Laura Knight-Jadczyk - Schwaller De Lubicz And The Fourth Reich.pdf

(596 KB) Pobierz
Schwaller de Lubicz and the Fourth Reich
Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Many readers have written to me
asking about the work of Rene
Schwaller de Lubicz, and why I
have suggested that work based
on his ideas is misleading. I
have before me the lovely boxed
set of his magnum opus, The
Temple of Man , in which
Schwaller makes all kinds of
claims about the "pharaonic
intelligence" and thought, which
we must take as true simply
because he says so. Oh, indeed,
he does attempt to dazzle the
ignorant and easy believer with
his mathematical and
"symbolique" feats of cerebral
derring-do, but when his
sentences are examined carefully for content, one makes the
most distressing discovery that the word density of Schwaller
is quite low. And he helpfully informs us at the beginning, in
case we don't get it, that if we don't get it, it's going to be our
fault because we aren't bright enough to get it.
Schwaller de Lubicz settled in Egypt in 1938 and for the next
15 years studied the symbolism of the temples, particularly
Luxor, finding what he considered to be proof that the ancient
Egyptians were the ultimate examples of Synarchy, because
the were ruled by a group of elite initiates . He failed to point
out that the Egyptian civilization was static and limited.
What's more, it caved in on itself, and never managed to
produce any significant work of benefit for humanity , as
mathematician Otto Neugebauer showed. In fact, Neugebauer
made it clear that the Egyptian civilization was a hindrance to
the development of mankind. The Pharaonic lifestyle was that
of a small group of the "elite," served and worshipped by
everyone else - and that all others were, essentially,
But let's back up a bit and review some history.
Clement of Alexandria established the idea that the
"true philosophy" was Hebrew, and that it was
preserved most closely in the Egyptian "Mystery
Schools." I would like for the reader who has not done so, to
stop right now and read my series of article entitle Who Wrote
the Bible? for a better understanding of why this single point is
780832211.001.png 780832211.002.png 780832211.003.png
so important.
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 ."
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?
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
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
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
Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin