|
by
Sir Laurence Gardner
Kt St Gm., KCD, KT St A.
July 1998
from
NexusMagazine Website
Recovered through
WayBackMachine Website
|
The true Grail bloodline originated with
the Anunnaki gods in
southern Sumeria at least 6,000 years ago and was sustained by
ingestion of an alchemical substance called ’Star Fire’ |
Part 1
|
Part 2
|
Part 3
Part 1
It is now nearly two years since my book,
Bloodline of the Holy
Grail, was published, and for those of you who
have not read this, the investigation is essentially concerned with the
Messianic Bloodline as it has descended through the family of
Jesus
Christ down to the present day.
It is also concerned with comparing
the New Testament Gospels with the first-hand historical accounts of
the era, as related in both the Roman and Jewish archives. In this
regard, it details how the eventual Christian High Church
corrupted
and manipulated the early records to suit its own political agenda.
Despite the contrived doctrine that Jesus was born of a virgin and
was the ’one and only’ son of God (definitions that did not feature
in the original pre-Roman texts), the New Testament Gospels of
Matthew and Luke actually give details of Jesus’ descendant lineage
from David of Israel and the Kings of Judah. This has led to the one
question I have been asked more than any other during the past
months.
The question (in its various forms) asks quite simply:
What
was so special about this Bloodline in the first place?
Given that the dynastic succession from Jesus has been expressly
prominent in sovereign and political affairs through 2,000 years -
with the family constantly supporting constitutional democracy
against control by the
Church establishment - its status rests upon
the fact that Jesus was a lineal descendant of King David.
But, what was it that made the line of David so important, and so
different from any other? It was this very question which set me on
the trail for my next book,
Genesis of the Grail Kings, which tells
the story of the Messianic line from the very beginning.
The Bible explains that the Bloodline story began with Adam and Eve,
from whose third son, Seth, evolved a line which progressed through
Methuselah and Noah, and eventually to Abraham who became the Great
Patriarch of the Hebrew nation. It then relates that Abraham brought
his family westwards out of Mesopotamia (present-day
Iraq) to the
land of Canaan (or Palestine), from where some of his descendants
moved into Egypt. After a few generations they moved back into
Canaan where, in time, the eventual David of Bethlehem became King
of the newly defined Kingdom of Israel.
If viewed as it is presented in the scriptures, this is a
fascinating saga; but there is nothing anywhere to indicate why the
ancestral line of David and his heirs was in any way special. In
fact, quite the reverse is the case. His ancestors are portrayed as
a succession of wandering territory-seekers who are seen to be of no
particular significance until the time of King David. Their biblical
history bears no comparison to, say, the contemporary Pharaohs of
ancient Egypt. Their significance, we are told, comes from the fact
that (from the time of Abraham) they were designated as ’God’s
chosen people’. But even this leaves us wondering, because,
according to the scriptures, their God led them through nothing but
a succession of famines, wars and general hardship - and, on the
face of it, these early Hebrews do not appear to have been too
bright!
We are faced, therefore, with a couple of possibilities. Either
David was not of this Abraham succession at all, and was simply
grafted into the list by later writers. Or maybe we have been
presented with a very corrupted version of the family’s early
history - a version that was specifically designed to uphold the
emergent Jewish faith, rather than to represent historical fact.
In consideration of this, I was reminded of precisely what I had
found with the New Testament. The Gospel texts that have been in the
public domain for centuries bear little relation to the first-hand
accounts of the era. The New Testament, as we know it, was
compiled
by the 4th-century bishops to support the newly contrived Christian
belief. But, what if the Jewish scribes had previously done exactly
the same thing?
Clearly, I had to get back to the more ancient writings in order to
find any anomalies. The problem was that, even if this were
possible, the earliest Hebrew writings (which were rehashed many
centuries later) were themselves only written between the 6th and
the 1st centuries BC, so they were not likely to be that authentic
in their telling of history from thousands of years before. Indeed,
it was plain that this would be the case, because when these books
were first written their express purpose was to convey a history
which upheld the principles of the Jewish faith - a faith that did
not emerge until well into the ancestral story.
Given that the first group of these books was written while the Jews
were held captive in Mesopotamian Babylon in the
6th century BC, it
is apparent that Babylon was where the original records were then
held. In fact, from the time of Adam, through some 19 said
generations down to Abraham, the whole of Old Testament patriarchal
history was Mesopotamian. More specifically, the history was from Sumer in southern Mesopotamia, where the ancient Sumerians did
indeed refer to the grasslands of the Euphrates delta as the Eden.
When researching for Bloodline of the Holy Grail, I found that good
sources for some background information were the various Gospels and
texts that were not selected for inclusion in the canonical New
Testament. Perhaps, I thought, the same might apply to the Old
Testament. The
books of Enoch and Jubilees, for example, were among
those not included.
A further book, to which attention is specifically drawn in the Old
Testament books of Joshua and Samuel, is the Book of Jasher. But
despite its apparent importance to the Hebrew writers, it was not
included in the final selection.
Two other works are also cited in the Bible. The Book of Numbers
draws our attention to the Book of The Wars of Jehovah. And in the
Book of Isaiah we are directed towards the Book of the Lord.
What are these books? Where are these books? They are all mentioned
in the Bible (which means they all pre-date the Old Testament), and
they are all cited as being important. So, why did the editors see
fit to exclude them when the selection was made?
In pursuing an answer to this question and in studying the substance
of the Old Testament prior to its corruption, one fact which becomes
increasingly clear is that in English-language Bibles the definition
’Lord’ is used in a general context, but in earlier texts a positive
distinction is drawn between ’Jehovah’ and ’the Lord’.
It has often been wondered why the biblical God of the Hebrews led
them through trials and tribulations, floods and disasters, when
(from time to time) he appears to have performed with a quite
contrary and merciful personality. The answer is that, although now
seemingly embraced as ’the One God’ by the Jewish and Christian
churches, there was originally a distinct difference between the
figures of Jehovah and the Lord. They were, in fact,
quite separate
deities. The god referred to as ’Jehovah’ was traditionally a
storm
god, a god of wrath and vengeance, whereas the god referred to as
’the Lord’ was a god of fertility and wisdom.
So, what was the name given to the Lord in the early writings? It
was, quite simply, the prevailing Hebrew word for ’Lord’, and
the word was ’Adon’. As for the apparent personal name of
Jehovah, this
was not used in the early days, and even the Bible tells that the
God of Abraham was called ’El Shaddai’, which means
’Lofty
Mountain’.
The apparent name ’Jehovah’ came from the original Hebrew stem
YHWH,
which meant ’I am that I am’ - said to be a statement made by God to
Moses on Mount Sinai, hundreds of years after the time of Abraham.
’Jehovah’ was therefore not a name at all, and early texts refer
simply to ’El Shaddai’ and to his opposing counterpart, ’Adon’.
To the Canaanites, these gods were respectively called
’El Elyon’
and ’Baal’ - which meant precisely the same things (’Lofty Mountain’
and ’Lord’).
In our modern Bibles, the definitions ’God’ and ’Lord’ are used and
intermixed throughout, as if they were one and the same character,
but originally they were not. One was a vengeful god (a
people-hater), and the other was a social god (a people-supporter),
and they each had wives, sons and daughters.
The old writings tell us that throughout the patriarchal era the
Israelites endeavored to support Adon, the Lord, but at every turn
El Shaddai (the storm god, Jehovah) retaliated with floods,
tempests, famines and destruction. Even at the very last (around 600
BC), the Bible explains that Jerusalem was overthrown at Jehovah’s
bidding and tens of thousands of Jews were taken into Babylonian
captivity simply because their King (a descendant of King David) had
erected altars in veneration of Baal, the Adon.
It was during the course of this captivity that the Israelites
weakened and finally conceded. They decided to succumb to the ’God
of Wrath’, and developed a new religion out of sheer fear of his
retribution. It was at this time that the name of Jehovah first
appeared - and this was only 500 years before the time of Jesus.
Subsequently, the Christian Church took Jehovah on board as well,
calling him simply ’God’ - and all the hitherto social concepts of
the Adon were totally discarded. The two religions were henceforth
both faiths of fear. Even today, their followers are classified as
’God-fearing’.
So, where does that leave us? It leaves us knowing that within an
overall pantheon of gods and goddesses (many of whom are actually
named in the Bible), there were two predominant and opposing gods.
In different cultures they have been known as ’El Elyon’ and
’Baal’;
’El Shaddai’ and ’Adon’; ’Arhiman’ and
’Mazda’; ’Jehovah’ and
’Lord’; ’God’ and ’Father’. But these styles are all titular; they
are not personal names.
So who precisely were they? To find the answer we have to look no
further than where these gods were actually operative, and the old
Canaanite texts (discovered in Syria in the 1920s) tell us that
their courts were in the Tigris-Euphrates valley in Mesopotamia, in
the Sumerian Eden delta of the Persian Gulf.
But what did the ancient Sumerians call these two gods? What were
their personal names? We can trace the Sumerian written records back
to about 3700 BC, and they tell us that the gods in question were
brothers. In Sumer, the storm god who eventually became known as
Jehovah was called ’Enlil’ or ’Ilu-kur-gal’ (meaning
’Ruler of the
Mountain’), and his brother, who became Adon, the Lord, was called ’Enki’. This name is really
important to our story because ’Enki’ means
’Archetype’.
The texts inform us that:
-
it was Enlil who brought the Flood
-
it was Enlil who destroyed Ur and Babylon
-
it was Enlil who constantly opposed the education and enlightenment of humankind
Indeed, the
early Syrian texts tell us that it was Enlil who obliterated the
cities of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Dead Sea - not because they were
dens of wickedness, as we are taught, but because they were
great centers of wisdom and learning.
It was Enki, on the other hand, who, despite the wrath of his
brother, granted the Sumerians access to the Tree of Knowledge and
the Tree of Life. It was Enki who set up the escape strategy during
the Flood, and it was Enki who passed over the time-honored
Tables
of Destiny - the tables of scientific law which became the bedrock
of the early mystery schools in Egypt.
Many books talk about the hermetic school of Tuthmosis III of Egypt,
who reigned about 1450 BC. But it is not generally known that the
school he originally inherited was the Royal Court of the Dragon.
This had been founded by the priests of Mendes in about 2200 BC and
was subsequently ratified by the 12th dynasty Queen Sobeknefru.
This sovereign and priestly Order passed from Egypt to the
Kings of
Jerusalem; to the Black Sea Princes of Scythia and into the Balkans
- notably to the Royal House of Hungary, whose King Sigismund
reconstituted the Court just 600 years ago. Today it exists as the
Imperial and Royal Court of the Dragon Sovereignty, and after some
4,000 years it is the oldest sovereign Court in the world.
But what were the earliest aims and ambitions of the Order back in Pharaonic times? They were to perpetuate and advance the alchemical
strength of the Royal Bloodline from Lord Enki, the Archetype.
The kings of the early succession (who reigned in Sumer and
Egypt
before becoming Kings of Israel) were anointed upon coronation with
the fat of the Dragon (the sacred crocodile). This noble beast was
referred to in Egypt as the Messeh (from which derived the Hebrew
verb ’to anoint’), and the kings of this dynastic succession were
always referred to as ’Dragons’, or ’Messiahs’ (meaning
’Anointed
Ones’).
In times of battle, when the armies of different kingdoms were
conjoined, an overall leader was chosen and he was called the
’Great
Dragon’ (the ’King of Kings’) - or, as we better know
the name in its old Celtic form, the ’Pendragon’.
One of the interesting items from the archives of
the Dragon Court
is the origin of the word ’kingship’. It derives from the very
earliest of Sumerian culture, wherein ’kingship’ was identical with
’kinship’ - and ’kin’ means ’blood relative’. In its original form,
’kinship’ was ’kainship’. And the first King of the Messianic Dragon
succession was the biblical Cain (Kain), head of the Sumerian House
of Kish.
On recognizing this, one can immediately see the first anomaly
in
the traditional Genesis story, for the historical line to David and
Jesus was not from Adam and Eve’s son Seth at all. It was from Eve’s
son Cain, whose recorded successors (although given little space in
the Old Testament) were the first great Kings (or Kains) of
Mesopotamia and Egypt.
Two more important features then come to light when reading the
Bible again with this knowledge in mind. We all tend to think of
Cain as being the first son of Adam and Eve, but he was not. Even
the Book of Genesis tells us that he was not, and it confirms how
Eve told Adam that Cain’s father was the Lord. Who was
’the Lord’?
The Lord was Adon, and Adon was Enki. Even outside the Bible, the
writings of the Hebrew Talmud and Midrash make it quite plain that
Cain was not the son of Adam.
So what else have we been wrongly taught about this particular
aspect of history? The Book of Genesis (in its English-translated
form) tells us that Cain was ’a tiller of the ground’. But this is
not what the original texts say at all. What they say is that
Cain
had ’dominion over the Earth’ - which is a rather different matter
when considering his kingly status.
In fact, the Bible translators appear to have had a constant problem
with the word ’Earth’, often translating it to ’ground’,
’clay’ or
’dust’. But the early texts actually referred to ’The Earth’. Even
in the case of Adam and Eve, the translators got it wrong. The Bible
says: ’Male and female he created them, and he called their name
Adam.’ The older writings use the more complete word ’Adama’, which
means ’of the Earth’. But this did not mean they were made of dirt;
it means that they were ’of The Earth’ - or, as the Anchor Hebrew
Bible explains in absolutely precise terms, they were ’Earthlings’.
There is a lot to be said about the story of Adam and Eve and of how
they were the result of clinical cloning. Writers such as
Zechariah Sitchin
have written at some length in this regard, and my new book delves
far more deeply into the subject. I shall not dwell upon this
particular aspect now because I want to move more directly into the
alchemy of the Messianic Bloodline of the Earthly
Dragon Kings. What I will say is that the Sumerian records state
that around 6,000 years ago, Adam and Eve (known then
as ’Atabba’ and ’Ava’, and jointly as the ’Adama’) were purpose-bred for kingship at the
House
of Shimti by Enki and his sister-wife Nin-khursag. In Sumerian, the
word Shi-im-ti meant ’breath-wind-life’.
Adam was certainly not the first man on Earth, but he was the first
of the alchemically devised kingly succession. Nin-khursag was
called ’Lady of the Embryo’ or ’Lady of Life’, and she was the
surrogate mother for Atabba and Ava who were created from human ova
fertilized by the Lord Enki.
It was because of Nin-khursag’s title, Lady of Life, that Ava was
later given the same title by the Hebrews. Indeed, the name Ava (or
Eve) was subsequently said to mean ’Life’. And there is an
interesting parallel here, because in Sumerian the distinction ’Lady
of Life’ was Nin-tî (Nin meaning ’Lady’, and
tî meaning ’Life’).
However, another Sumerian word, ti (with the longer pronunciation,
’tee’), meant ’rib’; and it was by virtue of the Hebrews’
misunderstanding of the two words, tî and ti, that
Eve also became
incorrectly associated with Adam’s rib.
Both Enki and Nin-khursag (along with their brother Enlil, the later
Jehovah) belonged to a pantheon of gods and goddesses referred to as
the Anunnaki, meaning ’Heaven came to Earth’. In fact, the
Grand
Assembly of the Anunnaki (later called the ’Court of the Elohim’) is
mentioned in Psalm 82 wherein Jehovah makes his bid for supreme
power over the other gods.
According to the Dragon tradition, the importance of Cain was that
he was directly produced by Enki and Ava, so his blood was
three-quarters Anunnaki. His half-brothers Hevel and
Satanael
(better known as Abel and Seth) were less than half Anunnaki, being
the offspring of Atabba and Ava (Adam and
Eve).
Cain’s Anunnaki blood was so advanced that it was said that his
brother Abel’s blood was ’Earthbound’ by comparison. Cain, it was
said in the scriptures, ’rose far above Abel’, so that his brother’s
blood was swallowed into the ground. But this original description
was thoroughly mistranslated for our modern Bible, and we are now
told that ’Cain rose up against Abel and spilled his blood upon the
ground’. This is not the same thing at all.
We can now progress our story by considering the oldest Grant of
Arms in sovereign history - a Grant of Arms which denoted the
Messianic Dragon Bloodline for all time. The Sumerians referred to
this insignia as the Gra-al. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? From
biblical history, however, we know it better as the ’Mark of Cain’.
This ’Mark’ is portrayed to us by the Church as if it were some form
of curse. But, knowing what we now know, the Bible does not actually
say this. What it says is that, having got into an argument with
Jehovah over a matter of sovereign observance, Cain feared for his
life. We are then informed that the Lord placed a mark upon
Cain,
swearing sevenfold vengeance against his enemies.
No one has ever really understood why Jehovah should decide to
protect Cain when it was he who held the grievance against him. But
the fact is that Jehovah did not make this decision.
Cain’s
protector was not Jehovah. As stated, the ’Mark’ was settled upon
Cain by the Lord - and the Lord (the Adon) was Cain’s own Father,
Enki.
Few people ever think to enquire about the supposed enemies of Cain
as defined in Genesis. Who could they possibly have been? Where
would they have come from? According to the Bible, only Adam and
Eve, with their sons Cain and Abel, existed - and Cain had
apparently killed Abel. If we are to accept the text as it stands,
there was no one around to be his enemy!
So, what was this Sumerian Gra-al which the Bible calls
’the Mark of
Cain’? It was an emblem dignified as the ’Cup of the Waters’ or the
Rosi-Crucis (the ’Dew Cup’), and it was identified in all records
(including those of Egypt and Phoenicia and in the Hebrew annals) as
being an upright, centered red cross within a circle. Throughout the
ages it was developed and embellished, but it has always remained
essentially the same and is recognized as being the original symbol
of the Holy Grail.
Another anomaly is presented soon afterwards in Genesis when we are
told that Cain found himself a wife. Who on Earth were her parents
if Adam and Eve were the only couple alive? Without confronting this
anomaly at all, Genesis then proceeds to list for us the names of
Cain’s descendants!
It becomes clear from all of this that some very important
information has been edited from the Old Testament narrative.
Clearly there were plenty of other people around at the time and it
is not difficult to find their stories outside the Bible. Quite
apart from the Sumerian annals, even old Hebrew and
early Christian
texts give us far more information in this regard.
In order to further enhance the succession from Cain, he was married
to his half-sister - a pure-bred Anunnaki princess, Luluwa. Her
father was Enki and her mother was Lilith, a granddaughter of
Enlil.
Although not giving the name of Cain’s wife, the Bible does name
their younger son Enoch, while the Sumerian records cite his elder
son and kingly successor, Atûn, who is perhaps better known as
King Etana of Kish.
Etana was said to have ’walked with the gods’, and to have been fed
from the ’Plant of Birth’ (or the ’Tree of Life’, as it is called in
Genesis). Henceforth, the kings of the line were designated as being
the twigs of the Tree - and the ancient word for ’twig’ was
klone
(clone). In later times this ’Plant’ or ’Tree’ was redefined as a
’Vine’, and so the Gra-al, the
Vine and the Messianic Bloodline became conjoined as one in the literature of subsequent ages.
By virtue of their contrived breeding, this kingly succession was
modeled specifically for leadership, and in all aspects of
knowledge, culture, awareness, wisdom and intuition they were highly
advanced against their mundane contemporaries. In order to keep
their blood as pure as possible, they always married within a close
kinship.
It was fully recognized that the prominent gene of the succession
was carried within the blood of the mother. Today we call this the
’mitochondrial DNA’. And so was born a tradition inherited by their
kingly descendants in Egypt and by the later Celtic rulers of
Europe. True kingship, it was maintained, was transferred through
the female, and so kingly marriages were strategically cemented with
maternal half-sisters or first cousins.
Having reached the point where the Plant of Birth is first mentioned
in the records, we are at about 3500 BC; and it is at this point
that we begin to learn how the kingly succession was orally fed with
bodily supplements from the early days. This practice continued for
more than 1,000 years until the nourishment program became wholly
scientific and alchemical.
Before getting into the detail of the kingly diet, it is worth
considering why it was that the all-important Royal Bloodline which
progressed from Cain and his sons was strategically ignored by
the
Hebrews and the Christian Church in favor of their
promoting a
parallel junior line from Adam’s son Seth. Why was it that the
immediate Cainite dynasty was eventually shunned by the fearful
disciples of Enlil-Jehovah?
In the Old Testament Book of Genesis, the lines of descent are given
from Cain and from his half-brother Seth, but it is of interest to
note that through the early generations the names detailed in each
list are pretty much the same, although given in a different order:
Enoch, Yared, Mahalaleel, Methuselah and
Lamech.
In view of this, it has often been suggested that the line from Seth
down to Lamech’s son Noah was (not very cleverly) contrived by the
Bible compilers so as to avoid showing the true descent from Cain to
the time of Noah. If this were the case, then something must have
occurred during the lifetime of Noah to cause the ancestral story to
be veiled by the later writers. The answer is to be found in the
Bible itself.
At that stage in the family’s history, the vengeful Jehovah
apparently warned Noah and his sons against the ingestion of blood -
an edict which became expressly important to the later Jewish way of
life. It has long been a customary Jewish practice to hang meat for
blood-letting before cooking and consumption.
But, in contrast, the Christian faith is especially concerned with
the figurative ingestion of blood. In the Christian tradition it is
customary to take the Communion sacrament (the Mass) wherein
wine is
drunk from the sacred chalice, symbolically representing the blood
of Jesus, the lifeblood of the Messianic Vine.
Could it be, perhaps, that the modern Christian custom is an
unwitting throw-back to some distant pre-Noah ritual which Jehovah
opposed? If so, then since it is known that the chalice is a wholly
female symbol which has been emblematic of the womb from the
earliest times, might this even have been an extract of menstrual
blood? The answer to these questions is ’Yes’. That was precisely
the custom, but it was not so unsavory as it might seem. Indeed,
few of us think to enquire about the ultimate sources of many of
today’s ingested medicines and bodily supplements, and those in the
know would often be reluctant to tell us. The Premarin hormone, for
example, comes from the urine of pregnant mares, while certain
growth hormones and insulin are manufactured from
E. coli, a faecal
bacterium.
The blood extract in question was, in the first instance, not human
but from the sacred Anunnaki lunar essence - that of
Enki’s sister Nin-khursag, the designated Lady of Life. It was defined as
the most
potent of all life-forces and was venerated as being ’Star Fire’. It
was from the womb of Nin-khursag that the kingly line was born, and
it was with her blood, the divine Star Fire, that the Dragon
succession was supplementally fed.
In ancient Egypt, Nin-khursag was called ’Isis’, and by either name
she was the ultimate Mother of the Messianic line, for hers was the
matriarchal gene which constituted the ’Beginning’, the ’Gene-Isis’,
or, as the Greeks identified it, the Genesis.
It is worth reminding ourselves, then, that the biblical edict to
abstain from blood came not from Enki the Wise but from Enlil-Jehovah - the
God of Wrath who had instigated the Flood, had
wrought havoc in Ur and Babylon, and had
endeavored to deceive Adam
by saying that he would die if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge.
This was not a god who liked people, and the Sumerian records are
very clear in this regard. Hence, if he forbade the taking of blood,
this was not likely to have been an edict for the benefit of Noah
and his descendants - it was most probably to their detriment.
In strict terms the original Star Fire was the lunar essence of the
Goddess, but, even in an everyday mundane environment, menstruum
contains the most valuable endocrinal secretions, especially those
of the pineal and pituitary glands. The brain’s pineal gland in
particular was directly associated with the Tree of Life, for this
tiny gland was said to secrete the very essence of active longevity,
called soma, or, as the Greeks called it, ambrosia.
In mystic circles, the menstrual ’flow-er’ (’she who flows’) has
long been the designated ’flower’ and is represented as a
lily or a
lotus. Indeed, the definition ’flow-er’ is the very root of our
modern word ’flower’. In ancient Sumer, the key females of the
Dragon succession were all venerated as lilies, having such names as
Lili, Luluwa, Lilith, Lilutu and Lillette.
In pictorial representation, the Messianic Dragon bore little
relation to the winged, fire-breathing beast of later Western
mythology. It was, in essence, a large-jawed serpent with four legs,
very much like a crocodile or a monitor. This was the sacred Messeh
whose name was ’Draco’. Draco was a divine emblem of the
Egyptian
Pharaohs, a symbol of the Egyptian Therapeutate, of the
Essenes at
Qumran, and was the Bistea Neptunis (the sea serpent) of the
descendant
Merovingian Fisher-Kings in Europe.
In the old Hebrew Bibles, all references to serpents are made by use
of the word nahash (from the stem NHSH); but this usage does not
relate to serpents in the way that we would know them - that is, as
venomous snakes. It relates to serpents in their traditional
capacity as bringers of wisdom and enlightenment, for the word
nahash actually means ’to decipher’ or ’to find out’.
Serpents, in one form or another, were always associated with
wisdom
and healing, and the Trees of Life and Knowledge are customarily
identified with serpents. Indeed, the insignia of many of today’s
medical associations is precisely this image of a serpent coiled
around the Plant of Birth (Tree of Life) - a depiction shown in the
clay reliefs of ancient Sumer to be Enki’s personal emblem.
Interestingly, though, another common emblem for medical relief
organizations depicts two coiled serpents, spiraling around the
winged caduceus of Hermes the magician.
In these instances the true
symbolism of the Star Fire ritual is conveyed, and this symbol can
be traced back to the very origins of the alchemical mystery schools
and gnostic institutions.
|
The records explain that the central staff and entwined serpents
represent the spinal cord and the sensory nervous system. The two
uppermost wings signify the brain’s lateral ventricular structures.
Between these wings, above the spinal column, is shown the small
central node of the pineal gland.
The combination of the central pineal and its lateral wings has long
been referred to as the ’Swan’, and in Grail lore (as in some yogic
circles) the Swan is emblematic of the fully enlightened being. This
is the ultimate realm of consciousness achieved by the mediaeval
Knights of the Swan, as epitomized by such chivalric figures as
Perceval and Lohengrin. |
Most of you are probably quite familiar with the functions of the
pineal and other glands of the endocrinal system.
But for those who
are perhaps not, the pineal is a very small gland, shaped like a
pine cone and about the size of a grain of corn. It is centrally
situated within the brain, although outside the ventricles and not
forming a part of the brain-matter as such.
The pineal gland was thought by the 17th-century French optical
scientist René Descartes to be the seat of the soul - the point at
which the mind and body are conjoined. The ancient Greeks considered
it likewise, and in the 4th century BC Herophilus described the
pineal as an organ which regulated the flow of thought. This gland
has long intrigued anatomists because, while the rest of the brain
is ’double’, the pineal has no counterpart.
In the days of ancient Sumer, the priests of Anu (the father of
Enlil and Enki) perfected and elaborated a ramifying medical science
of living substances, with menstrual Star Fire being an essential
source component. In the first instance, this was pure
Anunnaki
lunar essence called ’Gold of the Gods’, and it was fed only to the
Kings and Queens of the Dragon succession.
Later, however, in Egypt
and Mediterranea, menstrual Star Fire was ritually collected from
sacred virgin priestesses who were venerated as ’Scarlet Women’.
Indeed, the very word ’ritual’ stems from this practice, and from
the word ritu - which defined the sacred ceremony of the ’Red Gold’.
Endocrinal supplements are, of course, still used by today’s organotherapy establishment, but their inherent secretions (such as
melatonin and serotonin) are obtained from the
desiccated glands of
dead animals and they lack the truly important elements which exist
only in live human glandular manufacture.
In the fire symbolism of ancient alchemy, the color ’red’ is
synonymous with the metal ’gold’. In some traditions (including the
Indian tantras), ’red’ is also identifiable with ’black’. Hence, the
goddess Kali is said to be both ’red’ and ’black’. The original
heritage of Kali was, however, Sumerian, and she was said to be
Kalimâth, the sister of Cain’s wife Luluwa.
Kali was a primary princess of the Dragon House, and from her
Star
Fire association she became the goddess of time, seasons, periods
and cycles. Because of this, her name was the root of the word ’calendar’ (kalindar), which is concerned with the divisions of
seasonal time.
In the early days, therefore, the metals of the alchemists were not
common metals but living essences, and the ancient mysteries were of
a physical, not a metaphysical, nature. Indeed, the very word ’secret’ has its origin in the
hidden knowledge of glandular
secretions. Truth was the ritu (the ’redness’ or ’blackness’), and
from the word ritu stems not only ritual but also the words ’rite’,
’root’ and ’red’. The ritu, it was said, reveals itself as physical
matter in the form of the purest and most noble of all metals:
gold.
Hence, gold was deemed an ’ultimate truth’.
Just as the word ’secret’ has its origin in the translation of an
ancient word, so too do other related words have their similar
bases. In ancient Egypt, the word Amen was used to signify
something
hidden or concealed. The word ’occult’ meant pretty much the same
(’hidden from view’), and yet today we use ’Amen’ to
conclude hymns,
while something ’occult’ is deemed sinister. In real terms, however,
they both relate to the word ’secret’, and all three words were, at
one time or another, connected with the mystic science of endocrinal
secretions.
Since Kali was associated with ’black’ (being ’black but
beautiful’), the English word ’coal’ (denoting ’that which is
black’) stems also from her name via the intermediate word kol. In
the Hebrew tradition, Bath-Kol (a Kali counterpart) was called the
’Daughter of the Voice’, and the voice was said to originate during
a female’s puberty. Hence, the womb was associated with the voice,
and Star Fire was said to be the oracular ’Word of the Womb’.
The womb was, therefore, itself the ’utterer’, or the ’uterus’.
The ’Scarlet Women’ were so called because of their being a
direct
source of the priestly Star Fire. They were known in Greek as the
Hierodulai (’Sacred Women’) - a word later transformed (via
mediaeval French into English) to ’harlot’. In the early Germanic
tongue, they were known as Horés - which was later Anglicised to
’whores’. However, the word originally meant, quite simply,
’Beloved
Ones’. As pointed out in good etymological dictionaries, these words
were descriptions of high veneration and were never interchangeable
with such words as ’prostitute’ or ’adulteress’. Their now common
association was, in fact, a wholly contrived strategy of the
mediaeval Roman Church in its bid to denigrate the noble status of
the sacred priestess.
The withdrawal of knowledge of the genuine Star Fire tradition from
the public domain occurred when the science of the early adepts and
later Gnostics (the true pre-Christian Christians) was stifled by
the forgers of historic Christianity. A certain amount of the
original gnosis (or knowledge) is preserved in Talmudic and
rabbinical lore, but, generally speaking, the mainstream Jews and
Christians did all in their power to distort and destroy all traces
of the ancient art.
In addition to being the ’Gold of the Gods’, the
Anunnaki menstruum
was also called the ’Vehicle of Light’, being the ultimate source of
manifestation, and in this regard it was directly equated with the
mystical ’Waters of Creation’ - the flow of eternal wisdom. It was
for this reason that the Rosi-Crucis (the Dew Cup, or
Cup of the
Waters identified as a red cross within a circle) became the
Mark of
Cain, and the subsequent emblem of the kingly succession.
It was said that the Light remained quite dormant in a spiritually unawakened person but that it could be awakened and motivated by the
spiritual energy of self-will, and by constant self-enquiry. This is
not an obvious mental process, but a truly thought-free
consciousness - a formless plane of pure Being.
Go Back
|
Go to Part 2
|
