It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

That Mason/Occult thing...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
In my collection of books, most of which I actually have read; there is a significant portion which could be designated 'on the occult'. Getting my feet wet on the subject late in the spaced-out 60's, the bookcases have begun groaning through acquisitions over the intervening 40 years.

So, I imagine myself an amateur expert on what 'the occult' encompasses to a small degree...

I'll not bore you with the listings of authors and titles, because it seems to cause certain stresses within these boards...and I'd not want to stress anyone out, so I'll go straight to my question...

Why is it that any reference to the occult immediately draws all sorts of pro/con Masonic posts as if they had the corner on the subject?

In my understanding, 'the occult', as a body of esoteric works, preceded Christianity by millenia...the Templars and Masons had their beginnings only lately, in the 11th century. Or are there those among the Masonic brethren here that ascribe to the story as related in the Hiram Key? (great bit of fun reading, but it got kinda anal in Uriels Machine, imo)

Also...it can be said that any ritual behind closed doors is an occult ritual...does that mean it is baaad, related to the Devil and/or Masonic?

just curious...





[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]




posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
The Hiram Key assumes a lot, and should only be regarded as fiction/science fiction. There are some interesting finds, but his linking Hiram Abif to Seqenenre Tao is way out, and he admits to making some far out assumptions to get to this "find".

It was an interesting read, but should be taken lightly as fact.

Also, the occult and Freemasonry are covered just a few posts before this, but I understand that you might be referencing that post.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Well, "occult" only means "hidden".

But in the context that it's normally aimed at Freemasonry, it's deciphered as Satanism.
The word has changed meaning over the centuries to some.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Wiggy, I agree that The Hiram Key was a 'fun read', but I certainly do not take it seriously at all...what I asked was if there are any masons here who believed in the lost 'king-making ritual' story and Hiram. Personally, I believe it could be viewed as a myth. As far as the body of work considered
as 'The Occult' is concerned, I regard all the material ever written by or about the different Masonic traditions to be a mere sliver (lately added).

Leveller...I know what occult means...I'm referring to the writings and oral traditions surrounding all the aspects of the occult...as well as the many ancient manuscripts which may have survived the book burnings during the early centuries of the first millenium A.D. I would include in that the paltry few books the conquistadors did not burn after invading South America.

I'm certainly not talking about Satan, because I consider that a Christian construct. I also do not equate Lucifer with Satan...that could be a thread in itself.

Blavatsky. LaVey, Wilson, Graves as well as a thousand other recent and contemporary authors have knitted their brows and speculated over dusty pages from centuries before, putting pen to why and how it could relate to the human experience today. That, to me, are only the recent manifestations within the body of work I understand as 'The Occult'.

[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]

[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Why is it that any reference to the occult immediately draws all sorts of pro/con Masonic posts as if they had the corner on the subject?


I think it depends on who's posting at the time. Some people who oppose Freemasonry for erroneous reasons believe that Masonry is the grandaddy of the occult, and that the occult means satanism. The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of Masons aren't interested in the occult in the least bit, and those of us who are, are often derided because the occult is misunderstood by the masses.

However, I would never claim that one has to be a Mason in order to be an occultist, or even necessarily that a Mason is better suited to occult studies than non-Masons.


In my understanding, 'the occult', as a body of esoteric works, preceded Christianity by millenia...the Templars and Masons had their beginnings only lately, in the 11th century. Or are there those among the Masonic brethren here that ascribe to the story as related in the Hiram Key? (great bit of fun reading, but it got kinda anal in Uriels Machine, imo)


In my view, you are absolutely correct, and I know of no serious Masonic researchers or historians who take books like that seriously. In recent years, Masonic scholarship has had a rebirth, especially with organizations like the Scottish Rite Research Society here in the States, and the Quatuor Coronati Lodge of Research in London, both of which provide far superior research into Masonic history and symbolism than books like "The Hiram Key".


Also...it can be said that any ritual behind closed doors is an occult ritual...does that mean it is baaad, related to the Devil and/or Masonic?


That indeed is the key. Technically, Masonic initiation is "occult" because it is "hidden", i.e., is to be viewed only by the initiated. And just as you've insinuated, this by itself doesn't make it "bad". Likewise, two atoms of hydrogen combining with one atom of oxygen in order to form a molecule of water is also "occult". With regard to religion, we could say that God Himself is occult, because He remains hidden from our senses.

I've always believed that the secrecy surrounding Masonry, the ancient mysteries, etc., was actually only symbolic of this. That is to say, the secrecy may not have any intrinsic value in itself, but it may symbolize the secret processes of Nature, God, and the Soul, of which it is the object of the Mysteries to discover.

Therefore, in this sense, I find the anti-Masonic tirade about "secrecy" sort of childish; in Masonic ritual, a big deal is made about keeping passwords and handshakes secret, even though this sort of stuff has been labeled "claptrap" even by scholars within the Fraternity. So it appears to me that the constant talk about secrecy concerning Masonry in the Fraternity's rituals must be a hint to look for something else besides grips and passwords, and real Masonic secrecy concerns those things that Nature guards in secret from our senses, i.e., the true Occultism.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
..what I asked was if there are any masons here who believed in the lost 'king-making ritual' story and Hiram.


You'll have to elaborate on that one as I'm not familiar with it.
If the story relates to Hiram being made a king in a ritual, it's not in the Masonic tradition. Solomon of Israel and Hiram of Tyre are the recognised kings in Masonic ritual, but not Hiram Abif.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   
What I mean is...are there masons who believe that the Masonic Orders were in existence before Jacques DeMolay was tortured and murdered By James the Fair back in 1307?

Forget the Hiram Key...it was just an interesting book.

The intent of the thread, however, is the question; Why does everyone seem to think 'Mason' when they read the word 'occult'? It seems to me to be more than a little blinkered.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   
"Occult" has to be one of the most misunderstood words in the English language. And, as said by other posters here, when applied to Masonry it connotes evil.

If one talks about or studies the occult, they are often branded as evil witches, satanists, devil worshippers, people possessing a plan to rule the world.
What is it about hidden knowledge that terrifies people so much? Is it merely that it is hidden, and therefore suspect? If the general populace doesn't know about "it", "it" must be evil or harmful? Is it that we are told occult=dangerous and we look no further?
It seems that some religions want to keep people in the dark. So they install fear into people that studying or dabbling in the occult is dangerous and will cause you to "lose your immortal soul".



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Thank you, Masonic Light...

I agree with every single thing expressed in your post.

Relating the literary 'Occult' as a study of "true occultism' within nature is how I can relate, and in that I would agree with your suggestion that a true searcher for wisdom need not pore over books, but only to open our eyes to those things which nature will confide.

Whether native Shaman or Fraternal Brother, it is the awakening to what is truly around us as we live and breathe that reveals what is occult.

It has nothing to do with hiding things and everything to do with seeing and understanding our experience.





[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
are there masons who believe that the Masonic Orders were in existence before Jacques DeMolay was tortured and murdered By James the Fair back in 1307?



There are Masons who study Egyptology at length and who see direct connections between speculative Freemasonry and the operative guilds of craftsmen who worked in stone.

What's in a few thousand years?



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
DontTreadOnMe...

imo

There are those who fear the unknown and wish others to tell them what it means to be human and how we relate to the mysteries. Nice safe systems full of security are what they crave. To them there is nothing to learn.

There are others who wish to understand for themselves and will not listen to another, unless there is agreement through observation and interpretation. These people seek out the unknown and revel in it, always surprised and amazed.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
I'm certainly not talking about Satan, because I consider that a Christian construct. I also do not equate Lucifer with Satan...that could be a thread in itself.
[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]


It almost was. Covered here
www.abovetopsecret.com... near the bottom of the page and
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Masked Avatar...when comparing the Epic of Gilgamesh and the mysteries perplexing today's scientists and searchers, it appears that a few millenia are nothing but a blink in time.

It is all about knowing and attaining, even if we are doomed to fail, wouldn't you agree?

The men who worked the stone in prehistoric times were also master masons, knowing things we can only dream of attempting. Why stop at Egypt, when the Crooked Ware People preceeded them in both skill (my opinion) and time? I hope we are just beginning to scratch the surface in grasping the scope of the works done during the neolithic era and before.

Cotwom...I am of the same opinion as to your statements in the provided link about Lucifer...I believe it is Venus and, based on the path it takes around the rising sun, describes the most widely known symbol in the world today...it's strength undiminished.

[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]

[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]

[edit on 12-1-2005 by masqua]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 01:27 AM
link   


tortured and murdered By James the Fair back in 1307?

Ibelieve that would be Philip le Bel, and it ran until 1314.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 04:28 AM
link   
The attack on the Templar stronghold and their subsequent arrests, started on Friday, October 13, 1307 (according to my sleepy head this morning).

The year of Jacques DeMolay's torture and murder was 1314?

I stand corrected on Philip le Bel (Philip the Fair)...shows my weakness of relying on a faulty memory instead of hitting the books.

thanks



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

There are those who fear the unknown and wish others to tell them what it means to be human and how we relate to the mysteries. Nice safe systems full of security are what they crave. To them there is nothing to learn.




And I believe that this is where the misunderstood connection with the "occult" and Freemasonry began.

In my opinion, a lot of people are satisfied with not knowing who or what they are. They go so far and refuse to go another step and are fearful of those that do. If you took a room of average people how many would claim that they know themselves? I'll bet the majority, even though the truth is that very, very few people (if any) know themselves. If they did, they would have the answers to everything. I believe that most people have been taught to go so far and then to stop - they have been taught to rely on the word of the Church and swallow dogma. It's a procedure that has been drummed into mankind for millenia. It's not even a case of people being deliberately ignorant and craving a security. The security that you speak of has been forced upon them so it's very, very hard to take the first step out of the door if they have lived in the house all of their lives.

Certainly history tells us that the Church relied on ignorance to propogate it's growth. There could be no questioning of it's doctrine or it's teachings. The individual was offered only one acceptable course in spiritual learning and everything else was branded with the label of occult and became associated with Satanism. And here we get to the crux of the problem. Freemasonry encouraged a man to learn about who he is, what he is, what his place in the grand scheme of things is. It offered the opportunity for spiritual study outside of the set parameters that were enforced by the Church. Obviously, the Church perceived a threat. Any independent study would be able to see flaws in the "accepted" doctrine. If those flaws were large enough, there would be damage caused to the Church's image and as it relied on total obedience to it's dogmatic system, it could hardly afford the quesioning that would follow.

To stop this perceived threat to it's power, the Church reverted to a tried and tested defence. Anything which had threatened it in the past had been labelled as ungodly or Satanic. Before the 20th century, there was no more powerful accusation than to brand someone with being outside the realms of God. The Church had such complete power that it could make the acussation and the people would go along with it, without question. The people were so fearful of being branded as heretics themselves and being denied Salvation, that they would literally fall over themselves to join the Church in condemnation where-ever the finger pointed. Even if they didn't entirely agree with the Church, they had become so indoctrinated and so fearful that they would never dare defend any group which the Church saw fit to brand as occult or Satanic.

And to a degree, we still have that situation occuring. People still follow the Church and some still perceive it's word to be the pure truth. They pick up their history books and see the past and apply it today.
But this sort of attack is losing it's power. Ordinary people can pick up their Bibles and study the Word for themselves. We now have a literacy rate that allows this and we live in a society that doesn't destroy an individual if he seeks knowledge. But that's not to say thst the Church isn't still fearful of that knowledge though. Although it's power may be ebbing and flowing in the West, it still controls the spiritual learning of the rest of the planet. Organised groups of individuals searching for truth are a threat to it's hold over those elsewhere.

In the Middle East, Freemasonry is still associated with occultism and Satanism by Islam and this is the excuse that the authorities there use to ban it. They have managed to keep their people in the same spiritual box that the Church in the West used up until the 20th century. But in the West, as more and more people start looking for answers themselves, that accusation is starting to lose it's bite. We therefore have the situation where those that want to retain their power have to look for another line of attack. They had to adapt the fears of modern day society and use those. The easiest tool to use was money, so they charged Freemasonry with corruption and sedition. So Freemasonry now comes under attack from both sides of history. The ancient, which relies on the control of the spiritual. And the modern, which relies on the control of the physical.









Returning to the subject of the occult itself. I believe that it's a matter of definition and is relevant to the individual. Everything is occult until you open your eyes. It doesn't matter if the subject matter has been placed in front of you or not but until you actually see it yourself, it is occult. It doesn't occur to some, that although they keep their eyes closed, there are others who are looking at what is in front of themselves.
A lot of of what is classed as occult is only what we have not been allowed to see. Yet more is branded because the majority don't want to see. And yet more because there are unfortunately those who can't see.
The true meaning of the word is as relevant today as it was in the days of that it was coined. First it was hidden in Nature. Then it was hidden by the Church. Today it is hidden by those who fear the unknown and by those whose way of life is so concentrated on the physical that they muddy the waters for those who want to study the spiritual.



[edit on 13-1-2005 by Leveller]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Quote...If those flaws were large enough, there would be damage caused to the Church's image and as it relied on total obedience to it's dogmatic system. (unquote)

I agree that this was the case throughout the Dark Ages and is still a factor in today's more educated Western church flocks. In fact, I'm beginning to suspect a move backwards, as I see fundamentalism growing in strength.
It may very well be that the New Age phenomena of differing cults is closely tied to the same process as the emergence of televangelists. All flash and show for the biggest buck, blinding the inner visions.

It also seems tied to marketing...having the 'look' through clothes, gadgets, body piercings, lifestyle etc., promoted through movies, music and, of course, the immediate mediums like television and radio.

But, basically, it is a single or small group of individuals trying to get rich off those who fall for their message of obedience.

In none of those paths is there spiritual growth dependant on personal experience and knowledge...it is all spoonfed and geared to soothe. In all those cases, total belief in the dogma is desired and any free thought is looked upon as threatening. Any differing thoughts are considered offensive, even in the most sugar-coated New Age cults. (No names here, lol)

You'd be branded as 'having issues' if you dared to suggest alterations.

Because of that I consider any person who takes a solitary path to his or her spirituality as far more believable and true. Isn't it the Deists who believe in an 'absent God' and that we are left to study (His/Her/It's) creation to find our relation to that Deity?

So, once again, leveller, we agree, as I have gathered in all the posts so far...
That spirituality is a personal journey, not to be trusted to another.

What is truly remarkable is that someone has yet to damn me (or any one of us) to hell for making such heretical statements. Eerie

[edit on 13-1-2005 by masqua]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
masqua...

You have said nothing that has been offensive. Even if you had not one of us here has the ability to "damn you". I am a Mason and a Christian although some here would say that's impossible, and even as a Christian I do not find you offensive. You have a good mind.




posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
as i recall the date of Demolays death was Mar. or Apr. 17 1314.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Of course, there are some who believe that. There are still some who say that we go back to the building of King Solomon's Temple. I think its a great legend and is used to teach some wonderful Lessons.

One thing that many outside the Craft fail to realize is that any Mason can believe about the Craft what he wants to. There is no control of belief or re-inforced dogma. This means that I can read, for example, "Morals and Dogma" by Pike (a GREAT book though a confusing one) and choose to believe all or part of it or none of it at all and still consider myself a good Mason! Also, don't you mean Phillipe le Bel and not James the Fair?


Originally posted by masqua
What I mean is...are there masons who believe that the Masonic Orders were in existence before Jacques DeMolay was tortured and murdered By James the Fair back in 1307?




top topics



 
0

log in

join