Pathway to the Light Pole Shift: Part 2
The True Teachings of Jesus?

Now that we have more or less deconstructed the Bible, I think it's time to take a breath and sit back and ponder the situation.  I realize that I have dumped what amounts to many years of research and "coming to terms" with this matter into the reader's lap with barely a pause for air between assaults on sacred cows.  If it took me years upon years to deal with it, do I for a moment expect you, the reader, to be instantly able to process such ideas?  Of course not!   What's more, I know all the arguments of faith that are used against what I have written.  I know, because I have used them myself.

In the first place, all of this history and archaeology is all fine and good.  But can we not think that the assembling of the Bible, under whatever circumstances it took place, was all done under the power and guidance of God?  Just because we can use all the tools at our disposal to figure out how it was done, does this mean that it was not Divine Revelation?  Must we discard it as divine scripture?

For quite a while, I was able to balance on such a tightrope.  I knew the history, and I had faith that God was in charge of everything, so what did it matter?  Sure, I had to give up the "inerrancy" idea of the Bible.  Clearly, there were things in there that were full of errors, but as a story of incredible overcoming of obstacles, it shone forth into the world like a beacon.  Right?

That thought was followed by the question: Who overcame what?  When, where, how and why?

The Ten Commandments declares from the start: "I am the Lord Your God."  But that's only half the story.  A reading of the full verse shows how belief in the God of Torah is predicated on the Exodus experience: "I am the  Lord Your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt from the house of slavery."[1]

The Jewish people have survived for thousands of years, against all odds, because, as they say, "we knew clearly the truth of Torah."  When the Jews who lived during the times of the Crusades chose to be burned at the stake rather than convert, they were certain that they were not dying for a god and a religion that was based on lies.  Many Jews nowadays, in reaction to "biblical revisionism," claim that to suggest otherwise is to insult the millions of Jews who have died for their beliefs.  If Torah isn't true, what were they dying for?  And if Torah wasn't true, on what is the "New Covenant of Christ based?

What is more, to say that the Bible is composed from four different texts, and that we have an idea of how it was "invented" or from what other traditions the stories may have been borrowed with a greater or lesser degree of distortion, does not deal with the central issue.  When we have taken the whole thing apart and have ascertained, as much as possible, the approximate legitimacy of each element, there still remains another question that actually constitutes the essence of the matter: What are the main trends of the whole?  What are the lines of force running through the ideological field in which the details are placed?[2]

Well, that started to bug me.  I thought about the fact that the Jews are not the only ones who die for their beliefs, or who are dying right now for their beliefs, including many Palestinians.  I would also like to point out that, because of the beliefs of the Jews, and the consequences of those beliefs, including the creation of Christianity, which was founded on the platform of Judaism, many multiplied millions of human beings have died.  Out of the deaths that were the result of World War II, the deaths of Jews constitute only one tenth of the total.  It could be then said that 55 million other human beings - most of them Christian - died for the sake of the beliefs of the Jews.

It struck me forcibly that something was wrong with this picture.

I then further considered the matter: as a result of Christianity, which evolved out of Judaism, we could begin to count the numbers of Native Americans, Hawaiians, Africans, South Americans, and a host of other peoples of a dozen or more other faiths that have given up their lives to the depredations of monotheism.

The saying of Jesus, when he was accused of casting out demons by the power of Satan kept sneaking back into my head and whispering: "By their fruits you shall know them."  And it was pretty evident that this idea that any one group had the hotline to God was a tree that bore very bitter fruit.  It then struck me as strange that, automatically, I was using a saying of Jesus as a yardstick of reality in which I was trying to determine the reality of Jesus and all that went before.  I realized how deeply this system pervades the psyche of the Western mind, and how nearly impossible it is to even formulate a coherent thought without it.  Nevertheless, as a yardstick, the "fruits agenda" seemed to be useful.  It suggested an empirically observable way in which we might evaluate our reality.  We know, for example, that very often a beautiful plant, with succulent appearing fruit, can be deadly poison.  Contrariwise, some plants that are really ordinary in appearance, with unattractive fruit, are quite tasty and beneficial.  So, I decided that the "fruits agenda" could safely be employed as an evaluation criterion.

I tried to imagine a situation in which monotheism - the idea of one, and only one, universal god with a "chosen group" of followers and priests - was not the arbiter of our reality.  I tried to imagine a world where religion was not the reason people would consider themselves more special or "chosen" than other people, or more "right" or having a monopoly on the "real" Universal God, in the "right" context, and with the "right" rituals and modes of worship.  I tried to imagine a world where "saving" others from their errors was not a priority, and I suddenly realized that such a world, where everyone accepted everyone else's view of god, or gods, or worship as being right for them, would be a far more pleasant world.  And suddenly, I realized that Judaism is the trunk of the tree that bears bitter fruit, and monotheism is at the root of all the religions that dominate the Western world today.

During Passover and on Good Friday of this year (2001), the Los Angeles Times published an article entitled Doubting the Story of Exodus.  A number of Jewish commentators wrote scathingly that the "the timing was typical of the insensitivity often shown in mainstream media to religious Jews and Christians."  This insensitivity was compared to publishing an article on Martin Luther King’s extramarital affairs on Martin Luther King Day.

I had to wonder when I read that remark if the writer was even conscious of the comparison he was drawing: that there are "dirty secrets" behind Yahweh's claim to be a liberator and a "good guy?" And what is so "insensitive" about TRUTH?

The main complaint of the Jews regarding the findings of the scholars (in this case, archaeologists in particular) that the Exodus never happened, is that their whole religion and claim to Palestine is based on Exodus.  If the Exodus never happened, then there is nothing to Judaism.  And, they have a point.

But that is what the evidence shows: that the story of Exodus, as told by the Bible, simply never happened.  Every effort and attempt to juggle the times, or suggest real historical explanations that might fit, end in failure.  And believe me, I have read a lot of them looking for the one that might really fit myself!  I admit that I have been as desperate as anyone to discover the "truth" of the Bible.

One of my favorite arguments, for a rather long time, was to denigrate science as being full of anti-religious bias to begin with, and then I would point out all the accounts of scientific theories that have been proven wrong in order to support my argument.  I would sneeringly remark that, since scientists can't make up their mind about anything, or since they often change their theories based on new data, that we ought not to believe any of them about anything until they finally give us the final and complete answer.  Meanwhile, we are better off believing Yahweh and/or Jesus since they do claim to have the final answer!

I would then point out how the Big Bang proved that God created the universe, and that scientists didn't like this theory because of that very reason.  The fact of the matter is that now I have studied the Big Bang theory in some detail, and I realize that a more materialistic theory of the origins of the universe has never been invented, and it is actually not a very good one.  The Big Bang theory, despite the best efforts of many scientists to "cook the data" and make it work, is slowly being overturned as a useful theory.  Does that prove that we ought to believe the Bible, and that we ought to stop looking for answers?

And yet again, I am reminded of a parable of Jesus!  The story of the Pearl of Great price where the guy knew that there was a field with a treasure buried in it, and he sold all he owned to purchase the field.

Well, of course, that parable is used repeatedly to symbolize giving up everything you own to have salvation by faith.  But what if that pearl is Knowledge and "giving up everything you own" means to expend all efforts in the pursuit of knowledge?  What if it relates to the Parable of the Talents and "burying one's talent" is equivalent to not taking the risk and buying the field?  What if not going after the pearl is the act of stopping thinking, to stop trying to learn and discover?  What if it is equivalent to stop knocking and asking at the door?  And if we stop, if we do not trade with our talents, and if we do not exert all our efforts to purchase that knowledge, if we sit down and bury our talent by settling on a belief and stopping thinking, will we possibly be cast into outer darkness?

In fact, Jesus said: "You will know the Truth, and the truth will set you free.  The only problem is, different groups have their own version of the truth, and each group thinks that the version it has is the right "truth."  Is it so that only one group gets to be right in the end?  And if so, which one?  And if not, then what is everybody dying for?

Regarding the general consensus that has been reached among scholars, after many years of hard work and painful attempts to prove Exodus, they simply had to be honest with themselves and admit that they couldn't find what they were looking for.  Those who accuse them of "anti-religious" bias don't know much about archaeologists.  Many of them enter the field because they want, more than anything, to prove the Bible to be true.  But thankfully, most of them are honest, even if it hurts.  And it certainly has to be painful to report discoveries when they know they will face vicious attacks from true believers.  One Jewish commentator on the matter wrote:

According to the book of Exodus, the Israelites spent only 40 years in the desert over 3,000 years ago.  What could possibly remain from a mere 40 years in a desert 3,000 years later?  And since when does the alleged lack of physical proof mean something never happened or doesn’t exist?

Apparently this writer failed to read the evidence carefully.  Evidence was most definitely found of individuals in the desert.  Some of this evidence was even older than the times of the supposed Exodus.  Some evidence was from later times.  The point was that there was NO evidence found in the time period in which the Exodus was supposed to have occurred, and certainly NO evidence of the vast hordes of Israelites that were supposed to have been members of the forty year wandering party.  And the archaeologists involved even went to great extremes in allowing as wide a window of time as possible to cover any and all possible scenarios.

No Exodus; no Cigar.

The above writer would certainly demand some physical proof if he was charged with a crime in a court of law!  And the point is that it seems that religion is, indeed, guilty of a crime.  The fruits of the religions of man are horrible persecutions, multiplied millions upon millions of deaths, and we still persist in saying that we don't need some sort of evidence that our beliefs are appropriate?  Maybe it's true; maybe we can never have any "proof" of the physical kind that they are true, but we certainly have circumstantial evidence, and it all points to monotheism as being guilty of a terrible crime perpetrated against humanity.

The arguments for the Exodus, as described in the Bible, descend rapidly to some of the most absurd comments I have ever read.  One writer snidely remarked:

I have no doubt that many of the archaeologists who are so certain that the Jews never wandered out of Egypt are quite sure that there is intelligent life somewhere in the universe.  But on what basis?  Despite decades of highly sophisticated probing, we do not have a shred of evidence to support the belief that intelligent life exists anywhere else.  They choose to believe it because logic suggests to them that intelligent life exists out there.  Well, logic suggests to many of us that Jews were slaves in Egypt and that there was an exodus.  For thousands of years Jews have been retelling this story.  It is possible that it is all a 3,000-year-old fairy tale, but do logic and common sense suggest this?  Why would a people make up such an ignoble history?  Why would a people fabricate a myth of its origins in which it is depicted so negatively?

There is no parallel in human history to the Hebrew Bible’s negative depiction of the Jews’ national origins.  The Torah’s depiction of the Jews’ exodus from Egypt to Canaan portrays the Jews as ingrates, rebels and chronic complainers, undeserving of the freedom G-d and Moses brought them.  Moreover, aside from Moses, the heroes of the story are nearly all non-Jews.  It is the daughter of Pharaoh who saves and rears Moses (later Jewish tradition actually holds her to be his mother); it is a Midianite priest, Jethro, who tells Moses how to govern the Jewish people; and the two midwives who refuse the pharaoh’s order to kill all male Jewish babies are almost certainly Egyptians.  As for Moses himself, he is depicted as being raised an Egyptian.  That is one of the three reasons I am certain of the Jews’ slavery and exodus.  Any people that makes up a history for itself makes sure to depict itself as heroic and other peoples as villains.  That the Torah’s story does the very opposite is for me an unassailable argument on behalf of its honesty.[3]

Aside from the ridiculous comparison of probing outer space - to which we have no direct access - to the study of archaeology, which is definitely a hands-on activity with many tools at its disposal, the argument about the "ignoble" beginnings is actually specious.  In fact, using a history of slavery and suffering to induce a people to unite into a certain mode of action is a rather common Machiavellian trick.  In fact, it is precisely the argument Hitler used to rally the Germans to throw off the yoke of the Treaty of Versailles.  What is more, such an argument is also a backward way of saying: "See how special we are?  We were ingrates and stiff-necked, and we fought Yahweh all the way.  But he chose us, so what can we do?  We are the ones, the only ones, that he has chosen thus, and therefore it must be because there is something wonderful and special about us, and nobody else on the planet is as wonderful and special as we are!"  And in fact, I have found that both arguments are used by Jews - either one will do when it is convenient.  Allow me to point out that this is not a "Jewish" trait, it is a human trait.  What is more, the Jews are not the only ones who claim an origin as slaves!

In 1972, T.C. Lethbridge, a distinguished naturalist and archaeologist, long time Director of Excavations for the Cambridge Antiquarian Society and for the University Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, published a slim volume entitled The Legend of the Sons of God.  In this book he speculates about the origins of man and asks the reader to seriously consider the questions: just who were the sons of God mentioned in Genesis?  What was the war in Heaven?  Is there more than one species of man?  And how do flying saucers throughout history relate to all of this?

Four years later, Zecharia Sitchin published his own variation on the theme with his Book One of the Earth Chronicles: The 12^th Planet.  In this book, Dr. Sitchin informs us that the word "Nefilim" is from a Semitic root NFL, meaning "to be cast down," as in cast down to earth from heaven.  He points out that theologians and biblical scholars tend to deal with this issue by explaining it away as an allegory or ignoring them.  The Jewish scholars do talk about "fallen angels," but that tends to move into the realm of ethereal beings and clearly we are not talking about ethereal beings when we talk about "the fallen ones" mating with human women and producing offspring.

According to Dr. Sitchin, these the gods, from the realms where these Nefilim originated, literally created human beings in a scientific laboratory.  What is more, man was created to be a "worker," or slave to the gods.  So there is a very, very deep history of this idea of slavery rooted in the Sumerian stories of the creation of the world.  Dr. Sitchin writes:

Since the biblical story of Creation, like the other tales of beginnings in Genesis, stems from Sumerian origins, the answer is obvious.  Condensing the many gods into a single Supreme Deity, the biblical tale is but an edited version of the Sumerian reports of the discussions in the Assembly of the Gods. […] The God of the ancient Hebrews could be seen face-to-face, could be wrestled with, could be heard and spoken to; he had a head and feet, hands and fingers, and a waist.  The biblical God and his emissaries looked like men and acted like men - because men were created to look like and act like the gods. […]

Evolutions cannot account for the appearance of homo sapiens, which happened virtually overnight in terms of the millions of years evolution requires, and with no evidence of earlier stages that would indicate a gradual change from Homo erectus. […] Homo Sapiens is the product of some sudden revolutionary event.  He appeared inexplicably some 300,000 years ago…[4]

Dr. Sitchin quotes extensively from his translations of the Sumerian tablets to prove his point that human beings were created to be slaves.  This was the overwhelming idea of the Sumerians.  It was the weltanschau of the Semitic peoples. And we notice that one of the chief Machiavellian tricks is to create a problem, and then offer the solution. The "gods" created humans to be slaves, and then "one of them" offers to save a particular group by offering them a "covenant." Other "gods" do the same thing, and in the end, mankind is in the same boat that he was in to begin with though now, it has a twist: divide and conquer.

But, there is something more to Judaism than meets the eye.  Another commentator pointed out that the Jews have preserved the Torah and observed all of its meticulous laws for thousands of years, under the most adverse circumstances, with minimal deviation, after being scattered all over the world.

The argument that this is proof of the validity of the Bible says that the various theories of the "Biblical scholars" as to when, where and by whom the Bible was allegedly composed do not explain how the "stubborn, stiff-necked" Jewish people (as described in the Bible) were tricked or coerced into accepting a purported monumental hoax.  Nor do the experts have any rational explanation as to why the Jews have clung so tenaciously and meticulously to the commandments for so many centuries and through so much persecution!

They ask: If the Exodus never happened, how did it become so deeply ingrained in the collective Jewish psyche?  How is it that no natural Jews, however secular they may be, can trace their ancestry back further than four generations without running into a solid line of believers in Torah?  What would cause generation after generation to endure so much suffering for the sake of some phony hoax some Israelite ruler put over on the ignorant multitude?  The experts have no answer as to how the entire Jewish people (including the so-called "Ultra Orthodox") all agreed to go along with a weird scheme and kept it up for century after century even when easier and more popular schemes came along.

Good points, yes?  How in the world could so many people be fooled for so long by a purported hoax, when all of them are so obviously superior in mental and spiritual qualities?

Well, I think we can find the answer to this question, though the reader will need to bear with me here.  First, let's take a look at a story told to P.D. Ouspensky by Georges Gurdjieff about an evil magician.

There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep.  But at the same time this magician was very mean.  He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing.  The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and above all they ran away, for they knew that the magician wanted their flesh and skins and this they did not like.

At last the magician found a remedy.  He hypnotized his sheep and suggested to them first of all that they were immortal and that no harm was being done to them when they were skinned, that, on the contrary, it would be very good for them and even pleasant; secondly he suggested that the magician was a good master who loved his flock so much that he was ready to do anything in the world for them; and in the third place he suggested to them that if anything at all were going to happen to them it was not going to happen just then, at any rate not that day, and therefore they had no need to think about it.  Further the magician suggested to his sheep that they were not sheep at all; to some of them he suggested that they were lions, to others that they were eagles, to others that they were men, and to others that they were magicians.

And after this all his cares and worries about the sheep came to an end.  They never ran away again but quietly awaited the time when the magician would require their flesh and skins."

In order to awaken, first of all one must realize that one is in a state of sleep.  And, in order to realize that one is, indeed, in a state of sleep, one must recognize and fully understand the nature of the forces which operate to keep one in the state of sleep, or hypnosis.  It is absurd to think that this can be done by seeking information from the very source which induces the hypnosis.

Theoretically, (a man can awaken),but practically it is almost impossible because as soon as a man awakens for a moment and opens his eyes, all the forces that caused him to fall asleep begin to act upon him with tenfold energy and he immediately falls asleep again, very often dreaming that the is awake or awakening.[5]

When I first read this story in 1985 or 86, I was so enraged at the suggestion that the god of my religion was an evil magician, that I actually threw the book across the room against the wall.  I fumed and stewed and I'll bet that steam literally issued from my ears.  I was hot!  After awhile, when I had calmed down a bit, I examined the idea in my mind, and a still, small voice asked me: "what if it's true?"

I was so shocked at such a traitorous thought in my own mind that I literally clutched my head to drive out the demon!  If ever there was evidence of how Satan works, that thought creeping into my brain was it!  I resorted to a frenzy of prayer to blot such an idea out of my awareness.

But it wouldn't go away.  At that point in my life I had spent years searching for the ways and means to justify and "prove" my religion, my faith; and here I was being presented with about the most controversial thought imaginable: what if it wasn't just wrong?  What if it is a system that is deliberately contrived to keep people blind?

Well, heck, that's sick!  Isn't it?

At about that point in time someone gave me a copy of the Gnostic texts of Nag Hammadi.  I was pretty sure that I was going to read these very ancient writings - older than most of the copies of the original Bible we have - and that they were going to give me clues that would provide a path to inerrancy and faith.  Here, surely, we would find the truth that had been distorted by millennia of translation and editing.  These guys lived back then, they must have had a clue about what was going on.  The Gnostic writings were going to give me the keys to reconcile my faith questions.

Guess what?  The idea of the Evil Magician as god was right there at the center of gnosticism.  What's more, their version has barely come down to us because the Catholic church saw to it that nearly all the copies of such heresy were destroyed and anybody who subscribed to it was burned at the stake.  Right there, right then, I sat up and took note.  Something was wrong with this picture.  And I have spent the last sixteen years trying to come to some conclusion about which idea stands up as truth after it has been tested, tried, challenged, investigated, and essentially taken apart and put back together.

Yahweh didn't do too well up on the rack in the stress tests.  Neither did Allah.  Christianity did only slightly better, and then, only when I removed the obvious gloss of the Egyptian resurrection myth and left in the clearly Gnostic teachings about the "God of this world" being an "evil magician!"  When the reader is fully informed about the variations on these two themes, it is almost pathetically easy to read the New Testament and see what might be original to "Jesus," and what was added by the "creators" of Christianity as we know it.

What was even more interesting was the fact that the only writings contemporary to the times of early Christianity, which mention it specifically, remark that it is a "vile superstition."  Yet, what we have as Christianity today, is nothing more or less than the same religious practices of the peoples who branded it a "vile superstition."  Obviously something very strange happened between the times of the early Christians, and the times in which Christianity became the established religion.  And whatever it was that happened, changed Christianity from a "vile superstition" to an acceptable, all-inclusive, monotheistic device.  In short, it seems evident that "true Christianity" has completely disappeared from the world stage and those individuals who call themselves Christian are not, in fact, Christians in the original sense of the word by any stretch of the imagination.

The question that comes to mind is: what would the peoples of that time have considered a "vile superstition," when one is aware of what they considered normal religious practice?  The only thing that seemed to fit the bill, so to say, is the possibility that whoever was the figure around which the Jesus legend was wrapped, was teaching that the "God of this world" was an "evil magician."  Not only that, but that he probably suggested that man is the manifestation of God, and all creation is the "body of God," and that there was no point in praying to an "external god" at all.  Now that would have set just about everybody back then on fire!  To suggest that sacrifice to the gods, that appeasing the gods, that honoring the gods, that praying to the gods, that expecting to be saved by or cleansed from sin by any of the gods, was a waste of time would have been absolute heresy to all of the many religions!  For them, such an idea, and only such an idea, would have been most definitely a "vile superstition."

In fact, we have something of a parallel in some remarks about Pythagoras.  He was accused of believing the "vile superstitions" of the barbarians, that a soul is born over and over again into different bodies.  Clement of Alexandria[6] writes:

These are the times of the oldest wise men and philosophers among the Greeks.  And that the most of them were barbarians by extraction, and were trained among barbarians, what need is there to say?  Pythagoras is shown to have been either a Tuscan or a Tyrian.  And Antisthenes was a Phrygian.  And Orpheus was an Odrysian or a Thracian.  The most, too, show Homer to have been an Egyptian.  Thales was a Phoenician by birth, and was said to have consorted with the prophets of the Egyptians; as also Pythagoras did with the same persons, by whom he was circumcised, that he might enter the adytum and learn from the Egyptians the mystic philosophy.  He held converse with the chief of the Chaldeans and the Magi; and he gave a hint of the church, now so called, in the common hall which he maintained.  And Plato does not deny that he procured all that is most excellent in philosophy from the barbarians; and he admits that he came into Egypt.

Whence, writing in the Phaedo that the philosopher can receive aid from all sides, he said: "Great indeed is Greece, O Cebes, in which everywhere there are good men, and many are the races of the barbarians."[…]

And in the Symposium, Plato, landing the barbarians as practicing philosophy with conspicuous excellence, truly says: "And in many other instances both among Greeks and barbarians, whose temples reared for such sons are already numerous." And it is clear that the barbarians signally honoured their lawgivers and teachers, designating them gods.  For, according to Plato, "they think that good souls, on quitting the supercelestial region, submit to come to this Tartarus; and assuming a body, share in all the ills which are involved in birth, from their solicitude for the race of men;" and these make laws and publish philosophy, "than which no greater boon ever came from the gods to the race of men, or will come.[…]

And it is well known that Plato is found perpetually celebrating the barbarians, remembering that both himself and Pythagoras learned the most and the noblest of their dogmas among the barbarians.[…]

But, as one notices when reading Clement, he has an agenda to validate Judaism and the New Covenant of Christianity.  He identified "barbarians" as Egyptians, Persian, Hindus, Babylonians, Phrygians, and so on.  Again we find that all we can discover about the deeper beliefs of the ancient secret schools is what we hear from their detractors.  In the end, Clement established the idea that the "true philosophy" was Hebrew, and that it was preserved most closely in the Egyptian "Mystery Schools."  This twisting of the facts has been the foundation for centuries of researchers to look in the wrong direction for the answers, and to follow the wrong clues regarding such things as the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail.

The Jews who lived in Alexandria in the centuries after its foundation sought to show that, although they were ruled by the Greeks, Jewish writings and teachers had inspired much of Greek culture.  They claimed that the mythical Greek singer Musaeus was really Moses.  Aristobulus, an Alexandrian Jew of the second century B.C., wrote verses that he attributed to such famous Greek writers as Sophocles, showing them to believe in a single male God such as that of the Jews.  He asserted that Pythagoras, Socrates, and Plato had studied the books of Moses and believed that the world was sustained by the God of the Hebrews.  He claimed that “Plato followed our system of law, and clearly worked out every detail in it.”

To explain how Plato was able to learn from these Hebrew writings, Aristobulus said he used a Greek translation of the Bible.  Never mind that this was several centuries before the first known Greek translation existed!

Clement of Alexandria was writing at a time when the Christian church was engaged in a struggle with the predominantly Greek pagan culture.  It was necessary for him to take a very hard line and write some serious propaganda.  Clement claimed not merely that Greek culture was borrowed but that it was stolen.  “They not only stole their religious doctrines from the barbarians, but they also imitated our [that is, Jewish] doctrines.”

During these periods, Egyptians were eagerly telling visiting Greeks that the greatest Greek thinkers depended on Egyptian instruction.  It might be seen as a way of asserting the importance of their culture, especially in a time when they had little or no political powers.  The Greeks were willing to listen to what they were told because of their respect for the antiquity of Egyptian religion and civilization, and a desire somehow to be connected with it.  However, there is no real reason to believe that Greeks derived their philosophy or learning from Egypt!

The story of how the myth of a Greek appropriation of Egyptian philosophy reached the twentieth century is quite instructive.  Many modern researchers and authors of books on the many subjects surrounding the renewed interest in Egyptian religion and its possible relation to great secrets hidden somewhere on the planet, have made the mistaken assumption that, from early times, there was such a thing as an “Egyptian Mystery System,” which is what is supposed to have led the Greeks to come to Egypt to study in the first place.

As it happens, there is no acceptable evidence for this idea.  The works from which this idea derives are either works that are not philosophical or works of Greek philosophy written by Greeks.  They created a genre of literature by which they hoped to gain greater respect for their ideas by pretending that these ideas were based on authentic Egyptian mysteries.

During the Renaissance in Western Europe, such works were suddenly "discovered" and became the rage among "occultists" and "alchemists" and purveyors of all mystical wisdom.  They were taken to be literally true, and representative of Egyptian mysticism, and it is from this imposture that the idea of "Egyptian Mystical Supremacy" was created.  It didn't hurt that this "philosophy" was also connected to the pyramids and sphinx, never mind that the probable true architects of those monuments, and their civilization had absolutely nothing to do with Egypt as we know it from the archaeological record.

The myth of Egyptian mysticism took a serious blow in the nineteenth century following publication of the evidence of the spade and the translation of real Egyptian writings.  However, the facts did not seem to make any impact on the masses of "true believers."  The greatest promoter of this invented Egyptian mysticism were the Freemasons who adopted the fraud in the eighteenth century.  Their version assumed not only the existence of an Egyptian Mystery  System but one that was connected to a great system of "moral education."  The source of these ideas was a fictional, three-volume novel called Sethos, based on "Unpublished Memoirs of Ancient Egypt," published in 1731 by a French priest, the Abbé Jean Terrasson.

Following the ancient convention, the author pretends to be translating an unknown manuscript written by an unknown Greek of the second century A.D. that is ostensibly describing the Egypt of the thirteenth century B.C.  Terrasson portrays a world of advanced science, technology, art, law, and educational institutions such as would delight the imagination of an enlightened eighteenth-century European gentleman.  Access to this ancient science requires the comprehension of a complex system of mysteries, that can only be penetrated by long preparation, including study, moral purification, and a mystical initiation ceremony.

Father Terrasson’s novel became very popular and powerfully shaped the beliefs, practices, and rituals of the Masonic movement, whose reliance on a mythical, mystical, Egyptian tradition is perhaps most widely known in its depiction by Mozart  in his Magic Flute.  This picture of ancient Egypt was soon totally discredited by the discoveries of scientific Egyptology.  But, it remains today as a "secret mystical tradition," that is "rejected" by mainstream science.

Most interestingly, in the present day, authors/researchers Picknett and Prince, in their book The Stargate Conspiracy, have stumbled upon some of the clues as to why this situation has obtained up to the present time.  They have effectively exposed the very nefarious activity behind the scenes of those who are actively promoting the "Egyptian gods are returning" (or any gods, for that matter) scenario. As I have delved into it myself, I have found that the the main figure behind the "Egyptian Mystery Cult" is Rene Schwaller de Lubicz." Picknett and Prince nailed him when they wrote:

 A leading figure in the Paris Theosophical Society, he broke away to form his  own occult organisation, which he called Les Veilleurs – the Watchers –  specifically in order to carry his esoteric ideas into the political arena.

 Perhaps it will come as no surprise to discover that he has been described as  a ‘proto fascist’. He even claims to have designed the uniform for Hitler’s SA  (‘Brownshirts’). Although it is not certain that his claim is true, Schwaller de Lubicz clearly had no problem with people thinking that it was.

 One of Schwaller de Lubicz’s ‘Watchers’ was Vivien Postel du Mas, the man who wrote the Synarchist Pact of the 1930s. Through du Mas, Schwaller de Lubicz  had a particular influence on Hitler’s Deputy, the tormented and complex  Rudolf Hess.

 Schwaller de Lubicz was anti-Semitic and racist – and, like the Nazis, thought  that women were inferior to men. For example, he taught that women were  intellectually incapable of understanding the Hermetica.

All this is important, because it is impossible to separate Schwaller de  Lubicz’s political, Synarchist beliefs from his work as an Egyptologist, the  work that certain authors so admire. [Picknett and Prince, The Stargate Conspiracy See also: Magick and Hitlerism]

The facts seem to demonstrate that humanity is, indeed, being "set up" in a particular way, and it is true that "myths" of Ancient Egypt are part of the ruse, but the chief player in the drama has not - as yet - been identified.  I hope to do so in the course of this work.

The point is: when Pythagoras was accused of "barbarian beliefs" in the earliest sources, it was NOT the Egyptians that were suggested as his philosophical teachers; it was the Druids.  The Druidic beliefs were pronounced to be "vile superstitions."  And so was early Christianity.  What might they have in common?  And can we even get close to it, considering the millennia of corruption, distortion, destruction of material, and brainwashing of the masses?

Regarding the possible clues of what early Christianity was really all about, at one point in the Gnostic gospel of Thomas, the disciples ask Thomas what Jesus told him when he withdrew with him and "told him three things."  Thomas said to them: "If I tell you even one of the things he told me, you will pick up rocks and stone me.  Then fire will come forth from the rocks and devour you."

What in the world was so controversial about what Jesus was saying in private that even some of his closest followers could not be told?  At another point, Jesus says to his disciples, following a rendition of the parable of the sower: "This is also how you can acquire the kingdom of heaven.  If you do not acquire it through knowledge, you will not be able to find it."  Repeatedly throughout the Gnostic texts, the seeking of knowledge, as opposed to belief in salvation from a "god out there" was emphasized.  That was truly heretical in those days.  In fact, it is heretical now.

If "three day deaths and resurrections" of savior gods was so commonplace throughout the Middle East, why was Jesus saying:

You miserable people!  You unfortunate ones!  You pretenders to truth!  You falsifiers of knowledge!  You sinners against the spirit!  Why do you continue to listen when from the beginning you should have been speaking?  Why do you sleep when from the beginning you should have been awake, that the kingdom of heaven might receive you?  I tell you the truth: it is easier for a holy person to sink into filth, and for an enlightened person to sink into darkness, than for you to reign.[7]

At one point, in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus makes a rather astounding comparison:

They saw a Samaritan carrying a lamb and going to Judea.  He said to his disciples, "Why is he carrying the lamb around?"  They said to him, "So that he may kill it and eat it."  He said to them, "He will not eat it while it is alive, but only after it has been killed and has become a carcass."  They said, "it cannot happen any other way."  He said to them, "So also with you: seek a place of rest for yourselves, that you may not become a carcass and be eaten."

That's a far cry from the accepted Christian image of the "Good Shepherd."  The point is, the Gnostic gospels, obviously the "other Christianity" that was abolished and buried by the church had, as the centerpiece of their teachings, that the gods of the many religions down through the ages were merely different manifestations of the Evil Magician of Gurdjieff.  But such an idea is extremely difficult to deal with when one has been inculcated for all of their life in a belief system that includes, (as a precaution), the idea that such ideas as this will come along as the "wiles of Satan" tempting a person to renounce their faith.

At that point I began to try to figure out, if indeed we have been deceived at a level that passes comprehension, for thousands of years, how, in the name of God (no joke!) this was done?  And indeed, I found many clues.

I had always avoided reading the works of Carlos Castaneda because of the "hallucinogen use" reputation attached to them.  But finally, in the course of searching for answers, I began to read some of his work - with an attitude that was somewhat hostile, I admit.  As I read, I realized that Don Juan was telling Carlos about the very thing that was explicated in the Gnostic teachings, and which was alluded to in the works of Gurdjieff.  What was more, when the Egyptian gloss was removed from the teachings of Jesus, it was clear that between the lines, he was saying the same things.  All of them basically say that this world is controlled - owned, you might say - by a Predator.

A recent work by anthropologist Jeremy Narby entitled The Cosmic Serpent,[8] comments on the work of one of the foremost authorities in the history of religions, Mircea Eliade, who wrote Shamanism: Archaic techniques of Ecstasy, saying:

Eliade, who was not a trained anthropologist...  identified astonishing similarities in the practices and concepts of shamans the world over.  Wherever these 'technicians of ecstasy' operate, they specialize in a trance during which their 'soul is believed to leave the body and ascend to the sky or descend to the underworld.' They all speak a secret language' which they learn directly from the spirits, by imitation.  They talk of a ladder - or a vine, a rope, a spiral staircase, a twisted rope ladder - that connects heaven and earth and which they use to gain access to the world of spirits.  They consider these spirits to have come from the sky and to have created life on earth.[9]

Narby comments that "Eliade understood before many anthropologists that it is useful to take people and their practices seriously and to pay attention to the detail of what they say and do."[10]  After his own experience with the South American shamans, Narby concluded that True reality is more complex than our eyes lead us to believe.  He then describes an experience which helped him to conceptualize the reality of the shamanistic world.

Five months into my investigation, my wife and I visited friends who introduced us during the evening to a book containing colorful three-dimensional images made up of seemingly disordered dots.  To see a coherent and 3-D image emerge from the blur, one had to defocalize one's gaze.  […]  After several attempts, and seemingly by magic, a remarkably deep stereogram sprang out of the page that I was holding in front of me.  It showed a dolphin leaping in the waves.  As soon as I focused normally on the page, the dolphin disappeared, along with the waves in front of it and behind it, and all I could see were muddled dots again.[11]

Narby next brings up some interesting things about cognition:

We do not know how our visual system works.  As you read these words, you do not really see the ink, the paper, your hands, and the surroundings, but an internal and three-dimensional image that reproduces them almost exactly and that is constructed by your brain.  The photons reflected by this page strike the retinas of your eyes, which transform them into electrochemical information; the optic nerves relay this information to the visual cortex at the back of the head, where a cascade-like network of nerve cells separates the input into categories (form, color, movement, depth, etc.).  How the brain goes about reuniting these sets of categorized information into a coherent image is still a mystery.  This also means that the neurological basis of consciousness is unknown.  [12]

This highlights the fact that, if we don't even really know how we see things that we term "three-dimensional reality," how can we begin to conceptualize how we will perceive something as strange as the ideas of beings at other layers of reality above our own?  It seems to be so that when a person hallucinates there is no "external source" of visual stimulation.  This is seemingly proved by the fact that cameras cannot record hallucinations.  The "enigma of hallucinations" can be reduced to a primary issue: are the hallucinations originating inside the human brain as the scientific studies suggest, or from outside as the shamans declare?

All around the world shamans of different pathways tell the same stories and see many of the same visions.  And these visions nearly always include serpents which inform the percipient that they are the creators of the human race.

Dr. Narby concludes his study by hypothesizing that the serpentine images are representations of DNA, but I think he has missed the point.

To sum up, DNA is a snake-shaped master of transformation that lives in water and is both extremely long and small, single and double.  Just like the cosmic serpent.  […]  Mircea Eliade has shown that these different images form a common theme that he called the axis mundi, or axis of the world, and that he found in shamanic traditions the world over.  According to Eliade, the axis mundi gives access to the Otherworld and to shamanic knowledge; there is a paradoxical passage, normally reserved for the dead, that shamans manage to use while living, and this passage is often guarded by a serpent or a dragon.  For Eliade, shamanism is the set of techniques that allows one to negotiate this passage, reach the axis, acquire the knowledge associated with it, and bring it back.  [...] According to my hypothesis, shamans take their consciousness down to the molecular level and gain access to biomolecular information.[13]

Again, I think that Narby has missed the point simply because he is not aware of the potentials of hyperdimensional space.  He also has not made the extensive studies over many years that Eliade did.  There is also the matter in the present day of the ubiquitous experience with "aliens" and abductions that leave physical traces in our realty that are clearly not a manifestation of hallucinations produced by going within and having a chat with your DNA!  Indeed, Joseph Campbell discusses the ubiquitous snake symbols saying:

Throughout the material in the Primitive, Oriental and Occidental volumes of this work, myths and rites of the serpent frequently appear and in a remarkably consistent symbolic sense.  Wherever nature is revered as self-moving, and so inherently divine, the serpent is revered as symbolic of its divine life.[14]

But, as Dr. Narby notes:

Campbell dwells on two crucial turning points for the cosmic serpent in world mythology.  The first occurs 'in the context of the patriarchy of the Iron Age Hebrews of the first millennium BC, [where] the mythology adopted from the earlier Neolithic and Bronze Age civilizations...  became inverted, to render an argument just the opposite to that of its origin.'  In the Judeo-Christian creation story told in the first book of the Bible, one finds elements which are common to so many of the world's creation myths: the serpent, the tree, and the twin beings; but for the first time, the serpent, 'who had been revered in the Levant for at least seven thousand years before the composition of the Book of Genesis,' plays the part of the villain.  Yahweh, who replaces it in the role of the creator, ends up defeating 'the serpent of the cosmic sea, Leviathan.' [...]

Campbell writes regarding the twin beings in the Garden of Eden: 'They had been one at first, as Adam; then split in two as Adam and Eve.  However, 'the legend of the rib is clearly a patriarchal inversion' as the male begets the female, which is the opposite of previous myths and of biological reality.  Meanwhile, the damnation of the serpent is particularly ambiguous; Yahweh accuses it of having shown Eve the tree that allows one to tell the difference between good and evil...  According to Campbell, these patriarchal inversions 'address a pictorial message to the heart that exactly reverses the verbal message addressed to the brain; and this nervous discord inhabits both Christianity and Islam as well as Judaism, since they too share in the legacy of the Old Testament '[15]

It occurred to me as I pondered these issues, keeping the "fruits agenda" in mind, that what had actually occurred was a pure Machiavellian ploy.  Label your enemy as what you really are yourself, and then set yourself up as the "savior" from that enemy.  Or even more cunning, if a cabal wishes to take over a country, they play what we know today as "good cop-bad cop."  What if our world is "owned" by such a hyperdimensional cabal?

The confusion about who the serpent really is suggests to us that this confusion is intentional.  We find that the second turning point for the serpent image occurs in Greek mythology where Zeus, originally represented by a serpent, becomes a killer of the serpent and defeats Typhon, the child of the goddess Gaia.

At this point, I would like to go back to my comment about so-called "aliens" and UFOs.  What we need to find is a "track" that there is a connection between this reality and the realm of the Predator as described by Gurdjieff, the Gnostics, and Castaneda.  In The Active Side of Infinity, Carlos Castaneda describes an experience in the wilderness of Mexico under the tutelage of his mentor, Don Juan Matus:

He [Don Juan] had described the energy body to me countless times, saying that it was a conglomerate of energy fields, the mirror image of the conglomerate of energy fields that makes up the physical body when it is seen as energy that flows in the universe.  He had said that it was smaller, more compact, and of heavier appearance than the luminous sphere of the physical body.

Don Juan had explained that the body and the energy body were two conglomerates of energy fields compressed together by some strange agglutinizing force.  He had emphasized to no end that the force that binds that group of energy fields together was, according to the sorcerers of ancient Mexico, the most mysterious force in the universe.[16]  His personal estimation was that it was the pure essence of the entire cosmos, the sum total of everything there is.

Don Juan had said that by means of discipline it is possible for anyone to bring the energy body closer to the physical body.  Normally, the distance between the two is enormous.  Once the energy body is within a certain range, which varies for each of us individually, anyone, through discipline, can forge it into the exact replica of their physical body - that is to say, a three-dimensional solid being.  [...]  By the same token, through the same processes of discipline, anyone can forge their three-dimensional, solid physical body to be a perfect replica of their energy body - that is to say, an ethereal charge of energy invisible to the human eye, as all energy is.  [...]

Sitting at the back of his house in central Mexico that day, don Juan said that the energy body was of key importance in whatever was taking place in my life.  He saw that it was an energetic fact that my energy body, instead of moving away from me, as it normally happens, was approaching me with great speed.

'What does it mean that it's approaching me, don Juan?' I asked.

'It means that something is going to knock the daylights out of you,' he said, smiling.  'A tremendous degree of control is going to come into your life, but not your control, the energy body's control.'

'Do you mean, don Juan, that some outside force will control me?' I asked.

'There are scores of outside forces controlling you at this moment,' don Juan replied.  'The control that I am referring to is something outside the domain of language.  It is your control and at the same time it is not.  It cannot be classified, but it can certainly be experienced.  And above all, it can certainly be manipulated.  Remember this: It can be manipulated, to your total advantage, of course, which again, is not your advantage, but the energy body's advantage.  However, the energy body is you, so we could go on forever like dogs biting their own tails, trying to describe this.  Language is inadequate.  All these experiences are beyond syntax.'

Darkness had descended very quickly, and the foliage of the trees that had been glowing green a little while before was now very dark and heavy.  Don Juan said that if I paid close attention to the darkness of the foliage without focusing my eyes, but sort of looked at it from the corner of my eye, I would see a fleeting shadow crossing my field of vision.

I did see some strange fleeting black shadow projected on the foliage of the trees.  It was either one shadow going back and forth or various fleeting shadows moving from left to right or right to left or straight up in the air.  They looked like fat black fish to me, enormous fish.  It was as if gigantic swordfish were flying in the air.  [...] ' What is it, don Juan?' I asked.  'I see fleeting black shadows all over the place.'

'Ah, that's the universe at large, ' he said, 'incommensurable, nonlinear, outside the realm of syntax.  The sorcerers of ancient Mexico were the first ones to see those fleeting shadows, so they followed them around.  They saw them as you're seeing them, and they saw them as energy that flows in the universe.  And they did discover something transcendental.  [...]  They discovered that we have a companion for life...  We have a predator that came from the depths of the cosmos and took over the rule of our lives.  Human beings are its prisoners.  The predator is our lord and master.  It has rendered us docile, helpless.  If we want to protest, it suppresses our protest.  If we want to act independently, it demands that we don't do so.  [...]  You have arrived, by your effort alone, to what the shamans of ancient Mexico called the topic of topics.  I have been beating around the bush all this time, insinuating to you that something is holding us prisoner.  Indeed we are held prisoner!   This was an energetic fact for the sorcerers of ancient Mexico. 

'Why has this predator taken over in the fashion that you're describing, don Juan?' I asked.  'There must be a logical explanation.'

'There is an explanation,' don Juan replied, 'which is the simplest explanation in the world.  They took over because we are food for them, and they squeeze us mercilessly because we are their sustenance.  Just as we rear chickens in chicken coops, the predators rear us in human coops.  Therefore, their food is always available to them.'

I felt that my head was shaking violently from side to side.  I could not express my profound sense of unease and discontentment, but my body moved to bring it to the surface.  I shook from head to toe without any volition on my part.

'No, no, no, no,' I heard myself saying.  'This is absurd, don Juan.  What you're saying is something monstrous.  It simply can't be true, for sorcerers or for average men, or for anyone.'

'Why not?' don Juan asked calmly.  'Why not?  Because it infuriates you?'

'Yes, it infuriates me,' I retorted.  'Those claims are monstrous!' [...]

'I want to appeal to your analytical mind, ' don Juan said.  'Think for a moment, and tell me how you would explain the contradiction between the intelligence of man the engineer and the stupidity of his systems of beliefs, or the stupidity of his contradictory behavior.  Sorcerers believe that the predators have given us our systems of beliefs, our ideas of good and evil, our social mores.  They are the ones who set up our hopes and expectations and dreams of success or failure.  They have given us covetousness, greed and cowardice.  It is the predators who make us complacent, routinary, and egomaniacal.'

'But how can they do this, don Juan?' I asked, somehow angered further by what he was saying.  'Do they whisper all that in our ears while we are asleep?'

'No, they don't do it that way.  That's idiotic!' don Juan said, smiling.  'They are infinitely more efficient and organized than that.  In order to keep us obedient and meek and weak, the predators engaged themselves in a stupendous maneuver - stupendous, of course, from the point of view of a fighting strategist.  A horrendous maneuver from the point of view of those who suffer it.  They gave us their mind!   Do you hear me?  The predators give us their mind, which becomes our mind.  The predators' mind is baroque, contradictory, morose, filled with the fear of being discovered any minute now.

'I know that even though you have never suffered hunger...  you have food anxiety, which is none other than the anxiety of the predator who fears that any moment now its maneuver is going to be uncovered and food is going to be denied.  Through the mind, which, after all, is their mind, the predators inject into the lives of human beings whatever is convenient for them.  And they ensure, in this manner, a degree of security to act as a buffer against their fear.'[17]

And there is where we find the connection between Dr. Narby's ideas of the serpent as DNA and the reality of the Serpent Race as hyperdimensional beings.  Now, let's go back a moment to something that Dr. Narby found in the literature of shamanism.  He quotes the subjective description of the ayahuasca experience written by an anthropologist named Michael Harner.  In the early 1960s, Harner was studying the culture of the Conibo Indians.  He was told by the Indians, that if he really wanted to understand their religious system, he had to drink ayahuasca.  He agreed with fear and trepidation, and the following account of his experience was the result:

After several minutes he found himself falling into a world of true hallucinations.  After arriving in a celestial cavern where 'a supernatural carnival of demons' was in full swing, he saw to strange boats floating through the air that combined to form 'a huge dragon-headed prow, not unlike that of a Viking ship.'  On the deck, he could make out 'large numbers of people with the heads of blue jays and the bodies of humans, not unlike the bird-headed gods of ancient Egyptian tomb paintings.  [...]

Then he saw that his visions emanated from 'giant reptilian creatures' resting at the lowest depths of his brain.  These creatures began projecting scenes in front of his eyes, while informing him that this information was reserved for the dying and the dead: 'First they showed me the planet Earth as it was eons ago, before there was any life on it.  I saw an ocean, barren land, and a bright blue sky.  Then black specks dropped from the sky by the hundreds, and landed in front of me on the barren landscape.  I could see the 'specks' were actually large, shiny, black creatures with stubby pterodactyl-like wings and huge whale-like bodies...  they explained to me in a kind of thought language that they were fleeing from something out in space.  They had come to the planet Earth to escape their enemy.  The creatures then showed me how they had created life on the planet in order to hide within the multitudinous forms and thus disguise their presence.  Before me, the magnificence of plant and animal creation and speciation - hundreds of millions of years of activity - took place on a scale and with a vividness impossible to describe.  I learned that the dragon-like creatures were thus inside all forms of life, including man.  In retrospect one could say they were almost like DNA, although at that time, 1961, I knew nothing of DNA.[18]

Going back to Castaneda for a moment, and keeping in mind these strange creatures described by Michael Harner, we find don Juan and Carlos out in the desert one day:

...I really wanted to start for home right away [...] but before we reached his house, don Juan sat down on a high ledge overlooking the valley.  He didn't say anything for awhile.  He was not out of breath.  I couldn't conceive of why he had stopped to sit down. 

'The task of the day, for you, ' he said abruptly, in a foreboding tone, 'is one of the most mysterious things of sorcery, something that goes beyond language, beyond explanations.  ...So brace yourself by propping your back against this rock wall, as far as possible, from the edge.  I will be by you, in case you faint or fall down.  ...I want you to cross your legs and enter into inner silence, but don't fall asleep.'

It was rather difficult for me to enter into inner silence without falling asleep.  I fought a nearly invincible desire to fall asleep.  I succeeded, and found myself looking at the bottom of the valley from an impenetrable darkness around me.  And then, I saw something that chilled me to the marrow of my bones.  I saw a gigantic shadow, perhaps fifteen feet across, leaping in the air and then landing with a silent thud.  I felt the thud in my bones, but I didn't hear it. 

'They are really heavy, ' don Juan said in my ear.  He was holding me by the left arm, as hard as he could. 

I saw something that looked like a mud shadow wiggle on the ground, and then take another gigantic leap, perhaps fifty feet long, and land again, with the same ominous silent thud.  I fought not to lose my concentration.  I was frightened beyond anything I could rationally use as a description.  I kept my eyes fixed on the jumping shadow on the bottom of the valley.  Then I heard a most peculiar buzzing, a mixture of the sound of flapping wings and the buzzing of a radio whose dial has not quite picked up the frequency of a radio station, and the thud that followed was something unforgettable.  It shook don Juan and me to the core - a gigantic black mud shadow had just landed by our feet. 

'Don't be frightened,' don Juan said imperiously.  'Keep your inner silence and it will move away. 

I was shivering from head to toe.  I had the clear knowledge that if I didn't keep my inner silence alive, the mud shadow would cover me up like a blanket and suffocate me.  Without losing the darkness around me, I screamed at the top of my voice.  Never had I been so angry, so utterly frustrated.  The mud shadow too another leap, clearly to the bottom of the valley.  I kept on screaming, shaking my legs.  I wanted to shake off whatever might come to eat me."[19]

This is pretty scary stuff, to say the least.  But, can it be true?  Before we think that this is just a phenomenon or hallucination of shamans or anthropologists, let's have a look at another event in a slightly different context.  The following is just a short segment of an account obtained under hypnosis wherein the individual experienced "missing time" common in the alien-UFO literature.  The hypnotist is Barbara Bartholic and the subject is "David," the son of Dr. Karla Turner.  Karla is describing the session:

Something was obviously missing in David's recollection of events, so Barbara asked him more about what he had seen by the fir tree.

'I'm looking at a shadow,' he replied.  'Maybe it's the cat, he likes that tree.  Rustling, pomegranate tree.  At the bottom?  But how?  This, there's something moving, but I can't see it.  It's a dark spot, a black spot, moving around the tree.  And it's gone.'

Barbara asked him to expand his description, so David continued.

'I saw, it looks irregular.  Is it a shadow?  It's black.  It's on the ground.  It's moving around and away, quickly, rustling.  Like walking on leaves.  And it's very faint with a whisper...  a snake sound, real faint.  [...]  My brain's not working, ' he said.  'I'm just tramping behind her to the car.  Ah, ah.  But I want to go look at that.  I heard a noise.

'What did the noise sound like?'  [Barbara's question.]

'A rope, pulled real fast,' he replied.  ' Whoooo, kind of like a top.  But soft, so it was muted.  And that' when I see the thing.  The black.  It's just blackness, on the ground.  Very quick.  Something hit me before.'

'Where?'  Barbara inquired.

'Shocked me,' he answered.  'In the back.  In my hip, at the bottom of my spine...  I'm bouncing, mechanically, towards the satellite dish, I think.  ....  It's big....  It hurt, all over, the shock.  Tingles real loud.  All over my bones it's tingling, shaking.  [...]  I'm walking around the tree, and I hear a noise.  Like a top, a spinning top.  It starts high-pitched and goes lower, and goes away pretty fast.  So I look towards it.  I can't see very well.  ...It's like a blot on the ground, ... a black towel?  Or a garbage bag?  Kind of odd-shaped.  It's flat, flat-flat.  It, it is on the ground, it's no different than the ground, but it's just black and moving fast.  And it's making a little noise.  ...I'm looking at the thing.  ...A blackness.  A 'not.'  Like a 'not-there.'  Like a moving oil puddle on the ground.  ...And it's moving, but changing, too.  Not much, just the edges, not very stable.  And it's gone quick.  ...  I feel strange.  ...  I'm just not me. ... I feel blank ...like a remote unit...'[20]

It's rather strange that this victim of an "abduction" has described something similar to what don Juan talks about as the "predator."  It is also worthy of note that David experiences some strange sound effects similar to those described by Castaneda while interacting with this "black shadowy" thing that looks like a puddle of oil on the ground.  Castaneda, in fact, entitled the chapter that discussed these things: Mud Shadows.

That Gnosticism was part of early mainstream of Christianity is witnessed by the fact that one of the most prominent and influential early Gnostic teachers, Valentinus, was probably in line for election as the Bishop of Rome in the mid-second century.  Valentinus was born in Alexandria around A.D. 100, (so keep in mind that he was very close to the "time" of the purported events of the life of the "historical" Jesus).  He rapidly distinguished himself as an extraordinary teacher and leader in the highly educated and diverse Alexandrian Christian community.  In the middle of his life, around A.D. 140, he migrated from Alexandria to the Church's evolving capital, Rome, where he played an active role in the public life of the Church.

One of the main claims made by the Gnostics was that they were keepers of important secret teachings, gospels, traditions, rituals, and basically things for which many Christians were simply either not prepared to hear.  Such knowledge would, apparently, be shattering to the weak individual.  Valentinus claimed that he had been personally initiated by one Theudas, a disciple and initiate of the Apostle Paul, and that he possessed knowledge of teachings which were being suppressed by the developing opposition that became Christian orthodoxy.

The opposition, it seems, prevailed.  Though he had been an influential person in the church in the mid-second century, by the end of his life, which was only some twenty years later, Valentinus had been forced from the public eye and branded a heretic.

The Control System went into overdrive damage control in the middle of the second century.  From that point on, gnosticism was heresy and the Egyptian model of the dying and resurrecting savior - the corn god - had been substituted into the Christian mythological structure, and a "history" of a "real person" about whom all would revolve was carefully written.  But, not carefully enough.  Obviously, as with the Old Testament, real stories and real sayings had to be used or the adherents of the system would notice.  As the witch in the Wizard of Oz said about taking the Ruby Slippers from Dorothy: "These things have to be handled VERY carefully!" (Followed by fiendish laughter, don't forget!)

And, indeed they were.  By A.D. 180, Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, was publishing his attacks on Gnosticism as heresy.  This process was continued with increasing vehemence by the orthodox church Fathers throughout the next century.  The orthodox catholic church was deeply and profoundly influenced by this struggle against Gnosticism.  Many of the formulations of the traditions and the twist they were given in orthodox theology were the result of the deliberate efforts to demonize gnosticism.  Just as Moses was Demonized by the Aaronid priests, so were all the ideas of gnosticism definitely pronounced upon balefully in the New Testament.

By the end of the fourth century the struggle between the Catholic Church and the classical Gnosticism represented in the Nag Hammadi texts was essentially over.  The church now had the added the force of political correctness to bolster its dogmatic denunciation, and with this sword so-called "heresy" was surgically removed from the Christian body; without anesthesia, I should add.  Gnosticism was eradicated, its remaining teachers murdered or driven into exile, and its sacred books destroyed.  All that remained for scholars seeking to understand Gnosticism in later centuries were the denunciations and fragments preserved in the patristic heresiologies.

And this brings us to a most interesting connection: the Cathars.  There are a number of people nowadays who claim to speak with authority about what the Cathars did or did not believe, but most of them are blowing smoke.  The fact is, the only thing we know about what the Cathars believed or taught is what is filtered through the accusations of their detractors.  The following account is from a medieval source: "Reynaldus: On the Accusations Against the Albigensians."  ("Albigensians" was another name for the Cathars.):

First it is to be known that the heretics held that there are two Creators; viz. one of invisible things, whom they called the benevolent God, and another of visible things, whom they named the malevolent God.  The New Testament they attributed to the benevolent God; but the Old Testament to the malevolent God, and rejected it altogether, except certain authorities which are inserted in the New Testament from the Old; which, out of reverence to the New Testament, they esteemed worthy of reception.

There is no surviving complete version of the Cathar New Testament, or any definitive exposition of their teachings. But, based on the material we do have, we do see that the Gnostic gospels are, very likely, similar to the Cathar texts.  We do know that they esteemed their gospel of John as being the "closest" to the truth, and that the "historical" gospels were all "made up" stories that had nothing to do with the "real" Jesus. The reader may wish to read the Cathar Gospel of John the Evangelist, from which the following is an excerpt, keeping in mind that "Henoch" is "Enoch."

And I asked the Lord and said: What shall be in that time? And he said to me: From the time when the devil fell from the glory of the Father and (lost) his own glory, he sat upon the clouds, and sent his ministers, even angels flaming with fire, unto men from Adam even unto Henoch his servant. And he raised up Henoch upon the firmament and showed him his godhead and commanded pen and ink to be given him: and he sat down and wrote threescore and seven books. And he commanded that he should take them to the earth and deliver them unto his sons. And Henoch let his books down upon the earth and delivered them unto his sons, and began to teach them to perform the custom of sacrifice, and unrighteous mysteries, and so did he hide the kingdom of heaven from men. And he said unto them: Behold that I am your god and beside me is none other god. And therefore did my Father send me into the world that I might make it known unto men, that they might know the evil device of the devil.

Reynaldus continues:

They charged the author of the Old Testament with falsehood, because the Creator said, "In the day that ye eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ye shall die;" nor (as they say) after eating did they die; when, in fact, after the eating the forbidden fruit they were subjected to the misery of death.  They also call him a homicide, as well because he burned up Sodom and Gomorrah, and destroyed the world by the waters of the deluge, as because he overwhelmed Pharaoh, and the Egyptians, in the sea.

This is quite clearly a Gnostic idea.  The Gnostics taught that Jehovah/Yahweh was an "Evil God" more like a demon than anything else.  But, that he did have something to do with the creation of the material world was part of their teachings as well.  So, he clearly wasn't just a "demon" in the sense of an ethereal attacker of human beings who could be "cast out" by an exorcism.  No, indeed, he was far more than that!

They affirmed also, that all the fathers of the Old Testament were damned; that John the Baptist was one of the greater demons.

This is an interesting remark since it relates in a curious way to a comment of "Jesus" in the "Secret Book of James."  His disciples are asking him: "Lord, how can we prophesy to those who ask us to prophesy to them?  For many people ask us, and expect to hear a sermon from us."  The Lord answered and said:

Do you not know that the head of prophecy was removed with John?  When you realize what the head is, and that prophecy comes from the head, then understand what this means: its head was taken away.  At first I spoke with you in parables, but you did not understand.  Now I am speaking with you plainly, and you still do not perceive.[21]

This is, no doubt, an extremely mysterious remark.  Writers of the present day, not understanding the symbolism of the "talking head" and the head of John the Baptist as it relates to the head of Bran the Blessed, have erroneously come to the conclusion that John the Baptist was the true object of worship of the Cathars and Templars.[22]  Some writers have even ignorantly proposed that this "talking head" is the armillary sphere of Pope Sylvester, and that it "talks" about "precessional cycles."[23]

The remark of Raynaldus about the condemnation of John the Baptist by the Cathars was not made up out of thin air, and we see it in the Cathar Gospel of John the Evangelist where Jesus says:

And Satan the prince of this world perceived that I was come to seek and save them that were lost, and sent his angel, even Helias the prophet, baptizing with water: who is called John the Baptist. And Helias asked the prince of this world: How can I know him? Then his lord said: On whom soever thou shalt see the spirit descending like a dove and resting upon him, he it is that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost unto forgiveness of sins: thou wilt be able to destroy him...

Considering the above, what are we to make of the claims of those who propose that there has been a secret society for millennia that actually worships John the Baptist and Mary Magdalene in secret?  Certainly, if that had been the case with the Cathars, Raynaldus would have said so because such a claim was damning enough in its own right.  But that is not what he said.  He said that the Cathars damned John the Baptist as one of the greater demons.  And then we see the "Jesus" of the Gnostic texts saying that the head of this "demon" had been related to "prophecy" and was "removed."  In a very strange way this reminds us again of the myth of Perseus, where the head of the Gorgon, a major "demon" if ever there was one, was "taken away" and, in fact, became rather useful in and of itself.  Perhaps as we go along, we will come to some idea about this mysterious remark that the "head of prophecy was removed with John."  Returning to the allusions to the beliefs of the Cathars as recorded by Raynaldus:

They said also, in their secret doctrine, (in secreto suo) that that Christ who was born in the visible, and terrestrial Bethlehem, and crucified in Jerusalem, was a bad man, and that Mary Magdalene was his concubine; and that she was the woman taken in adultery, of whom we read in the gospel.  For the good Christ, as they said, never ate, nor drank, nor took upon him true flesh, nor ever was in this world, except spiritually in the body of Paul.... .[24]

It is indeed likely that the Cathars did not believe that the "historical Jesus" was accurately depicted in the New Testament.  Clearly, they did believe that the "Jesus" of the New Testament was a fraud.  However, it is not very likely that they believed that the "real Christ" was manifested ONLY in the body of Paul.

The remark about Mary Magdalene does irreparable damage to many popular theories of the present time, that she was the "wife of Jesus," and that they produced children together and that these children are the origin of the idea of the "Sang Real," or "Holy Blood."  The point is, if Raynaldus had simply reported that Mary Magdalene was the "mistress" of the "real Jesus," and that they had children, that would have been sufficiently damning.  If he had reported that the Cathars worshipped John the Baptist as the true Christ, that also would have been sufficiently damning.  However, his version of what they believed was that John the Baptist represented a demon, and that there was a "bad man" crucified in Jerusalem, who was connected to Mary Magdalene, but that it wasn't the real Jesus.  So he probably wasn't making it up.  Clearly, the beliefs of the Cathars were something other than an idea that John the Baptist was the true Messiah, or that Jesus and Mary had children together as many present day popular writers would have us believe.

There is a curious connection of this idea to those teachings of Paul.  You see, it is evident from textual analysis that Paul did not know of a "Christ" as a historical personage in the body of a man called Jesus as represented in the New Testament.  He knew of a "Christ" spirit that was an "anointing" of gnosis, and when his writings are analyzed with all the tools of linguistics, and the additions, glosses, and interpolations removed (not to mention the epistles that are clearly not Pauline), we find a series of teachings that is most definitely Gnostic in flavor and texture.  Not only that, but the teacher that Paul referred to had quite a different history than the Jesus of the New Testament.[25]

It is also likely that the Cathars believed that any physical "crucifixion" that took place was that of a criminal and not of the "real" Jesus.  This was, as they would perceive it, an overlay of the Egyptian religion of the resurrection of Horus, and was repugnant to the Gnostic ideas of salvation through direct knowing, as opposed to salvation by a "sacrifice."  Their very rejection of the patriarchs and Yahweh was based on the sacrifice issue, which they saw as a violent "eating of humanity" undertaken by evil Archons of Darkness.  Nevertheless, that they did, indeed, have some idea of an initiatory process that was part of being Christed seems to be apparent.

They said that almost all the Church of Rome was a den of thieves; and that it was the harlot of which we read in the Apocalypse.  They so far annulled the sacraments of the Church, as publicly to teach that the water of holy Baptism was just the same as river water, and that the Host of the most holy body of Christ did not differ from common bread; instilling into the ears of the simple this blasphemy, that the body of Christ, even though it had been as great as the Alps, would have been long ago consumed, and annihilated by those who had eaten of it. .[26]

Sure, the Cathars probably thought and taught all these things.  But then, why not?  They were probably right.

Confirmation and Confession, they considered as altogether vain and frivolous.  They preached that Holy Matrimony was meretricious, and that none could be saved in it, if they should beget children.  Denying also the Resurrection of the flesh, they invented some unheard of notions, saying, that our souls are those of angelic spirits who, being cast down from heaven by the apostacy of pride, left their glorified bodies in the air; and that these souls themselves, after successively inhabiting seven terrene bodies, of one sort or another, having at length fulfilled their penance, return to those deserted bodies. .[27]

Now, of all the things said by Raynaldus, this is the most interesting.  But, let me deal with them in reverse order.  The item that human souls are those of "higher beings" is quite in keeping with the many myths and legends of The Fall - the former state of man in paradise.  But, that this "paradise" is here described as sort of "in the air" and not exactly "in heaven," is most interesting in terms of hyperdimensional realities.  It is also interesting in terms of the "ascent of the shamans" that we will come to soon enough.  The statement that clearly describes a belief in reincarnation and seven incarnations is also interesting since it seems to be a garbling of the seven levels of reality that are part and parcel of many other ancient systems of philosophy, originating, in fact, in Siberian Shamanism, as we will show.

The item about marriage is interesting in the sense that, indeed, it seems that the Cathars taught that their followers ought not to have children so as to not provide more "food" for the Archons of Darkness.  However, that they did not teach an abandonment of marital relations is clear from other accusations that they engaged in "sexual rites" of some sort, designed to heighten awareness, similar to Tantric practices.  In fact, a deep study of the matter will suggest that the "crucifixion" of the "true Christianity," the "Christing," was actually the Shamanic ascent to the Goddess, which may or may not have been effected by participating in prolonged, rhythmic, ritual intercourse.  We don't know that, so without further evidence, we cannot make such assumptions or claims. What we can discover from investigating the matter is that very little is really known about Tantric practices, because those who are initiated speak about it only in allusions and allegories.  So please keep in mind that assuming that physical sexual activity has anything to do with it may be misleading - an exoteric blind.

The bottom line is, it seems that their main point about marriage was that if you bring a child into the world, you are perpetuating darkness because this world is ruled by beings who can invade the mind, and thereby further entrap the soul.  This idea has recently been brought forward in a most interesting way.  Dr. David Jacobs, professor of History at Temple University,[28] wrote about his extensive research into the alien abduction phenomenon.  Dr. Jacobs says that now, after all of these years of somewhat rigorous research, that he knows what the aliens are here for and he is afraid.  David Jacobs says that producing offspring is the primary objective behind the abduction phenomenon.  He writes that there are ongoing abductions through particular families.

Beyond protecting the fetus, there are other reasons for secrecy.  If abductions are, as all the evidence clearly indicates, an intergenerational phenomenon in which the children of abductees are themselves abductees, then one of the aliens' goals is the generation of more abductees.  Are all children of abductees incorporated into the phenomenon?  The evidence suggests that the answer is yes.  If an abductee has children with a non-abductee, the chances are that all their descendants will be abductees.  This means that through normal population increase, divorce, remarriage and so on, the abductee population will increase quickly throughout the generations.  When those children grow and marry and have children of their own, all of their children, whether they marry an abductee or non-abductee, will be abductees.  To protect the intergenerational nature of the breeding program, it must be kept secret from the abductees so that they will continue to have children.  If the abductees KNEW that the program was intergenerational, they might elect not to have children.  This would bring a critical part of the program to a halt, which the aliens cannot allow.  The final reason for secrecy is to expand the breeding program, to integrate laterally in society, the aliens must make sure that abductees mate with non-abductees and produce abductee children.[29]

We find here a strange and frightening connection between the alien abduction phenomenon and the teachings of the Cathars.  And, if it is so that the Cathars were following a form of Christianity that was closer to what the "real" Jesus taught, then the entire mystery begins to make sense.  Apparently what "Jesus" taught was the reality of hyperdimensional beings who can travel in time, invade and control the mind, and whose primary source of nourishment is human beings - either physically or mentally or emotionally.  Remember what don Juan said:  "They took over because we are food for them, and they squeeze us mercilessly because we are their sustenance.  Just as we rear chickens in chicken coops, the predators rear us in human coops.  Therefore, their food is always available to them.'  And how did don Juan say they can do this and get away with it?  Because they "gave us their mind."

What is this Predator's mind that don Juan talks about?

When you put the various pieces of the puzzle together, what you find is that the Predator's Mind, the "hypnosis" that Gurdjieff talked about, the Matrix Control System interface with our bio-cosmic computers, our bodies, is our DNA which is controlled and restricted by the generation of specific brain chemicals via the control of our emotions.  This is what determines the way our brains and nervous systems are set up, which includes certain early periods of Imprinting, which establishes our circuitry and thinking processes at an age and under conditions over which we have no control.  And once those circuits are set up in a certain way, they can almost never be changed without a major melt-down, and they determine forever after how all incoming information is categorized.  Indeed, we all have "reptilian" DNA.  But we also have avian DNA.  In fact, we are a veritable smorgasbord of DNA from all that exists around us.  Nevertheless, something is going on that puts the reptilian DNA in control, and it is in that context that don Juan means that the "Predator gave us his mind."  And I am not just going to make this statement without backing it up.

One of the main aspects of socio-cultural programming is what is called "imprinting." Human beings are born with certain basic behavior patterns built in their DNA.  Just as a flower will follow a certain series of steps from the emergence of the seedling to the stage of producing a flower, human beings also develop certain characteristics only at certain times in their growth process.  These sequences are something over which we have no control at the time it is done, and it almost completely insures that we will not attempt to change it later because it becomes, in effect, the "way we think."

Konrad Lorenz illustrated this principle with his famous ducks.  Ducks (and humans) are "programmed" at a certain time in their lives to "accept a mother" figure.  If the proper mother figure is not there at that moment of imprinting, whoever or whatever is there will become the mother image in the mind of the duck.  That is to say, when the appropriate (or inappropriate) object of need is presented to the duck at the correct time in its development, the object is labeled "mother" somewhere in the brain, and this label is next to impossible to erase.

Experiments were conducted with ducks which demonstrated that there is a critical age in hours at which a duckling is most responsive to "obtaining and labeling" a mother.

Similar studies were done with monkeys.  These studies demonstrated that if a monkey has not received motherly stimulation before he is a certain number of weeks old, he will grow up to be cold, aloof, and unfriendly to his own offspring.  Since monkeys have a "window of imprinting" that extends over a larger time frame than a duck, we might suppose that a human has a similarly wide window of a week or two.

The curious thing about the monkey experiments were that the sense of touch was more important than the feeding.  A fuzzy surrogate with no milk was preferred over a wire surrogate with milk.  This demonstrates a high level need for touching and caressing.  It also suggests the "mode" of the mother imprint - sensory.  What is felt on the skin determines the mother image in the mind of the human being.

Evidence that there is a critical period for the mother imprint in the higher animals was emphasized in the monkey experiments.  In one instance, the experimenter was not prepared for the arrival of a new baby monkey and had to create a makeshift surrogate mother using a ball for the head.  This was provided to the baby, while the experimenter worked on a better model with a face.  But, it was too late.  The baby monkey had already bonded to the faceless mother and turned the face of the new model around so that it was blank.  A mother with a face was simply not acceptable because the imprint had already been made.  Joseph Chilton Pearce writes:

Occasionally we hear of people found chained in attics and such places from infancy.  Their world view is either scanty or different for they are always feeble minded at best.  In 1951 a child was found in an Irish chicken-house, having somehow survived there with the chickens, since infancy.  The ten-year old's long hair was matted with filth; he ate at the chicken trough; roosted with the flock; his fingernails had grown, fittingly, to semicircular claws; he made chicken-like noises, not surprisingly; he had no speech and showed no promise of learning any in the time he survived his rescue.

Forty years ago there was interest in two feral children found in India.  They had apparently been raised by wolves.  They were taken from an actual wolf den along with some cubs, the older wolves scattering or being killed.  One of the children, Kamala they called her, survived for nine years.  Only with difficulty was she taught table manners and such niceties as walking on the hind legs.  Nevertheless she exhibited a growing awareness of the reward system of her new group, and displayed a strong drive toward such orientation.  As with the chicken-child, however, she had missed the formative period of human infant development, and there was no easy or complete going back to retrace the steps.  Kamala had formed according to the pattern eliciting response around her during her mirroring [imprinting] period.  For her first two years of captivity - or rescue - she howled faithfully at ten, twelve, and three at night, as all Indian wolves do.  She would also, in spite of precautions, manage to get at the chickens, rip them apart alive and eat them raw.  Only when the new social reward system grew strong enough to outweigh the earlier rewards did she abandon her early training.  [30]

We are all Kamala.  We are all divine children raised by wolves, the Predator of Monotheism.  We are all programmed.  Our programs are written in the circuits of our brains by those around us in our formative years, just as their programs were written during their formative years, and so on back into the mists of time.  Each generation just adds a few more lines of code.  It is our ideas that shape our children.  We provide what we may consider to be the ideal environment for the child, but our own programming determines what we may consider to be the "proper environment."  Once we have provided the environment, we then want our children to like it, to approve of it, to agree with us that it is "right."  And our ideas come from our culture.  And our culture is created by what?  A Control System?  Indeed.  The Matrix of Monotheism.

There is considerable evidence that "agreement" is also "in the genes."  There seems to be a genetic drive toward communion with others, for speech and preferences and disposition.  As newly born human beings, it seems we come into the world with intent to be in agreement with others.  But the details of how we go about being "agreeable" is related to the imprints we receive at the various stages of childhood development.

Everyone carries in their genes, it seems, deep archetypes that are very much like a database program just waiting for someone to input data.  The thing is, this database is only open to input for a limited period of time, and whatever data is entered during that time determines how all other data will be evaluated forever after.  It will produce over and over again the same response to any set of stimuli that have one or more items that have been organized by the database.  Anything that is not found in the database is "discarded."  If the database is not utilized and no data is entered during the period of readiness, or imprinting, that possibility goes dormant and diminishes.

The higher thinking functions, laid over the deep level archetype database, can be viewed as a kind of software that is linked to the database, and must constantly check with it in order to operate.  You could think of it as a word processing program with a fixed dictionary and set of templates, and you can only write in it according to the templates, and you can only use the words that are in the already fixed dictionary.

Since our brains are genetically designed to accept imprint conditioning on its circuits at certain crucial points in neurological development, these critical periods are known as times of Imprint Vulnerability.  The imprint establishes the limits or parameters within which all subsequent conditioning and learning will occur.  Each successive imprint further complicates the matter, especially if some of these programs are not compatible with others.

Different schools of thought describe these circuits as "stages of development."  Some of the earliest work in these concepts has passed into our culture to such an extent that they have become slang terms such as "Oh, he's just anal-retentive," with very little actual understanding of what is meant by such expressions.

It seems that, according to research, the "older" brain structures - those necessary for basic survival, such as the brain stem - are imprinted in the earliest stages of development, and that the "newer structures," such as the mid-brain and cortex develop "superimpositions" upon the more primitive imprints.  However, the earlier parts of the brain and their imprints form the foundation for how later imprints are responded to and continue to function after the higher thinking modes are developed.

In other words, if you are traumatized as an infant at a crucial point of Imprint Receptivity, it doesn't matter if you grow up to be the President of the United States - you will still be ruled by the imprint.

And, of course, we have a classic example in Bill Clinton.  It didn't matter that he was behaving in ways that could have destroyed his marriage and the emotional well-being of a well-loved child; it didn't matter that his behavior was destructive to the point of practically bringing the entire country to chaos.  His inner emotional drives, determined in infancy by his imprinting, ruled his behavior.  His Rhodes scholar intellect had nothing to do with it.  And, sadly, this is actually exactly how everyone operates in principle, though not necessarily in specific.  A lot of men do have the same imprint Bill has; only they aren't President of the United States.  But then, women also have their own variations on this theme.

In terms of the attachment of the Jews to their religion, we are here concerned with the first stage, or circuit, which is the oral-passive-receptive, and is imprinted by what is perceived to be the mother or first mothering object.  It can be conditioned by nourishment or threat, and is mostly concerned with bodily security.  Trauma during this phase can cause an unconsciously motivated mechanical retreat from anything threatening to physical safety.

Having come to the tentative idea that the whole Judeo-Christian monotheistic rant was a major control program, I came face to face with the question: how and why has it worked so well for so many thousands of years?  More than that, how was it imposed in the first place?

I puzzled over this for weeks.  I thought about several things that Friedrich Nietzsche had said that struck me like thunderbolts of truth once I was able to really step back and look at the matter:

The Jews are the most remarkable nation of world history because, faced with the question of being or not being, they preferred, with a perfectly uncanny conviction, being at any price; the price they had to pay was the radical falsification of all nature, all naturalness, all reality, the entire inner world as well as the outer.  They defined themselves counter to all those conditions under which a nation was previously able to live, was permitted to live; they made of themselves an antithesis of natural conditions - they inverted religion, religious worship, morality, history, psychology, one after the other, in an irreparable way into the contradiction of their natural values.[...]

Christianity has waged a deadly war against the higher type of man.  It has put a ban on all his fundamental instincts.  It has distilled evil out of these instincts.  It makes the strong and efficient man its typical outcast man.  It has taken the part of the weak and the low; it has made an ideal out of its antagonism to the very instincts which tend to preserve life and well-being...  It has taught men to regard their highest impulses as sinful - as temptations.

What is Jewish, what is Christian morality?  Chance robbed of its innocence; unhappiness polluted with the idea of "sin;" well-being represented as a danger, as a "temptation," a physiological disorder produced by the canker worm of conscience.[31]

But, that's not to say that Nietzsche was any paragon himself, with his mysogynistic, misanthropic rants!   He was, in fact declared insane in 1888.  Revolt against the whole civilized environment in which he was born is the keynote to Nietzsche's literary career.  But maybe sometimes the pendulum has to swing all the way in the opposite direction to get a clear perspective on where it was before?  And the fact is, he had a point about Judaism and Christianity (and any and all other monotheistic, dominator religions.)

So, there I was, pondering this and trying to figure out HOW and WHY people could be so completely taken in by this utter nonsense?  How can educated members of the human race, in this day and age, with all the resources of knowledge and awareness available to those who have the desire and energy to search for truth, possibly buy into such myths?  It just staggered my mind to think about it.

I went back in my thinking to the whole Jehovah-I AM deal; the Moses story and all that; and went over the details as they are presented in the Bible for clues.  And I came up against that most interesting demand of that crafty Yahweh: circumcision - on the 8th day, no less.

The only thing is: the rite of circumcision began with Abraham, not Moses.  In Genesis Chapter 17, verses 10 through 14, Yahweh, after promising Abraham all the wonderful things he was going to do for him, says:

This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your posterity after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised.  And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token or sign of the covenant between Me and you.  He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner not of your offspring.  He that is born in your house, and he that is bought with your money, must be circumcised; and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.  And the male who is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.

Some scholars have suggested that the rite of circumcision, commonly practiced in Egypt, Persia, and the Middle East, was an imitation of menstruation.  In the earlier cults, it was performed at puberty on boys who were dressed up as girls for the occasion.  We do find that the first specific act of circumcision described in Genesis was that of the 13 year old Ishmael, son of Abraham by Hagar the Egyptian.  It was considered to be a sacrifice that was pleasing to a male deity who, effectively, related to his devotees in an explicitly sexual way - including the men.  We do, indeed, find this factor in the "prophetic" utterances of Yahweh who repeatedly accuses the Israelites of "whoring" after other gods.  And of course, the first commandment is based on the "jealousy" factor, which is implicit in a sexual relationship.

Based on information provided to me by a Jewish physician who has researched the matter, circumcision was originally practiced by removing only the tip of the foreskin, known as the frenar band.  This area contains 50% of all genital nerve fibers.

In Tantric theory, the tip of the penis and clitoris correspond to the top of the head (crown chakra - spiritual seat) in a manner that is very similar to reflexology.  Certain Tantric practices utilize this factor for achieving elevated states of consciousness.  If it is possible that the brain functions as a hologram, with different frames in different parts of the brain receiving nerve impulses from different parts of the body that is then coordinated into a smooth continuous picture, the extreme richness of nerve endings in the foreskin being removed might very well create a "blank spot" in the brain of some significance.  His conclusion is: " I am thinking that it was used as a form of mass control."

Talk about your basic abyssal cunning.  That Yahweh was one crafty dude.

How do I dare to say such a thing?  Ought not God to strike me dead on the spot?  I am certain that, by this time, what I am saying is equally repugnant to Christians and Jews alike - not to mention their close cousin Moslems.

The point is, I am not saying what I am saying just to shoot sacred cows for the fun of it.  We have a real problem with understanding and navigating in our reality that has not been solved for the masses of humanity these many thousands of years.  The path of "blind belief" just isn't getting it.  It never did and never will no matter how many Orthodox Rabbis or Catholic saints or Baptist Preachers say we need to get back to the "fundamentals."  Fundamentalism in terms of religion is the root cause of most of the evils of this planet.  We need a different kind of fundamentalism: a true fundamentalism, a getting back to the basics of trying to learn about and understand our reality without all the filters of Mind Control that are exerted on humanity today.  And I don't mean mind control in any sense of "secret government projects" or sitting somebody in a chair and shining a light in their face while intoning "Vee haf vays of makink you talk!"

No, I mean the Mind Control of the Matrix.  The Mind Control of the belief systems that have been imposed on us for millennia for reasons we need to determine, and pretty damn quick!

You are visitor number .