The Real Priory of Sion

Hi,

The most commonly accepted theory about the priory of sion is that they hold some secret(s) to do with the grail and the knights templar. but i was recently looking at the 'Les Dossiers Secrets' which shows all the grand masters of the priory of sion from 1099 through to 1963, And i saw that obviously Leonardo Davinci was once head (as shown in 'the Davinci Code') but also Nicolas Flammel.

The interesting thing is that these are only two people who ever supposedly created or been in the possesion, of the philospher's stone were nicolas flammel and Leonardo Davinci

I don't know what this means but it could be that what we thought the priory of sion is wrong OR that the philosipher's stone is the holy grail

www.iras.ucalgary.ca...
ca.geocities.com...

-Graham

The Priory of Sion is a hoax. Da Vinci was not a member, nor did it exist in his time.

See:

home.graffiti.net...

Fiat Lvx.

It seems that they were just incorperated into the Freemasons from what I read some time in the early 1500's. It was actually zion is the correct spelling of it and it was more to do with the Jewish zionist. They incorperated into the Freemasony at some point during that 100 year peiod. At least that is what I have read.

There is not now, nor has there ever been, any �Priory of Sion� incorporated into Freemasonry. There was no such thing as a Priory of Sion before the 1950�s. They invented a fictional �history� for themselves, which is still perpetuated by hoaxsters.
For me info, see the link I gave above.

Fiat Lvx.

The Priory of Sion did not exist before the early to middle 50's...possibly.
But whats in a name.
Are they a continuation of a group by a different name....possibly.

One thing is for sure at least one Secret Society existed throughout the period The priory claimed to have been active.
The modern Priory are adept at smoke and mirrors, by showing themselves as frauds they give you reason to look no further than the fraud.
Isn't that the real reason detre of the secret society. You see fake..you look no further.

not that I necesarily believe thats the case here, just playing devils advocate.

So hold on... because there's no evidence of a secret society, that means that a secret society definitely exists? Woah, give me some of that stuff you're drinking, my life obviously is not interesting enough.

Seriously, though, we can suppose anything we want if we don't care about evidence. Sure, the Priory of Sion by that name existed only after 1950, but before that they were actually known as "The Extraordinarily Secret Society of Talking Ponies with Long Pink Hair and Star Marks." And, in fact, Pierre Plantard still has a talking pony which smells like strawberries. And at their secret meetings, they all danced around a statue of a coelacanth while singing "Proud Mary" (which actually goes back to pre-Biblical times, and was sung by the ancient Ziggurat builders of Sumer).

No your wrong the statue was Baphomet!!!!
You hounding me again Big Man...
I didn't say I believed it... merely that its as possible... and until it can be proved one way or another it warants investigation.
Like I said devils advocate

[edit on 19-6-2004 by Smudge]

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
So hold on... because there's no evidence of a secret society, that means that a secret society definitely exists?

No because if the modern societies continue the craft, there must have been someone to pass that info on. Who filled the gap? Not the Priory clearly but there must have been as I said at least one Secret Society during this period.

Originally posted by Smudge
No your wrong the statue was Baphomet!!!!
You hounding me again Big Man...

I didn't say I believed it... merely that its as possible... and until it can be proved one way or another it warants investigation.
Like I said devils advocate

Sure, but devil's advocate is a boring game, in the end.

Here's the problem: There are infinitely more false things than there are true things. For every correct theory, there are millions of corresponding incorrect theories. Of course, it's possible that gravity is actually caused by billions of magic invisible fairies pushing down on us at all times... but there's no real proof, and until there's some tiny iota that indicates that it has a good-ish possibility of being true, there's no point wasting time trying to investigate it.

Not trying to hound you, by the way, my good quacking duck. Just trying to make sure we keep it, as the young people are so fond of saying, real.

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

Originally posted by Smudge
No your wrong the statue was Baphomet!!!!
You hounding me again Big Man...

I didn't say I believed it... merely that its as possible... and until it can be proved one way or another it warants investigation.
Like I said devils advocate

Sure, but devil's advocate is a boring game, in the end.

Here's the problem: There are infinitely more false things than there are true things. For every correct theory, there are millions of corresponding incorrect theories. Of course, it's possible that gravity is actually caused by billions of magic invisible fairies pushing down on us at all times... but there's no real proof, and until there's some tiny iota that indicates that it has a good-ish possibility of being true, there's no point wasting time trying to investigate it.

Not trying to hound you, by the way, my good quacking duck. Just trying to make sure we keep it, as the young people are so fond of saying, real.

truth is stranger than fiction i guess lol

Okay Alex humour me, when did the Masons start as far as we know....?
If the Answer is somewhere around 1300, or even 900 then who did they get their knowledge from. Was it dug up in a tomb, or passed down by.....stonemasons ?


Not that I know the answers its just a genuine question.

Oh, I know it's a genuine question, and an excellent question at that. You say "where did they get their knowledge from" but I should reassure you once again that Freemasonry does not really pass down "secret knowlege" per se. What Freemason gives to the candidate is a method for discovering the knowledge that is contained within himself. The moral lessons of Freemasonry, in their basic stated form, are nothing that any adult does not know in his or her heart of hearts. The symbolism of the three degrees, I suspect, came from two sources: 1) symbolism of similar initiatory rites known to the originators of Freemasonry (and public knowledge, as well), and 2) certain universials or archetypes which are inherent to the human condition. The wonderful thing about symbolic systems, however, is that they are inherently structuralist. Various "interpretations" can be superimposed on the system, and the truth or falsehood of those interpretations can be evaluated based on how well they correspond to the symbolic structure.

For example, take arithmetic: we all know that, symbolically, the mathematical expression 1 + 1 = 2 is true in the symbolic system of base 10 mathematics. We can now overlay various actual life observations on this symbolic truth: if we have one apple in each hand, we have two apples. If we have one half of an apple in each hand, we can form a whole apple, which extends this truth into the realm of fractions. If you work at the same job under similar conditions for twice as much time, you will get twice as much wage, etc. etc. By connecting life situations to these symbols, we can see an essential unity to those various life situations, which points out a kind of "Platonic ideal." In this case, it would be the Platonic ideal of addition. By doing so, we become able, as Plato would say, to directly observe the ideal through our reason and intuition, and so our knowledge of the nature of things increases.

Allow me to give a less simplistic example. We tell the story of "Little Red Riding Hood." She is a girl, in a forest, given a task to do, and set upon by a wolf. She resists the wolf at first, but the sly beast eats her grandmother and takes the grandmother's place. Little Red Riding Hood confronts the "Grandmother" and may or may not get eaten, and the family may or may not be saved by a hero cutting open the wolf.

This is all well and good, and entertaining. But what does it mean? To a child, for example, the story may present a tale of the caution necessary in not revealing to strangers your intentions (as Red Riding Hood told the wolf she was on her way to her Grandmother's house). To a young adult, the story may present the idea of budding sexuality, and the mores of the society: the young woman must resist the open advances of the young man, but through slyness and double-entendre, a meeting can be arranged. The flip side of this is that youthful sexuality can destroy the traditional family (the Grandmother). Alternatively, the story could show the quest of the initiate for truth, and that if the initiate is not careful to work in silence, not giving his or her opinion until the time is right, he or she may be consumed by the very temptations he or she has resisted for so long.

I don't intend to bore you with more interpretations of this story. As you can see, and imagine on your own, there are many. Importantly, though, the story can make us see a similar structure in all of these life events, and perhaps lead us to an understanding of the eidos from which they are derived. This, in a sense, is one of the important things that Freemasonry does.

So as you see, the "knowledge" is not something dangerous handed down in secret, just something difficult that must be mastered in little steps. Where did it come from? To my mind, the most likely explanation is that between 900 and 1300, intelligent individuals with an interest in the ideals of the Renaissance used there knowledge of the arcane and hermetic to originate the system of philosophy, and then during the Enlightenment, the ideals of that time period matured the Craft into something approximating what it is today.

Thanks for, as usual, your excellent response.
Although your reasurance is welcome it is not neccessary, I am aware of the basic structure of Freemasonry. I understand fully what it offers its members today and I think that is an amazing organisation with as much potential as the initiate can muster enthusiasm. There are things I do not like, but they are in the minority.

My interest is not as a Freemason hunter, but rather driven by the apparent similarities between the practices and ideaology of many groups throughout history. When I first joined this forum I hoped to find people who knew a lot more than me and would help me to find the conections I sought. The reality has been that slowly the conections I believed to be obvious have been discredited and brought into question. This is obviously a good thing, as the truth is more important to me than sensationalising a subject that is quite sensational enough. This means that many of the sources I would quote as evidence for my opinions are seemingly weak against those of people who have been at this a lot longer than myself.

The apparent evidence of a consistent lineage of rites and rituals however still seems too strong for me to ignore, even if it is just circumstantial at this stage. The Freemasons themselves seem to point to Scotland and the Scottish Rite Freemasonary as one of the earliest lodges if not the first, as the earliest known minutes are from Edinburgh I believe, in 1598. .Oldest Minutes
It is also agreed widely that the Templars saw out their days in Scotland as the then monarchy was at logerheads with the Catholoic church and some say were themselves connected by birth to the Templars of the time
Scottish conections
Rosslyn Chapel as we all know, creates yet more reasons to suspect that the end of the Templars and the beginning of the Scottish Freemasons are connected in some way.

If we can connect the Templars and Freemasonry then the next step is to look at the birth of the Templars and the enigmatic nine Knights supposedly created to shepard the pilgrims safely through the Holy lands, without pursuing the evidence that makes that seem an unlikely truth just yet, I shall return to my interest of the Masonic origins.

Whos sons are they? Templars.....Roseicrucians....Priory of Sion...

my own instincts say Templars, but its good fun exploring the other possibilities.

Originally posted by Smudge
The Freemasons themselves seem to point to Scotland and the Scottish Rite Freemasonary as one of the earliest lodges if not the first, as the earliest known minutes are from Edinburgh I believe, in 1598. .Oldest Minutes

What you are writing here is indeed very interesting... but I want to note that the Scottish Freemasonry to which you are referring is not Scottish Rite Freemasonry. There are even some Masons who make this mistake. But Scottish Freemasonry is simply a form of regular Craft Lodge Masonry (except that many Scottish Lodges include the Mark Master Mason Degree as a kind of loosely associated "fourth degree"), while Scottish Rite Freemasonry is actually French (I know, I know... we love being confusing), and is a completely separate and appendant body based on the ideas of the Chevalier Ramsay.

my own instincts say Templars, but its good fun exploring the other possibilities.

Well, although I don't believe that Masonry has anything directly to do with the Knights Templar (you should read the book "The Murdered Magicians," it's not only a load of fun, it will set you straight on Templarism), there are two things I should mention:

1) There is absolutely no doubt that Freemasonry includes ideas based on mythical Templars (i.e. it contains Templarist elements, which are, of course, not based on the actual historical Knights Templar, but rather based on some people's ideas of the Knights Templar), and

2) Of all the false ideas about where Freemasonry came from, I think that the Templars are the least ludicrous.

I have written an essay on this issue for my local Lodge of Research, Fiat Lux, and I can post it here if you want (although I think it's something like 10 pages single spaced), or e-mail it to you.

Originally posted by AlexKennedy


But Scottish Freemasonry is simply a form of regular Craft Lodge Masonry (except that many Scottish Lodges include the Mark Master Mason Degree as a kind of loosely associated "fourth degree"), while Scottish Rite Freemasonry is actually French.

Alex. I was recently told that the 4th degree that the Scots confer is that of the Chapter. The MMM Degree was part of the 2nd degree in Craft. They certainly fit in better that way.

I believe that Scots masonry is the oldest in Europe and that it's origins beyond that are impossible to prove. The Duke of Sussex destroyed a lot of our history in the Civil War against the Jacobites and I believe it's possible that amongst this was the evidence of Freemasonry's origins.

I would like to read your research paper.

So would I, I'll take it however you see fit, post it or mail it to me.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
The Priory of Sion is a hoax. Da Vinci was not a member, nor did it exist in his time.

See:

home.graffiti.net...

Fiat Lvx.

uhhh...you're going to have to do better than that. That site is nothing but a compilation of writings but who the heck knows who with absolutely no references.

AND, I might also point out that whether the "excavations" in 2003 at Rennes discovered something or didn't that cannot be stretched to "debunk" the anomalous activity surrounding the priest.

Originally posted by Smudge
So would I, I'll take it however you see fit, post it or mail it to me.

OK, I will post it in its entirety on another page. I see that if I leave out the bibliography, title, and footnotes, it's only 7 pages long. I hope you enjoy it!

Originally posted by Valhall
uhhh...you're going to have to do better than that. That site is nothing but a compilation of writings but who the heck knows who with absolutely no references.

AND, I might also point out that whether the "excavations" in 2003 at Rennes discovered something or didn't that cannot be stretched to "debunk" the anomalous activity surrounding the priest.

OK Val, try this one.

www.alpheus.org...

It's not as up to date as ML's and their are some errors in it, but the gist is the same and it does supply references.
Just because something was happening at Rennes le Chateau it does not logically follow at all the the Priory was involved. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I have to agree, having looked at Rennes extensively, it is clear that Saunier was involved with a group operating out of Paris, that included Emma Calve amongst others, there is however no evidence that this group was the Priory.