13 - The Da Vinci Code 
	Fiasco
	
	We have spoken much of the Grail in this book because it is the goal or quest 
	of the individual. 
	
	 
	
	For this reason it is seen as central to the symbols of 
	the secret societies. There has recently been a lot of excitement about the 
	Grail - a cyclical phenomena in humanity for the past 2,000 years. There are 
	huge implications today with the Grail being a secret of various secret 
	societies and I want to investigate this before we move on.
	
	One question regarding the Holy Grail that the early medieval writers asked 
	was “whom does it serve?” Well, let’s have a look at the current Grail world 
	and see if it is serving us - or are we serving it? We shall also discover 
	just who it is behind this fiasco that has been manipulating the story from 
	the very earliest of times.
	
	Very briefly and for those among us who have been on the planet Sanity for 
	the last few years, the Da Vinci Code is a fiction based around a man who 
	discovers a code that reveals the true identity of the Holy Grail to be 
	nothing more than the very bloodline of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene.
	
	Unfortunately the author of this work, Dan Brown, claimed his now infamous 
	book to be based upon real factual organizations and events. This could not 
	be farther from the truth.
	
	Let’s take it apart.
	 
	
	
	
	Priory of Sion
	This supposedly ancient and enigmatic group allegedly once had Leonardo da 
	Vinci himself as a Grand Master, not to mention several other notables such 
	as Nicolas Flamel and Isaac Newton. 
	
	 
	
	However, there is no truth in it at all. Sion was the name of a hill nearby the residences of Pierre Plantard and 
	Gerade de Sede - the two original creators of the Priory of Sion hoax.
	
	The documents of the Priory secreted in the Biblioteque Nationale in Paris 
	have been proven to be forgeries. In fact, the only truthful copies of 
	anything for Mr. Plantard in the Paris Library are newsletters from the 
	1950s for a rather boring housing association, complaining about the state 
	of the streets - and even this is in extremely poor French.
	
	All the instigators of this surrealist hoax have admitted their creation on 
	record. On the one hand they said it was a surrealist joke; on the other, a 
	kind of egotistical ploy to be accepted by society. Yet the world still goes 
	mad with every new bloodline myth.
	 
	
	
	
	Sang Real
	One of the main pieces of evidence for the books about the bloodline of 
	Christ, from Holy Blood, Holy Grail to the Templar Revelation, has been the 
	interpretation of the original term used for the Holy Grail - San Graal.
	
	 
	
	In 
	the 1980s book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent et al, we find 
	that it is interpreted differently, placing the g from graal onto the end of 
	san, making sang real. This then translates as royal or holy blood. 
	Mistaking a simple error by a 15th century writer - the only time the error 
	was ever made until the 1980s - an entire theory is based upon something 
	that was simply not true.
	
	 
	
	Sir Walter Skeat, one of the greatest etymologists 
	in England, said, 100 years ago, that this error was “very early falsified,” 
	and for what ends he did not know. 
	
	 
	
	He pointed out that the original concept 
	meant “mixing bowl,” which relates entirely with the theory I put forward in 
	The Serpent Grail.
	 
	
	
	
	Leonardo da Vinci
	So, now that we know the true etymology of San Graal and that the Priory of 
	Sion never existed, we should also know that da Vinci could not have been a 
	grand master of a nonexistent order that protected a secret that also didn’t 
	exist.
	 
	
	
	
	The Holy Chalice in St.Peter’s Rome
	 
	
	In fact, all the historical background and information on da Vinci reveals 
	that he was a skilled and wonderful artist - no great revelation there.
	
	However, there are those strange elements of his paintings, which the Da 
	Vinci Code and other works of fiction pick up on. Take the female-looking 
	character in the Last Supper, for instance: Many have pointed to the fact 
	that this individual looks remarkably feminine. Well, he does. Others have 
	pointed to the Mona Lisa as being not quite feminine enough, and that surely 
	the sitter must have been a boy. 
	
	 
	
	Using these assumptions many have claimed 
	that da Vinci was, therefore, homosexual. It is more and more amusing by the 
	day just how far this rubber band can be stretched, before it comes hurtling 
	back and hits somebody in the face.
	
	So what is the truth? Is that a lady in the Last Supper? No.
	
	There was a tradition of painting the disciple whom Christ loved, John the 
	Evangelist, as a slightly boyish individual, thereby bringing questions to 
	the mind of many as to whether Jesus was gay.
	
	I discovered this to be part of an ancient Gnostic tradition whereby the two 
	Johns (John the Baptist and John the Evangelist) were two sides to the 
	duality - male and female, positive and negative - which needed to be 
	rejoined in order to be complete. Therefore, John the Evangelist was 
	perceived as the feminine principle in this relation, and John the Baptist 
	was the manly, bearded, wild figure.
	
	It was also part of the hidden tradition of the painter’s guild of the time 
	to include androgynous elements within their paintings - hence Mona Lisa 
	seeming a little boyish. This androgynous element is there a symbol of the 
	third force, the union of opposites mentioned before, of man and woman, of 
	male and female, of the two sides of our mind that need to be brought into 
	union once again to form the perfect human. 
	
	 
	
	There is no evidence whatsoever 
	pointing to da Vinci being involved in any secret society, but the theories 
	of the union of opposites was a rising current in the renaissance world in 
	which he lived, and so that influence would have been absorbed by this 
	perfectionist of a painter.
	 
	
	 
	
	Did Jesus and Mary Marry and Have Children?
	Who would have thought that such a simple question would raise such a 
	controversy and even be taken seriously? To answer this one we need to break 
	it down.
	
	Firstly, if Jesus married Mary Magdalene then we have to admit that Jesus 
	and Mary existed in the first place. Although we have a substantial amount 
	of textual evidence for these biblical characters, this is due to the sheer 
	amount of copying being carried out hundreds of years after the supposed 
	event. We have no actual texts naming either character from the period; most 
	of the texts date to hundreds of years after.
	
	Even if we do admit that these people were real, then we would have to admit 
	that Jesus did walk on water, cast out demons into pigs, and die and 
	resurrect. That, or we would have another option: That the character of 
	Jesus, just like that of Robin Hood and King Arthur, was based upon a real 
	man somewhere, and all the extra mythical and mystical elements were added 
	into the story. Just as Robin married Marion (Mary), and Arthur married 
	Guinevere, so too in this mythical way, Jesus may have married Mary - even 
	though there is no textual evidence for this.
	
	Marion and Mary are the same and imply water and wisdom. Guinevere comes 
	from similar roots, especially as the queen of heaven, which was a title for 
	Mary the mother of Jesus and Isis the mother of Horus. And, as many scholars 
	have pointed out, the two Marys may be amalgamations of a much older myth.
	
	Guinevere is also the queen of serpents and, therefore, knowledge and 
	wisdom, and her name is related in etymology to Eve, which means female 
	serpent and is an indication of wisdom.
	
	Just as the early Christian Church was forming groups such as the Gnostic 
	Ophites or serpent worshippers, raising their communion cup to the good 
	serpent, they were also splitting the threefold mother goddess - Mary - into 
	distinct parts. First the Mother Mary, then the Sister Mary, and then Mary 
	Magdalene, a mysterious element, and we shall see why.
	
	Mary the mother is Isis the mother of Horus. As Horus is the son and in fact 
	reincarnation of Osiris, so Isis or Mary is also his sister and lover. She 
	is all three, the feminine trinity. Mary Magdalene therefore is the hidden 
	lover of Jesus who is both God and the son of God, just like Horus. And all 
	of this mystery tradition relates back to the ancient serpent cult, as Isis, 
	Osiris, and Horus had strong associations with the creative, wise, and 
	immortal serpent.
	
	Jesus was eventually likened to the Mosaic “brazen serpent in the 
	wilderness” and imaged hundreds of times as a serpent upon the cross. Here 
	we have that parallel with Arthur, whose name, Pendragon, means “head 
	serpent” or “head of the serpent.”
	
	Now we can see with just these few examples that there is a real code afoot 
	- an ancient code going right back into ancient Egypt and beyond, through 
	Osiris and Isis and to Enki and Ninkhursag in Sumeria and Mesopotamia, who 
	were known themselves as serpent priests or doctors.
	
	But what is this code telling us?
	
	Simply that in order to give birth to our own messiah or anointing, or in 
	order to save ourselves, we need to be in union with wisdom, which is 
	symbolized as both water and the serpent - hence Arthur Pendragon and his 
	wife the queen of serpents, or the early Enki and Ninkhursag, who were 
	serpent deities or Shining Ones and were therefore symbols of enlightenment.
	
	As God was upon the face of the waters of the deep in Genesis, so too must 
	we submerge ourselves in wisdom to bring about the divine creation within 
	us.
	
	So, now we understand that Jesus and Mary, in union, could be a metaphor or 
	a copy of this ancient system. But what are we left with?
	
	There are characters such as Yeshua who, it seems, may have been a real 
	character of the 1st century or thereabouts, and who did preach a new 
	Gnosis. But, there was also Apollonius of Tyana.
	 
	
	 
	
	Apollonius of Tyana
	He was born in the 3rd or 4th year B.C. in Tyana in Cappadocia. 
	
	 
	
	At age 16, 
	he apparently became a disciple of Pythagoras, renouncing flesh, wine, and 
	women (so he obviously could not have been that clever). He wore no shoes 
	and let his hair and beard grow long - the first hippy.
	
	He soon became a reformer and fixed his abode in the Temple of Aesculapius, 
	who was a serpent healing deity and is still seen in the sky as Ophiucus, 
	the serpent handler. Here it was said that many sick people came to be cured 
	by him, and so we can only conclude that he learned the methods of healing 
	from this serpent-worshipping cult.
	
	Apollonius was claimed to have been a wise man, which is probably due to the 
	fact that the Nagas of Kashmir in India taught him. These Nagas were the 
	followers of the serpent cult found across the globe and often known in the 
	West as Ophites - the very early Christian Gnostics who perpetuated the 
	hidden wisdom of unification of the opposites. 
	
	 
	
	These Ophites were also 
	connected to the Essene community, otherwise known as followers of Isis and 
	who worshipped the serpent, and who are picked out by scholars to be the 
	very people who created the Christ myth.
	
	The biographer of Apollonius, Philostratos, tells us of his journey to 
	Kashmir and the “emerald valley set in a rim of pearls” and of the tales 
	that Apollonius told to his trusted friend, Damus, of dragons that lived in 
	the hills, meaning the Naga serpent sages.
	
	The hill where these wise men lived was defended on all sides by immense 
	piles of rocks. As soon as the travelers had dismounted, a messenger from 
	one of the Masters appeared, wearing, of all things, a serpentine Caduceus 
	on his brow indicating the 6th chakra of the kundalini or coiled serpent 
	enlightenment process. 
	
	 
	
	Platitudes were given, and in conversation, 
	Apollonius learned that these Nagas had delivered their wisdom to the 
	Egyptians and that Cush,
	
		
		“was inhabited by the Ethiopians, an Indian nation.”
		
	
	
	We can only take this to mean that the idea of serpent-worship found a 
	brotherhood in Ethiopia, and it only became named after the serpent 
	following influence from the Naga sages of India.
	
	Apollonius more than passed on wisdom wherever he went, and according to 
	many he lived to be well over 100 years old. Others say that he never died 
	at all, but simply disappeared from view, much like Nagajurna (who gained 
	his wisdom from the same sources and is a possible original of John). This 
	idea of never dying often tends to imply that the “secret Gnostic wisdom” of 
	the sage continued in a sect of some kind - in this case, most likely the 
	Gnostic Ophites.
	
	According to theosophist H.P. Blavatsky, a wise prince of India, a Naga, 
	skilled in magic, made seven rings for the seven planets, which he gave to 
	Apollonius. The great sage wore one for every day, and it was via these, it 
	is said, that he maintained good health and long life. Of course, it may be 
	that he was very small, lived in a mound, and was called Bilbo.
	
	In the Valley of Kashmir, where Apollonius went, there is a place called 
	SriNagar, meaning serpent king. 
	
	 
	
	Founded by the Buddhist King Asoka in 300 
	B.C. there is a local tradition that a great sage or adept came from Europe 
	in the 1st century and eventually died there. Some have said that this was 
	Apollonius, others that it was Jesus himself. There may be some truth in 
	this, as Philostratos does mention a “Temple of the Sun,” which matches very 
	closely with one just a few miles away from SriNagar called the Temple of 
	Martland.
	
	Aurelian vowed to erect temples and statues to his honor, “for was there 
	ever any thing among men more holy, venerable, noble, and divine than 
	Apollonius? He restored life to the dead; he did and spoke many things 
	beyond human reach” (The Magus by Francis Barrett).
	
	Truly, temples and statues were erected to Apollonius in many places, 
	including his own town of Tyana, even though later Christians destroyed many 
	of them. Unlike Jesus, there is evidence to prove that Apollonius actually 
	existed. As Moncure Conway said in his book Modern Thought, “The world has 
	been for a long time engaged in writing lives of Jesus.” Even though they 
	were writing about a man with no provenance.
	
	In the fourth gospel it is said: “There are also many other things that 
	Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that 
	even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. 
	Amen.”
	
	The library of such books has grown since then. But when we come to examine 
	them, one startling fact confronts us: All these books relate to a person 
	concerning whom there does not exist a single scrap of contemporary 
	information - not one! 
	
	 
	
	Nobody can say with any conviction in truth, and not 
	faith, that Jesus was a real person.
	 
	
	
	
	Rostau Modern Mound
	
	
	On the other hand and by accepted tradition, Apollonius was born in the 
	reign of Augustus, the great literary age of the nation of which he was a 
	subject.
	
	 
	
	In the Augustan age, historians flourished; poets, orators, 
	critics, and travelers abounded. Yet not one of them mentions the name of 
	Jesus Christ, much less any incident of his life. Jesus left us nothing in 
	writing, although there is a growing speculation that the Gospel of Thomas 
	was written by his hand. This is growing due to modern Christian propaganda. 
	If, indeed, he existed, then he traveled only in Judea and Egypt. 
	
	 
	
	Apollonius 
	traveled extensively and wrote extensively. 
	
	 
	
	The Emperor Marcus Aurelius 
	admitted that it was to Apollonius that he owed his own philosophy, and 
	erected temples and statues in his honor. No statues or temples were erected 
	to Jesus.
	
	Faust said, “Everyone knows that the Gospels were written neither by Jesus 
	nor by his apostles, but long after their time by some unknown persons, who, 
	judging well that they would hardly be believed when telling of things they 
	had not seen themselves, headed their narratives with the names of the 
	apostles or disciples contemporaneous with the latter.”
	
	Conversely, the written record of the life of Apollonius is very sound, and 
	Philostratos, who wrote the Life of Apollonius, was the close friend of 
	Damus, who had related the whole thing in person.
	
	Philostratos said: 
	
		
		Some consider him as one of the Magi, because he 
	conversed with the Magi of Babylon and the Brahmans of India and the 
	Gymnosophists of Egypt. But even his wisdom is reviled, as being acquired by 
	the magic art, so erroneous are the opinions formed of him. 
		 
		
		Whereas 
	Empedocles and Pythagoras and Democritus, though they conversed with the 
	same Magi, and advanced many paradoxical sentiments, have not fallen under 
	the like imputation. 
		 
		
		Even Plato, who traveled in Egypt, and blended with his 
	doctrines many opinions collected there from the priests and prophets, 
	incurred not such a suspicion, though above all men on account of his 
	superior wisdom.
	
	
	But the end was near. 
	
	 
	
	The very fact that Apollonius was in danger of 
	usurping the “idea” of Christ with his own “factual” life caused much 
	consternation among the early Christians. Justin Martyr, one of the Church 
	Fathers of the 2nd century, said, 
	
		
		“How is it that the talismans by 
	Apollonius have power over certain members of creation, for they prevent, as 
	we have seen, the fury of the waves, the violence of the winds, and the 
	attacks of wild beasts. And whilst Our Lord’s miracles are preserved by 
	tradition alone, those of Apollonius are most numerous, and actually 
	manifested in present facts, so as to lead astray all beholders?”
	
	
	The book by Philostratos was therefore, and not surprisingly, kept back from 
	translation and distribution.
	
	 
	
	In fact, the books of the New Testament did 
	not appear until at the very least 100 years after the Life of Apollonius. 
	Even the birth of Apollonius bears some remarkable similarities to the 
	fictional life of Christ. 
	
	 
	
	While his mother was pregnant with Apollonius, 
	Proteus, the Egyptian god appeared to her and said, 
	
		
		“Thou shalt bring forth 
	me!” 
	
	
	The mother of Apollonius was to bring forth a god.
	
	Incidentally, Proteus was known to take the form of a snake, and so wisdom 
	gave birth to the real Christ.
	
	Perhaps the fact that so much was written about Apollonius made it 
	impossible to “use” him as the new religious icon. The new creation of the 
	Christian Church needed a fresh start, which would include as many elements 
	of other Pagan beliefs as possible in order to maximize its effectiveness. 
	According to Phillimore, Apollonius actually founded a church and a 
	community, made up of his disciples.
	
	 
	
	It is highly likely that these were 
	connected to a branch of the Essene, known as the Therapeuts and Nazarenes.
	
	Indeed there was a group known as the Apolloniei, the adherents of 
	Apollonius, who actually survived some centuries after his death. These 
	constituted what became the Christian Church, after the Council of Nicaea - 
	so Apollonius did indeed begin Christianity, based upon serpentine myths and 
	traditions of the oldest order.
	
	Eunapius stated that Philostratos should have called his book “The 
	Sojourning of a God Among Men.” Instead Philostratos’ book was titled the 
	Life of Apollonius - and once the decision had been made to plump for the 
	newly created Christ, the name Apollonius was repressed. It is basically 
	because of books such as the one of Philostratos that the ancient libraries 
	at places such as Alexandria were torched. Destroy the evidence of the 
	opposition and there appears to be no opposition. 
	
	 
	
	As Dr. Lardner pointed out 
	in his book, Credibility of the Gospels:
	
		
		It is manifest, therefore, that Philostratos compared Apollonius and 
	Pythagoras; but I do not see that he endeavored to make him a rival of Jesus
		Christ. Philostratos had never once mentioned our Savior, or the Christians, 
	his followers; neither in this long work, nor in the Lives of the 
	Sophists... 
		 
		
		There is not so much as an obscure or general description of any 
	men met with by him, whom any can suspect to be Christians of any 
	denomination, either Catholics or heretics.
	
	
	However, the same is true of Apollonius, who is not mentioned in the New 
	Testament. Or is he? 
	
	 
	
	In 1st Corinthians 3:3–6 it says,
	
		
		“for while one saith, 
	I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal? Who, then, is Paul, and whom Apollos, 
	but ministers, by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I 
	have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.”
	
	
	I could so easily have overlooked this had it not been for a chance 
	discovery of an ancient version of 1st Corinthians found in a French 
	monastery by a Huguenot soldier entitled the Codex Bezae. 
	
	 
	
	The name Apollos 
	is spelled Apollonius! In the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the name Apollo in 
	this context can also mean Apollonius. Indeed this Apollos was said to have 
	even visited Paul (the apostle who did not suffer from snakebites) and he 
	was called an Alexandrian Jew. Now we can understand how Paul managed to 
	“see” the Lord on the road to Damascus.
	
	 
	
	It is possible that Apollonius 
	brought back a new gospel of Chrishna or Christna from the Kashmir 
	interlude, and it was this that gave birth to the Christ of Chrishna and the 
	idea of Christ being the serpent god.
	
	In many respects this answers the issue of Jesus marrying Mary, as this 
	tradition of the uniting of opposites is most profound in the Indian 
	kundalini expressed through the rising serpents upon the rod, which is the 
	third force. This rod became the tree or cross in Christianity with the male 
	Jesus and the female Mary both in association.
	
	The truth of the Da Vinci Code is more real than people know. Jesus and Mary 
	did marry, in the Gnostic sense and not the literal sense. They did spawn a 
	child and he was known simply as Gnosis. 
	
	 
	
	However, the evil twin brother 
	known as Catholicism tried to wipe him out, as Seth tried to destroy Osiris, 
	or Mordred killed Arthur, or the sheriff of Nottingham killed Robin. In the 
	end, Seth, Mordred, and the sheriff were themselves brought down, so what 
	will be the verdict on the Catholic Church?
	
	 
	
	It is possible that a Gnostic 
	revival could occur now that the Da Vinci Code has done us the service of 
	raising the questions of the doubtful validity of the literal Jesus myth. It 
	is possible, but, with greed, lust, and hatred being powerful tools in the 
	mind of men, I doubt it. Maybe, by understanding that religion should be 
	more than the rules written by man, we will question our existence again - 
	looking for an answer we thought we already had.
	
	At the center of each one of us, at the very core, there is a place where we 
	become conscious of our unconscious state. 
	
	 
	
	Where we wake up to a whole new 
	world that resides within us. This inner world is at peace and is in perfect 
	balance. It is interconnected through the world of the subatomic particle to 
	the very universe. Just as our eyes see the sun, our unconscious senses feel 
	the warmth and absorb the goodness, without our conscious mind giving it a 
	second thought.
	
	 
	
	There is a whole world within us untapped and unknown to 
	modern science, but one that was perfectly understood by the ancients, and 
	they left clues for us to decipher. They understood how to remain conscious 
	and to perceive the unconscious world of senses, and they gave voice and 
	imagery to their experiences, and these became spirits, demons, and gods. We 
	have a lot yet to learn, that has already been forgotten. 
	
	 
	
	There is a world 
	full of Gnosis awaiting us.
	
	The question now is, whom does it serve?
 
	
	
	Back to Contents