Milk (Not Mother's)

The apron and its symbolism

By Bro. F.R. Worts, M.A., P.A.G.D.C. HISTORY OF THE APRON¹  There can be no doubt that the Masonic apron has been developed from the apron worn by operative masons in the middle ages. The few examples surviving show that the operative apron was fashioned from the skin of an animal, most probably a sheep. It was large enough to cover the wearer from chest to ankles, and its fall was held by a leathern thong which passed round the neck. From each side a thong, firmly stitched, enabled the mason to tie the apron round his waist, and the tied bow tended to fall as end-strings. The use of this rough apron continued for many centuries ; the woven apron used by modern masons is comparatively late; it came into use in the eighteenth century.  The earliest representations of the Freemason’s Apron are seen on the engraved portrait of Antony Sayer, the first G.M. of the modern Craft. (1717), and on the frontispiece illustration of Anderson’s first Book of Constitutions (1723). In the former, unfortunately, only the upper part of the apron is visible, and what appears to be the bib or flap is raised. In the second example a Tyler is bringing into the hall a number of aprons ; these have long tie-strings which seem to be of leather. They are also large, well capable of covering a man from chest to: ankles. The method of tying-on the apron was that of operative masons, with the bow and strings in front ; this method was continued later, even when silk or linen strings were used.  The leather apron died hard. Despite the use of softer materials from possibly 1740 onwards, it survived in use until at least 1811. The evidence of this is the first official reference to the apron found in the G.L. minutes of 17th March, 1731 : ²

Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges may line their white leather Aprons with white silk, and may hang their Jewels at white Ribbons about their Necks." (A.Q.C., x, p. 146.)

This regulation was repeated in the 1738 and in subsequent editions of the Constitutions up to and including Noorthouck’s edition (1784), which was the last edition before 1815.  Crowe contended that by 1738 linen had supplanted leather, but Rylands disagreed ; both scholars, however, thought it possible that in the 1730’s some masons were experimenting with fabrics other than leather for their aprons.³  We do not know when the very long aprons went out of use. Only four of Rylands' plates (Nos. 2, 8, 10, 23), depicting non-operative aprons, show the apron to be long. The most interesting of these is No. 23, dated 1754. It shows a group of six Masons and only one of them is certainly wearing a long apron. He is, presumably, the S.W. ; he wears a level as Collar-jewel, and his apron-flap is down. The sixth figure, probably the Tyler, with drawn sword and no Collar-Jewel, wears his flap up.  The early fashion of wearing the bib or flap up soon fell into disfavour. The flap was either cut off or worn down as a fall. Rylands' illustrations offer only two or three examples of the raised flap (Nos. 1, 1717; 23, 1754; 42, 1784). Of his pictures Nos. 1 to 38, no less than nine, it seems, have no flap; in the remainder the flaps are down.  It is evident from surviving aprons and illustrations of the early period that they were designed to be worn with the flap up and fastened, by means of a button-hole, to a button on the coat or waistcoat. Many of these old aprons have a button-hole in the flap, but there seems to have been a tendency amongst Master Masons to wear the flap down or to dispense with it altogether. ⁴ (See Illustrations c and g.)  From 1731 onwards the apron began to assume a more convenient shape, usually kneelength. Leather gave way to softer fabrics, silk, satin, velvet, linen, and chamois-leather. The flap, when retained, was either cut to a triangular form or in a semi-circular line. The latter was increasingly adopted-by M.M.’s, presumably to mark their distinctive rank. The lower part of the apron was sometimes squared off, but generally the corners were trimmed to give a semi-circular line, and the leather thongs were displaced by ribbons or strings.  According to Dermott (Ahiman Rezon, 1764, pp. 24-3 1), some " Modern" Masons, objecting to the working apron of the operatives, introduced a new mode of wearing their aprons upside down; what was formerly the lowest part was now fastened round the abdomen and the bib and strings hung downwards, dangling in such a manner as might convince spectators that there was not a working mason amongst them. Blackham states that this "subterfuge" was introduced between 1730 and 1740, but it was short-lived. ⁵  Before 1760, elaborately-painted or embroidered aprons came into fashion and continued to be favoured until the Union (1813). Many of these aprons were home-made, often artistically finished and adorned with symbolic designs. From 1760 onwards the printed and engraved aprons appeared, many of them being subsequently coloured by hand. (See Illustration n.)  The tendency to decorate Masonic aprons with symbolic designs began in the 1730’s, and between 1740 and 1790 this practice became widespread. These efforts were mostly crude, but many surviving examples reveal skill and taste. Indian ink, paint and embroidery were commonly used for this ornamentation. The most popular designs usually included the All-Seeing Eye, the Columns, and the Square and Compasses, all evidence of the advance of Speculative Masonry in the second half of the eighteenth century. (See Illustrations o, p, q.) Rylands sums up the matter thus: —

". . . by 1784 the apron was greatly reduced in size . . . for a long time there had been considerable laxity . . . and no definition laid down as to uniformity. So long as the material was white the face might be decorated with any number of Masonic symbols or other symbols without infringing the law, provided always that it did not interfere with the privileges of the Grand Officers, who used a purple edging to their aprons . . . The size had grown smaller and smaller. (See Illustrations a, b, l.)  . . . it was quite within the power of each mason to invent for himself almost any apron he pleased." ⁶

In the Library of the Province of Yorkshire (West Riding) is an apron dated about 1820. It is small, hand-made, of white linen edged with narrow light blue ribbon, and there is no other adornment. The strings are very long and of the same blue ribbon. The flap is down; it is cut to a semi-circular line; but it is also cut into two halves, each half forming a semi-circle, and the two parts being neatly edged with the blue ribbon. Among the "Antients" it became a common practice to draw or paint on their aprons the coat of arms of their own Grand Lodge, but in the main the Atholl Masons adopted the fashions of the "Moderns" ; indeed., they indulged their fancy even more freely than their rivals in the choice and use of embellishments. On 2nd September, 1772, the Atholl G.L. passed the following resolution: —

"It having been represented to the G.L. that several Brethren have lately appeared in public, with gold lace and fringe, together with many devices on their aprons, &c., which was thought inconsistent with the dignity, propriety and ancient custom of the Craft, Resolved and Ordered That for the future, no Brethren, Grand Officers excepted, shall appear with gold lace, gold fringe, gold embroidery, or anything resembling gold, on their Masonic clothing or ornaments." (Ahiman Rezon, 1807, pp. 90-91.)

This was simply a ban on gold decoration ; there was still no attempt to prescribe uniformity of design. BLUE RIBBONS AND BLUE SILK  The resolution of the Grand Lodge on March 17th, 1721, ordained that:

"None but the Grand Master, his Deputy and Wardens shall wear their Jewels in Gold or gilt pendant to Blue Ribbons about their Necks, and White Leather aprons with Blue Silk ; which Sort of Aprons may also be worn by former Grand Officers."

This was the first official mention of Blue Silk as a trimming for aprons, and it is clear that the Blue was originally reserved for Grand Officers. The Rawlinson MS., c. 1740, mentions: " Two Grand Masters aprons Lined with Garter blue silk and turned over two inches with white silk strings."  By 1745-50 Grand Officers were beginning to edge their aprons with purple ribbon. The light blue, gradually given up by the Grand Officers, was soon adopted by Master Masons, and since there was no official ruling on the subject (until 1815), blue-edged aprons became fairly common with the rank and file of the Craft from about 1745 onwards.  Uniformity and regularity in the material, design, form and decorations of the apron were not officially insisted upon by the United Grand Lodge until 2nd March, 1814. The pattern was submitted and agreed to on the 2nd May; then the order for a general uniformity was issued. The Constitutions (1815), p. 123, prescribed:

Washington's Masonic Apron

The apron is perhaps the most symbolically important emblem found in speculative Masonry.  It is made of pure white lambskin and is worn by every Mason to all Lodge events.  The apron is the first symbol explained to the Entered Apprentice (1st degree, Blue Lodge) and the first tangible evidence that he possesses of his admission into the fraternity.  What the Mason probably doesn't know at the time of his initiation is that the apron is also worn by temple Mormons and active practitioners of Wicca (witchcraft).
The Mason is taught that the apron is an "emblem of innocence and the badge of a Mason."  According to Joseph Fort Newton, author of The Words of a Great Masonic Divine, "…'by the lambskin,' the Mason is reminded of the purity of life and rectitude of conduct which is so essentially necessary to his gaining admission into the Celestial Lodge above, where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides." 1

In the Mormon temple ceremony, the participant is presented with a green satin "fig leaf" apron. In the "Garden of Eden" portion of the ceremony, the character portraying Adam asks Lucifer, "What is that apron you have on?"  Lucifer answers, "It is an emblem of my power and Priesthoods." 2   Participants obediently follow the narrator's voice as he directs them to put on the apron that has already been explained to them twice as an emblem of Lucifer!

According to William Schnoebelen (former Mormon, Mason, and Witch; author of Mormonism's Temple of Doom), "...in magick, the apron is a symbol of magickal energy or planetary (astrological) force.  It is the badge or rank for the third degree; and represents (when green) the priestly office of Lucifer.  It is the magickal 'tool' of that degree.

"In this third degree of Wicca, the apron serves a practical, magickal purpose.  In this degree, through a bizarre ceremony called the Great Rite, one is initiated into the principle of sex magick (tantra yoga).  The apron is often used during this sort of ritual to help contain and channel sexual energy.  This is why it covers the genital area....it serves rather like putting a lid on a teakettle to help bring it to a boil.  This channeling raises the Kundalini force and supposedly produces enlightenment when the Kundalini serpent strikes upwards and 'bites' you metaphysically at the base of the brain.

"...just as the stole is the emblem of authority in the Catholic Priesthood, so the green apron is the emblem of Lucifer's authority.  In every Satanic group I knew of, the hierophant (High Priest) always wore a green apron, usually of the finest silk or satin." 3

Schnoebelen gives this conclusion of the Mormon ceremony and use of the apron, "...as I saw Lucifer with his Priesthood apron—and as I received my own apron—I was convinced that Christianity reached its highest level of witchcraft in Mormonism.  Jesus, I had been taught as a witch, was a Medium of the highest order, who worked miracles by magick.  Now as I saw the priesthood of Lucifer transferred to Adam in the Apron, I knew it was true." 4   

Manly P. Hall - The Spinal Column & Kundalini

9/11, Star Wars and The Memes of Public Myth

9/11, Star Wars and The Memes of Public Myth from Spike EP on Vimeo.

"During his interview with Bill Moyers in 1986, Dr. Joseph Campbell warned that we had entered a period of history in which the millennium-old myths/ religions no longer functioned: Myth has to give life models and the models have to be appropriate to the possibilities of the time in which you are living. And our time has changed and changed and changed – and continues to change so fast that what was proper 50 years ago is not proper today. The virtues of the past are the vices of today and many of what were thought to be the vices of the past are the necessities of today. The moral order has to catch up with the moral necessities of actual life in time – here and now – and that’s what it is not doing. … And that’s why it’s ridiculous to go back to the old-time religion. … [W]hen you go back to the old-time religion it belongs to another age, another people, another set of human values, another universe. The world changes – then the religion has to be transformed. 

When asked by Bill Moyers: “So what happens when a society no longer embraces powerful mythology?”

Dr. Campbell replied: What we’ve got on our hands … if you want to find what it means to have a society without any rituals read the New York Times … [where you’ll find] the news of the day – young people who don't know how to behave in a civilized society. … I imagine 50% of the crime is by young people in their 20's and early 30's that just behave like barbarians.

The analogy Dr. Campbell drew between myths and computer software provides a way forward: I’ve had a revelation from my computer about mythology. You buy a certain software with a whole set of signals that lead to the achievement of your aim. Once you’ve set it – if you begin fooling around with signals that belong to another system they just won't work. You have a system there – a code – a determined code that requires you to use certain terms. Now, similarly in mythology – each religion is a kind of software that has its own set of signals and will work. If a person is really involved in a religion and really building his life on it, he had better stay with the software that he's got. The [future] myth has to incorporate the machine just as the old myths incorporated the tools that people used – the forms of the tools are associated with power systems that are involved in the culture. We have not a mythology that incorporates these – the new powers are being surprisingly announced to us by what the machines can do. We can't have a mythology for a long, long time to come, because things are changing too fast. The environment in which we are living is changing too fast for it to become mythologized. The individual has to find the aspect of myth that has to do with the conduct of his own life.

Dr. Campbell cautioned: You can’t predict what a myth is going to be any more than you can predict what you’re going to dream tonight. Myths and dreams come from the same place. They come from realizations of some kind that have then to find expression in symbolic form. Every mythology, every religion is true in this sense: it is true as metaphorical of the human and cosmic mystery. But when it gets stuck to the metaphor – then you're in trouble. … The real horror today is what you see in [Jerusalem] – where you have the three great Western religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – and because the three of them have three different names for the same biblical God they can't get on together – they're stuck with their metaphor and don't realize its reference. Each needs its own myth … love thy enemy – open up. Don't judge.

Later in the interview, Dr. Campbell advised: The only myth that’s going to be worth thinking about in the immediate future is one that’s talking about the planet: not this city, not these people, but the planet and everybody on it. That’s my main thought for what the future myth is going to be. And what it will have to deal with will be exactly what all myths have dealt with:

1) the maturation of the individual, the gradual, pedagogical way to follow from dependency through adulthood to maturity, and then to the exit, and how to do it;

2) And then how to relate to this society and how to relate this society to the world of nature and the cosmos. That’s what the myths have all talked about. That’s what this one’s got to talk about. But the society that it’s got to talk about is the society of the planet. And until that gets going you don’t have anything. 

And therein lies the problem: we still don’t have anything."

"Israel" is not a good name - his name was Jacob at first...

"Israel" means "Strives [wrestles] with [a] god"

Now you have to deal with what that name means....

by Estelle Nora Harwit Amrani

November, 1998

from Vibrani Website

recovered through BibliothecaAlexandrina Website

The caduceus is one of the most ancient of symbols. You might best know this symbol as the DNA structure and healing used by the medical profession. Since ancient Mesopotamia the caduceus presented two serpents intertwined (the central nervous system) around a staff (the spinal column) with the wings (the "swan") on either side (the two hemispheres of the brain, with the circle in the center representing the pineal gland, or the central sun and psychic center within). It also symbolized the kundalini energy.

This was originally the symbol for the Anunnaki-Sirian creator god, EA, or EN.KI (who has become an Archetype), was the chief of the magicians, "the one who knows," and infamous for being the serpent of the Garden of Eden who created lifeforms in test tubes half a million years ago with his half-sister Ninharsag, at the suggestion of his son, Marduk, to create humans to be the workers for the gods. (The symbol is also based upon the winged globe for the planet Nibiru, the symbol of the royal Anunnaki family.)

Biblical writers called the healing serpent Nehushtan. The Hebrew word for serpent is "nahash." The root of the word are the Hebrew letters Nun, Het and Shin, which means "to guess." This was translated into other languages as "satan," which some say mean "enemy," or "adversary."

Enki’s identity, as Lord of Earth or In Earth (EN.KI), also known as EA ("whose house is water") is reflected in other names, as well: 

• Adonai
• Ptah
• Aton
• Aten
• Adom
• Adam
• Amen

(Linguistic paleontology is a marvelous and vast area for proving these connections.) 

The name EARTH also comes from EA/Enki. Actually, the name "earth" can be traced to Enki (a.k.a. EA), and "human" is related to Ninharsag/Ninhursag, who was Hathor (the House of Horus): HU (Horus) is also a transliteration of the ancient Sumerian EA (Grimms’ law of interchangeable letters and sounds). If we use Hebrew, HU means "she."

India, the "nagas" were the serpent gods and goddesses. In the Americas there was Quetzlcoatl (or Thoth). The entire world has worshipped the serpent for its wisdom, but ironically, it was not really about snakes at all - unless you feel you have to "guess" what a snake is up to! Why was the snake chosen? For its cleverness, ability to survive in the harshest of environments, and again, its shape resembling the flow of energy up the spine - to the crown chakra, and the third eye. The snake sheds its skin and is reborn. The snake is clever. And perhaps because it naturally instilled a bit of caution or awe in people. Was Enki really a snake? Not literally. He has many different appearances.

The serpent always represents spiritual wisdom, life and healing. The first symbols of serpents were attributed to Enki and then Ninhursag. However, the story of the serpent becoming an evil symbol began with the wars between Enki and his brother, Enlil (later known by the name "Allah"). These conflicts began at birth and had to do with birthright to the royal throne of the Nibiruan civilization in which their father, Anu, was the leader and father to Enki and Enlil. There was a time when Anu felt Enki (due to his wisdom and magical abilities) was the only savior of the Anunnaki people ("Enuma Elish"). 

This story later was reflected in Cain and Abel, and all the stories throughout your times of brothers competing for power, favoritism and inheritance. Enlil’s anger with Enki caused him to twist the truth around to make the serpent evil, which later became what you know as the story in the Bible. What you think of as being Satan is not that at all, but THE REVERSE!

Although there was love between Enki and Enlil, they often did not see eye to eye on many issues, especially when it came to supporting human beings. Enlil never had patience or compassion for people, and on several occasions, Sodom and Gomorrah as one example, he literally nuked them out of existence. He attempted this again during the time of the Great Flood but Enki (and those who supported him) took swift action to alert the Noahs around the planet of the forthcoming dangers. Some of the Anunnaki outraged with Enki for doing so but saw they had little choice in finally carrying out the rescue. Anu supported saving humanity.

In the Garden of Eden situation, Enlil was furious that Enki permitted humans to have access to knowledge, the mixing of the Anunnaki with human genes, thereby becoming more "godly," and equal to the Anunnaki. To strike back at Enki, and in the attempt to regain his power over humans, Enlil vowed to tarnish Enki’s reputation by spreading the idea that the serpent of wisdom was evil. Enlil tried to wipe out knowledge of the DNA coding Enki gave humans, and of what the Anunnaki used in order to have longevity (gold).

However, Enlil was not completely successful because most of Enki’s plan had worked. For centuries afterwards, humans attempted to duplicate the concoction of gold the gods used to maintain their youth and health, and those with the knowledge were able to manufacture substitutes for a while. But, much also had to do with the DNA content of the individual. 

The more pure Anunnaki DNA, the better chance one had of having longevity, etc. Then, combine the DNA with spiritual awakening to the body, blood, and spirit with nutritional supplements, and each human will know who they are - gardeners, and caretakers of the Earth, not owners. Humans are here to maintain beauty, harmony and balance that was first given to us after the Earth was created. We are not to be interested only in ourselves.

Why did Adam eat from the Tree of Knowledge and not from the Tree of Life? Without getting into complex detail, Enki told me simply: 

"With the Tree of Knowledge humans had the chance to figure out everything on their own in time, to be equal to the Anunnaki. Had they eaten only from the Tree of Life, they would live but not have been more the wiser." 

The Garden of Eden, by the way, was a literal place, but also a genetic metaphor.

Enki knew had Adam (Adapa) eaten from the other tree, it would not ensure wisdom or spiritual evolution. Instead, it would more likely result in primitive human living for eons without evolution. The story of this translated from the ancient Babylonian texts is very interesting with Adapa’s confusion over whom to believe, which to eat. It resulted in him eating "the wrong" thing, but actually it was the right thing, in terms of DNA, which would eventually bring our spirituality back from whence it faltered, and remind people to tend to the Earth, which was not created by extraterrestrials, but by God.

The battle between the brothers continued into the time of the pyramid wars and Exodus. The staff with the caduceus was also one of Moses’ tools. The serpent, for the Hebrews represented salvation and wisdom. Moses’s copper serpent staff, often utilized by his brother, Aaron, was made famous for performing miracles. Another connection between the staff and the serpents occurred during the Exodus when the staff was seen to transform into snakes. Aaron was high priest and had been trained in magic. 

He and Moses received instructions from a collective of that main Anunnaki family (who taught Moses the alphabet). Isn’t it interesting that during the Exodus, the name Jehovah, YHWH, took over and the name Adonai began to disappear? This was at the time when Enki departed the Earth and Marduk became the leader of Enki’s family. Enlil’s family was given the Sinai (taken away from Ninharsag) and Enlil’s son, Sin, was its new ruler. His symbol is the crescent moon (which became the symbol for Islam).

Luckily, the heritage of the caduceus lived on. In some versions the staff is capped with a solar disk or even a crescent moon. Nisaba, one of Enki’s daughters, also held a similar staff topped with an "ankh." For some, the staff symbolized Hermes/Mercury. Throughout time different civilizations in India, the Americas, Greece, Egypt, including the great mystery schools and secret societies have renamed and used it. In Christianity the archangel Michael was associated with this staff. The sirens became the staff for two serpents they held in their hands. This staff was considered to be so powerful it was able to raise up the dead.

The symbol of the caduceus was later transferred to one of Enki’s counterparts, Ningishzida (Thoth), the healing god, and then to others of his family because it was a code for the bloodline of Enki’s heritage. From this symbol of the serpent the power was transferred to the symbol of the dragon, who continued to hold the knowledge. The dragon could "divine." This is one reason why we say we and you are of "divine" heritage. You will see a version of the caduceus as the winged solar disk in Ancient Egypt, which incorporated the knowledge of one’s divinity and eternal soul, in the third eye chakra, along with the traditional knowledge of what it stood for. 

Therefore, you will see this symbol above arches and entrances into temples and royal structures to remind those who enter who they really are. And this means not only the DNA connection to the Anunnaki, but the divine soul-being as coming from the Source, itself. The symbol of the winged Isis represents the original female mother goddess, Ninharsag, and blood connection in birthing humans who mated with "the gods," those who fly as a free spirit.

When you see the caduceus, know you are triggering your own genetic memory and seeing your heritage. Each one of you holds within you the DNA, in varying degrees, the wisdom from the Anunnaki and the Source. Since Enki and Ninhursag, there have been other off-planet beings who added in their own DNA to the human species. 

So, you are all a mixture - and all one family from the One God. Within you is the consciousness with which you can liberate yourselves through SELF-knowledge and return to the garden.

Moffat Accredits the Memes: Part I - I Like Icke

"…it means… I don’t know. It means, basically, that some movies are clearly being made by Invisibles and they contain messages for other Invisibles. Invisibles talking to each other in ther own secret language… the movies are signals, they let us know that others are out there…”

"Remain still and lay down your weapons in the name of the British Empire!"

Moffat is a bipolar, manic genius - he never puts in anything random without having acres and acres of planning behind it - he understands Deep Politics, and he understands the  practice, methods, and cultural grammar of Predictive Programming.

When he writes something that looks and sounds completely jarring, incongruous and out of place, it's not due to carelessness or bad writing - it's because he wants you to see something that not everyone will have the eyes to see (much less want to).

So when a Siluran Reptilian Humanoid Lizard-woman drops in fro the ceiling to "rescue" the (newly Scottish) Doctor and says "Stay Where you are, in the Name of the British Empire!", those of is whose brains work in the same kind of way know exactly what he means...

Vastra is meant to a Consulting (I.e. private) Detective. 

And also, a non-naturalised illegal alien.

And a lizard.

She is not an agent of the State.

"It's not real, of course."

"Oh yeah? Well, what is it, then?"

"The Guv'munt"

"Oh, yeah, right - 'The Government' "

"ROAR!!"

"ROAR!!"

"Why this face...?"

"Oh, make me over,

I'm all I wanna be;

a walking study

in Demonology..."

"Hey, so glad you could make it now..."

"But why THIS face...? Have you ever seen it before...?"

"Well, I thought it looked quite good on the Princess."

"It's as if I'm trying to tell myself something..."

"But why this face...?"

"Imagine... Imagine you knew something. 

Imagine you found yourself somewhere. 

I don't know, Pompeii. Imagine you were in Pompeii. 

And you tried to save them. 

But in doing so, you make it happen. 

Everything I do, just makes it happen."

"But your own planet, it burned."

"That's just it. Don't you see, Donna? Can't you understand? If I could go back and save them, then I would, but I can't!"

"I can *never* go back. I can't. I just can't. I can't."

"Just someone. Please.

Not the whole town. Just save someone."

He probably no longer remembers saving Gallifrey.

But she does.

The Impossible Girl...

"She's filled with secrets."

GALLIFREY STANDS.

Gallifrey Falls No More : Which begs the obvious question - so, where is it, then...?

Wherever it is that they are, they don't seem to be fully coporeal, or able to get out by themselves (despite having eternity to work on the problem, and the Highest Sciences and Art in all creation.

So where are they?

Heaven..?

Or the Other place...

From the Book of Enoch

[Chapter 21]

^1,2 And I proceeded to where things were chaotic. And I saw there something horrible: I saw neither ³ a heaven above nor a firmly founded earth, but a place chaotic and horrible. And there I saw ⁴ seven stars of the heaven bound together in it, like great mountains and burning with fire. Then ⁵ I said: 'For what sin are they bound, and on what account have they been cast in hither?' Then said Uriel, one of the holy angels, who was with me, and was chief over them, and said: 'Enoch, why ⁶ dost thou ask, and why art thou eager for the truth? These are of the number of the stars of heaven, which have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and are bound here till ten thousand years, ⁷ the time entailed by their sins, are consummated.' And from thence I went to another place, which was still more horrible than the former, and I saw a horrible thing: a great fire there which burnt and blazed, and the place was cleft as far as the abyss, being full of great descending columns of ⁸ fire: neither its extent or magnitude could I see, nor could I conjecture. Then I said: 'How ⁹ fearful is the place and how terrible to look upon!' Then Uriel answered me, one of the holy angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'Enoch, why hast thou such fear and affright?' And ¹⁰ I answered: 'Because of this fearful place, and because of the spectacle of the pain.' And he said unto me: 'This place is the prison of the angels, and here they will be imprisoned for ever.'

The Lonely God - The Chief of Ten..?

"And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: 

Samlaz-az, their leader, Arakl-ba, Rame-el, Kokabl-el, Taml-el, Raml-el, Dan-el, Ezeqe-el, Baraqij-al, Aza-el, Armar-os, Batar-el, Anan-el, Zaqi-el, Samsape-el, Satar-el, Tur-el, Jomja-el, Sari-el. 

These are their chiefs of tens."

Kal-El, last survivor of the Elohim to reach Earth and wear mortal flesh and live amongst them - not fond, it seems of Boaz and Jachin...

The twins Romulus and Remus (don't get me started), whom legend teaches us are sucklings The Beast) discover that their meddling with equations has resulted in the summoning of one of old gods (Elohim) to manifest upon their checkered, mosaic floor.

Higher Mathematics (and Block Transfer Computation) are dangerous, powerful fundamental forces for the unwary initiate to dabble in.

Boaz, Jachin, the Chakras, Kundalini and All-Seeing Eye.

The Three Ruffians (Policemen / Jubelon / Juwes) fail to gain entry into the Lodge.

DISCLAIMER : Freemasons lie an awful lot, especially to one another and most particularly at the Blue Levels - which exist solely as protracted personal induction or probation period to ensure and verify that you are capable of keeping a secret and a man of your word.

This goes quadruple for anything the Freemasons might actually PRINT, or write to each other, so much (if not all) of the below explanation is likely NOT TRUE.

Or, at the very least, only so true as to be still appropriate for public consumption.

Generally speaking, since the first thing all Masons are taught is that mathematics (and by extension numbers and geometry) are the only absolutes in terms of (moral) truth, if it has numbers or measurements in it that you can verify, it's more likely to be true than any kind of narrative analogy or parable used to instruct the initiate.

XX

JACHIN AND BOAZ

"AND he reared up the pillars before the temple, one on the right hand, and the other on the left; and called the name of that on the right hand Jachin, and the name of that on the left Boaz." (II Chron. 17.)

Very likely some of us have wondered what was the meaning of these two mysterious pillars set up by Solomon in front of his temple, and why they were called by these strange names; and then we have dropped the subject as one of those inexplicable things handed down in the Bible from old time which, we suppose, can have no practical interest for us at the present day. Nevertheless, these strange names are not without a purpose. They contain the key to the entire Bible and to the whole order of Nature, and as emblems of the two great principles that are the pillars of the universe, they fitly stood at the threshold of that temple which was designed to symbolise all the mysteries of Being.

In all the languages of the Semitic stock the letters J and Y are interchangeable, as we see in the modern Arabic "Yakub" for "Jacob" and the old Hebrew "Yaveh" for "Jehovah." This gives us the form [paragraph continues] "Yachin," which at once reveals the enigma. The word Yak signifies "one"; and the termination "hi," or "hin," is an intensitive which may be rendered in English by "only." Thus the word "Jachin" resolves itself into the words "one only," the all-embracing Unity.

The meaning of Boaz is clearly seen in the book of Ruth. There Boaz appears as the kinsman exercising the right of pre-emption so familiar to those versed in Oriental law--a right which has for its purpose the maintenance of the Family as the social unit. According to this widely-spread custom, the purchaser, who is not a member of the family, buys the property subject to the right of kinsmen within certain degrees to purchase it back, and so bring it once more into the family to which it originally belonged. Whatever may be our personal opinions regarding the vexed questions of dogmatic theology, we can all agree as to the general principle indicated in the role acted by Boaz. He brings back the alienated estate into the family--that is to say, he "redeems" it in the legal sense of the word. As a matter of law his power to do this results from his membership in the family; but his motive for doing it is love, his affection for Ruth. Without pushing the analogy too far we may say, then, that Boaz represents the principle of redemption in the widest sense of reclaiming an estate by right of relationship, while the innermost moving power in its recovery is Love.

This is what Boaz stands for in the beautiful story of Ruth, and there is no reason why we should not let the same name stand for the same thing when we seek the meaning of the mysterious pillar. Thus the two pillars typify Unity and the redeeming power of Love, with the significant suggestion that the redemption results from the Unity. They correspond with the two "bonds," or uniting principles spoken of by St. Paul, "the Unity of the Spirit which is the Bond of Peace," and "Love, which is the Bond of Perfectness."

The former is Unity of Being; the latter, Unity of Intention: and the principle of this Dual-Unity is well illustrated by the story of Boaz. The whole story proceeds on the idea of the Family as the social unit, the root-conception of all Oriental law, and if we consider the Family in this light, we shall see how exactly it embodies the two-fold idea of Jachin and Boaz, unity of Being and unity of Thought. The Family forms a unit because all the members proceed from a common progenitor, and are thus all of one blood; but, although this gives them a natural unity of Being of which they cannot divest themselves, it is not enough in itself to make them a united family, as unfortunately experience too often shows. Something more is wanted, and that something is Love. There must be a personal union brought about by sympathetic Thought to complete the natural union resulting from birth. The inherent unity must be expressed by the Individual volition of each member, and thus the Family becomes the ideally perfect social unit; a truth to which St. Paul alludes when he calls God the Father from Whom every family in heaven and on earth is named. Thus Boaz stands for the principle which brings back to the original Unity that which has been for a time separated from it. There has never been any separation of actual Being--the family right always subsisted in the property even while in the hands of strangers, otherwise it could never have been brought back; but it requires the Love principle to put this right into effective operation.

When this begins to work in the knowledge of its right to do so, then there is the return of the individual to the Unity, and the recognition of himself as the particular expression of the Universal in virtue of his own nature.

These two pillars, therefore, stand for the two great spiritual principles that are the basis of all Life: Jachin typifying the Unity resulting from Being, and Boaz typifying the Unity resulting from Love. In this Dual-Unity we find the key to all conceivable involution or evolution of Spirit; and it is therefore not without reason that the record of these two ancient pillars has been preserved in our Scriptures. And finally we may take this as an index to the character of our Scriptures generally. They contain infinite meanings; and often those passages which appear on the surface to be most meaningless will be found to possess the deepest significance. The Book, which we often read so superficially, hides beneath its sometimes seemingly trivial words the secrets of other things. The twin pillars Jachin and Boaz bear witness to this truth. 1

Footnotes

196:1 The following comment was made by Judge Troward, after the publication of this paper in Expression:

"The Two Pillars of the Universe are Personality and Mathematics, represented by Boaz and Jachin respectively. This is the broadest simplification to which it is possible to reduce things. Balance consists in preserving the Equilibrium or Alternating Current between these two Principles. Personality is the Absolute Factor. Mathematics are the Relative Factor, for they merely Measure different Rates or Scales. They are absolute in this respect. A particular scale having been selected all its sequences will follow by an inexorable Law of Order and Proportion; but the selection of the scale and the change from one scale to another rests entirely with Personality. What Personality can not do is to make one Scale produce the results of another, but it can set aside one scale and substitute another for it. Hence Personality contains in itself the Universal Scale, or can either accommodate itself to lower rates of motion already established, or can raise them to its own rate of motion. Hence Personality is the grand Ultimate Fact in all things.

"Different personalities should be regarded as different degrees of consciousness. They are different degrees of emergence of The Power that knows Itself."

Although not clearly visible here, the summit of either of the Boaz/Jachin clock towers designed by Wren has upon each an inverted pine cone or pineapple (as tour guides are often delighted to point out to baffled tourists).

Freemasons (rightly) revere the pineal. 

And always drink bottled water.

Significantly, the pineal gland is located within the oldest, most "primitive" (long-ago evolved/perfected) reptilian cortex within the human brain.

The Ancients knew it to be associated with the Third Eye, and directly connected the appearance and stimulus of direct sunlight upon the brow with higher sensory experiences relation to spirituality.

In reptiles, and many amphibious species, this is actually directly verifiable by way of an outwardly distinct and visible photosensitive Third Eye in the middle of the forehead:

Silurians do indeed have three eyes (or used to).

But Vastra's warrior tribe do not display the same kind of psionic ability previously seen amongst Morka and K'to's Scientific Oligarchy under Wenley Moore.

Although, now, thinking about it - her ability to create and host transtemporal, non-coporeal conference calls on the astral plain, involving other people, other minds, from other species, in other eras, irrespective of whether they themselves are even alive or dead...

At least now their sex life finally seems to at least make sense...

WE MAY NOTE : Vastra has mamalian "People" eyes - she has a soul.

Mackey’s Encyclopedia of Freemasonry discusses the symbol of the the mosaic pavement:

“The mosaic pavement in an old symbol of the Order. It is met with in the earliest rituals of the last century. It is classed among the ornaments of the lodge along with the indented tessel and the blazing star. Its party-colored stones of black and white have been readily and appropriately interpreted as symbols of the evil and good of human life.”

!kcoR s'teL

.mooR gnitiaW eht si sihT

There's also BIG overtones there, commenting on the fact that very soon, the Doctor essentially just won't be British anymore.

"...they probably want to secede  from the rest of my face and set up their own independent state of eyebrows, and that's Scot... 

I have, haven't I, I've gone Scottish..."

"Auw.... Ah'm Scauttish...!"

(Then fry something)

Almost from the first moment he becomes Scottish, he immediately takes up drinking.

Anyway - the point here is that if he is now Scottish, in a matter of weeks, he will no longer be British... Whereas, were he to have remained (nominally) English (or even become Welsh), he would still be British, but if he's Scottish, that will soon no longer be true - most Americans don't understand this, ALL English people don't understand this (and moreover, don't care).

This is how you end up casting George Lazenby - Cubby Broccoli doesn't understand the difference.

But for anyone who might be Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Canadian, Australian or Kiwi, the distinction is fundamental and profound - all these people are victims of the British system placed in positions of inferiority relative to the English under British governance.

We need at least one Venn Diagram to clear this one up:

The likelihood is that the Act of Union 1709 will be nullified within the next coming months, and that Scotland will formally disassociate and remove itself from the United Kingdom, just as (most of) Ireland did in 1921, having formally entered the Union on a purported coequal basis early in the previous century.

If Scotland too annuls it's recognition of the Act of Union and reasserts it's national sovereignty, that will consequently bring about the termination of the United Kingdom as a national entity - the Queen will still (for now, anyway - and in future, it quite well may not be the same one as is crowned in England...) be the Queen of Scotland, as well as England (and Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc. etc....), but Scotland will effectively become a Crown Dominion with a status much as has previously been afforded to Canada, Australia, at one point India, and all the other of the most important Colonies and outposts of the British Empire. Or even Mamdatory Palestine...

"The posh wog and the pushy Jewish bird... We could have our own series..!"

"We do..!"

Verity Lambert (Order of the British Empire) shares a quiet fag with Malpha (Master of the Eighth Galaxy)

Which must, then, surely revert once more to being the English Empire - as indeed it had been understood and conceived prior to the ill-fared Darien Expedition of 1701....

Doctor Who has always been  British - and indeed, the Doctor himself has always been British.

You might say, in some ways that Doctor Who is the ultimate product of the first generation of patent, BBC-brand multiculturalism... Before the deluge of post-modern radical nominalism prompted the reactionary backlash that made that the dirty word some now seem to insist that it is....

As though "Cultural Marxism" was not itself the very epitome of radical nominalism.

Multiculturalism, especially in a state broadcaster like the BBC is a wonderful thing - at least in an era ten years before even the peak (for which, read "absolute lowest depths") of The Black and White Minstral Show, Larry Grayson's Generation Game and It Ain't 'alf Hot, Mum. And Savile. 

In fact, it's fair to say, that at its best, and in it's totality, Doctor Who has always been a product of the victims of the British :

Canadians,

 Gay Indians,

Pushy Jewish Birds from Golders Green not called Cohen,

Scotsmen and the Welsh.

Yorkshiremen,

Australians,

(Certainly more than just a Mouth on Legs, that one...)

And of course the Scouse atheist ex-Monk builder from Jersey.

Yes. Anyway...

The point is that these are all British outsiders - not wanted under the principles under which the imperial (Anglophile) system worked.

None of them would be considered for potential membership of the Lodge, for example...

How the BBC (and all Great British Institutions) Traditionally Works

Jon Ronson : [Regarding Bilderberg] Isn't that in some sense a  conspiracy...?

Denis Healy : Oh, now come off it, Dear Boy...! Listen, now you "get on" at the BBC, by sucking up to people who will say "Go and talk to Denis Healy"...

Jon Ronson: Channel 4

Denis Healy: Hm, what..?

Jon Ronson : At Channel 4.

Denis Healy : Yes... What...? Oh, Channel 4, yes, there you are - that's even worse; because that's commercial.

"He is a strange person. When he was at Oxford he was a communist. Then friends took him in hand, sent him to the Rand Corporation of America, where he was brainwashed and came back very right wing."

Harold Wilson, 

Memoirs: The Making of a Prime Minister, 1916-64 (1986) 

"Probably too many economists in the Government..."

Jim Davidson was incredibly popular on the Bill Cotton-era 1970s TV Variety Circuit - and beats women relentlessly.

This is well-known; everyone is aware of it - he even makes jokes about it.

Never gone to prison - not once. But for why...?

"Both Jesus Christ and God are very important in my life but I don't like the Christianity that links the two. I have found a lot of the answers to my questions in Freemasonry." 

Jim Davidson

Hello Magazine

June 1996

Great Intelligence

Great Intelligence

Great Intelligence

Unfinished Pyramid

Unfinished Pyramid

Unfinished Pyramid

Is that quite what he had in mind....?

Some people accuse the gay community as a whole of being self-centred, divorced from reality, permanently enraged and militant about forms of discrimination and hate speech that just aren't there, completely immune to either fact or a joke, and totally obsessed with absolute irrelevant trivia.

Well, the same is true of many parents.

Marie Antoinette was the Austrian-French Hapsburg Queen, whose reputation in France was purposely destroyed via pre-meditate Masonic intruige, the so-called Necklace Affair - a wholly synthetic, manufactured scandal promulgated by the Magician Cogliostro to ferment xenophobic class-resentment amongst th French urban proletariat and the bourgeoisee.

"The Lord Shelburne machine owned France's Philippe Duke of Orleans, cousin and enemy to Louis XVI, and opponent of the French nation-building tradition which was now being applied to the American cause. Shelburne and the Duke of Orleans employed creatures from the swamp of mystics and charlatans centered in the freemasonic lodges of Lyons, France, in particular the Martinist Order. Among the Martinists who performed in the staged 1780s-1790s French destabilizations were Franz Anton Mesmer, Count Cagliostro (real name Giuseppe Balsamo), Jacques Cazotte, Fabré d'Olivet, and Joseph de Maistre.

Martinism, a mocking perversion of Catholicism, considers Fallen Man to be in exile in this earthly existence, deprived of his powers. Man can only restore his original condition by initiation to the inner ranks of a secret society, through purgative violence—sado-masochistic rituals, torture, and human sacrifices. As a candidate learns to tolerate injury to others, he gives up his human identity, the sympathy which was celebrated in the Peace of Westphalia as the "Advantage of the Other." He loses the Platonic and Christian truth that men prosper by seeking to benefit others rather than themselves.

This pagan ritualism breeds heartless imperial soldiers and fanatic gang leaders, as Mithraic Stoicism did for the Roman Caesars. After Martinism guided successive French coups, its banker-proprietors spun it into Synarchy and fascism—while labeling it Conservatism or fundamentalist Christianity.

Cagliostro had already published a Letter to the French (June 20, 1786) prophesying that "The Bastille shall be completely destroyed, and the land upon which it had been erected shall become a promenade area." The "Count" made this pronouncement after his meetings with the Scottish Rite Mother Lodge in London.

Queen Marie-Antoinette was the particular target of Shelburne's Martinists. The Queen's brother, Austrian Emperor Joseph II, sponsored Wolfgang Mozart, whose music illuminated Joseph's Vienna and his sister Marie-Antoinette's Paris. Marie personally acted in a performance of The Marriage of Figaro, a play by Franklin's arms supplier Caron de Beaumarchais, satirizing the pornographic, still-feudal oligarchy (Mozart's opera was based on the play). The enraged Orleanists repeatedly interfered, trying to stop the play's performance at the Royal court, just as the Duke of Orleans—"Philippe Égalité" as he called himself for the Jacobins—had forced Mozart himself out of Paris in 1778.

The gossip roiling Parisian streets against Marie-Antoinette came from the assassination warmup known as the Affair of the Necklace. 

Cagliostro and his occultist brothers enabled a designing countess, down on her luck, to embroil a Cardinal in a scam involving the purchase, for the Queen, of an exorbitantly expensive necklace she explicitly did not want. The arrest of the countess and Cardinal was played into a scandal vilifying Marie-Antoinette as extravagant, unfeeling, and foreign, amidst starvation. The Countess who stole the necklace escaped prison and fled to England where she was falsely celebrated as a poor victim of tyranny. 

The French King and Queen would be executed."

ADDENDUM: This one story continues to grow:

Cooper: Have either of you fellas heard of the White Lodge

Hawk: Where’d you hear of it?

Cooper: Well, it was the last thing Major Briggs said to me before he disappeared.

Hawk: Cooper, you may be fearless in this world, but there are other worlds.

Cooper: Tell me more.

Hawk: My people believe the White Lodge is the place where the spirits that rule men and nature here reside.

Truman: Local legend, goes way back.

Hawk: There is also a legend of a place called the Black Lodge, the shadow-self of the White Lodge. The legend says that every soul must pass through there on the way to perfection. There you will meet your own shadow-self. My people call it The Dweller on the Threshold…but it is said if you face the Lodge with imperfect courage, it will utterly annihilate your soul.

"Who do you think this is, there...?"

"What is a doppelganger?

Literally, a 'double walker' (German).

One definition of doppelganger (and the earliest on record) is "one who has seen himself".  Such an experience was taken as an ill omen, namely one of impending death.  One doppelganger tradition has it that when the doppelganger meets the person, they mutually annihilate each other.  

In Twin Peaks, it would appear that the doppelgangers are the embodiment of the 'dark side' of one's personality, the accumulation of all his/her bad karma.  

Such a thing, called The Dweller on the Threshold, was supposed to confront the initiate on the 'astral plane' as a force to be overcome (c.f., Hawk's speech in episode 18).  

The expression 'Dweller on the Threshold' first appears in Bulwer-Lytton's novel "Zanoni". "

"We live inside a dream..."

"Would you care for some Garmonbozia?"

Things which you are definitely not supposed to do... :-

"There's a man alive in the world who wasn't alive before."

"An ordinary man: that's the most important thing in creation. "

The whole world's different because he's alive!

7 : When I say stay put, I mean stay put - not take on an entire Dalek assault squad single-handed. What were you doing here, anyway? 

ACE: I came to get my tape deck. 

7: Where is it? 

ACE : It's in little bits. 

7 : Good. 

ACE: Good? Ow. What do you mean, good. Where am I going to get another one? 

7 : That tape deck was a dangerous anachronism. 

If someone had found it and discovered the principles of its function, the whole microchip revolution would take place now, twenty years too early, with incalculable damage to the time line. 

ACE: So? 

7 : So? Ace - the Daleks have a mothership up there capable of eradicating this planet from space -

But even they, ruthless though they are, would think twice before making such a radical alteration to the time line...