Yes you do have to weave things
        together not tie them to make a tapestry and since I've been a seamstress
        all my life in more ways than one I am sure I am up to the challenge.
        Besides that I am shown the pathways through broad and deep vision. Things
        are as complicated as you make them for yourself Regan, the spirit knows,
        the ego questions...

        J: ".......I think rather than the Phoenix representing the risen
        transformed perfected soul, I see it as representative of reincarnation of
        the spirit until the soul becomes perfect. Only because the bird comes back
        looking the same as before rather than evolving to a new form. Where spirits
        do shapeshift they also have a main form of their choice they normally
        appear as, and the other forms are with respect to their lineage. The soul
        creates the personality (mask) that does indeed burn up on death but then it
        creates a new one in the next life. They do not normally look alike."

        R: I would agree that the Phoenix does not just symbolise the final stage
        of the soul's development. Rather I think it represents the soul in all its
        stages of development, because the Phoenix is said to undergo a recurrent
        cycle of self-transformation, from the egg-state to the bird-state and back
        again. I think it does symbolise the soul rather than the spirit though,
        because the soul is individual, like the Phoenix, whereas the spirit
        transcends all, including individuality. But the difference is really one
        of emphasis and is not absolute, since the soul is itself an expression of
        the spirit.


        J: "The peacock struts it's stuff and is more representative of the young
        ego of the soul in humans...."

        R: As we both know, the alchemists take a different view. To them, the
        Peacock represents the fully-developed individual soul, not an immature ego.

        J1: Possibly because it is always with the mother(graal),since that is where
        our soul came from...


        J: ......It is also more representative of beauty(she is the goddess of
        beauty) and the vibrations of it's tail more the equivalent of the magic
        Nephthys(Hera) performed. She was known for great magic words or
        vibrations. The vibration of the tail also shows how the dimensional doors
        open up with vibrations of magic. The many eyes showing how she could see
        everywhere at once being the earth as she turns around can see in any
        direction, and how intuition can see through solid objects.

        R: This is very interesting, Jahnets. However, I fear it digresses from
        the subject of alchemy which we were discussing, so I'll leave it there for
        now.

        J1: The article was not just on Alchemy Regan, maybe you should read it
        again... I was not discussing Alchemy but the Graal and what it is. He also
        used various practices and beliefs to make his point and yet did not end up
        in knots... Imagine that...


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 7:12 PM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


        Touché... I did make that point Regan, that is true. I was being facetious
        since I felt he made such a broad jump (lol literally)...to becoming God. If
        I am expounding my knowledge of them, it is only because others expounding
        their knowledge seems to be lacking in tying all of the symbology together.
        Numerology is another way of symbolically viewing something, whether you
        believe it or not. I figure if you can tie as many systems together as
        possible meaning the same thing, that it is more likely to be that, rather
        than using one of the many that may have been changed through time perhaps.
        I think rather than the Phoenix representing the risen transformed perfected
        soul, I see it as representative of reincarnation of the spirit until the
        soul becomes perfect. Only because the bird comes back looking the same as
        before rather than evolving to a new form. Where spirits do shapeshift they
        also have a main form of their choice they normally appear as, and the other
        forms are with respect to their lineage. The soul creates the personality
        (mask) that does indeed burn up on death but then it creates a new one in
        the next life. They do not normally look alike.

        The peacock struts it's stuff and is more representative of the young ego
        of the soul in humans. It is also more representative of beauty(she is the
        goddess of beauty) and the vibrations of it's tail more the equivalent of
        the magic Nephthys(Hera) performed. She was known for great magic words or
        vibrations. The vibration of the tail also shows how the dimensional doors
        open up with vibrations of magic. The many eyes showing how she could see
        everywhere at once being the earth as she turns around can see in any
        direction, and how intuition can see through solid objects.

        Most importantly the article was about the graal. It is my feeling that the
        graal if it were a physical object would be her as she reincarnates into
        different lives. Furthering a line of maternal DNA or lineage.



        -----Original Message-----
        From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Regan Power
        Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 6:48 AM
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


        No, Jahnets, I was not "discussing the English language". Quite
        simply, I was discussing the question which you had raised of how one can
        "get from union with God, to being God". It is true that you had raised it
        in response to the article about alchemy, but I don't think that expounding
        your understanding of Who's Who in the pantheon of western alchemical
        deities and what the numerological signifance of their names is, actually
        relates to my answer to your original question about union and becoming or
        explains why "(you) don't think so".

        You now ask me: "Why do you think seeing the peacock was the final
        phase of alchemy as he said???" I appreciate that you are making a point
        here rather than asking a question, but I will answer it anyway from my
        perspective on alchemy and spiritual realization, which may be different to
        yours. I believe the Peacock was used by the alchemists as an alternative
        symbol to the mythical Phoenix for the risen, transformed, perfected soul.
        They chose the Peacock because, for one reason, it is a living "firebird",
        whose irridescent colours express every colour of the rainbow that is
        implicit in the pure, "white light" of the Spirit. The liberated soul does
        the same thing, expressing the "white light" of pure consciousness on every
        individual level of frequency, to produce a continuous, multi-coloured
        waveform of consciousness. But I think a second reason for their choosing
        this symbol has to be the male Peacock's magnificent tail, which depicts the
        ultimate form of all creation. The "eyes" on the tail-feathers are arranged
        in a pattern of contra-rotating spirals which can be found throughout
        nature, in snail-shells, pine-cones, galaxies, whirlpools, deer-antlers,
        tree-structures, beehives and seemingly everywhere. The "eyes" themselves
        symbolise centres of consciousness. And the tail vibrates!

        Is the Peacock not a fitting symbol for the realization that awaits
        the spiritual alchemist at the end of his quest? To observe the Peacock in
        full display is to gaze upon the form of heaven.

        Regan
        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 3:49 AM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


        "The Philosopher's Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into
        gold, to cure all diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its
        possessor. It also stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest
        and most perfect conceivable, which was the state of union with God or
        virtually being God."

        J: The paragraph above and the earlier part of his article was speaking
        about the goddess in Ireland and the rites that turned men into Kings, then
        he turned it into Alchemy of the west to show how he thought the graal and
        they were the same thing. The paragraph above is what I was refering to. You
        agreed with him that you thought they were the same words or meant the same
        thing, I beleive you said surely??? I said I didn't think so and why. So if
        we we're talking about different topics I'm not sure where...

        He thinks the graal is the philosophers stone and I think it is the goddess
        of Earth, Gaia, Hera, Nephythys or what ever name you want to give her. Why
        do you think seeing the peacock was the final phase of alchemy as he said???
        It was always with her...or that the Pope batted the doves away that flew
        back in the window to him... Good example of the church denying her
        symbolically since the dove was also one of her birds, but then they would
        see her as Lucifer right? The fallen one, first born, buried in the core of
        the planet. It's rather humerous to think that the sun in the center of
        earth is seen by them as hell when it is lifegiving to those who live inside
        earth, their sun. I'm looking at all the symbols he used in his article and
        stating how I can see it meaning something equally plauzable but different,
        I think you were talking about the English language... ;-)




        J: I do not think so. I think union with God or in this case the Goddess was
        a sexual act with a spirit. The spirit may have come into or used a
        priestess's body as a vehicle, but it was truly the Goddess. That would not
        make them God...lol. Like in the picture of Nephythys her hands I believe
        are showing something. The right is crossed fingers showing 10 and her left
        is the thumb under the four fingers showing 4. If you look up fourteen in a
        Kabala book you will find Gold, abundance is the message here. Meaning the
        earth is abundance for all. This is why the grail is suppose to give
        abundance, she does. As twin to Isis she is beauty and magic, the mistress
        of the house or the spirit of the earth. People are looking for an object
        when the object is her. She heals all, she imparts all, she can give or take
        energy or life force. I truely abhor the name Sophia, and I totaled it up
        and it comes to 229 when it should be 228 so maybe that is why??? Did they
        add the A maybe?

        R: Clearly, you and I are discussing different topics and it would be
        pointless for me to reply.

        Regan
        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 6:51 PM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


        J: I do not think so. I think union with God or in this case the Goddess was
        a sexual act with a spirit. The spirit may have come into or used a
        priestess's body as a vehicle, but it was truly the Goddess. That would not
        make them God...lol Like in the picture of Nephythys her hands I believe
        are showing something. The right is crossed fingers showing 10 and her left
        is the thumb under the four fingers showing 4. If you look up fourteen in a
        Kabala book you will find Gold, abundance is the message here. Meaning the
        earth is abundance for all. This is why the grail is suppose to give
        abundance, she does. As twin to Isis she is beauty and magic, the mistress
        of the house or the spirit of the earth. People are looking for an object
        when the object is her. She heals all, she imparts all, she can give or take
        energy or life force. I truely abhor the name Sophia, and I totaled it up
        and it comes to 229 when it should be 228 so maybe that is why??? Did they
        add the A maybe?

        I just found out something interesting on Easter. My mothers mother was
        Eastern Star and my father's grandfather was Mason, so it's on both sides of
        the family. I never knew that. I knew it was on my fathers but not my
        mothers. My mother's maternal grand father was Armenian also which has many
        more interesting ideas with it. I find it interesting that I am studying all
        this on my own yet have never got into the organizations. I was asked once
        to join Rocrucians,but Kundalini had already risen and the two young people
        asking me wanted me to start at the beginning. Right... It is interesting
        what Dogma looses...



        -----Original Message-----
        From: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Regan Power
        Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 7:25 AM
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone


        J: Now how does one get from union with God, to being God? Do men become
        their wives from union with them?

        R: Aren't "union with God" and "being God" just different words to describe
        the same state or process? If you "unite" with something truly, then how
        can you avoid "becoming" it? You are one with it and no longer possess a
        separate identity to theirs. You and they have become one being and you
        only have one, single, common identity. You are them and they are you.

        Do men become their wives from union with them? If they truly unite
        with their wives, then I would say that they automatically become them. But
        of course, many marriages are shams, in which no real union of individual
        husband and wife takes place, or is ever really intended to by either party.
        In those, neither party has become the other in reality, but only in name as
        recognised by society.

        Regan
        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Jahnets
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 5:46 AM
        Subject: RE: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone






        The Philosopher's Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into
        gold, to cure all diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its
        possessor. It also stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest
        and most perfect conceivable, which was the state of union with God or
        virtually being God.

        J: Now how does one get from union with God, to being God? Do men become
        their wives from union with them?

        Instead of divinity manifest in the flesh in Jesus Christ—a theological
        dogma rejected by Sethian Gnostics as deviant —they experienced "Divine
        Presence" in the presence of the Earth itself, in the Goddess revealed as a
        humble planet.

        J:I have stated this over and over again for months now, all the planets
        have spirits including earth. Earths spirit is Hera, Nephythys, Gaia, Mary
        and I would be willing to bet that there are 8 more lifes this spirit has
        lived or incarnated on earth. Whats more, during those incarnations she
        chose certain males lines to be with. Thus those lines are in her cup. If
        you look at this picture of Nephythys, she is sitting on the symbol for
        gold, she wears her crown, the sign for house(earth being her house, body)
        and note the bowl or cup on her head.

        The dove has always been the symbol of divine compassion. It was a bird
        sacred to the Goddess and it passed into the panoply of the Shekinah where
        it symbolized God's Holy Spirit. Within Christianity the Holy Spirit's
        doubtful gender has been obscured by its symbolization as a dove: the
        promise of ultimate redemption, the perfect indwelling of God...

        [J:] After reading the above description of the Dove, I couldn't help but
        remember tha last Pope letting a dove go and it flying back into the room
        and them thinking it was bad luck and meant death.


        with no other bodily sustenance than that derived, by an osmosis-like
        process, from air and water and sunlight, similar to the process whereby a
        plant produces chlorophyll (P. xii).


        J:This is not a difficult thing to do, but a human can not live on it for
        any length of time without harming the body. The physical body was not meant
        to work in this manner.

        The Green Lion is a naive symbol indicating how sunlight converts to
        chlorophyll and thus provides vital energy in the form of edible plants.

        J: Another point for vegetarians...

        Seeking to delve into the secrets of nature, they were regarded by the
        Church as heretics who colluded with the evil spirits believed to animate
        the natural world

        J: Curious that they would see it as heretical when they animate the
        world... Rather their own egos could not handle the fact that they were not
        in complete control, that the spirits created the world for them based on
        the egos thoughts for this they call them demons. They blame them for their
        own thoughts... How sad...


        Dear Friends,

        Click the link if you don't receive the images.

        http://www.metahistory.org/StoneWise.php

        Love and Light.

        David

        The Radiant Wisdom Stone

        Mystery Wisdom in the Grail Legend
        Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung (1875 - 1961) was almost singlehandedly
        responsible for the modern revival of interest in alchemy. (Jung was
        initially "turned on" to alchemy by his patient, protege, and mistress,
        Sabina Spielrein, who—until recently—had been written out of the story.)
        Jung and all who followed him regarded Western alchemy as originating with
        the work of Zosimos, an Alexandrian mystic from Panopolis (a town on the
        Egyptian delta). Textual evidence of Zosimos dates from the 3rd Century CE,
        but scholars agree that the roots of the Art are far more ancient, going
        back to the secret schools of the Egyptian Mysteries.

        Alchemical Peacock, associated with the cauda pavonis,
        "the peacock's tail," the final stage of the Great Work.

        Jung's work on alchemy was complemented by The Grail Legend, written by
        his wife, Emma Jung, and his close colleague, Marie-Louise von Franz. The
        authors argue that

        the Grail's many wonderful attributes, which qualify it as 'a treasure
        hard to attain,' and its analogy to the alchemical Stone, which in Wolfram
        actually goes as far as identification, justify its being taken as a symbol
        of the Self. (p. 155-6)
        But such justification only makes sense within the tautological system
        of Jungian theory "in which the unconscious explains itself" (p. 142). To
        Wolfram von Eschenbach and those of his time, the Grail was not symbol of
        the Self or of anything else. It was a magical and mysterious object of some
        kind, a numen described in pre-Christian mythology of Celtic and Irish
        origin. One French commentary on the Grail Legend, the "Elucidation," says
        C'est del Graal dont nus ne doit
        Le secré dire ne conter.

        This is about the Graal, of whose mystery
        None may speak or tell. This language calls to mind some lines from the
        Homeric hymn to Demeter, referring to the secret of the Eleusinian
        Mysteries:
        She taught them the ministry of her rites,
        And revealed to them her beautiful Mysteries,
        Which are impossible to transgress, or pry into, or divulge,
        For so great is one’s awe of the gods that it halts the tongue.
        An aura of secrecy similar to that applied to the Mysteries also applied
        to the Grail, raising the question, Had the Grail been revealed to ancient
        initiates before the medieval Legend took form, and before alchemy appeared
        in the West?



        A Significant Near Miss

        Anyone who delves into Grail studies will encounter a single, supremely
        influential book: From Ritual to Romance by Jessie L. Weston. As already
        noted, this book (published in 1920) figured in the writing of the famous
        Modernist poem, The Wasteland, by T. S. Eliot. Avidly discussed by Eliot and
        other literati of the time, and later featured among the reading material of
        the deranged Colonel Kurtz played by Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, From
        Ritual to Romance asserts that the Grail Quest derived from ancient Pagan
        Mysteries. Weston was quite explicit with her central thesis. In the
        Introduction she wrote, "We can now prove by printed texts the parallels
        existing between each and every feature of the Grail story and the recorded
        symbolism of the Mystery cults."

        That statement may be the greatest near miss of modern scholarship on the
        Mysteries. But a near miss is also a near hit. Weston was right in tracing
        the Grail Legend to "Mystery cults," but she was mistaken in her view of
        what transpired in those cults. Scholars note that there were two levels of
        the Mysteries, the popular and the elite. This is evident in the Eleusinian
        tradition of celebrating the Lesser Mysteries in the Spring, and the Greater
        Mysteries in the Fall. The former were popular, presenting rites of seasonal
        renewal and ecstatic immersion in nature for the general public. The latter
        involved elite practices with the kykeon, the entheogenic brew that induced
        perception of "a marvellous light." When the Mysteries fell into decline,
        the rites got confused (or subverted) and the kykeon came to be used as a
        recreational libation (as seen in the case of Socrates' charismatic young
        friend Alcibiades, one of the few people known to have been accused of
        desecrating the
        Mysteries.)

        Elsewhere I have argued that no one who lacks first-hand mystical
        experience equivalent to that of initiation in the Mysteries is qualified to
        comment in a reliable way on such arcane matters. Apparently, Weston did not
        have such experience. In fact, like a good many other scholars, she failed
        to preserve a clear distinction between the popular and elite rites. She
        assumed that the Pagan Mysteries involved "fertility rites." True, but this
        is a near miss, because it does not take into account the elite rites that
        had nothing to do with fertility. This is such an important point that I
        would like to take a few minutes to clarify it in more detail.
        Chrismation

        In the archaic model of royal empowerment in the ancient Near East, the
        male candidate underwent sexual initiation with a woman who represented one
        or another Goddess identified with the Earth. For instance, the
        Assyro-Babylonian Goddess Ishtar (the Sumerian Inana) and her human lover,
        Tammuz (the Sumerian Dumuzi), the shepherd king. In this rite, the priestess
        represented Ishtar, and Tammuz was no particular man, no single historical
        person, but the ritual name of the candidate who would be king. The man's
        mastery in the hunt and his strength as a warrior were measured against his
        capacity to surrender and become totally vulnerable to the pleasures
        afforded by a woman's body. It was known to people in those times that
        pleasure makes us weak, as one can be weak in the knees from a good sexual
        encounter. For the royal candidate to accept being weak was not regarded as
        a sign of weakness, however. Rather, it was taken as evidence of his
        capacity to give and receive
        tenderness—evidence of his compassion. Candidates for kingship had to pass
        the test of tenderness to prove they had "female" qualities to balance their
        male prowess and temper their masculine lust for lording it over others.
        These sacred conjugal rites conducted by the Goddess cults were of
        course enacted privately, but they were also reflected in public
        celebrations where the king was represented as mating with the earth to
        insure the fertility of the land. In popular imagination, the "fertility
        rites" of theocracy appeared to be a means of sympathetic magic to insure
        the cycles of nature, but they had nothing to do with human fertility. It
        was never the role of the anointed man to impregnate the anointed
        priestess—indeed, this would have been an abomination, a sacrilege against
        the Goddess. The anointing priestesses were always virgins, or viragos—
        words derived from the Indo-European root vir- ,"heroic force, strength,"
        also the basis of the word virility. Originally, virgin (Greek parthenos)
        denoted, not the woman who never had sexual intercourse, but the woman who
        did not procreate. Her womb was virginal because she did not conceive, not
        because she did not copulate. (Concern with
        intactness of the hymen is symptomatic of patriarchal societies where
        women are viewed as property and/or breeding stock.)
        At the deeper level understood in the inner sanctum of the Mysteries,
        conjugal initiation was a tantric rite of empowerment in which a female
        adept in Kundalini yoga initiated a man who thereby gained paranormal
        faculties. (See She Who Anoints.) The popular rite concealed another, deeper
        meaning, and within that meaning, still another. Like most scholars, Weston
        saw only the first level of meaning. She thought initiation in the Mysteries
        was a ritualization of primitive fertility rites which, in turn, came to be
        reflected in the two dominant mofits of the Grail Legend: the bleeding Lance
        (phallic symbol) and the Grail (vagina or womb symbol). As the leading
        Arthurian scholar Loomis points out, "Miss Weston's fascinating theory of a
        lost mystery cult, conveyed by Eastern merchants from the Mediterranean to
        Britain, and of secret initiation rites enacted in remote ages is
        discredited by the absence of such a cult in the mass of medieval testimony
        on heresy" (The Grail -From
        Celtic Myth to Christian Symbol, p. 49)—and, I would add, by similar lack
        of evidence of any such spear-and-chalice mumbo-jumbo in the ancient Near
        East or Egypt.

        Most scholars reject the thesis of From Ritual to Romance, yet they
        perpetuate a specious inference related to Weston's half-miss: the anointing
        rite of theocracy was an external and popular enactment of what initiates
        experienced in the inner sanctum of the Mysteries. This interpretation
        touches on the entheogenic theory of religion, which asserts that Pagan
        initiates underwent altered states by the use of sacred potions such as the
        fermented barley potion (kykeon) of Eleusis. This is a fact that can be
        evidentially supported. It has been argued that entheogenic initiation
        provided the basis for anointing sacred kings in a ritual exercise that
        repeated before the eyes of the world what the illumined ones experienced in
        the telesterion, the inner chamber of initiation. This is an inference, and
        no more than an inference. There is no evidence that supports the assertion
        that initiates did any such thing.
        This inference is another half-miss, a shade closer to the bullseye than
        Weston got. In the first place, it recognizes the true nature of the secret
        entheogenic rites practiced at Eleusis and elsewhere. This recognition goes
        deeper than the widely accepted theory of ancient fertility ritual as
        related to sacred kingship, but it still does not go to the core of the
        Mystery experience. Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy (The Jesus Mysteries)
        claim that initiation provided the model for sacred kingship, without a word
        on the entheogenic practices. Carl Ruck (The Apples of Apollo) makes a
        similar claim, and does assert the entheogenic factor. In both cases, these
        learned scholars confound empowerment rites for sacred kingship with the
        mystical initiatory experience, or they construe those rites as an exoteric
        expression, and extension, of such experience. In his conflation of
        entheogenic lore with Judeo-Christian religion, Ruck writes:
        Iesous was the name of the mythical hero Iason (Jason), for Iason was so
        named for the ceremonial chrismation or anointing that made him a shaman. In
        the Hebrew tradition, Messiah is the name for the "anointed," who in Greek
        is called Christos... The ritual of chrismation had become a validation for
        the authority of kings and prophets; but the unguent of anointment
        originally conferred its power through the entheogen that made the
        recepients consubstantial with the sacred plant of their shamanism. (The
        Apples of Apollo, p. 146-7)
        In other words, sacred kingship "originally" involved entheogenic
        initiation of the royal candidate by shaman-priests who administered a
        psychoactive sacrament. There is no evidence that theocracy originated with
        such rites, and to infer that it did so is, I maintain, a serious error.
        Conflation of this sort is particularly devious because it gives the
        impression that there is, or originally was, some kind of valid shamanic
        entheogenic rite behind sacred kingship and even behind Jesus, the Christos.
        Likewise, Freke and Gandy argue for a type of Pagan apologism in which they
        confer value on Pagan Mysteries by regarding them as the "true basis" of
        Jesus' teachings and Christianity. In other words, the Mysteries were a
        means to an end. And because the end was good, we can assume that the means
        were also good. In this approach. Paganism (whatever that was) becomes
        acceptable because it provided the basis for Christianity.
        Fine, but the problem here is, it didn't. Christianity stole some window
        dressing from Paganism—the babe in the manger, for instance, was an infant
        version of the Sumerian shepherd Tammuz—and it co-opted Mithraic rites to
        concoct the sacraments, but its ethics and ideology came from elsewhere. The
        historical basis of Christianity lies in the Zaddikim cult of the Dead Sea.
        From the time of the Patriarch Samuel, the entire Jewish community was
        pulled into theocratic politics by the machinations of the Zaddikim whose
        obsession with a messiah culminated in the Christ of Saint Paul. The messiah
        is the "anointed one," christos in Greek, formed from the verb echrisa, "to
        anoint." In both ancient Near Eastern theocracies and Judeo-Christian
        tradition alike, anointing was the key ritual of investiture, central to the
        entire ideological construct of divine power, but there is not a shred of
        evidence that Pagan religion in Europa, North Africa, and the Levant
        followed this custom.
        Entheogenic shamanism in the Mysteries was never used to set up and
        legitimate either patriarchal rule or patriarchal religion. Telestic rites
        were not a means to a mundane political end. Initiation had nothing to do
        with empowerment, except empowerment through knowledge, if that be allowed.
        It had nothing to do with secular, political power games as exemplified in
        the public enthronement of theocrats in the ancient Near East and Palestine.
        No genuine, uncorrupted adept in the Mysteries would have consented to
        confer initiatory power on a politician or patriarchal authority figure. And
        no ceremony conferring such power could have reflected what happened at the
        third and deepest level of initiation.

        A Garbled Secret

        To avoid further digression, I let this subject drop for now, but we will
        return to the specious interpretations of theocratic empowerment later in
        Mythbusting 101. Clarity on this issue is essential in confronting and
        defeating the Paternal Lie and its current resurgence in terrorist-supported
        global theocracy. For now, let's return to the "three currents" from the
        Grail, and come around to the subject of this lesson, "the Stone of the
        Wise."
        As explained in Lesson Three, one of the currents flows in the direction
        of social enlightenment, after the model of Lohengrin. This current can be
        traced ahead from the 10th Century to Renaissance humanism in the 15th.
        Humanism was the mundane, socially oriented expression of the generosity of
        the medieval Nobility who served the Grail.
        Two other currents proceed from Parzival's attainment of the Grail in
        968 CE. The direct encounter with the supreme numen of indigenous magic is
        deeply mystical and does not find expression in social life, but in hidden,
        anti-social trends, in esotericism, counterculture, and underground
        movements of a cryptic and cultic character. As noted, both of these hidden
        currents deeply inform the plot of alternative history. They operate behind
        the scenes throughout the Middle Age, but they arose in far earlier times.
        Unlike the Western initiative of social altruism and philanthropy
        represented by Lohengrin, these other two currents have an ancient
        provenance in the pre-Christian Mysteries.

        The current that gives rise to Western alchemy is intimately related to
        the third and deepest level of initiation. Behind the popular
        seasonal-sexual rites, and even behind the delicious tantric rites of sacred
        mating, there was the supreme ritual experience: instruction by the Light.
        Alchemy preserved a vestigial memory of this experience, but not the ancient
        method for transmitting the experience itself. In other words, with the end
        of the Mystery network throughout Pagan Europa and the Near East, continuity
        of access to the Organic Light was disrupted. The supreme initiatory
        experience became inconsistent and incoherent, almost a matter of
        chance—which may explain the strange motif attached to the Castle of the
        Grail, namely that "no knight who sought it would find that place unless
        chance led him there" (The Prose Tristan, cited by Loomis, The Grail - From
        Celtic Myth to Christian Symbol, p 206). Even when the Grail was revealed,
        witnesses could not make out what it was
        because they did not have the guiding framework of the Mysteries to assist
        them. From the 4th century CE onward, instruction by the Light became
        precarious and aleatory.
        The problem with alchemy, which all those who explore it know well, much
        to their exasperation, is its daunting and often impenetrable obscurity.
        Again and again, the alchemists allude to something they have the privilege
        of knowing about, without saying exactly what it is. They do this because
        they don't know what it is. This was certainly the case in those
        instances—and that would be almost all instances attested by surviving
        material—where alchemists appear to be covering up what they know, when in
        fact they don't essentially understand what they are attempting to conceal.

        It is as if I told you a secret in garbled form, and I entrusted you to
        keep it. Intent on honoring the vow, you would do everything possible to
        conceal the secret, without in fact knowing what it really, precisely was.
        Wolfram calls the Gral a stone, and alchemists universally used this
        term for the ultimate secret of "the Art." The alchemical dictionary of Dom
        Pernety (18th C., France) gives over 600 definitions for the Stone. Well,
        there you go. The amazing thing is, all of them are in some sense correct.
        But not one of them is valid for unmediated access to the experience of the
        Stone.
        Quant ele fu laiens entree a tot le graal qu'ele tint,
        Un si grans clartez i vint...
        Thus Chretien de Troies, Perceval, 3224-5, in Medieval French
        octosyllabic rhyming couplets. In plain English, "As she walked into the
        hall, the graal she held gave forth a radiance so great and clear...." This
        is written from unmediated access to the experience of the Stone. In King
        Arthur and the Grail (the best single introduction), Richard Cavendish
        writes:
        The Grail is clearly no ordinary object. It is surrounded with
        mystery; it is holy and it emanates blazing light. (p. 137) ... The Grail in
        Parzival is not remotely adequately explained as a symbol of humility
        [theory of R. S. Loomis, the eminence gris of Arthurian studies. JLL]. It is
        much closer to the Philosopher's Stone of alchemy, which is both a
        mysterious object of gigantic size and a spiritual state. The Philosopher's
        Stone was believed to turn anything it touched into gold, to cure all
        diseases and to confer eternal life and youth on its possessor. It also
        stood for the "golden" spiritual condition, the highest and most perfect
        conceivable, which was the state of union with God or virtually being God.

        Like the Grail hero, the alchemist trod his own path to salvation,
        independently of the Church, and consequently suspect. Alchemy first
        attracted attention in the Western Europe in the twelfth century and
        Parzival was written early in the thirteenth. (p. 161)

        I would say that Chretien preserves genuine first-hand testimony of the
        Mystery experience, but "blazing" is too strong a word. The Organic Light is
        soft and substantial, like nothing so much as luminous marshmallow.
        Cavendish makes the connection between the Gral and the Stone of the Wise,
        but attaches to it an in appropriate theological inference. The state of
        perfection associated with beholding the Gral—for no one could possess
        it—might be construed as "union with God or virtually being God," but this
        interpretation opens the old trap of deification, which was not the aim of
        the Mysteries, although inflation (to use Jungian jargon) was certainly a
        risk of initiation. (Jung stated that identification of the Self with God—in
        mystical terms, union with the Godhead—was and ever is the supreme spiritual
        realization of the human psyche, but it carries the risk of ego inflation. I
        would argue that the God-Self equation is nothing but ego inflation, no
        matter how you cut it.)

        The Wisdom Light

        The Pagan telestai did not seek to become God, although initiation made
        them in some measure God-like because they came to know the world as God
        knows it. Or more presicely, as the Goddess knows it. As explained in A
        Cheaf of Cut Wheat, they attained Her Mind.

        Cavendish comes very close to an intuition of the Gral as the corporeal
        revelation of the Goddess: "whether the light shines from the Grail itself
        or from the maiden who carries it, is not absolutely clear" (p. 137). But
        neither he nor any other author writing on the Grail makes the direct
        identification of its luminosity with a divine feminine presence. When the
        Grail is associated with a "Divine Presence," it is assumed to be God, or
        Christ, due to the thick filter of Christianization laid on the legend.
        Nevertheless, all the archaic and folk-loric material that supports the
        Grail Legend points to the Great Goddess, not to the Father God or his
        only-begotten Son. In the Irish and Welsh sources of the Legend, the Grail
        was the magical cauldron of the underworld goddess, Keridwen, or Erui-Erin,
        identified bioregionally with Ireland (source of the arcahic levels of Grail
        material). For the archaic, participatory imagination, the jump from the
        goddess who guards the cauldron
        to goddess as cauldron would have been natural and effortless.
        In her essay, "Sophia, Companion to the Quest," Grail scholar and
        Mystery revivalist Caitlin Matthews makes the important observation that the
        Quest for the Grail is "more concerned with the land than the glories of
        kingship," (At the Table of the Grail, p. 116. This remark is consistent
        with the above digression.) To put all this in Gaian terms, the Quest is
        concerned with the Earth and the powers of the living planet, rather than
        paternal rites of empowerment. Matthews makes pretty work of sorting out the
        garbled secret. Commenting on the dove emblem worn by the members of the
        Grail Family, she says:
        The dove has always been the symbol of divine compassion. It was a
        bird sacred to the Goddess and it passed into the panoply of the Shekinah
        where it symbolized God's Holy Spirit. Within Christianity the Holy Spirit's
        doubtful gender has been obscured by its symbolization as a dove: the
        promise of ultimate redemption, the perfect indwelling of God... However the
        Holy Spirit is theologically understood today, it stems from its origins as
        part of the Divine Feminine: the holy Motherhood of God. In this tangle of
        symbolism Christ has assumed the attributes of Wisdom. (Ibid., p. 123)
        In other words, the attributes of Sophia. To the adepts of the Pagan
        Mysteries, the source of "radiance so grea<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
      • Jahnets
        J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from time immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today. That along
        Message 3 of 24 , Apr 28, 2006
          J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from
          time
          immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today. That
          along with an inability to see the same history in a new light that is
          different from their present understanding, as you so graciously pointed out
          above, even when the differences are coming at them from a many different
          directions.

          R3: Hey, where do you get the right to insult the entire male sub-species?
          If it was not for the males who you are deprecating, you would not be here
          today to deprecate them! What qualifies you to stand in judgement over the
          understanding of the entire male population of the earth since "time
          immortal"? Do you even know what all men since time immortal understand?
          I think you should cut the pretense of being omniscient, Jahnets. You make
          too many mistakes to carry that off here.

          J4: Seeing as you did not explain what it is in the above statement that
          makes you assume that I am insulting the whole male sub-species, I'm going
          to guess it is the way in which I wrote Hu-man as He-man. If you do a little
          bit of research you will find Hu means He in Hebrew and was another name for
          Kether. I was simply being more specific as to what and who our race was
          named after... Oh and it does include the female of the species I believe.
          Regan, just because I do not accept your jejune arguments does not mean I
          believe I am omniscient, personally I think the word philosopher would be a
          better description of me since reading, thinking and meditating are where
          most of my knowledge comes from.

          J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation......

          R3: Well, that depends on what you mean by "explanation", doesn't it? If,
          by the term, you mean the flat assertion of your belief as though it were a
          matter of obvious fact which anyone but an idiot or a wilfully disagreeable
          person would accept and concur with unconditionally, then yes, I suppose I
          have had quite a lot of that kind of "explanation" from you.

          J4: Maybe if you were not so caught up in your feigned runtiness you might
          have been able to comprehend my points. Since that is all you seem capabile
          of I have better things to do.




          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Regan Power
          J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from time immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today. That along
          Message 4 of 24 , Apr 28, 2006
            J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from
            time immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today.
            That along with an inability to see the same history in a new light that is
            different from their present understanding, as you so graciously pointed out
            above, even when the differences are coming at them from a many different
            directions.

            R3: Hey, where do you get the right to insult the entire male sub-species?
            If it was not for the males who you are deprecating, you would not be here
            today to deprecate them! What qualifies you to stand in judgement over the
            understanding of the entire male population of the earth since "time
            immortal"? Do you even know what all men since time immortal understand?
            I think you should cut the pretense of being omniscient, Jahnets. You make
            too many mistakes to carry that off here.

            J4: Seeing as you did not explain what it is in the above statement that
            makes you assume that I am insulting the whole male sub-species, I'm going
            to guess it is the way in which I wrote Hu-man as He-man. If you do a little
            bit of research you will find Hu means He in Hebrew and was another name for
            Kether. I was simply being more specific as to what and who our race was
            named after... Oh and it does include the female of the species I believe.

            R4: When are you going to stop playing these dishonest word-games with us,
            Jahnets? You know full well that English is the language of commerce at
            this forum. He-man is a standard English term which is listed in the
            dictionary and it does not mean "human". As you surely must know, it refers
            specifically to men. So you were not being "more specific" in fact.
            Instead, you were misleading us.

            However, in view of your self-explanation above, I do take back what
            I said about your insulting the entire male sub-species. I now see that I
            should have applied my criticism to your insulting the entire human race,
            females of the species included.


            J4: .......Regan, just because I do not accept your jejune arguments does
            not mean I believe I am omniscient,

            R4: My attribution of pretentions of omniscience to you was not based on
            any arguments of mine that I am asking you to accept, jejune or not. It was
            based on your presumption of the capacity to judge the entire male human
            sub-species as if you knew what it has understood "from time immortal",
            which I realise I must now ammend to include the entire female sub-species
            as well.


            J4: .....personally I think the word philosopher would be a better
            description of me since reading, thinking and meditating are where most of
            my knowledge comes from.

            R4: Philosophers are concerned with knowing universal truth, Jahnets. Is
            that what you want to know?


            J4: Maybe if you were not so caught up in your feigned runtiness you might
            have been able to comprehend my points. Since that is all you seem capabile
            of I have better things to do.

            R4: "feigned runtiness"? Oh, no. If you perceived me as displaying
            "runtiness", you created that illusion all by yourself. I can't imagine why
            you would do that. But never mind. I'm not concerned to understand the
            intricacies of your internal psychology. That's a job for you, I would
            think - if you haven't got better things to do, that is.

            Regan
            _____


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Jahnets
            To: Ufodiscussion
            Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 7:11 PM
            Subject: Re: [ufodiscussion] The Radiant Wisdom Stone




            J3: ......The he-man races facts and their understanding of them from
            time
            immortal is more than likely the reason they are so screwed up today. That
            along with an inability to see the same history in a new light that is
            different from their present understanding, as you so graciously pointed out
            above, even when the differences are coming at them from a many different
            directions.

            R3: Hey, where do you get the right to insult the entire male sub-species?
            If it was not for the males who you are deprecating, you would not be here
            today to deprecate them! What qualifies you to stand in judgement over the
            understanding of the entire male population of the earth since "time
            immortal"? Do you even know what all men since time immortal understand?
            I think you should cut the pretense of being omniscient, Jahnets. You make
            too many mistakes to carry that off here.

            J4: Seeing as you did not explain what it is in the above statement that
            makes you assume that I am insulting the whole male sub-species, I'm going
            to guess it is the way in which I wrote Hu-man as He-man. If you do a little
            bit of research you will find Hu means He in Hebrew and was another name for
            Kether. I was simply being more specific as to what and who our race was
            named after... Oh and it does include the female of the species I believe.
            Regan, just because I do not accept your jejune arguments does not mean I
            believe I am omniscient, personally I think the word philosopher would be a
            better description of me since reading, thinking and meditating are where
            most of my knowledge comes from.

            J3: Regan you have had plenty of explanation......

            R3: Well, that depends on what you mean by "explanation", doesn't it? If,
            by the term, you mean the flat assertion of your belief as though it were a
            matter of obvious fact which anyone but an idiot or a wilfully disagreeable
            person would accept and concur with unconditionally, then yes, I suppose I
            have had quite a lot of that kind of "explanation" from you.

            J4: Maybe if you were not so caught up in your feigned runtiness you might
            have been able to comprehend my points. Since that is all you seem capabile
            of I have better things to do.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.