Were there no Egyptian mysteries?

Peregrin Wildoak, in a response to my blogpost on the Primordial vs. Temporal Traditions, wrote a couple of days ago:

The way ancient and pre-modern folk understood the world is very different to the way we understand it.

We cannot easily escape our culture and the paradigm with live in, no matter how much we try.

To down play on the Traditionalist concept of original Egyptian Mysteries, referring to it as a “overlaying the mythic Egypt atop the historical Egypt”, he cited his own buddy Caroline Tully, what he refers to as the “Pagan scholar”, and her book Ten Years of Triumph of the Moon, in which she critizies the authencity of McGregor Mathers’ Rites of Isis in Paris, which she refers to as a “reconstruction of the Egyptian Mysteries”. She writes:

Undoubtedly inspired by Herodotus’ application of the Greek term ‘mysteries’ to Egyptian religion (Histories. 2.171), Diodorus’ erroneous claim of an Egyptian origin for the Greek Mysteries of Eleusis when in fact it was the other way around (Lib. 1.29.2,4; Martin 1987: 78), Apuleius’ Metamorphoses (11.21–6), and Plutarch’s mention of Isis and Osiris initiations and mystic rites (De Iside. 2, 25, 28), the main problem with the Mathers’ attempt at creating this initiatory system was that there were no Egyptian Mysteries to begin with.

While there certainly were Graeco-Roman mysteries of the Hellenised Isis, the idea that there were ancient Egyptian ‘mysteries’ originated with Greeks like Herodotus misunderstanding the Egyptian cult of Osiris at Abydos and interpreting it as ‘mysteric’ because it was carried out by specially consecrated priesthood, unlike the part-time priests of Greece (Burkert 1987: 39–40; Lefkowitz 1997: 93). While access to the inner recesses of the Egyptian temple was limited to the priesthood, festivals were open to the public, not restricted to groups of initiates (Morenz 1973: 89–90).

Mr. Wildoak’s punch line is that the Golden Dawn, for the same reasons as Golden Dawn founder and Chief MacGregor Mathers’ Rites of Isis is a “reconstruction”, actually don’t use any Egyptian Gods. He says: 

Really there are only modern interpretations and adaptations of Graceo-Coptic Gods. And some of those adaptations were based on Mathers’ personal assumptions and mindset of what Egypt was.

First of all, it is true that we are all prisoners of the cultural paradigm in which we are living. This also equally applies to academics, scientists and scholars. Somehow there is this myth floating around that a scientist and scholar, in virtue of his academic education and merits, is exempt from this paradigm. This is of course utterly false.

Today we live in a post-modernist paradigm in which all “truths” are thrown out with the bath water and everything is relativized. We also live in the paradigm in which we, as members of post-modernist humanity and society, believe us to know more than humanity ever has, especially compared to the “superstitious” ancients, in virtue of our modern scientific methods.

Golden Dawn God-Form

I don’t know about you, but I personally trust the paradigm of the ancient Greeks, such as the pioneering historians Herodotus, Diodorus and Plutarch, long before the likes of Tully, Hutton, et al. The old Greek scholars surely lived much closer to the ancient Egyptians and their traditions that we post-modernist occidentals do. The possibility of them having intimate (i.e. first hand) knowledge of the subjects they were researching, or even being initiates themselves, is severely higher compared to our post-modern scholars☺

It is also very obvious for all serious students of the Golden Dawn Tradition that the God-Forms, as they are deptictied in the so-called “Z” document and attached papers, are a modern magical adaptation. But that doesn’t imply that there still aren’t any traces left from original ancient concepts. As I said in my original blog post, in the God-Forms of the Golden Dawn we see a temporal tradition. But behind this cultural coating there is an essence which breaths the Primordial Tradition into the outer temporal shells. The “Z” document surely enough is based upon the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The fact is that this document, and its teachings on the Egyptian God-Forms, originated from the Third Order; it wasn’t MacGregors’ own invention. And this same Third Order happens to be a true custodian and lineal descendent of these original Egyptian Mysteries. 

The Rites of Isis

Secondly. I bet that Caroline Tully hasn’t seen any copies of the Rites of Isis, as written by MacGregor Mathers. In fact very few have been so fortunate who are still living today, even though it is still possible although only to a select group of initiates. So how can Caroline Tully even say anything of its varacity? Non in my opinion. She simply assumes that it all was a reconstruction in MacGregor Mathers’ mind, as she regards anything pagan today. A pet theory of hers and that of Hutton, et al.

Being children of the post-modernist era, occultists and scholars alike of today don’t believe in a authenic and living tradtion. They are driven by a relentless scepticism and have a natural tendency of being hostile against any notions contrary to what academically may be proven. Most of them believe that there are no other initiatic traditions or organisations other than those that have already been made public. I.e. Golden Dawn post-modernist students believe that the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and its initiatic system up to and including the Adeptus Minor Grade was the final contribution and crowning of the system, and that it was reconstructed by W.W. Westcott and S.L. MacGregor Mathers. Any notions of an authentic source more advanced that the Second Order of the R.R. et A.C. are considered to be baroque. 

This also counts for MacGregor Mathers’ revival of the Rites of Isis which are regarded to be a reconstrution. But only because Aleister Crowley did an actual reconstruction of the Eleusinian Mysteries in his Rites of Eleusis, which was nothing of the kind but rather a series of Planetary invocations using classical Ceremonial Magic as a framework, although I bet that Crowley were inspired by MacGregor Mathers and his Rites of Isis, the post-modernist students and scholars assume MacGregor Mathers to have done something along the same lines as Crowley.

Mind you, the actual Isiac mysteries are alive and well in Europe, limited to a small group of initiates. Considering the level of MacGregor Mathers’ initiations, including that continental and ancient fraternity referred to by MacGregor Mathers as the Third Order, I doubt that he didn’t have any access to these as well.

Hermanubis

Regarding the Greek vs. the Egyptian Mysteries, there is some merit to what Caroline Tully is describing. The problem is that it is only a half truth; or a half lie depending how you see it. It is not a sensation for historians that Hellenistic culture represents a mix of both Greek and Egyptian civilization, as shown in its philosophy and theology, and also concerning its mysteries. The most foremost examples of this being Serapis, being composed of the Egyptian Osiris and Apis bull, and the Greek Hades (or Roman Pluto); as well as Hermanubis, being a blend of the Egyptian Anubis and Greek Hermes (or Roman Mercury). This syncretistic approach was very common during and after the Ptolemic dynasty in Egypt.

So I consider it to be but a deliberate red herring used by Mr. Wildoak when he claims the Egyptology of the Golden Dawn, and its associated traditions, to have a Greek origin. In fact they are at least Hellenic, which is a blend of Greek and Egyptian traditions and concepts. I must stress this; Hellenism isn’t solely a Greek phenomenon – it is a Graeco-Egyptian one. We are actually talking about the era of the Ptolemic dynasty of Egypt, while being the result of a Macedonian take-over still integrated fully with the original Egyptian civilization and culture, taking care not to oppose the highly conservative Egyptian population.

Concerning the Egyptian origins of the Eleusinian Mysteries, it seems that there is no such consensus amongst scholars as Mr. Wildoak would like you to believe. I.e. in his rhetoric we see yet another example of the use of red herrings. Let me quote from one source:

In the early part of this century, [Paul François] Foucart theorized, on the basis of statements by classical authors (e.g., Herodotus Bk. 2) as well as the discovery at some Mycenaean sites of Egyptian figurines and small artifacts, that the cult of Demeter in Greece originally derived, in whole or in part, from Egypt. Further support for this hypothesis comes from certain remarkable parallels between the myth of Isis (especially in the version presented by Plutarch in his Isis and Osiris, chs. 15 and 16) and that of Demeter (as recounted in the “Hymn to Demeter,”). Among the details of these parallels are episodes in both stories involving infant princes who almost gain immortality—but not quite—at the hands of the respective goddesses.

On the basis of these correspondences, Foucart and his followers concluded that the Mysteries at Eleusis originally must have come from Egypt (Foucart 2-23; Magnien 44-46). Yet the fact that the sanctuary ruins in Eleusis evidently go back centuries earlier than the Hymn itself, and that excavations have unearthed no Egyptian artifacts there from that period, militates against this hypothesis (Mylonas 15, 276). On the other hand, since we know that Greek colonists and mercenaries had settled in Lower Egypt by the seventh century BCE (Leclant 245), it is reasonable to surmise that these Greek and Egyptian fertility goddesses had already begun to penetrate each other’s cults and mingle in the minds of worshippers, perhaps by way of Cretan influences. There is still no consensus about this and it remains a topic of lively debate.

My personal opinion regarding this cross-cultural mixing, based upon the traditional history that I have been taught, is the following: The mysteries of Egypt were overly patriarchal and centered around the cult of Osiris. Isis was an important character in this story, but only in a supporting role as the faithful wife and restorer of Osiris’ life so that he might be resurrected to fulfil his destiny.

The hellenicised Isis

On the other hand, the mysteries of Greece were overly matriarchial and based on the earlier shamanic mother goddess cults. Both mysteries were agricultural, based on the Solar cycles of death and resurrection, the former centred on the Solar force itself, the latter on the terrestrial and Lunar (as receivers of the Solar currents), althought there is evidence to assume Osiris also to be a earth ferility god. During the Hellenistic period these two mysteries met and cross-pollonized. By now the Eleusinian Mysteries may have taken up influences from the Egyptian Isis, if not earlier. On the other hand perhaps the Isiac mysteries grew in prominence in Hellenistic Egypt and Greece because of the influences of the Eleusinian Mysteries. They surely were related.

Thus, it is fruitless to look upon this as a one way transmission; it is more fruitful to see it as a reciprocal influence, typical of the Ptolemaic dynasty. The proper academic stance on this subject is that we may never know the truth regarding who made who, simply based on archaeology and study of classical literature. The best position is to suspend judgement and be open-minded to either possibility.

Granted, the mystery plays of the pre-hellenistic Egypt were public, while the Eleusinian Mysteries in Greece were secret. Still the Egpytian plays did conveyed a mystery to the spectators. Remember that Egypt was a theocracy and involved the entire population in its state sanctioned cults; magic was a common and everyday event. Still not all of that was open do the public. Not even the public festivals were that public, as can be seen in this quote from another source:

At these times, ordinary people might witness the procession of a deity, although it would most frequently be from a distance and usually the actual image of the god would not be visible to them.

The daily cult ritual was a secluded and secret affair, reserved to the priests who held the images of the gods locked up in special shrines, called naos. Thus like with the religious cult of Israel (which clearly drew its inspiration from the Egyptian cults, not only in this respect), the Holy of Holies or Sanctuaries were prohibited territory for the common Egyptian. Thus secret practices were reserved for the priests and priestesses, as is shown in this source which I quote:

The involvement of the general public in the temple ceremonies was small. Ordinary people had no access to the inner regions of the temples which could only be entered after elaborate purification rituals. Offerings to the gods, food, flowers, or votive stelae, could be made in the outer temple courts.

Also concepts of the Egyptian theology amongst the priests and priestesses were different compared to the popular views held by the common Egyptians. There surely was a secret lore that was only reserved to the priestly caste and the royalty. In the New Kingdom priesthood was, like royalty, hereditary. Many priests and priestesses were members of the royal family even. Magic was closely associated with the priesthood, although there existed a popular or common form of magic as well. Thus, as the daily cult ritual – which used a magical formula – was a secret affair, there truly was an esoteric tradition in Egypt.

The Naos of the Edfu Temple which housed the image of Horus

However, the esoteric tradition extended beyond that of the daily cult rituals. There also existed an alchemical tradition, mainly reserved for the royalty in its inception (in a similar way as there also existed an Daoist internal alchemy reserved for the Chinese Emperor), although it later became part of the innermost initiatic secrets of the priestly caste.

Egypt was very exotic and commonly regarded as mysterious, and magical, amongst the surrounding ancient peoples, not only to the Greeks and Romans. The Babylonian Talmud, as an example, says the following:

Ten measures of sorcery descended to the world; Egypt took nine and the rest of the world took one.

Many of the greatest Greek philosophers travelled to Egypt and brought with them a new wisdom, such as Thales, Pythagoras and Plato, at least if we are to believe their own accounts and that of their disciples. Greek philosophy as we know it wouldn’t had been the same without the Egyptian influence. Even the New Testament states that:

...Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds. (Act 7:22)

So there is absolutely no empirical basis for the post-modernist concept that there were no esoteric and secret initiatory mysteries surrounding the priests and priestesses of Egypt prior to the Hellenistic era; the empirical information rather supports the opposite view. And now, when this fallacy has been disproven what more will we see coming from the post-modern reconstructionist “scholars”? That there were no magical nor any alchemical tradition in Egypt as well? Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised…

S∴R∴

The question of Divine Evil: Dualism and the Golden Dawn – Part Two

o

I would like to share with you some of my thoughts that have been raised in recent discussions, following my pervious essay on this matter, and in particular on the subject of “evil” versus “good”. I would agree with the standard Golden Dawn definition that “evil” may be regarded simply as “unbalance” or lack of equilibrium. Thus the only difference between a “good” order and an “evil” one lays in the whole, not in its parts. When you view the corresponding part of both a “good” and an “evil” system of arrangement you will see the same innate nature in both, in the sense of being two sides of the same coin. It is when you regard the whole system that you will notice a difference; the “good” system is the world of harmoniously working and integrated Sephiroth on the Tree of Life, while the “evil” system shows differentiation, disassociation, disharmony and chaos in its corresponding Qlippoth. But is has to be remembered that both the Sephiroth and the Qlippoth share the same innate nature, which has its origin in the Divine. Thus, if there is an evil, this is also part of God. The Qabalah is quite clear on this subject.

There is lot of symbolism in the Golden Dawn ritual and teachings that refer to a primal or primordial chaos, which is associated with the Kings of Edom, while the King of Israel symbolizes the orderly cosmos. Thus in the Golden Dawn ritual corresponding to the 4°=7° Grade of Philosophus we find the following sentence:

Ere the Eternal instituted the Formation, Beginning and End existed not. Therefore, before Him, he expanded a certain Veil, and therein has instituted the Primal Kings. And these are the Kings who reigned in Edom before there reigned a King over Israel but they subsisted not. When the Earth was formless and void; behold this is the reign of Edom; and when Creation was established, lo this is the reign of Israel. And the Wars of Titanic Force in the Chaos of Creation, lo these are the Wars between them.

These Kings of Edom are also associated with the primordial Serpent or Dragon Force, which evokes both the image of the great Mother Goddess Tiamat from the Babylonian Enûma Eliš and also the Dragon from the Revelation of St. John. Thus in the Stella Matutina (the later derivative of the Golden Dawn) ritual corresponding to the Grade of Portal we find the following words:

The Realm of Chaos and of Ancient Night, ere ever the Aeons [Sephiroth] were, when there was neither Heaven or Earth, nor was there any Sea, when naught was, save the Shape Unluminous, formless and void. To and fro in the Deeps, swayed the coils of the Dragon with 8 Heads and 11 Horns. Eleven were the curses of Mount Ebal, eleven the Rulers of the Qlippoth, and at their head were the Dual Contending Forces.

Another Golden Dawn symbol of the force which brings order to the primordial chaos is Thoth, the god of wisdom, magic, mathematics and of architecture. In the Book of the Voice of Thoth (Ritual “Z”) we find the following opening sentence:

The Speech in the Silence; The Words Against the Son of Night; The Voice of Thoth before the Universe in the presence of the Eternal Gods; The Formulae of Knowledge; The Wisdom of Breath; The Radix of Vibration; The Shaking of the Invisible; The Rolling Asunder of the Darkness; The Becoming Visible of Matter; The Piercing of the Coils of the Stooping Dragon; The Breaking forth of the Light; All these are in the Knowledge of Thoth.

Thus what we have here is an implication that “evil” precedes “good”, that creation is good while the primordial state of non-creation or un-creation is seen as evil. Thus the Qlippoth (Evil Demons) as manifest in our World of Matter and Action seeks annihilation; the drive towards total destruction. It may be compared to the Freudian death drive seeking extinction and a return to the womb versus the life instinct urging us forward towards individuation.

Here it is interesting to seek out the etymology of the word “annihilation” which have its origin in the Latin root nihil or “nothing”. Thus a literal translation of the word annihilation is “to make into nothing”. In the Holy Qabalah we have the so-called “Three Negative Veils of existence”, which precedes creation, represented as the primordial Ain (“No-Thing”), which leads into the Ain-Soph (“Without Limit”) and lastly into Ain-Soph Aur (“Limitless Light”), before the emanation of the monad or Kether (“Crown”). Thus the primordial Chaos may be seen here as the equivalent of the Qabalistic concept of Ain or No-Thing.

Now, what I am about to say may be outrageous to some individuals and perhaps even blasphemous to others. I understand the controversial nature of this doctrine as it has taken many years for my conditioned Christian mind to accept and integrate the following message: If we are to follow the way of the antinomian Qabalah of the Golden Dawn into its logical conclusion, we also have to deal with the fact that the very innate and purest essence of Godhead or the ALL shares a basic “urge” in common with the Qlippoth of Matter, i.e. that of maintaining non-existance, all encompassing darkness and unluminous void.

The Sabbathian doctrine or philosophy speaks of this and has created a concept called the “thoughtless light”, residing in the primordial Ain-Soph, which tries to prevent creation or existance. But we have to remember that the Sabbathian doctrine also states that on the level of the Ain-Soph, which represents the next stage in the process of creation after Ain, there is also created the ambivalence in the “mind” of the Goodhead, represented as a contest between the “thoughtful light” versus the “thoughtless light”. Thus we see here the manifestation of both the willing and unwilling nature of Godhead, which later manifests as the “evil” left-hand emanation and the “good” right-hand emanation of God as symbolized by the two Pillars upon the Tree of Life, all according to the Sabbathian doctrine which permeates the Golden Dawn Tradition.

The Fallen World in the Abyss of Serpents

Through the Fall of the World and of Man an Abyss of Serpents were created below the Garden of Eden, creating the World of Action or Assiah as we know it, but also the World of the Qlippoth. Thus, according to the Sabbathian Qabalah, this explains how we perceive our World as differentiated (i.e. unbalanced) and base. But it has to be remembered that this lack of balance exists both in the Macrocosm (World) as well as in the Microcosm (Man). Thus, according to teachings of the Golden Dawn, we all have our own “Evil Persona” to deal with, symbolized in the Hall of Neophytes as Oomo-Shatan-Apophis. But this force is not contrary to the Divine nature or things.

Thus let us not forget that Satan (according to The Book of Job) is one of the Sons of God; indeed he does the dirty (albeit divine) handiwork of God. As we can see from the above quotations from Golden Dawn formulae this “satanic” or “luciferian” urge is an innate part of God, not at all his opposite or opponent as taught in the Christian Church. Until we as spiritual seekers deal with this fact we will never gain true illumination or become as God.

Oomo-Shatan-Apophis

Many spiritual seekers, such as the traditional Gnostic followers, look upon the World and all they are able to see is Evil manifesting in every part of worldly existence, while the Divine is seen as being held apart from it in some transcendent and exalted existence. Thus, to become as God they seek to escape from the body and hurl themselves into the purely spiritual. But this concept is a fallacy as all of existence is part of God, and ultimately good, albeit in a fallen state in our World of Action. So, if you want to become truly as God you have to be both transcendent and immanent at the same time, i.e. be conscious of your Spirit, Soul and Body simultaneously.

I have an fundamentally Alchemical (Hermetic-Tantric) outlook on this, which always involves “matter” as well as “spirit”. It is of course possible to experience pure spiritual states or planes, and that aspect of spiritual work also has its merit, but to be able to brake the cycles of reincarnation I truly believe that you have to integrate your inner essence with your manifest outer self; i.e. learn to master the matter. Only then may you become consciously immortal – i.e. partake of the immortal nature of God – and become a real co-creator. Even if your most terrestrial or base husk eventually must die, this doesn’t mean that a purified part of your Elemental and material body may not survive death. It can according to the Master Alchemists and that of the Dzogchen and Tantric masters.

It may seem to us that our body “traps” our soul, but this is only because it is yet in a fallen state. With our body being “trapped” (note the quotation marks) I mean that our Soul is limited and restricted in its expressions – in the normal case – while working through the body. This I and many alchemist before me, both in the Orient and Occident, hold may be remedied on the level of the physical, as well as in the astral, mental, etc. It has to be remembered that in Ceremonial Magic one must use all Four Elemental Weapons, also the Magical Pentacle or Disc; the principle of Magical Manifestation.

Earth Pentacle

Alchemy aims at purifying the body, emancipating it, for it to become “alchemical”; Tantrikas calls it (the end product) the “Diamond Body”, Dzogchenpas the “Rainbow Body” and Hermeticists the “Solar Body of Light”. Yogis and Tantrikas believes it’s possible to become emancipated from sickness, as well as render the body immortal and able to take flight, etc. This is also the Hermetic position. As I mentioned earlier, I do believe in the ability and worth in pursuing also purely “spiritual” exercises, apart from the body. However I also believe that the difference of opinion between Alchemists and Gnostics lays in equating the Self with “spirituality”. Surely enough, the Self is beyond the body, but with my emphasis upon the body I’m not pursuing any materialistic philosophy. No, contrary to materialism I regard both my Self and Body as equally Holy.

Is the Great Mother or Goddess of Nature any less important than the Great Father or God of the Heavens? No, its only “fallen” and may be raised to its former glory and union with its Divine Consort. Thus my perspective on the body is purely spiritual; it is the vessel or cup of my Spirit or Self. It is through my body that the Divine Spirit finds expression; with my Alchemy and Theurgy I’m simply trying to make it a better vehicle or expression for the Divine. Let us raise the Goddess!

Read the third part of this essay here.

S∴R∴

Golden Dawn och Aristoteles lära om Elementen

o

För ett tag sedan fick jag en fråga angående hur det kommer sig att Golden Dawn Traditionen placerar De Fyra Elementen på det sätt som görs i förhållande till väderstrecken, vilket frågeställaren ansåg vara unikt just för denna Tradition; Luft med Öster, Eld med Söder, Vatten med Väster, samt Jord med Norr.

Frågeställaren ifrågasatte Elementens attribuering till väderstrecken enligt detta arrangemang och förordade istället den lära som baserar sig på Aristoteles system av kvaliteter, dvs. torrt, fuktigt, hett och kallt, enligt arrangemanget nedan:


Detta arrangemang flyttar således på Elementen Vatten och Jord och får dem att byta plats med varandra, i enlighet med de diagonala tillskrivningarna av ”fuktigt & torrt” (Nordväst & Sydväst) samt ”varmt & kallt” (Sydost & Nordost). Jag anser dock att det finns en poäng med Golden Dawns korrespondens mellan Elementen och väderstrecken som jag presenterade ovan, vilket jag vill utveckla en aning.

Angående varför Jord bör associeras med Norr förklaras med att detta väderstreck är platsen för det största symboliska mörkret. Man kan se på de fyra väderstrecken som Solens resa under ett helt dygn, med soluppgången i Öster (Tempererat – Luft och Gult), solen i sin höjdpunkt i Söder (Intensivt – Eld och Rött), solen i sin nedgång (Tempererat – Vatten och blått), samt solen i sin lägsta punkt under horisonten eller i jorden (Inaktivt/passivt – Jord och Svart).

På samma sätt associeras årstiderna med de fyra Elementen; den tempererade Våren med Luft (det astrologiska/astronomiska nyåret där Solen ”föds” eller ”stiger upp” ur sin mörka dvala om vintern), den heta Sommaren med Eld (den varmaste årstiden), den tempererade Hösten med Vatten (den tid när Solen ”stiger ned” och går in i en nedbrytande ”döds-fas”, en årstid som ofta upplevs som fuktig och regnig), samt slutligen den kalla Vintern (den tid där solen är i sin mörka dvala och återigen befruktas vid vintersolståndet och tillåts gro fram till dess födelse vid vårddagjämningen).

En annan aspekt av det hela förklaras av den tantriska yoga-teorin om Tattwas eller Elementen (se illustration till höger). De utvecklas i ordningen Ande, Luft, Eld, Vatten och Jord. Tattwas är ju enligt detta österländska system ett uttryck för Solens prana (L.V.X. eller livskraft); för att återkoppla till Solens färd under dygnets fyra faser så ser man återigen denna följdordning från Öster och Luft till Norr och Jord i medsols ordning.

Det aristoteliska konceptet med Elementens ”dubbla kvalitéter” är Golden Dawn initierade väl förtrogna med – detta lärs ut redan till Neofyter. Men vi tillskriver inte det några väderstreck (vilket jag inte har hittat några referenser till att Aristoteles skulle ha gjort heller) och placerar inte direkt ut dem i Tempelrummet. Detta arrangemant över Elementen används mer som en alkemistisk illustration och tankebild om Elementens cirkulation och växlande karaktär.

Dock finns det ett viss antydan att man kanske gör det indirekt ändå i ett traditionellt Golden Dawn Tempel; i Salens hörn placerar man ut Horus Fyra Barn (de egyptiska kanopiska gudarna), vilket kanske något slentrianmässigt har associeras med Elementen. Det intressanta är att Jord och Vatten byter plats i Salen (Luft i Nordost, Eld i Sydost, Jord i Sydväst, och Vatten i Nordväst). Detta kan kanske istället vara en hänvisning till kvaliteterna: Imeshet i Nordost = fuktiget, Tuamataf i Sydost = hetta, Hapi i Sydväst = torrhet, och Kabexnuf i Nordväst = kyla. Vrider man detta arrangemang 45 grader i medsols riktning hamnar Elementen exakt som i Aristoteles system.

De Kanopiska Gudarna

Dock placerar man symboliskt i samma Sal Elementen i väderstrecken på det sätt som jag beskrev tidigare. Alltså betonar man den Solara kvalitéten i tillvaron. I mina ögon representerar de ”dubbla” kvaliteterna och kanopiska gudarna mer sinnliga aspekter av Elementen, medan det andra arrangemanget med Solens färd runt jorden och Tattwas succession belyser en mera exalterad och ”pranisk” eller ”eterisk” aspekt av Elementen.

S∴R∴

The Gospels and the Golden Dawn

o

There is a quite peculiar discussion going on in certain quarters which has arisen in the wake of some recent published papers from the George Slater Collection, originally derived from the Ahatoor Temple No. 7 of the Rosicrucian Order of Alpha et Omega. In particular one such document has been questioned because of its apparently “exoteric” interpretation of the L.V.X. Signs of the 5°=6° Grade. The paper in question makes an analysis of each of the Signs of the Letters and is corresponding them to the Inner Order Grades of Adeptus Minor 5°=6°, Adeptus Major 6°=5°, and Adeptus Exemptus 7°=4°, in a way that very much corroborates my own thoughts on this matter. It basically places the initiatory process of the Inner Order in a Christian mythological context.

In this particual case references are being made to earlier papers of the Golden Dawn interpreting the L.V.X. Signs solely focusing upon the particular Egyptian god-forms associated with each Letter and Sign. As this later and “christianized” analysis doesn’t mention at all any Egyptian god-forms or make any astrological references, as in the old paper, this later work must be in error and an exoteric deviation, according to some individuals. People even start to ask questions if S.L. MacGregor Mathers had converted to Chatolisism in his later years. I ask in return: If he did, so what? Would that have narrowed his esoteric perspective? Not at all; in my personal opinion, the Chatolic Church is more mystic in its orientation than any Protestant Church. MacGregor Mathers was aware of this when he wrote:

We have a profound respect for Christianity, and are in no sense hostile to the Roman Catholic Church, nor yet to the other forms of Christian belief, provided that on the more Unitarian side they do not too far gravitate towards Atheism. And we especially consider the Roman Catholic Church has resolutely preserved in its Ceremonies the August Symbols of the Divine Wisdom.(Azoth magazine,1917)

In this strange discussion some individuals thus regards that something becomes exoteric or even “fundamentalistic” only because references are being made to a Holy Book, in this case the Gospels, while esoteric or “Gnostic” Christianity on the other hand is the usual Golden Dawn pagan interpretation using Egyptian deities and god-forms. I personally see this paper as a important contribution which presents yet another layer of the 5°=6° Grade which adds to the previous without taking away anything; this is typical of the Golden Dawn tradition to merge the pagan with the monotheistic pantheons.

Everyone with a little bit of “out of the Golden Dawn box” perspective upon the Tradition, who may see the broader context of the Hermetic teachings, knows that this perspective as expressed in the current discussion doesn’t have any real basis in tradition. There are lots of references to the Gospels in Esoteric Christianity, and Rosicrucianism in particular. I have already written quite extensively on this matter, but only want to point out the fact that mythos and symbology taken from the Gospels are quite common in alchemical works. Just take a look at the works of Fulcanelli and Roger Caro as two well known examples in placing the Great Work in a Christian mythological context. Thus this use of Christian symbolism in an esoteric context has a real basis in classical Hermetic alchemical texts.

Since the early days of mysticism and esotericism, and up until quite recently, it has been common practice to use sacred books, such as the Bible, as a reference tool in the path of the mystic or occultist. Qabalah is basically an esoteric interpretation of the Torah; the Sepher Zohar is regarded by some Qabalists as being an esoteric “Thalmud” or esoteric oral Torah, while the ordinary or common Thalmud is considered by Qabalists to be the exoteric counterpart. Sufism is largely based upon an esoteric interpretation of the Q’ran, and – alas – Historical Gnosticism uses a similar interpretation of the Gospels.

This notion of regarding any religious references in an analysis of a esoteric technique as being “exoteric” and reducing Gnosticism to the mere use of Egyptian pantheons, is a typical post-Crowley invention, with absolutely no basis at all in tradition. The amusing thing about this all is that I really doubt that Aleister Crowley himself would have objected toward this use of Gospels and Christian symbolism in this context, as he himself did it on occasions. Look for example in his The Book of Thoth and the interpretation of the Fool, or Key No. 0 of the Major Arcana. Crowley being a real initiate understood the subtleties in the use of religious imagery and the worth of myths, even Christian, in the interpretation of esoteric doctrines. He ought to as esotericism is a mystical interpretation of religion, daring to penetrate further deeper into its symbology and mythos than any official exoteric doctrines of the church. Why should the Golden Dawn be anything less?

S∴R∴

En dag på British Museum

o

För drygt en vecka sedan var jag och min familj (de syns på några av bilderna som följer) på besök i London under en dag och då passade vi naturligtvis på att besöka British Museum för första gången i mitt liv. Eftersom museet är så stort, och med tanke på små barn och ett i övrigt hektiskt schema där allas önskemål skall förverkligas – där pappa (undertecknad) endast fick ett par timmar till sitt förfogande – bestämnde jag mig tidigt att endast besöka den egyptiska avdelningen och John Dee-montern (givna attraktionsmål för en ockultist som mig). Vad som följer är de bilder jag tog från vår lilla runda, något som jag skulle vilja dela med mig med mina läsare. Bilderna presenteras i den följdordning som de uppenbarar sig för besökaren när denne går igenom den egyptiska avdelningen. Texterna som bifogas innehåller information som jag har hämtat till största del från British Museums hemsida.


Den inledande bilden (Bild 1) förevisar själva ingången till den stora salen där delar av den egyptiska avdelningen är samlad. De två stora granodiorit-statyerna förevisar Amenhotep III, en farao som figurerar ganska ofta i utställningen (Bild 2 & 4). Bild 2 förevisar en närbild på den vänstra av dessa statyer som är hämtad från Amehotep III:s gravtempel i Thebes, från 18:e Dynastin runt 1350 f.v.t. Bild 4 förevisar ett huvud av samma farao tagen från en jättestaty av granit som (uppenbarligen huvudlös) fortfarande står kvar i Egypten vid ett Tempel vigt åt gudinnan Mut. Engelsmännen hade tydligen inte möjlighet att ta med sig hela statyn utan tog med sig huvudet istället.


Bild 3 förevisar en mycket vacker attrappdörr tillverkad i kalksten från en gravkammare tillhörande översteprästen Ptahshepses. Denna präst var en av de kungliga barnen till Menkaure och Shepseskaf, de sista två stora konungarna av den Fjärde Dynastin. Det verkar som att Ptahshepses levde från cirka 2490 till cirka 2400 f.v.t. Falska dörrar av detta slag var vanligt förekommande i kungliga gravkammare.

Bild 5 förevisar en exemplar på en mycket vacker lotuspelare, vilket är ganska talande för nivån på den storartade arkitekturiska byggnadskonsten som var förärskande i antikens Egypten.

Vad som följer i Bild 6 är fyra statyer i granit föreställande gudinnan Sekhmet, hämtade från Karnak i Thebes, från den 18:e Dynastin runt 1360 f.v.t. Dessa gudagestalter upplevdes som mycket kraftfulla och verkade som en magnet både på mig och min fru. Medan jag koncentrerade mig på att ta mina bilder på denna del av avdelningen satt min Soror Mystica i meditation och upplevde en starkt attraherande kraft från stayerna på Sekhmet. Även jag kände mig hela tiden attraherad av dem. De är helt makalösa exempel på Egyptiskt konsthantverk och utgjorde det ensamt starkaste objektet i hela museet av det som jag hann att se på rundvandringen. Mot slutet av den egyptiska avdelningen fanns ytterligare en vacker staty på Sekhmet från samma tidsperiod (Bild 16), men denna gudagestalt gjorde inte alls ett lika kraftfullt intryck på mig, även om den var estetiskt tilltalande. Vad som är särskilt attraherande med samtliga av dessa statyer på Sekhmet och de på Amehotep III (Bilderna 1 & 2) är det mörka stenmaterialet och den oerhörda detaljrikedom hantverkarna har lagt på att skapa de stilrena linjerna och den perfekt släta ytan.

Alldeles intill statyerna på Sekhmet stog en mycket vacker staty i kalksten av Amenhopet I i formen av Osiris, från den 18:e Dynastin runt 1510 f.v.t. Den hämtades ursprungligen från ett Tempel i Deir el-Bahari troligtvis helgat åt Hathor som inte existerar längre. Denna gudagestalt hade också en stark attraktionskraft på mig personligen. Tyvärr är bilden (Bild 7) taget på denna staty något oskarp.

Bild 8 förevisar en liten staty av brun kvartsit av den heliga egyptiska babianen, helgat åt visdomsguden Thoth från Hermopolis. Den är tillverkad någon gång under Amenhotep den III:s regeringstid (1390-1352 f.v.t.) under den 18:e Dynastin, troligtvis runt 1350 f.v.t. och har antagligen hysts i hans gravtempel. Denna staty var också en av de mer attraktiva objekten under utställningen. Tyvärr förevisas här extra tydligt mina bristande fotografiska färdigheter.

Bilderna 9 och 10 förevisar Rosettastenen hämtad från Fort St Julien, el-Rashid (Rosetta), i närheten av Alexandria. Stenen är 112,3 × 75,7 × 28,4 cm i sina dimensioner och väger 750 kg. Den tillverkades under den senare ptolemaiska perioden år 196 f.v.t. och hittades av franska soldater år 1799 under Napoleons egyptiska fälttåg. Det som är så speciellt med denna sten, och som har gjort den till de mest intressanta arkeologiska artefakterna, är att den råkar hysa tre texter med samma innehåll på två olika språk, fornegyptiska och grekiska. Egyptiskan är skrivet dels med hieroglyfer och dels demotisk skrift. Detta faktum gjorde det möjligt för den franske egyptologen Jean-François Champollion att år 1822 till slut efter mycket möda dechiffrera hieroglyferna. Sedan dess har egyptologer kunnat uttyda de fornegyptiska texterna, såsom den Egyptiska Dödsboken, etc. Dess glasmonter, som stog halvvägs längs den egyptiska avdelningen och avgränsade dess första och andra sektion, var den ensamt folktätatste delen av museet och det tog ett tag innan jag kunde ta mig fram för att ta dessa bilder. I närbilden (Bild 10) kan man tydligt se de tre typerna av skrift, de Egyptiska hieroglyferna längst upp, den demotiska skriften i mitten och grekiskan längst ner.

Bilderna 11 till 19 förevisar den avslutande sektionen av den egyptiska avdelningen. Här förevisas tre stensarkofager (Bilderna 11, 12 och 15) och egyptiska pelare, förutom en massa mindre statyer och andra artefakter. I Bild 11 förevisas Merymoses sarkofag. Merymose var vice-regent i Kush (Övre Nubien) under Amenhotep III:s styre. Endast sarkofagens lock har kunnat rekonstrueras. Avbildningen visar att den avlidne identifieras med Osiris, dödsguden. Sidorna är täckta med magiska formler för att hjälpa Marymose på hans hädanfärd. Sarkofagen återfanns år 1940 i Qurnet Marai.

Bild 12 förevisar ytterligare en granitsarkofag, denna från Alexandria och tillhörande Nectanebo II, vilket var den siste infödde Egyptiske konungen som regerade åren 360-343 f.v.t. Sarkofagen återfanns under Napoleons Egyptiska expedition i Kairo. En pelare från Templet i Heryshef, Herakleopolis, syns i bakgrunden, såväl som en liten staty av Horus, den solara falkguden, vid dess sida. Bilderna 13 och 14 visar två närbilder på samma falk.

Bild 15 förevisar den vackraste av sarkofagerna som fångade mitt stora intresse under denna sektionen av den egyptiska avdelningen. I synnerhet insidan är faschinerande och vacker att beskåda. Sarkofagen tillhör en Hapmen från Kairo, som levde under den 26:e Dynastin eller senare, någonstans mellan åren 600-300 f.v.t. Det går knappat att se på bilden (och endast om man klickar på den och ser den i förstoring) men om du tittar på sarkofagens botten kommer du att se en avbildning av en person som ligger med armarna utsträckta, på samma vis som i Tecknet för den Dräpte Osiris i Golden Dawn-traditionen.


Hapmens sarkofag användes senare för rituell tvagning i en moské i Ibn Tulun. Därav avtappningshålet som syns vid den bortre änden. Även Nectanebo II:s sarkofag (Bild 12) hade flera avtappningshål och hade använts på samma sätt i moskén vid Attarin, Alexandria. Nectanebo II:s sarkofag var också mytomspunnen då den sades ha varit självaste Alexander den Stores kista, något som vederlades efter att hieroglyferna lyckades att uttydas. De innehåller istället delar från texten Amduat, eller ’Boken om det som finns i Undervärlden’ (dödsriket).

Bild 17 förevisar en jättelik skarabé stort som ett modernt badkar, ca. 1,5 meter i diameter. Skarabén är Egyptens helige skalbagge, eller pillerbagge, betecknande för solen under sin nattliga färd under jorden eller solen just innan eller under sin uppgång på himmelen. Detta exemplar av diorit beräknas ha tillverkats under den ptolemaiska perioden mellan åren 332-30 f.v.t. En faschinerande pjäs som förtjänade att bli fotograferad. Tyvärr är detta kanske mitt sämst tagna fotografi.

Bild 18 förevisar en vacker och mystisk granitartifakt som jag först trodde var en symbolisk portal av något slag. Den var inbjudande och jag stog länge och försökte förstå mig på den. Det visar sig att det egentligen är ett naos, den centrala helgedomen i ett Tempel vari kultfiguren hystes som utgjorde medelpunkten för den dagliga kult-ritualen utfört av prästerskapet. Detta exemplar är taget från ön Philae under Ptolemaus VIII regeringstid, runt 150 f.v.t. Den återfanns senare återanvänt i en koptisk kyrka på samma ö.

Det är typiskt hur ofta egyptiska religiösa artefakter har återanvändts av både kristna kyrkor och muslimska moskéer efter den antika egyptiska religionens utslocknande. Uppenbart hyste människor stor respekt för det gamla Egyptens reliker, även under vår tideräkning. Som jag har redogjort för ovan så är dessa artifakter högt laddade med kraft som har fortsatt att attrahera och faschinera efterföljande generationer.

Den sista bilden (Bild 19) tagen i den egyptiska avdelningen är den på en av de vackra sfinxerna tillverkade någon gång under det romerska styret av Egypten, allt enligt informationen bredvid statyerna. De har en tydlig grekisk eller hellenistisk utformning. Där fanns två sfinxer som stog i varsin monter (den andre kan ses i bakrunden på Bild 19) och de flankerade den bakre utgången från den egyptiska avdelningen.

Några avslutande ord om gudagestalten på Sekhmet (Bilderna 6 & 16). Denna gudinna associerades av egypterna med förgörelse. Enligt myten symboliserade hon det eldiga ögat hos solguden Ra vilket han sände gentemot sina fiendet. I en av myterna sätts hon iväg att straffa mänskligheten och hinner nästan i sin blodtröst, likt syndaflodsmyten i Bibeln och andra liknande myter över hela världen, att förgöra mänskligheten men stoppas i sista stund genom att gudarna lurar henne att dricka ur en sjö som är fylld med öl som har fåtts att se ut som blod, varmed hon förvandlas till Hathor, kärlekens gudinna. Sekhmet är en mycket stark gudinnekraft och feminin kraft som även sades härska över menstruationen. Hennes namn betyder ”hon som är kraftfull”. Hon var en av faraon Amenhotep III:s favoritgudinnor som lät bygga många statyer av henne under sin regeringstid.


Avslutningsvis tog jag min familj till den s.k. King’s Library på andra sidan av British Museum, vilket förevisas på bilden vid huvudet på denna redogörelse. Det är nämligen i denna sal där John Dees monter är förlagt. Montern med John Dees utställning kan ses på bildens vänstra sida, precis bortom det stora ljusgråa stenfatet. Detta förevisningsobjekt var egentligen det huvudsakliga målet för detta besök på museet. I vanlig ordning skall man spara det bästa till sist!

Den engelska texten i skylten innuti montern tycker jag presenterar karaktären och fenomenet John Dee bättre än jag själv hade kunnat göra, så jag återger den här:

This group of strange objects is associated with John Dee (1527-1608/9), mathematician, astrologer and magician during the reign of Queen Elisabeth I. A respected if controversial figure in his own lifetime, Dee is now best remembered for his experiments in conjuring up divine spirits using some of the objects displayed here.

A number of Dr. Dee’s materials came to the British Museum via the antiquary and collector Sir Robert Cotton who aquired them after Dee’s death. The large disc, called the ‘Seal of God’ is engraved with magical names and symbols. Dee used it as a support for his ‘Shew Stone’, in which his medium allegedly saw visions of divine beings unveiling the secrets of the universe. The two smaller discs are said to have supported Dee’s ‘Table of Practice’. The golden disc is engraved with the so-called ‘Vision of the Four Castles’. The black obsidian mirror originally a Mexican Aztec cult object, was used for conjuring up spirits. Its fitted case bare a label in the hand of Horace Walpole, the famous 18th century author and collector who once owned it.

Bilderna 20 till 24 förevisar sålunda självaste John Dee-utställningen, eller det som är kvar av den. Obsidian-skivan med tillhörande fodral, som det refereras till i texten ovan, är borttagen sedan ett tag tillbaka. När min fru besökte British Museum 1999 hade hon förmånen att få se denna. Jag vet inte hur länge den har varit frånvarande från utställningen men det kan knappas ha varit så länge med tanke på att skylten fortfarande är oförändrad. Vi har dock fortfarande det stora vaxsigillet kallat Sigillum Dei Aemeth eller ”Sigillet för Guds Sanning” (visat i närbild på Bild 23) varpå kristallkulan placerades, vilket syns till vänster på Bild 20 och i närbild på Bild 21. Det stora Sigillet placerades på ”Det Heliga Bordet” var vart och ett av de fyra benen vilade på var sitt vaxsigill i miniatyr (vilket var en kopia av det större). Två av dessa förevisas i montern och ett av dem kan ses i närbild (Bild 24). Vi ser också den gyllene skivan som förevisar de fyra Vakttornen, och även denna kan ses i (tyvärr tämligen suddiga) närbilder i Bilderna 21 och 22.



Jag är ganska så nöjd med bilden (Bild 23) på det stora vaxsigillet eller Sigillum Dei Aemeth. Något som gjorde mig tämligen förvånad var hur stort detta sigill egentligen är. Jag bedömer att det är runt 20 cm i diameter, större än jag har fått det beskriven för mig tidigare eller efter att ha sett moderna återskapningar av det på Internet. Vissa individer måste har blandat ihop det stora vaxsigillet med de mindre vaxsigillen, varav ett förevisas i närbild (Bild 24), då de senares storlek (runt en decimeter i diameter) mer motsvarar vad jag trodde att Sigillum Dei Aemeth var.



Nu när jag sitter och skriver om detta och tittar på bilderna igen så känns det lite surrealistiskt att ha sett dessa magiska redskap som brukades av John Dee och hans skådare Edward Kelly, ett magiskt system som jag själv har haft nytta av under de senaste två decennierna i den omarbetade form som framställdes av Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn.

En annan religiös artefakt förevisades också i samma monter som John Dee-utställningen (monterns tema var magiska artefakter), ett sistrum (Bild 25) eller en rituell skallra av brons helgat åt egyptiska gudinnan Isis. Efter Romarrikets erövring av Egypten år 30 e.v.t. spred sig Isis-mysterierna över hela det Romerska Europa och Tempel till Isis ära restes som ofta avbildade henne med detta redskap, och just detta examplar är hittat utanför Rom. Jag tänkte jag skulle ta med denna bild då den bl.a. brukades av S.L. MacGregor Mathers och hans fru Moina Mathers vid deras uppsättningar av Isis Mysterierna i Paris vid början av det förra seklet. Om någon skulle få för sig att återuppföra dessa så kan denne se hur ett sistrum borde vara utformad.

Efter det tämligen hastiga besöket på British Museum passade vi på att besöka det legendariska Atlantis Bookshop, som ligger precis utanför Museet, lämpligt beläget på 49a Museum Street. Många ockultister finner det naturligt att avsluta en tur på British Museum med ett besök på Atlantis, så också jag och min fru. Bokaffären är ovanligt välsorterat på ockult litteratur och är befriad från de vanliga New Age-attributen. Men affären är i synnerhet av intresse för en student av Golden Dawn eftersom den hyser två intressanta ”artefakter”, av vilket den ena är en samling med magiska redskap i original från första hälften av det förra seklet (Bild 26). Ägarinnan Geraldine Beskin gav mig efter viss övertalning tillåtelse att ta ett foto på redskapen, efter att jag hade låtit henne avsluta sin föreläsning om redskapen och en viss annan Golden Dawn-relaterad målning hon hade för utställning.

Enligt Geraldine Beskin utgjorde Lotusstaven och det Magiska Svärdet en del av den samling som hittades på Brightons strand 1967 i en kista. Enligt Francis King i boken Ritual Magic in England så hade dessa redskap låsts i en kista och begravts på en klippa vid havet efter ett Tempel i Rosicrucian Order of Alpha et Omega hade stängts på 1940-talet. Enligt King hade klippan till slut givit efter och kistan kastats ut i havet, varpå det sköjdes upp på stranden och återfanns av förbipasserade. Tydligen har en del av dessa redskap hamnat i Atlantis Bookshop om vi skall tro på ägarinnans utsago. Hon sa till mig att Lotusstaven (längst till vänster) och Svärdet hade ett motto från en Golden Dawn-adept inskrivna. Eldstaven längst till höger på Bild 26 visste hon dock inte vart den härstammade från eller vem den hade tillhört då den inte utgjorde en del av samma samling som de föregående redskapen. Men i mina ögon såg de samtliga tämligen autentiska ut, även om jag inte hade möjligheten att granska dem närmare. Ett fotografi tog jag i alla fall som jag bifogar nedan för läsarens nöje.


Avslutningsvis vill jag be om ursäkt för den dåliga bildkvaliteten i vissa av fotografierna. Tyvärr är jag inte speciellt bra fotograf (även om jag har tagit en fotokurs för några år sedan) och kameran jag hade fått med mig var lånad och därför lät jag endast per rekommendation av ägaren kamerans autofunktion styra skärpa och bländare. Av någon anledning använde jag heller aldrig kamerans blixt vilket delvis förklarar den dåliga skärpan i några av bilderna. Jag hoppas ändå att mina läsare skall få något nöje och nytta ut av bilderna och de bifogade texterna, den dåliga bildkvaliteten till trots.

S∴R∴

Golden Dawn, Paganism and Christianity: Polytheism vs. monotheism

o

One of the most recurring topics concerning the Golden Dawn, both as an Order and Tradition, is that of it either being Christian or pagan in its nature. I recently had a discussion with some persons on a forum, both of a neo-pagan and Christian bent, and what follows is my thoughts on this matter, as I stand today. It must be clear though that these words express my own personal views and sentiments on the matter which doesn’t necessarily reflect any traditional or official policy of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. When it comes to religion the Golden Dawn has always expressed a quite liberal attitude to the personal profession of the member. Although my views are largely the result and expression of my own experience with the Order and Tradition, and my particular initiatory process within its context, they still reflect my own personal revelation and attitude.

Personally I don’t see any conflict between Christianity and Paganism, or that of monotheism and polytheism, within the Golden Dawn. In my opinion the Golden Dawn may best be described as a pagan version of Christianity. It does use the symbol of Christ in its symbolism, but simultaneously it places this symbology in a wider and perennial context. It recognizes that the image of the Christ is a later development of the Osirian mysteries, as well as that of other mystery religions involving the formula of the dying god.

Being a Rosicrucian fraternity the Golden Dawn thus doesn’t represent a traditional or exoteric form of Christianity, but more properly an Esoteric Christianity which also gives acknowledgement of pagan deities such as the Egyptian and Greek pantheons. Thus it both uses the names of Osiris and that of Jesus (Yeheshuah) in its rites, often in the same context.

Upon entering the Inner Order, or Ordo Rosae Rubeae et Aureae Crucis (R.R. et A.C.), the initiate should find himself comfortable with using Christian symbolism in his magic, in combination with older and pagan symbolism. If one cannot touch Christian symbols or utter the holy name of God through the Pentagrammaton (i.e. Yeheshuah), or the Tetragrammaton (i.e. Yehovah) or any other Hebrew holy name, one will have problems as one advances through the system.

Thus open-mindedness is required both ways, towards both the Judeo-Christian and the pagan contents of the Golden Dawn tradition. As a neo-pagan one could believe in a pagan “Supreme Being”, such as Amen-Ra, Helios, Shiva, or any other, as a member of the Golden Dawn, but it would still require from the member to also invoke the IHVH (Yehovah) and YHShVH (Yeheshuah), and other Hebrew names for God. Likewise as a Christian one must feel comfortable with the fact that one put on Egyptian and other pagan god-forms in magical workings.

But this apparent paradox may easily be resolved. Every part belongs to the whole. Everything is a expression of the mysterious ALL. Regardless of symbol system, it and the particular god or goddess being used is only a mere vessel of the true mystery which cannot even be fathomed by the human mind nor realized through ordinary or extraordinary thought processes. One may or course argue if an earlier or more ancient religion is “purer” than a later one, or if a later development is a more natural progression or adequate “distillation” and sublimation of the Materia Prima, discarding the Caput Mortum.

The main point is: if it does the proper and adequate work it has a place in the system. Golden Dawn is a Hermetic Order and this means Alchemy is the very foundation of its philosophy and system, even if it is implicit. Now, I of course acknowledge the fact that Hermeticism and Magic stems from a blend of Egyptian and Greek religion and philosophy during the Hellenistic era. However, Alchemy has developed since then and taken a Christian form since the middle ages, perhaps even earlier.

Thus to unravel many of the Alchemical texts written since then, by most Alchemical Masters, you have to be able to decode the use of Christian symbolism which is prevalent in Alchemical textbooks. Regardless of the Ways used – the Dry or Wet – the Great Work or Alchemical Process is described using the analogy of the life of Jesus as expounded in the Gospels, especially concerning his Passion. Blood and sacrifice, in the context of the crucifixion of Christ, is something beautiful and intimately charged with esoteric significance when interpreted in a Alchemical context. The exception to this is the tradition of Internal Hermetic Alchemy which doesn’t use Christian symbolism, to my knowledge, but original Hermetic-Hellenistic concepts. But you won’t find any of these processes in a book shop or library.

One position held regarding the assimilation of Christian symbolism into Alchemy is that the alchemical tradition was compelled to adopt its Christian guise as otherwise practitioners would be burnt as heretics. Thus the need to use the specific Christian mythos for its imagery as to hide it from the persecution of the Church. Personally I find this explanation to limiting, even though it does give a partial explanation. However, I believe that the factual explanation is much more simpler than that. Much of our scholarly knowledge of alchemy mainly stems from the Arabs, who wrote from the Islamic viewpoint but was heavily influenced by the Hellenistic Hermetic texts. Then during the renaissance Christians translated these texts into Latin and through that process Christian symbolism became blended with the original Hermetic teachings.

Thus alchemy always takes its form from the cultural context in which it is living. Compare for example with Hindu Alchemy of the Tantrikas – Rasa and Nath Siddhas – where they explain similar processes but by using different mythos and cultural symbols. Our western Alchemy has taken its influences from the pagan Hellenistic culture, as well as that of the Islamic and Christian on its journey to the 21st Century. But regardless of the original cause the fact is that Judeo-Christian symbolism veils alchemical processes and if one wants to understand many of the important masters one have to acknowledge this fact and have a profound understanding of Christian mythology.

Furthermore, I don’t regard Christian symbolism and mythology as a “distorted” form of more ancient mystery religions, as well as I don’t regard that it currupts or dilutes the alchemical teachings. The Gospels and the Book of Revelation are quite straight forward and speaks to the heart (at least to mine). It is the Church interpretation of the Gospels and Revelation of John that is distorted. Christian symbolism has a profound effect upon the soul, as have any good mythology. Besides, alchemy also uses lots of Greek mythology in its symbols, which is a heritage from its ancient roots. Thus to grasp modern post-renaissance Hermeticism you have to have an understanding of both the Greco-Roman and of the Judeo-Christian mythos, as well as that of the ancient Egyptian. This is one of the factors which makes a good Golden Dawn Adept.

But personally I don’t believe that mythology only is about “decoding” a message so that the uninitiated won’t understand your texts. There is that part of course, but in my opinion mythology also delivers a message straight to the heart, the soul of man, by-passing the analytical mind. Alchemical symbolism is archetypal (i.e. speaks about universal principles at work both in the microcosm and macrocosm, both on a spiritual and material level) and may bring about an insight and flash of inspiration about a process from a purely intuitive angle and therefore also superconscious level.

If decoding was the only intention, the old alchemical masters surely would simply have used a secret alphabet or a cipher, like in the Steganographia of Trithemius. Even if they sometimes used that for open and plain texts, they also had the tendency to describe the processes using mythology, and also the play with words which Fulcanelli called “Cabala” and the “language of the birds”. All this implies a language directed to speak subliminally to the unconscious (or subconscious), which will plant seeds and grow and to create new though patterns in the automatic consciousness of man. Thus many alchemical books should be meditated upon, not simply read as a cook book. But there are also straightforward “cook books” as well, but these originally being reserved for initiates only.

In my opinion, the actual mythology used to explain the processes are irrelevant. The important fact is that mythology is used as it conveys archetypal truths in a more direct way without the interference and corruption of the analytical mind. And as I have already said, medieval and renaissance alchemical text books widely use both Christian and Greek mythology, sometimes in the same manuscript. Both mythologies serve their purpose well.

Thus mythology is of high import in the Golden Dawn. Now, I personally don’t see any great difference between Egyptian or Greek religion and that of Judaism or Christianity. That’s why I’m able to use both Egyptian God-Forms and invoke the Holy Name of God as interpreted by the Hebrew or (esoteric) Christian.

Most “polytheistic” religions, such as the Roman, Greek and Egyptian for sure, believed in a supreme godhead or deity. You will find this belief in both American natives and in the belief of the Ancient Egyptian Deity, such as Amen-Ra. The supreme Solar deity created lesser hierarchies of gods and goddesses to do lesser work, in the same manner as IHVH in the Judeo-Christian mythology created Archangels and Angelic Choirs to fulfill His will. There is a clear correspondence there. Just different designations. Only religious people, and perhaps academics, think and acts in such absolutes as “polytheism” and “monotheism”.

The prohibition in the Torah of having no other gods before IHVH is clearly a confirmation of a belief in the minds of the ancient Hebrews that there exists other gods besides their own in the first place, thus monotheism (i.e. the belief that there is only one true God which can be named and that all other gods are nothing but superstitions) apparently is a post Old Testament (as in post Torah) paradigm. Many scholars agree that the monotheistic concept of the Hebrews grew out of a early phase of monolatrism, i.e. the belief in many gods but that IHVH is the superior one and only worthy of worship. Thus what we see here is a gradul change of paradigm from a more “pagan” concept in the Torah to the belief in the one and only God of the psalms.

Nothing human created can be outside of a paradigm. In the individual this is referred to as “thought patterns” and in the cultural context as “paradigm”. Any image of God or a god or goddess is the product of the human mind and follows the social consensus. Man creates God into his own image so that he may comprehend the incomprehensible. This is only natural, and as all magicians know, works splendidly. In the Golden Dawn we create God-Forms to be able to attract real archetypal and spiritual forces. “They” can meet with us as we create though forms for these forces to incarnate and communicate with us. Still the essence of these forces transcends anything created by us, though it helps us being inspired by these forces and lift our spirit.

Thus I don’t care much for designations such as “monotheism” or “polytheism”. Any reader is free to categorize me according to this academic paradigm if he or she wants; the reader probably would place me in the fold of polytheism. I don’t mind, nor do I care. However, I wouldn’t call myself a neo-pagan as they seldom embrace the Christian mythos from several reasons.

Some neo-pagans resent the use of Christian symbolism in the Golden Dawn because of the narrow minded nature of many of its followers. Given the cruel history of Christianity and the attitude of Christian fundamentalists, I can understand their resentment. But the ancients believed in religious tolerance. These neo-pagans should be aware of the fact that Esoteric Christianity has very little to do with most exoteric expressions. The only thing that I share with ordinary Christians is the same Scriptures, mythology and symbology. The interpretation, i.e. the philosophy trying to decode these, is fundamentally different.

Another issue that many hold against the Judeo-Christian religion is that it is hostile to and prohibits the use of Magic, and therefore as a magician one should abandon Christian mythology for a neo-pagan religion. But I hold that the Bible is contradictory in its prohibition against the use of Magic. Most of us already know the part in Deuteronomy which says:

There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch. Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. (Deut. 18:10-11)

But suddenly the New Testament goes contrary to the old laws, when it says in Corinthians regarding how the Spirit of God (Holy Ghost) may act differently in men:

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. (1 Cor. 12:4-11. My emphasis)

Personally I believe Theugy never is addressed in the Old Testament. What the Torah seems to be against is the use of “low magic” or sorcery and necromancy while the New Testament seems to consider Theurgy as an integral part of the Holy Spirit. Many Ceremonial Magicians today regard Christ as the foremost example or prototype of a Magician of Light. Others consider Thoth-Hermes to be the great example. Here one may choose between them or even better use both!

Furthermore I regard Thoth-Hermes and Jesus Christ as more akin to being “avatars” or “prophets”, i.e. individuals highly gifted by the Spirit of God. They are similar to divinely inspired mythic and real men such as Hermes Trismegistus, Melchizedek, Eliah, Mohammed, Sabbatai Zevi, Christian Rosenkreutz or whatever. These are personages who teach humanity about the ALL.

Now, I’m aware of the fact that it is highly difficulty to make a clear distinction between “high” and “low” magic. But my point is that the writers of the Bible probably did make a implicit distinction and to interpret what they meant you have to understand the world view of the writer. This approach is referred to as Hermeneutics.

Now, regarding the prohibition against sorcery in the Torah, Yakov Leib HaKohain of the Donmeh West has provided this interesting quote regarding Jesus, taken from one Gemara of the Talmud:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshua [i.e., ‘Jesus’] was hanged [on a cross]. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plea on his behalf.’ But since nothing was brought forward in the favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! R. Ulla retorted: Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defense could be made? Was he not a Mesith [sorcerer, enticer], concerning whom Scripture says, ‘Neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him.’ With Yeshua [Jesus], however, it was different because he was connected to the royalty. (Tr. Sanhedrin 122a)

One interesting note is that Jesus, as YaLHaK points out, is acknowledged by the Jews to be an heir of King David. A interesting note is also that some people were exempted from penalty for the practice of “sorcery”, obviously a reference made to his ministry as an exorcist and miracle maker, and most probably to the miracle of raising the dead - Necromancy. We all know about the references to magic in the Grimoires attributed to King Solomon, a tradition which seems to be prevalent also in the Arabic culture (as Nineveh Shadrah has pointed out). Thus Theurgy or Magic seems to have been reserved for the Royalty and the Priestly chaste, but prohibited for the common man.

So obviously there were Magicians and there were magicians in the eyes of the Jews. King Solomon, as was Jesus, was regarded to be the vessel or hand of God. Therefore their magic was considered to be pure in the eyes of some Jews. Obviously this quotation lays bare the inherent conflict or ambivalence in the Jewish minds regarding the “messiah” Jesus, who was a political trouble maker on one hand by the ruling class, but on the other was considered by not so few Jews to be the real McCoy.

Also the tale of the Magical battle between Petrus and Simon, which often is brought forward as a argument against the use of magic in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, in my eyes in nothing more than a classical tale of “the Grand Master of our Order is much more powerful Magician than yours”. Eastern traditions are replete with these kinds of tales between competing Tantrik schools and Nath Orders. For a reference, may I please refer the reader to David Gordon White’s excellent scholarly research as put forth in the book The Alchemical Body.

Furthermore, Simon the Magician is tied by some to the Gnostic movement, or rather a proto-Gnostic sect called the Simonians. Gnostic references are often made in the Golden Dawn tradition, a fact which also ties it to Christianity. Valentinus, who led his own Neo-Platonic Gnostic group, was almost elected to be the Pope of the Christian Church. How wonderful and glorious wouldn’t that have been!

After the 3rd or 4th Century most orthodox Christians would consider Valentinus as a heretic. But prior to that Christianity was no homogenous movement. The Valentinians clearly were part of the Christian faith prior to the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Furthermore Valentinus was not the only Neo-Platonist in the Christian Church. There were many also during the medieval times, such as St. Augustine and Pseudo-Dionysius. Neo-Platonism also had a great influence on the later Scholasticism.

The battle between Petrus and Simon is however a reference to the fact that different sects were developing within Christianity which was competing for power. The Church Council of Nicaea took upon it the task to purge Christianity from all “heresy” and to amend (i.e. censor) the New Testament so that it would conform to the new anti-Gnostic theology. Hence the need of a separate and “unauthorized” collection of books, called the Apocrypha with texts like the Gospel of Thomas and the Valentinian Gospel of Truth, etc.

One tradition of Gnosticism refers the Tetragrammaton to the Demi-Urgos. But here is where the Pentagrammaton actually becomes relevant. Through the insertion of the Shin (or Spirit) the Tetragrammaton (or Elements) becomes salved as YHShVH; the Demi-Urgos (or Adam Kadmon) becomes the vehicle of the True and Highest Divinity. This also occurs in the Microcosm when the Ego (Tiphareth) becomes the True mediator between the lower Self (Yesod) and the True and Higher Self (of Divine Genius) in Kether.

In the Gospels the greatest heresy made by Jesus was him claiming to be God incarnate. But I ask if this isn’t the very essence of Theurgy? To be fully identified with God or Godhead, to become Him incarnate? That is the very essence of the negative theology of Meister Eckhart, who assured us that we all could become a Son of God. Thus the aim of the Esoteric Christian is to become like Christ, or as the ancient Egyptians said in the Book of coming forth by day, to be an “Osirian” or one of the immortals.

But with “God” I actually am referring to our own Divine Spark, the Higher Self, the Divine Genius, etc., our Microcosmic God within. This is of course not a Macrocosmic “God” but nevertheless it is the point of connection which we have with the ALL. This is not the same as worshipping ourselves. Or rather it depends on what part of ourselves we are worshipping; the little self or ego, or the True Self, the Divine Spark within which we must raise to be united with God and thus restore God.

Theurgy, as I see it, is the result of man being aware that he has a Higher or True Self but that it isn’t fully incarnate. It is distinct from his personal or lower self but he recognizes it as his True Self, the lower self but being a dull reflection of it. Thus he sets out to create exercises and rituals to induce a more complete incarnation of this Higher Self, to make it take the place in his personality and centre (Sol - Tiphareth). To restore (tikkun) himself to his formal glory before the Fall. To become the King, the New Adam (the YHShVH), which will rule his Kingdom with an Iron Rod.

This complete identification with the Self is the very essence of “doing the will of one’s Father”, etc. In this context Christ is the ideal that we seek to become as – to become true vessels or vehicles of our “Father”, when “His Will truly becomes ours”. This process of course entails the true Transmutation of the body. The raising of the sparks, etc. This, in Esoteric Christianity, is symbolized by the insertion of Shin in the Yod He Vau He – the Tetragrammaton becoming the Pentagrammaton.

Thus I don’t think that many Golden Dawners believe Jesus to be the actual son of God or God himself, although there are some few and I respect their view. Like Gnostics, most Golden Dawn initiates interpret the Bible as an allegory. Golden Dawn is a Rosicrucian tradition which uses esoteric interpretations of Christian symbolism. Like in all Esoteric Christianity, such as Martinism, it places a high import upon the Pentagrammaton. According to it, using a Qabalistic framework, it is the true deliverer which creates the New Adam Kadmon out of the ordinary man and his persona. This is the process called Restoration, Tikkun.

However I’m not promoting Valentinus theology or anything. That said, I adhere to the Rosicrucian Manifestos in my personal belief system. And the Rosicrucian Manifestos I regard to be Esoteric Christian in content, as well as Hermetic. I’m not a Valentinian, nor am I a Gnostic. I’m a Hermeticist. Thus I also adhere to the Emerald Tablet of Hermes and the Corpus Hermeticum, etc. Although I find it to be an interesting though system, in my book there are too many discrepancies between Valentinian Gnosticism and that of Hermeticism. At least this is my current understanding. I might change my mind in the future regarding Valentinus and Gnosticism.

And then there is the question regarding Queen Elizabeth’s court magician Dr. John Dee and of his magical system referred to by him as “Angel Magic”. Dee was an important influence to the Golden Dawn tradition, as well as a possible prominent figurehead in the Rosicrucian movement, the former adapting parts of his angelical magical system to create the system known today as “Enochian Magic”.

Now, John Dee was a professed devout Trinitarian Christian and dedicated to the newly-formed Church of England, under his Queen which reformed the Church. The Enochian Keys are very reminiscent of the Book of Revelation in their tone to the extent that I must conclude that they more belong to the Christian esoteric tradition rather than the purely Qabalistic. Some magicians shares my view regarding its Christian flavour, others don’t.

Most of my readers know that Dee’s magical system was delivered or revealed to him through Edward Kelly’s scrying into a shewstone. And even though classical Hebrew Angels such as Gabriel and Michael do appear to deliver the system to Dee most Enochian Angels such as Ave won’t be found in any Hebrew or Christian Holy Book. Still they were regarded by Dee to be angels, called by their true names and through a divine language that was considered to be lost through the fall of Adam from the Garden of Eden. Dee variously called this language as “Angelical”, or as the “Celestial Speech”, the “Language of Angels”, the “First Language of God-Christ”, the “Holy Language”, or “Adamical”, all intimately referring to a fundamentally Christian outlook.

But on the other hand Dee was also a student of the Renaissance and of Neo-Platonism, Hermetic magic, angel summoning and divination as well, and even necromancy, his most known work being the hermetic text Monas Hieroglyphica or “The Hieroglypich Monad”. But I ask if this isn’t typical of the renaissance philosopher, to be syncretistic? Perennialism has been part and parcel of Hermeticism since the renaissance, the Golden Dawn being but one such example. A renaissance magician and/or alchemist such as Agrippa, Dee and Paracelus, could invoke pagan deities as well as going to mass each Sunday and invoke the Holy Name of Yehshuah. In their minds there wasn’t any contradiction.

I have never thought of Dee as a typical Christian though. He wasn’t typical about anything, but that is the trait of a true initiate. The initiate seeks beyond religion and mythology and seeks the inherent truth behind these symbols through personal gnosis. He doesn’t need any priest; he is his own priest. He doesn’t need any human to confess to; he confesses to his own Divine Genius.

I nor anyone else in the Golden Dawn are part of nor represent the faith of the Christian Church, or any of it’s branches, although some of us are regular churchgoers. We are Esoteric Christians who make allowance for other deities. Thus we cannot be compared with fundamentalists or with Christian Exotericism. As a initiate I’m not following a religious path (although I often evoke a feeling which may be described as “religious”) and thus don’t regard the Golden Dawn to be a path for the many, not even the few.

I have more in common with the ordinary “Thelemite” that I have with the ordinary church-going “Christian”. But even within the “ordinary church” there are very uncommon people of a mystical bent which I call my brethren or sisters in the Work. I would go to a Catholic Mass with a Franciscan or Carmelite anytime, as I would with a Thelemite to a Gnostic Mass. But most of all I prefer to meet my Fratres and Sorores in the Hall of Maat. Why? Because we have a common language which means we don’t have to define basic concepts of faith or consensus notions and terms. This means we can take the discussion to an entirely different level.

It’s important to be able to discuss these topics on several levels. Theological discussions with fundamentalists and exoteric religious people, or atheists for that matter, are good as this forces me to define or redefine my own basic concepts for myself. But to advance my own concepts I have a need to discuss them on a level which transcends theology and reaches philosophy. But to transcend it further I can only rely on my own internal gnosis which makes redundant any intellectual discourse.

And I ask, how may intellectual discourses ever replace one’s own gnosis? I try to be a Magician, Alchemist and Mystic. Intellectual mind games are amusing and stimulating, yes, but Truth may only be revealed on a level beyond the “little ego” or “analytical mind”. As a Christian Esotericist and initiate I base my understanding of the world and myself as part of the ALL purely on direct experience. My own experience, my Soror Mystica’s, the experience of other Golden Dawn initiates, and the experience of mystics through millennia.

So contrary to Exoteric Christianity, the Golden Dawn isn’t a religion but inherently a Spiritual Path. I wouldn’t call myself a “polytheist” nor a “monotheist”. I personally don’t like these analytical and intellectual boundaries being made between “polytheism” and “monotheism”, as they don’t express any spiritual truth, thus I don’t do this broad categorizing. That’s why I sometimes enjoy defining myself as a “Pagan Christian” or “Christian Pagan”.

Some argue that the Golden Dawn does hold a theological position and counts as a religion (or as an organization that espouses religious beliefs). I’m also aware of the fact that my view is more biased than the opinion of a neutral outside observer. But contrary to the outside observer I have the advantage to have a far better understanding of my tradition. But what defines an expert? Who defines him?

Personally I don’t care much about modern academic or outside definitions on a movement that I am a member of. I still claim the right to define my own tradition. Thus for me it is not a religion; it is a Spiritual Path. Spirituality often incorporates a cosmology of sorts which includes a “Creator”, “Divine Architect”, “God” or “Higher Power” or whatever – a principle which transcends ordinary human nature and has a conscious and intelligent intention or Will.

The original Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn stated that it did require acknowledgement of a “Supreme Being” in the same fashion as Freemasonry. But is Freemasonry a religion? No, it is not; it is likewise a spiritual path which doesn’t stand in contradiction to any religious faith or moral conscience. Exactly the same may be said about the Golden Dawn. I must add though that MacGregor Mathers later changed this requirement to say “Belief in a God or Gods”. I prefer this later requirement.

Some other people make comparisons between Buddhism and Golden Dawn. Some hermeticists and even a few Golden Dawn initiates are Buddhists. But Buddhism doesn’t believe in a “Supreme Being” or personal “God”. I do believe in one, which I call the Lord of the Universe, and most Golden Dawners do as well. But in the same manner as the Golden Dawn Buddhism is more of a spiritual path than it is a religion. Also, both the Golden Dawn and Buddhism represent examples of spiritual psychology. So there are similarities to be found. But I cannot embrace the non-divinity concept of Buddhism. If anything Eastern, I’m more of a Tantrika as that tradition resembles Hermeticism most of all the Eastern spiritual systems.

Thus I am a Hermeticist. I also consider myself being a “Esoteric Christian” or (would-be) Rosicrucian. Thus I’m not a theologian. I’m a philosopher (or rather try to be). As a philosopher I don’t accept absolutes. On the contrary I prefer contradictions. Reality is confusing. Thus I often express myself confusingly and contradictory. I don’t overly differentiate and thus may appear confused, this essay being but one example.

One may argue that the early Hermetic texts are “theological” rather than “philosophical”. But I regard Hermeticism as a continuously evolving tradition and thus also recognize the Alchemical Masters since medieval times. They repeatedly refer to themselves as “philosophers”. One may here also consider the term “Philosophers Stone” or the word “philosophical” attached to many chemical terms throughout the alchemical texts.

One may exchange the word “philosopher” with “sage”. A philosopher or sage may also be a priest, thus a philosophy may also be a theology. But being a priest doesn’t necessarily make you a philosopher if you base your paradigm upon blind faith. Thus much theology of the Christian Church doesn’t qualify being a philosophy. Ancient theology was inseparatable from philosophy. In this essay I’m addressing the more modern theology of exoteric Christendom.

Contrary to this, in ancient Egypt different deities represented particular traditions or different branches or the arts and sciences. But there were no water tight compartments between them as is the case today, and members of one didn’t scorn or ridicule the other. As deities represented different branches everything was tied up in Egyptian religion and magical philosophy, regardless it being pure daily cult ritual, or physics, or mathematics, or architecture, or astronomy, etc. It was all interrelated and belonged to the same pantheon, ruled by a supreme deity and creator.

Thus ultimately it is the fallacy of the modern mind, in its interpretation of terms, to place “Philosophy” here, “theology” there and “science” over there in compartments. In the mind of the ancients there was no such division. Ancient philosophy embraced the concept of spirituality, destiny and divinity, at the same time as it did scientific research. This should be the paradigm of the new era to come.

Instead of religious (or theological) on one hand and philosophic on the other, I prefer the terms exoteric and esoteric. Esotericism does have parts which correctly may be attributed as “religious” in quality. But the main difference between the esoteric interpretation and the exoteric is that the former doesn’t mistake mythology for historical or material facts. Thus even if I use Christ as a symbol for my salvation, I don’t regard him as the only God for all. That fundamentalist position is for me a blasphemy.

Therefore I prefer to define esotericism as a “spiritual path” instead of religion, as religion implies a species of fundamentalism – the “my God is the only true one, and everone else’s gods or goddesses are false” attitude.

Christ wasn’t the first and only, or even a “prototype”. On the contrary, he is the latest form taken to represent the formula of the dying god in a modern context. This also makes the Christian mythos so interesting. The fact is that Christians hit levels in their mythos, theology and worship that are much more reminiscent of the older pagan religions rather than Judaism or Islam. Jews consider the notion of a “Trinity” to be a pagan blasphemy.

I consider both Judaism and Islam to be more “monotheistic” than Christianity, in that they only se one person in God (although with different attributes) and doesn’t use any idolatry or images of the transcendent deity. Christianity, on the other hand, see three personages (or hypostases) – The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost – as an expression of One God, besides praying homage to the “Mother of God”. The image of Christ crucified upon a cross is very reminiscent of the old pagan and “polytheistic” practice of god-form worship. Christ being the “son of man” or “god-man” divinity is not that separated from humanity as it is in the Old Testament, bringing the Egyptian myth regarding the death and ressurection of Osiris to mind. The similarities between the Christian mythos of Jesus and Mary and that of the Egyptian Horus and Isis, especially in the apocrypha, are so obvious that they cannot be ignored.

Hermeticism has its roots in paganism for sure, but over time Christian symbols were appropriated by the Hermeticists no doubt because of the many similarities between Christendom and the old mystery religions. Likewise, I share the opinion of MacGregor Mathers that Qabalah is a continuation of the Egyptian mystery traditions. Although Qabalah as we know it today is a relatively late medieval development it uses Divine Names which comes from antiquity and many other concepts which such great teachers as Isaac Luria inherited. Likewise, true Rosicrucianism is based on the yet older Hermetic and Qabalistic traditions, being interpreted and expressed in a modern European setting and in the context of the Christian mythos.

Personally I also believe that the Jewish “montoistic” religion originated from Egyptian worship of the Solar deity, possible as a continuation of the Amen-Ra cult, or even the cult of Aten (the solar disc). There is the theory which I find interesting and appealing, regarding the devout and “monotheistic” Aten-worshippers being expelled from Egypt into Caanan. According to this theory they, who by then had become the Hebrews, later distanced themselves from their roots, especially during and after the Babylonian imprisonment. This theory is put forth in the book Secrets of the Exodus by Messod & Roger Sabbah. They hold that the Israelites actually originates from Egyptians and in particular from the priestly chaste of Aten worship. Likewise the Hebrew alphabet originated from the Hieroglyphs according to the authors and they provide a interesting analysis of the origin of each Hebrew letter in relation to the Hieroglyphs. Reading their book it looks quite plausible, making comparisons between worship, symbols and liturgy of the Hebrews and Egyptians.

I personally hold that Christian religion found its way back to the original Egyptian source and especially attached itself to the mythos of Osiris, Isis, Horus and Seth. In this context Amen-Ra is the equivalent of the “Father” of Jesus. It’s not a coincidence that one of the earliest Christian churches was the Coptic. Egyptians converted en masse as they in Christ saw Osiris or Horus.

Images of Christ found in Alexandria depict him in the guise of Horus. There was also the cult of Serapis (Osiris combined with Apis), also known as “Christos” to its devotees. Horus and Osiris – the son and the father – as symbols are intimately related. Horus – or rather Harparkrat (Horus as a child) – being breast fed by Isis is very much related to the images of the Madonna and the Child Jesus. One may see Horus also as the next incarnation of Osiris, who takes the place of his father – not to replace him but to represent him or the powers that he symbolizes. Both were regarded at some point to be solar deities (both being associated with the solar deity Ra), the sun being a primary symbol for resurrection. But the image of Osiris is more complicated to simply relate him to the sun. He is also associated to the annual growth of vegetation and thus to Dionysus, etc. But then again Dionysus is the Greek equivalent of a dying and resurrected god.

But some neo-pagans abhor the God of the Old Testament because of its cruel and severe side and therfore condemn the use of “evil” Hebrew names. The Qabalist on the other hand is very much aware of the cruel and severe side of God, and even “embraces it”, especially the Lurianic branch called Sabbateism. They call it the “Left Hand Emanation”. They refer to God as both the God of Good and of Evil. In the Golden Dawn the Lord of the Universe is both the Lord of Light and of Darkness.

Thus there is also a merciful side of IHVH to consider, according to the descriptions of the Old Testament, a God who is just, merciful, loving and acts as a provider for is people. The Hebrews as well as Christians basically regard IHVH as Love.

Reality, especially spiritual reality isn’t as simple as a black and white situation. A “monotheistic” God or a deity which encompasses the ALL must incorporate all aspects of reality, also the “negative” sides. As a Hermeticist and Qabalist I acknowledge that life has a purpose, even through the darker periods. One important part of the Work is to transcend the ordinary human concepts of “good” and “evil”. On the level of godhead these concepts are transcended, which Meister Eckhart repeatedly attests.

Qabalah is a way of understanding existence as we know it, also the “negative” and “evil” sides of creation. I much rather prefer a philosophy which sees “evil” and “good” as two aspects of the ALL rather than two opposing deities, the “evil” one going against the preordained order of the “good”. That is an all too simplistic world view. Until we are prepared to acknowledge evil as both being part of ourselves and of God, it may never be transcended.

Compare with the death drive and life instinct of Sigmund Freud. In his philosophy the death drive serves the life instinct, but only after fusion. This, in my opinion, is a wonderful and modern way of describing Tikkun or the Alchemical Marriage. As we are created in the image of God, i.e. as the microcosm reflects the macrocosm, we have to work out our own negativity. In this work of Tikkun or restoration, God will also be restored.

The only reason that “evil” exists as a purely destructive and detrimental force is that it has been split from the “good” side of God or the ALL as part of the Fall or “Breaking of the Vessels”. Through the restoration “evil” and “good”, “darkness” and “light” will be united. Thus restoration is the equivalent of integration. “Evil” as we know it in physical universe may only exist because of disintegration– unbalance.

But as I already have mentioned, in certain Christian Esoteric theories IHVH is regarded as being a jealous God similar to the demi-urge of the Gnostics, who by the injection of the fifth letter Shin becomes Yeheshuah where the Elemental opposites becomes united and whole. This is also reflected in Lurianic and Sabbatian Qabalah as the Restoration of the World (Tikkun ha-Ohlam), which in reality is the restoration of God to his pre-fallen state. Here Christian Esotericism confirms Qabalah and vice versa.

So what I am finally getting at is that as esotericists we should be open-minded and see the ALL (or ONE as it is referred to in the Emerald Tablet) being expressed through all deities and polarities, not just incarnated in one particular god or goddess, regardless of it being the first cult of worship in history or not. Differentiation is an illusion. Now what did the Emerald Tablet, the premiere text of Hermeticism, state?

What is the above is from the below and the below is from the above. The work of wonders is from ONE. (New translation made of Apollonius of Tyana by the Magic Society of the White Flame. My emphasis)

Or to quote an older translation from the twelfth Century:

What is above is like what is below, and what is below is like that which is above. To make the miracle of the ONE THING. (Again my emphasis)

This view is confirmed in the ancient form of Hermeticism as represented by the Corpus Hermeticum which is replete with references to the ALL. The newer textbook The Kybalion, purportedly penned in 1912 by William Walter Atkinson with the help of Paul Foster Case and Michael Whitty, calling themselves “Three Initiates”, continues with this tradition of the concept of the ALL. Furthermore, if it is true that Golden Dawn Adepts Paul F. Case and Michael Whitty co-wrote The Kybalion, this means that it is highly relevant for Golden Dawn students. One occult historian and scholar whom I respect suggested to me that even William Atkinson could have been a member of the Ros. Cruc. Order of A.O. (The Golden Dawn). Be there as it may regarding the true identity of the authors of The Kybalion, but it may truly be regarded as the premiere Hermetic textbook or manifesto of the late 19th and early 20th Century occult revival, being a true expression of its current in content.

Although I agree that The Kybalion shares many views with the New Thought movement of Atkinson, that doesn’t make it any less true as New Thought surely came from somewhere and according to both Atkinson and Case from antiquity. Also reading the quotations from the Emerald Tablet, it’s easy to see that any notions of the ALL isn’t any invention of 21’st Century “New Thought” writers but is based on the very foundation text of Hermeticism.

The extant Greek texts [i.e. Greek translations of the Corpus Hermeticum] dwell upon the oneness and goodness of god... (Wikipedia)

The ONE or the ALL transcends anything remotely religious or any human attributions of deities, super or lower. It is beyond deity. It is the No-Thing. “Deity” (if there is such a thing) is created from this “first matter” or “hyle”. One may call IT “God” but that designation escapes ITS true nature or attributes.

Thus the ALL expresses itself in Amen as well as in IHVH, or Allah, or Shiva, or whatever you prefer to name it. The ALL transcends all names and all images we humans tend to attach to it. Thus it takes new forms of worship according to the development of humanity.

I do happen to believe that there is a reason or point in the long evolution of religion and mythology. Although I do believe in the paradigm of the ages (gold, silver, bronze, iron, etc.) I also believe it represents the fluctuation of evolution. Thus in returning to a new Golden Age we won’t start to worship Amen as they did in the original Golden Age of Egypt. We are not Egyptians are we? We will probably see a completely different deity developed from our current beliefs of God.

Likewise, restoration or Tikkun, as described by Lurianic and Sabbatian Qabalah, doesn’t mean that we will restore the old Eden again as it were exactly before the Fall. We will create a New Eden (or New Jerusalem if you prefer to use symbology of the Apocalypse) which is reminiscent of the state before the Fall but at the same time completely different. You cannot ignore the Millennia after the Fall. There has to be a point to it all. The evolution of consciousness and awareness, of experience, or practice, etc.

Compare with C.G. Jung’s notions concerning “individuation”. The Self and ego are born united but separates during childhood and life’s experiences, but through individuation optimally are found to be united again. It’s like looking at a circle movement. But that is only looking at it two dimensionally. Looking three dimensionally you will see the creation of a spiral movement. Thus it is not a return to the infant state of consciousness (which is psychosis), even if there are similarities (that’s why Jesus referred to Children in his parable of entering the Kingdom of God). You cannot ignore 30, 40, 50, or 60 years of adulthood in the process. It is a similar but at the same time completely different consciousness.

Thus “The Supreme Being” in some distant future mystery religion of a golden age won’t be the same as Amen who was worshipped 4 millennia ago. They probably will call him something completely different too than that of “Jehovah” or “Elohim”. Personally I embrace this development. I believe in evolution. And I believe we will in due time experience a new Golden Age, the symbol of the New Jerusalem being a metaphor for this.

Some argue that unification is likewise an illusion as it is based upon a concept of a state of separation. But that is on the level of ordinary consciousness and a necessary illusionary pre-state. Many mystics through the ages have repeatedly pointed out that diversity is an illusion and that unity is the actual reality. Thus they say it’s not about us “making” unification; we are already united. It’s about us becoming conscious of our unity. Our ordinary consciousness, heavily depended on our physical senses and brain processes interprets reality and thus divides it to be able to grasp it. But this diversity is possible to transcend through the use of meditation, Theurgy and Alchemy.

S∴R∴