Theosophy - Ancient Egypt - the Light of the world -by Gerald Massey- Book 12- The mysteries and the Miracles
ANCIENT
EGYPT- THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD by Gerald
Massey ΔΔ
BOOK 12 - this is part 2 of 2 Click here to go to Part -1-
THE MYSTERIES AND THE MIRACLES.
[Page
805]
The
Mysteries were a dramatic mode of representing the gnosis
or science of the Egyptian mythology and eschatology.
They are the mysteries of Amenta. It was in these the
dead
were raised, the blind were made to see, the dumb to speak,
the deaf to hear, the lame to walk, the manes to become
bird-headed. Hence the scenes of their occurrence were
in
spirit-world, where the manes made their transformation
visibly, and the mortal put on immortality. The greater
mysteries were founded on the resurrection from the dead [Page 806]
with
the Ka or the bird-headed Horus as the representative of
a survival in spirit. As we have seen in the “Pistis Sophia”, Jesus tells the disciples that “the mystery of the
resurrection of the dead healeth from
demoniac possessions, from sufferings and all
diseases. It also healeth the blind, the dumb, the
maimed, the halt” ;
and he promises that whosoever shall achieve the gnosis
of this wisdom shall have the power of performing
these mysteries of the resurrection which only become miracles
when exoterically rendered in the canonical Gospels (P. S., B. 2, 279). Amenta in the mythos was the secret earth
of the nocturnal sun. In the eschatology it is the spirit-world
in which the dead become once
more the living, and attained their continuity by being
proved and passed as true for all eternity. If they failed,
it was here they died the second death, and never rose
again.
Amenta was the world of the blind, the deaf and dumb, the
maimed, the halt, and impotent
because it was the world of the dead.
Thus
the miracles of the canonical Gospels repeat the
mysteries of the Ritual, and the scene of these was
in the earth
of the manes, not in the earth of mortals. It was
there the
deliverer wrought his “miracles” in the eschatological representation, whether as Horus,
the son of Osiris, or as Iusa, the son of Atum-Ra. The
Egyptian religion had no need of miracles. It did not
postulate the supernatural. The superhuman and ideally
divine were
a
part of and not apart from nature. The nether-earth was
the other half of this and the Gospel history has been
based upon that other earth of the manes being mistaken
for the
earth of mortals. In the Ritual, and in the gnostic writings,
we find the mystery, the events, the characters, the
Christ, the Virgin-Mother, the miracles, replaced upon
their own
proper
footing and on the only ground of their existence which
is eschatological and was a means of working out the
drama in Amenta by means of the mythology that was previously
extant.
The so-called miracles of Jesus were not only impossible
on human grounds; they are historically impossible because
they were pre-extant as mythical representations which
were made on grounds that were entirely non-human in
the drama of the mysteries that was as non-historical
as the
Christmas pantomime. The miracles ascribed to Jesus on
earth had been previously assigned to Iusa the divine
healer who was non-historical in the pre-Christian religion.
Horus,
whose other name is Jesus, is the performer of “miracles” which are repeated in the Gospels, and which were first
performed as mysteries in the divine nether-world. But
if Horus or Iusa be made human on earth, as a Jew in
Judea, we
are suddenly hemmed in by the miraculous, at the centre
of a maze with nothing antecedent for a clue; no path
that leads to the heart of the mystery, and no visible
means
of exit therefrom. With the introduction of the human
personage on mundane ground, the
mythical inevitably becomes the miraculous; you cannot
have the history without it; thus the history was founded
on the miracles which are perversions of the mythology
that was
provably pre-extant.
Not
only is it represented in the Gospels that Jesus raised
the dead but that he also conferred power on the disciples
to do likewise. They are to preach and proclaim that
the
kingdom of heaven is at [Page 807] hand, to “heal the sick and raise the dead” (Matt. X. 5-8).
So the followers, called the “Children of Horus”, had the power given them previously by
their Lord to raise the dead. In the Pyramid texts of Teta (line 270) it is said, “Horus hath
given his children power that they may raise thee up” ; that is, from the funeral couch. But
this resurrection was in Amenta, the earth of eternity,
not in the earth of time, and those who were raised up
for the second life are the manes, not mortal beings in
the human
world. It was not pretended that they were Egyptians in
the time of Teta, the first king of the sixth dynasty.
The Christians babble about the mysteries of revealed religion,
which
mysteries never were revealed except to those who had been
duly initiated. These were mysteries to the Christians
simply because they had not been revealed to them. They
are
the mysteries of ancient knowledge reproduced as miracles
of modern ignorance. Such mysteries of the Christian faith,
as the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Virgin Birth,
the
Transfiguration on the Mount, the Passion, Death, Burial,
Resurrection and Ascension, Transubstantiation and Baptismal
Regeneration, were all extant in the mysteries of Amenta
with Horus or Iu-em-hetep as the central figure of the
pre-Christian Jesus.
This mode of making miracles from the mysteries can be traced in the canonical Gospels.
For instance, according to John, when Jesus reappears to the seven fishers on board the
boat to cause the miraculous draught of fishes it is after his resurrection from the dead.
Consequently, the transaction is in a region beyond the tomb, therefore in spirit-world, not
in the life on earth. Whereas in Luke’s version, his reappearance was in the earth-life and
is not a reappearance after death. Yet the miraculous draught of fishes is the same in both
books; and either the transaction is historical in Luke and has been relegated to the
after-life in another world by John, or else the mythical version was first and has been
converted into an historical event by Luke. But here, as in other cases, there is no
corroboration of the history to be adduced, whereas the priority of John’s version is
attested by the Ritual where the fisher, the seven fishers,
the fishing and the fish belong not to this earth but
to that other world beyond the tomb and to the mysteries
of
Amenta.
When
Sebek in the Ritual (ch. 113) catches the fish in
his marvellous net this is proclaimed by Ra to be “a mystery”. But when Simon Peter in the Gospel catches the great draught
of fishes the mystery becomes a miracle.
Mythology knows nothing of miracle, nor the need of it. Miracle
has no place in the Egyptian Ritual. But the Ritual shows
us how the necessity for it arose as a modus
operandi when the gnosis had
to be accounted for by ignorance and the mythos was converted
into human history. For example, the sun or the sun-god
Atum is described in
the Ritual as going over the surface of the lake of Mati,
in Abydos, the place of rebirth, or of sunrise. That
which
is done mythically by the god is performed by the manes
on the
eschatological plane, and as he is in the human likeness,
it follows that he must walk the water in the sun-god’s track. He says, “the great God who is there is Ra himself. I walk on
his road; I know
the surface of the lake of Mati. The water of Mati is the
road by which Atum-Ra [Page 808] goes to traverse the field of divine harvest” (Rit., 17). In the first phase the
sun (or solar god) traverses the celestial water at dawn.
In the eschatological continuation the human soul in
Amenta does the same because assimilated to the
character of the god. It is but a mode of representing
phenomena in the two worlds of the double earth, the
imagery of upper earth being repeated in spirit-world.
But if we
substitute
a human being for the solar god or the manes in Amenta,
and make him walk the water in our world on the surface
of the sea or lake of Galilee, instead of the lake of
Mati in Amenta,
the water-walking can only be done by miracle. Such is
the genesis of the Biblical miracles in both the Old
Testament and the New. This we are now able to prove
twice over by
means of the original matter and mode of the mythos in
the Egyptian eschatology that was
humanized or literalized in legends and at last converted
into Christian history.
You
cannot rationalize the Bible miracles by reducing them
to what may be thought reasonable dimensions. As Matthew
Arnold said, “this is as if we were startled by the
extravagance of supposing Cinderella’s fairy godmother to have actually changed the
pumpkin into a coach-and-six, but should suggest that she
did really change it into a one-horse-cab”. It is not a matter of degree or proportion, but of a radical
difference in the fundamental nature of things. It is not
the kind of transformation that was applied to the
primary facts, nor is this transformation the result of
imagination. It was not a result of the faculty of imagining
that a man should be supposed to walk the water and not
sink. Such
an imagining was controverted by all the past of human
experience. When the Egyptians portrayed a human impossibility — a miracle — they depicted a pair of feet walking on the
water. This was a mode of superhuman force first made manifest
by the elemental powers such as light and darkness, the
wind, or the spirit of the storm. The water-walker was
an
old type of deity. The Christian miracles are false modes
of explaining that which was ignorantly misappropriated.
The gnostic interpretation of the Kamite mysteries had
no need
of miracles, no reversal or violation of natural law. The
process by which miracles, or total violations of natural
law, arose, was through perversion of ancient knowledge
by later
ignorance — not in the false or exaggerated reports of eye-witnesses.
Nor could anything be settled by a conflict of opinions
in the domain of ideas. We must have some foothold
and ground of fact to go upon even to fight the battle.
As it is in physical science, we have to ascertain the
knowable. It avails nothing to take refuge in the unknown
or to enshroud
ourselves in mystery. The legends of mythology were not
ideal, nor based upon abstract ideas. They were not first
evolved from the inner consciousness, but from facts in
outward
nature that are for ever verifiable. The mysteries that “historic Christianity” took over without
understanding, and preserved as food for faith, or as problems
for metaphysical speculation, are fathomable and even simple
when truly interpreted, but they have and can
have no solution on the supposed historic ground. And with its bogus miracles
surreptitiously derived from the ancient mysteries by falsification
of the myths, it has destroyed or tended to destroy all
standing-ground [Page 809] of common sense in natural
reality. With its “historical” virgin mother of a God who was her “historical” child, it has
made a double mockery of nature, human and divine. With
its risen corpse for an anointed Christ the only Son of
God, it has deified an image of death itself and made a
mortuary of
the human mind.
When it is conclusively proved that the Christian miracles are nothing more than a pagan
mode of symbolical representation literalized, there is no longer any question of
contravening, or breaking, or even challenging any well-known laws of nature. The
discussion as to the probability or possibility of miracle on the old grounds of belief and
doubt is closed for ever. A glance at the Egyptian pictures will show that the Horus or Christ
is the young sun-god who walks the waters in Amenta not on the upper earth, and that the
evil spirits who enter the swine and are driven down into the lake are the souls of those
who were condemned in the great judgment as typhonian, the black pig being a type of Sut
the evil being. A study of these miracles as they were originally rendered will lead to an
understanding of their true significance, and here as everywhere else the truth of the
matter once attained must ultimately put an end to the false belief:
Falsehood hath nothing in the world to do,
But lie to live and die to prove the true!
With what facility the miracle could be manufactured for
the exoteric Gospels, canonical or apocryphal, may be seen
from the legends in The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy (ch. 37). In one character the youthful sun-god, Horus or
Jesus, was represented as a sort of divine dyer. He is
called the great one who produces colours. In a passage
of the Ritual (ch. 153), as rendered by Birch, it is said
that “the great one journeys to the production of colours” These are the colours which are produced when the sun, or
the child-Horus, or Jesus, rises from the lotus to dye
the blue heaven with the hues of dawn. This is shown by
a reference in the same passage to the sycamore tree of
dawn. Now, in one of the numerous folk-tales that were
derived from the mythos, this is made a miracle of in a
legend of the Infancy. It was as the child-Horus that the
sun arose to create the colours; and, as a child, it is
said the Lord Jesus entered the shop of a dyer where lay
many cloths which were waiting to be dyed each of a different
colour. Taking them all up together he threw the whole
lot into a vessel of Indian blue. The dyer cried out and
said the boy had ruined them all. But Jesus said he would
cause each one to come forth of the colour that was desired,
and he took them out of the vessel one by one, each one
being dyed of the very colour that
the dyer wanted.
The
story of child-Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas who, when
five years old, took clay and formed the images of twelve
sparrows, which turned the word into a deed when Jesus
bade them fly, is a miracle manufactured from a mystery
of Amenta. When the manes
were transformed from mummy to spirit they became bird-headed
in the likeness of Horus whose head was that of a sparrow-hawk.
This in the folk-tale becomes a sparrow, and
twelve sparrows created by Jesus in the miracle are the
representatives of the twelve great spirits of [Page 810] Horus which have the head of the sparrow-hawk in the mystery
of
Amenta.
When
evil spirits enter swine and are driven down the
mountainside to be drowned in the lake of darkness
the representation
is mythical, not miraculous. The mount is rooted
in Amenta. The scene is in the earth of eternity. The
mount
was called the mount of birth in
heaven. This was ascended by the manes who had passed
through the judgment-hall and come forth as the good
spirits,
whereas the condemned were driven back and literally
sent
to the devil by entering the pig of Sut, which had become
a type of all impurity. The miracle begins when the
avenging Har-Tema is made historical, the pig actual,
and the transaction
takes place on this our upper earth. We must go to the
Egyptian drawings in the drama of the mysteries for
the verifiable fact; and once we are in presence
of the real truth we learn
that the argument of Professor Huxley against the miracle
is just as unprofitable as the Christian belief in
the miracle. Here, as everywhere, the miracle results
from a
misinterpretation of the mythos out of which the gospels
were ultimately evolved, piecemeal, and put together
in a spurious history,
with a spurious version of Horus the mortal, and a spurious
spectre of Horus in the spirit.
In
performing his miracles with a word, in being the
word incarnated or made truth in person, in wielding
a magical
power over the elements, in casting out devils, in
causing the
spirits of evil to enter the swine, in healing the woman
with the issue of blood, in giving sight to the blind,
in transforming and transfiguring himself, in suddenly
concealing himself,
in walking upon the sea, in his personal conflict and
battles with Satan, in raising the dead to life out
of the
earth, in resuscitating himself on the third day;
in all these and other
things Jesus is accredited with doing exactly what was
attributed to Horus in the Ritual and in the Egyptian
mysteries. But these miraculous things were never
done by mortal or
immortal on the surface of our earth. They are other-world
occurrences in the true rendering, and they can only
be re-related to reality as a mythical mode of representing
the
scenes in the drama of Amenta. The superhuman attributes
are possessed, the transformation and transfiguration
effected, the waters walked, the evil spirits cast
out to enter the typhonian swine; sight is restored to
the
blind, the dumb are given a mouth, the dead are raised
up out of the earth by Horus in this divine nether-world
termed the
earth of eternity and not on the earth of Seb in the
world of time.
The historical character of the four Gospel narratives must
stand or fall by the historical facts of the miracles.
From the birth derived from a virgin to the corporeal
resurrection of
the Christ, the sole standing-ground is upon miracle. No
amount of Jesuitical dialectic or logical argument based
upon false premises, can ever make right, as a trustworthy
matter
of faith, that which is verifiably wrong as matter-of-fact.
Yet the faith was founded on the uttermost falsification
of natural fact as the ground of the history. On the
one hand we
find a belief that these miraculous transactions, these
teachings of the Christ and the Christ himself were historical.
On the other, we have the proof that they were unhistorical,
a proof
upon evidence that has [Page 811] never been tampered with, and that is directly derived from
witnesses that do not, cannot lie. The miracles of the
virgin birth and physical resurrection of Jesus; the miracles
of giving sight to the blind and of raising the dead, the
descent into
Hades, and the resurrection in three days or on the third
day, are all Egyptian, all in the Ritual. They were previously
performed by the Christ who was not historical, the Christ
of
the Egypto-gnostics who is Horus or Jesus, identical with
the Osirian Christ who was Horus the lord by name, and
who, as the records show, was also extant as a divine type
or
spiritual impersonation as Iusa or Iu-em-hetep many thousand
years ago.
A
crucial example of the mode in which the gospel history
was manufactured from the matter of the mythos and
the eschatology is furnished by the miracle of miracles
of the
loaves and fishes. In one account the multitude of men,
women and children are fed on five loaves and two
fishes, and the remains of the meal were sufficient
to fill
twelve baskets
(Matt. XVI. 17-21). In the other miracle, or second version
of the same, the multitude are fed on seven loaves
and a few small fishes, and there were seven baskets
full of broken
pieces. But for the Ritual we might never have known
the correct number of loaves that did suffice to feed
the
vast multitude. They are seven in one place and five
in another, and
both the seven and five are found in one and the same
book. This difference, however, serves for Matthew
to make
out a second miracle (XV. 36). The speaker in the
Ritual says, “There are seven loaves on earth with Seb; there are seven
loaves with Osiris (in Amenta); there are seven loaves
at Annu with Ra in heaven” (ch. 53). “Henceforth let me live upon
corn in your presence, ye gods, and let there come one
who bringeth to me that I may feed from those seven
loaves which he hath brought for Horus” (Renouf, Rit., ch. 52). “It is the
god of the sektet boat and of the maatit boat who hath
brought them (the loaves) to me at Annu” (ch. 53). These seven loaves constitute the celestial diet
on which the multitude of souls are fed in Annu, called “the place of multiplying bread”. But those who are fed upon
the seven loaves in the celestial locality of Annu are
not human beings on earth; they are manes in Amenta where
Horus is the bread of life as giver of food to the quickened
spirits
of the dead; and as the transaction occurred in the next
life there was no need of a miracle in this life by asserting
that about five thousand hungry men, besides women and
children,
were fed upon five or seven loaves of bread and two fishes.
The
synoptics do not mention the incident, but according
to John (VI. 9) who retains much more of the Egyptian
wisdom in his Gospel, there was a lad present in the
scene who had
with him “five barley loaves and two fishes”. “Jesus therefore took the loaves from him and
distributed them to the people”. We have identified the feeding of the multitude of manes
on the seven loaves that were brought to Horus as distributor
of the bread of life, and the lad who brings the bread
to Jesus in the Gospel with the one who brings the seven
loaves
to Horus, or, it may be, the five loaves to Taht, in the
Ritual, and who is described as
“someone” who comes with the bread of Horus and Taht which is ritualistically
represented by the seven loaves. A primitive concept of the
infinite had been expressed in terms of [Page
812] boundless food and drink. Providence was the provider; and
the power that provided the fruits of the earth or water
was Providence. When bread was made the providing power
or godhead itself was figured by the Egyptians as an illimitable
loaf, the food of spirits or
celestial diet for the life to come. The one great loaf
was equivalent to the one supreme source of soul. Seven
loaves were numerically equivalent to the seven souls of
Ra. The
human soul was fed from the bread of life as typical of
divine source. With bread of that kind one loaf might have
sufficed without the pretence of a miracle, as it was cut
and come
again without diminution. It was the kind of bread which
keeps on rising and expanding for ever as in the German
tale of Jesus and the miserly woman with her dough.
Annu is the place of bread in which the multitudes of manes
are fed as men, women and children also, if the younglings
of Shu are included. It is called the place of multiplying
bread. There are seven loaves of
bread with Ra in Annu (Rit., ch. 53 B) on which the manes
are fed by Horus. They feed upon the seven loaves of celestial
bread which were
brought for Horus to feed the manes with by a divine messenger.
Seven loaves were brought for Horus and there were also
loaves for Taht (ch. 52), the two which correspond
to the seven loaves and the five in the “historical” miracles. The manes prays that he may
feed on the seven loaves that are brought for Horus, and
the loaves that were brought for Taht, which shows at least
that there was more than one set of loaves, when the multitude
were fed on the divine diet in the place of multiplying
bread. In the Gospel the multitude
recline upon the grass. In the Ritual they rest upon the
grassy sward beneath the sycamore of Hathor (ch. 52, 4).
But when the multitudes were fed in Annu they were the
souls of the
departed, and the symbolical seven loaves on which they
fed was Ka-bread that was neither made nor eaten on earth,
nor did it need a miracle to make the good go far enough.
Annu was a mythical locality which did not supply the conditions
for a miracle. A miracle
had to be performed only when the eschatological representation
was shifted from the mount of Annu in Amenta to a mountain
in Judea. One hieroglyphic sign of the mount
hetep is a pile of food. The mount was the place of feasting for the followers of
Horus, the beatified spirits of the departed. “Every feast on earth and on the mountain” signifies the
feasts of the living and the dead; the living upon earth,
the dead or the departed on the mountain. In the feasting
on the mount “Jesus went up into the mountain and sat there.
And there came unto him great multitudes, having with them
the lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and they
cast them down at his feet; and he healed them;
insomuch that the multitude wondered when they saw the
dumb speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking, and
the blind seeing; and they glorified the God of Israel.
And
Jesus called his disciples and said, I have compassion
on the multitude, because they continue with me three days and have nothing to eat”. (Matt. XV. 29-32.) The miracles of
healing, including the casting out of evil spirits and
the raising of the dead, as portrayed in the Ritual and
corroborated by the “Pistis Sophia”, occurred in the resurrection on the
mount; and this shows that those who had been with Jesus having
nothing to eat for three
days had been awaiting their [Page
813] resurrection on the third day, and that they were the
manes and not mortals.
The
only reason why the blind and deaf and dumb, the palsied
and the lame, including the dead, assembled in their
multitudes upon the mount is because this was the mount
of
resurrection and regeneration, thence of healing, for the
manes who had waited in Amenta for the coming of the
Lord. The resurrection of Osiris was solemnized at
the great Haker
festival. This is one of the ten mysteries described in
the “Book of the Dead” (ch. 18) said
to have been celebrated “before the great circle of gods in Abydos (the place
of Osiris’s
rebirth and resurrections) on the night of “Haker” (or Ha-k-er-a) when the glorious ones are
rightly judged: when the evil dead are parted off, and
joy goeth its round in Thinis” (ch. 18,
Renouf). The name for this festival is rendered “Come thou hither or Come thou to me” :
as the call of Ra upon the mount addressed to Osiris in
the valley on the day of resurrection, when the soul of
Horus the mortal was blended with Horus the immortal in
the
mystery of Tattu (ch. 17). The Haker celebration included
both fasting and feasting. The word haker signifies fasting,
to be famished, as well as denoting the festival of “Come thou
to me” or the rite of resurrection. Now, as the comparative process
shows an “historical”
version of the Haker festival is given in the Gospels where
we find an exoteric account of the funeral fast and resurrection
feast, in the miracles of healing performed upon the mount
and feeding the famished multitude upon the seven loaves
of bread. It should be premised
that the raising of Osiris, the god in matter was individual,
but, at the same time, the resurrection of the dead in
Osiris who were the “All
Souls” for the year or cycle was
general. The supreme miracle of “raising the dead” suffices of itself to show that it
belonged to the mysteries of Amenta, as asserted in the “Pistis Sophia”, where the dead
were raised; evil spirits were cast out, the blind were
made to see, the deaf to hear, the lame to walk, the bed-ridden
to get up and go, not by miracle but as a dramatic mode
of
illustrating the mysteries of the resurrection in the Peri em hru or coming forth to day. It is
noticeable that the miracles of healing on the mount described in Matthew (XV. 29-31), are
immediately followed by
the miracle of multiplying the loaves and fishes.
There is no change of scene, the multitude upon the mount
remain the same. “And Jesus called unto
Him His disciples, and said “I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue
with Me now three days and have nothing to eat; and I would not send them away
fasting”. Thus three days are allotted to the work of healing in
the mount, during which time the multitude were fasting
in
the company of Jesus and his disciples. In the Ritual these
are not only the fasting, they are also deprived of breath.
They are without a mouth. They
are the blind, the dumb, the motionless, in short, they
are the deceased awaiting in their coffins and their cells
for him who is the resurrection and the life, as the divine
healer and
deliverer of the manes from Amenta; he is the “divine one who dwelleth in heaven, and
who sitteth on the eastern side of heaven” (Rit., ch. 25) that is on Mount Bakhu, the mount
of the olive-tree, the only mount on which the dead were
ever raised (P. S., B. 2, 279). This
healing then was a mystery of the resurrection, the same
in the canonical as [Page 814] in the
Egypto-gnostic Gospel; the same in both as in the Book
of the Dead, or Ritual of the resurrection. Three days
was the length of time allowed for the burial in Amenta.
This
would constitute a three days’ fasting of the dead. We must discriminate. In the lunar
reckoning the resurrection of Osiris in the moon was on
the third day, which corresponded to the actual appearance
of the light in nature. This death, described by Plutarch,
occurred
on the seventeenth of the month. In the solar reckoning
three whole days and nights were allowed for the burial
of the sun or sun-god in the earth. Both are employed in
the
Gospels but not scientifically. Neither could the complex
of soli-lunar reckoning be explicated on the single line
of a personal human history. Both solar and lunar reckonings
remain, but hugely gaping apart with a gulf for ever fixed
between the two. The Son of Man
was to remain three nights as well as days in the “heart of the earth”. That is in keeping
with the solar reckoning, whereas the resurrection is on
the third day, the same as that of Osiris in the moon.
We repeat, there was a two-fold computation of time, lunar
and
solar, both of which are given in the gospels, but without
the gnosis that explained the astronomical mythology. Three
days is the full period, and this is the length of time
over
which the miracles of healing were extended and during
which the multitude with Jesus had “nothing to eat”, because they were with him in the Valley of Amenta; the
same that were healed by him on the Mount of Resurrection.
It was in the resurrection that the dead
were raised to life and became spirits. These were the
good spirits which were parted from the evil spirits that
were then “cast out”. Sight was given to the blind, a mouth to the dumb,
hearing was restored to the deaf. The lame were enabled
to rise and walk. Then the three days’ fast was ended by the feeding of the multitude on what the
Ritual terms celestial diet, i.e., the “seven loaves” of heaven that were supplied as sustenance for the risen
dead in Annu, the place of multiplying bread. In the Egyptian mysteries, all who enter the nether
world as manes to rise again as spirits are blind and deaf
and dumb and maimed and impotent because they are the dead. Their condition is typified by that of mortal Horus who
is portrayed as blind and maimed, deaf and dumb in An-arar-ef
the abode of occultation, the house of obscurity, the “city of dreadful night” where all the denizens were deaf and
dumb and maimed and blind awaiting the cure that only came
with the divine healer who is Horus of the resurrection
in the Ritual, or Khunsu, the caster out of demons, or
Iu-em-hetep the healer, or Jesus in the Gospels, gnostic
or agnostic. Thus the restoring of sight to the blind man,
or the two blind men, was one of the mysteries of Amenta
that
is reproduced amongst the miracles in the canonical gospels.
The speaker in the Ritual often makes the merest allusion
to some act of the drama that was visibly performed and
fully unfolded in the mysteries. For example, Horus the
avenger
is described as blending his being with that of the Sightless
One, who had been Horus in the flesh (Rit., 17). In a
previous allusion (same chapter) the coming of the soul
of Ra to
embrace and blend with the body-soul of Osiris, to give
light and life to the Mummy-God is also described as
the act of Horus-Tema who is blended with the Sightless
God. In either [Page 815] representation there is a restoration of sight to the blind;
and this when written out and narrated as “History” becomes the miracle of Jesus curing the man and giving sight
to him who was blind; or to the two men as Osiris and the
Osiris, N., or to any number of those who were sightless
in the city of the blind. When Horus the deliverer descends
into
Amenta he is hailed as the prince in the city or the region
of the blind. That is, of the dead who are sleeping in
their prison cells, and who therefore are the prototypal
spirits in prison.
He comes to shine into their sepulchres and to restore
their sight to the blind. “Hail to Thee,
Lord of Light, who art prince of the house which is encircled
by darkness and obscurity”,
in the city of the blind (Rit., ch. 21). This picture is
repeated in the Gospel of Matthew (IV. 16). “The
people which sat in darkness saw a great light: and to
them which sat in the region and shadow of death, to them
did the light spring up”. This, as written in the “Book
of the Dead” was in Amenta.
The
typical blind man of Amenta, then, is Horus in the
gloom of his sightless condition, as the human soul
obscured in matter or groping in the darkness of the
grave. This is Horus
An-arar-ef in the city of the blind. And the Horus who
comes to restore the lost sight, is he who had been
divinized in the likeness of Ra, the holy spirit. It
is said of this dual Horus in
the Ritual (ch. 17), “The pair of gods are Horus the reconstituter of his father
and Horus the prince in the city of blindness”. The second Horus is the spirit perfected. He descends
from heaven to the darkness of Amenta as The Light of the World. He is called the one
whose head is clothed with a white radiance. His presence
shines into the sepulchres and cells of the manes. He comes
to the blind in the city of the blind, the place in which
blind
Horus was enveloped in obscurity. He shows as a great light
in the darkness of the land of the dead, and is described
as restoring sight to those who are blind, that is to the
manes
who have not yet attained the beatific or spiritual
vision. This is represented as giving sight to the blind. Amenta was looked upon as the earth of the blind. The manes were
there as blind folk awaiting sight. The human Horus Har-Khent-An-arar-ef
in Sekhem was the prince of the blind, being chief amongst
the manes who were sightless or without the
means of seeing in the dark. For this reason the mole or
shrewmouse was his zootype. The typical blind man in Amenta
is the blind Horus who was deprived of sight by Sut, the
Power of Darkness. But every manes that entered Amenta
was also blind in the
darkness of death. Thus there are two blind men, or one
as the God and one as the manes; one in the soli-lunar
mythos, and one in the eschatology; Horus in his darkness
of
night or the eclipse; the mortal in the dark of death.
Miracle for mystery, this may explain the two different
versions of healing the blind in the Gospels. Three of
the evangelists know
of a single blind man only, who was cured by Jesus, where
Matthew reports the healing of two blind men in which he
obviously gives two separate versions of one and the same
miracle. In the Ritual, then, we can identify the one blind man with
Horus in the dark, or without sight (Rit., ch. 18, as Har-Khent-an-maati);
the
two blind men with Horus and the manes (otherwise [Page 816] with Osiris and the Osiris); and the multitudes of blind people
above ground with the manes or the dead in Amenta. There
is no need of limiting the miracle of curing the blind
to one or two men. Horus the light of the world in the
earth of
Amenta comes to cure the blind in general who are dwelling
in the darkness of the city of the blind, in which the
devil (Sut) was dominant previous to the second advent
of Horus.
The dead in Osiris were as blind mummies awaiting the spiritual
light which gave the beatific vision; and Horus comes to
unseal the eyes of the manes waking in their coffins.
The
poor blind Horus was given eyes at the time when he
became the anointed son, and the child of twelve years
made his transformation into the adult of thirty years
with the head
and sight of the hawk, or the beatific vision of Horus
in the spirit. He was anointed with oil at the lustration
in Abydos, the place of re-birth. Hence one mode of
making the anointed
or the Christ whom Horus became in this transformation
was by anointing with saliva. The lustration of children
by spittle was an old Papal rite, and in the Gospel
the spittle used to
open the eyes of the blind is equivalent to anointing the
sightless Horus in Sekhem. In acting the mystery of
Amenta the “Eye of Horus”, the anointed son, the light of the world,
was brought to blind Horus lying in his darkness. This
mystery is reproduced as miracle in the healing of
the blind man. “When I am in the world”, says Jesus, “I am the Light of the
World”. This is equivalent to bringing the eye of Horus to the
benighted manes in Amenta.
“When he had spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay
of the spittle, and anointed his eyes with the clay”. And in this unsightly way the man is said to have attained
his sight in thus becoming the anointed. Such is the puerility
of the miracle-mongers who
misrepresent the mystery-teachers in the Gospels. To preach
the “recovery of sight to the
blind” was to teach a doctrine of the resurrection and the opening
of the eyes in death, such as was set forth dramatically
in the mysteries of the Ritual (chs. 20-30). It was the
same also in giving a mouth to the dumb; in making
the dead to rise and the lame to
walk; likewise in casting out evil spirits, and the powers
of darkness, the associates of Sut, the Sami or the Sebau,
which originated in physical phenomena, and were afterwards
mis-rendered as obsessing spirits that were primarily human.
When the divine healer and
caster-out of demons, Khunsu-Horus, went to Bakhten to
exorcise an evil spirit from the possessed Princess, the
god was carried there in effigy, as the “driver away of evil spirits
that take possession “ of the human body, not as a divinized medicine-man portrayed
in human form. The effigy is an image of the wonderful
healer who originated as a power of
renewal in external nature, and not as a mortal on this
earth. The caster-out of demons is also portrayed as Khunsu
offering up the abominable pig in the lunar disk as a sacrifice
to
the Lord of Light (Planisphere of Denderah), the pig being
a zootype of Sut the evil one. Thus we reach a root-origin
in the war of light and darkness, or Horus and Sut, that
is
waged for ever in the Moon. The black boar, Sut, makes
his attack upon the eye, which is healed by Horus or Khunsu,
Taht or Ra. The power of light was then the healer of the
wound in nature that was wrought by the representative
of darkness as the pig, the
Apap-dragon, or the adversary Sut. Hence the eye of Horus
in [Page 817] the moon is a symbol
of healing, and of safety or salvation; an amulet, therefore,
or fetish, good against the powers of darkness. There was
no miracle in the natural phenomena. There was no
miracle involved or taught in the original mode of representation.
But when a “human
mortal” with the name of Jesus is put in place of Horus, Taht or
Khunsu, he becomes the supposed to be, but for ever impossible,
miracle-monger; Jesus, the Jewish Saviour, who
is described as coming into a world of blind people; some
of whom are blind figuratively, others actually. The Scribes
and Pharisees are denounced as blind, “blind guides”, “fools
and blind”, “blind leaders of the blind”, Jesus restores the sight of those who are physically
blind, “to many blind he gave sight”. That is in fitting the canonical Jesus to the rôle of
Horus. A form of blind Horus described by Isaiah leaves
no room for doubt that the Hebrew Messiah was the Egyptian
Horus. This is he who is blind; “my servant, who is blind as he
that is made perfect, and blind as the Lord’s servant” (chs. XLII, XLIII). This servant of the
Lord is the suffering Horus who was portrayed as the servant
of Osiris the Lord, blind, dumb, and therefore deaf, but
as being perfected in serving the Lord, who “confirmed the
word of His servant”. Being perfected marks the change from the servant, as Horus
who was born blind in matter to Horus in spirit, the restorer
of sight to the blind, that is, to the
dead. Also the word of the servant was confirmed by the
coming of Horus as the word-made-truth in Har-Ma-Kheru.
But it was in the earth of Amenta that Horus came to
restore the sight to the blind, and in the canonical Gospels
Judea, full of blind folk being cured by miracle, is just
Amenta wrong-side uppermost, with the drama of the double-earth
in a state of topsy-turvydom through the conversion of
the ancient mysteries into
Gospel-miracles.
In
arranging for the resurrection of the dead, as performed
in the mysteries of Osiris, the funeral bed, called
the Khenkhat, is prepared as the couch of the mummy.
It is said to the
deceased, “I have fastened thy bones together for thee. I have given
thy flesh to thee”. “I have collected thy members for theeâ€.
This is in arranging the deceased upon the funeral couch,
for his rising from, or as, the dead (ch. 170). “Hail
N”, it
is said to the deceased upon the funeral couch, “Arise on thy
bed and come forth” (Rit.,
chs. 169-170). Here is an instructive instance of the way
in which the mysteries of the Ritual have been converted
into the miracles of the Gospels.
There are two chapters concerning the funeral bed. The
first is “on making the Khenkhat to stand up”; the other is on “arranging the Khenkhat”. We repeat, the Khenkhat is the
funeral bed on which the dead were laid out in Amenta,
waiting for the coming of Horus, lord of the resurrection,
to wake the sleepers who are in their coffins or lying
breathless on
their couches in the likeness of inert Osiris. It is the
couch of the dead that is set up on end like the mummy-case
with the body inside which is thus erected on its feet
as a mode of
rendering the mystery of the resurrection or re-erection of the deceased (Rit., ch. 169). This
becomes a miracle in the Gospel, when the dead are raised,
and those who were paralytic take up their bed and walk.
In the next chapter (170) on the arrangement of the funeral
bed
it is said to the risen one, “Thou settest forth on thy [Page 818] way. Horus causeth thee to
stand up at the risings”. Then the deceased, as the risen mummy, is seen to be walking
off. That is in the resurrection. Here, as elsewhere, the
mystery of Amenta becomes a miracle when represented on
this earth. That change would of itself account for a huge
falsification, to say nothing of the intent and tendency
of the writers, which follow and
overshadow the truth of the ancient wisdom all through
as darkly as the night the day; for if ancient Egypt was
the light of the world, Christian theology has assuredly
been its
impenetrable shadow.
As
already shown, a reduced form of the mysteries that
were acted in the Osirian drama may here and there
be recognized in the form of parables and portable
sayings. Take the
mystery of Tattu in the 17th chapter of the Ritual, by
means of which the Sayings of the Lord, quoted from “the Gospel of the Egyptians” by the two Clements, can be explicated.
The Lord himself being asked by someone when his kingdom
would come, replied: “When
two shall be one. When that which is without is as that
which is within, and the male with the female (shall
be) neither male nor female” (Clem., Rom.). When Salome asked, when
those things about which she questioned should be made
known, the Lord said: “When
you tread under foot the covering of shame, and when out
of two is made one, and the male with the female is
neither male nor female” (Clem. Alex., Stromata). This is that
blending of the two souls or two sexes in one which was
figured and effected in the mystery of Tattu. This blending
of two halves in one whole, which is a likeness of neither,
but a new image of both, is exemplified thrice over in
the Ritual, when a soul was
established that should live for ever. Ra is blended with
Osiris; Shu with Tefnut; child-Horus with Horus the adult.
Ra represents the divine soul, and Osiris the body-soul
in matter. Shu
represents the male, and Tefnut the female nature. Child-Horus
is the mortal and Horus in spirit the immortal. Thus the
divine soul was blended with the soul of matter; female
with
male, and mortal with immortal in the mystery of Tattu.
The mystery was of course performed, and in the present
instance, the drama consists of three acts with six different
characters which are Ra and Osiris, Shu and Tefnut, Horus
the sightless, with Horus the
bringer of the beatific vision. In the saying quoted from “the Gospel according to the
Egyptians” the mystery has been reduced to the male and female becoming
neither male nor female in the mystical marriage, the other
factors being omitted. This shows the
process by which the mysteries of the Ritual were reduced
and made portable in the miracles, the parables and sayings,
or Logoi, whether as separate sayings or as
miscellaneous collections. A distant echo of the doctrine
is to be heard in the Gospel according to Matthew (XXII.
30): “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given
in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”. So remote is this from the mystical marriage in
Tattu that the mystery in Amenta is limited to sexual conjunction.
Now we learn from the Ritual that one mode of making the
change from matter to spirit and of being unified in
the type beyond sex was by discarding the garb of the female
in the preparation of the manes for the funeral bed at
the time of the second birth (Rit., ch. 170). The garment
is
again referred to in “the [Page 819] fragments of a lost Gospel” when the speaker says “he
himself will give you your garment”. “His disciples say unto him, when wilt thou be manifest
to us, and when shall we see thee? He saith, when ye shall
be stripped and not be ashamed’ (Grenfell and Hunt, New Sayings of Jesus, p. 40), which is the same thing as
being freed from the garb of shame upon the funeral bed.
This is no mystical reference to Genesis III. 7, but to
the mystery of Amenta and a ceremony that was performed
in the
nether-world, of which it is said, “Thou puttest on the pure garment and thou divestest
thyself of thy apron when
thou stretchest thyself on the funeral bed’ (Rit., ch. 172). “Thou
receivest a bandage of the finest linen”, in place of the old garb of shame, or the apron
which was now a symbol of the flesh. Lastly, amongst the
mysteries of Amenta which were converted into Gospel miracles
one of the most arresting is that of the Widow and her
only
son whom Jesus raised up from the funeral bier at Nain
(Luke VII. 14), because Isis is the widow by name in the
Ritual who was represented by the disconsolate swallow
as the
widow who has lost her mate, and Horus was her only son.
The connection of the child with the widow in Egypt is
already seen in the Gospel of Thomas or Tum, which goes
far
towards identifying the child-Jesus with the child of Isis.
Moreover, the mystery shows us how the mother as Isis became
a widow. When Osiris had been put to death, the birth of
the child-Horus followed the decease of his father, and
his mother was consequently the
widow who had an only son in Horus, the only child of his
mother. In the mystery of Tattu, child-Horus was raised
up from the dead when Horus in the spirit came to the funeral
couch and the immortal was blended with the mortal in the
mystery of the resurrection. This is repeated in the Gospel
as
one of the most telling of the mysteries that were Christianized
in the miracles.
JESUS IN THE MOUNT
Ascending
the mountain of Amenta is a figure of the resurrection
from the dead. When Jesus Aber-Amentho rises after
death it is to take his seat upon the mountain with
the
twelve preservers of the light. The group of twelve followers
was the latest to gather form upon the mount. This
was preceded by the seven, the four, and the two.
The Ritual of the
Resurrection opens with the coming forth to day of Horus
or the Osiris, who ascends the mount of glory, or
Mount Bakhu, the mount of the green olive-tree, which
afterwards
was
represented in Judea by the local Mount of Olives. In
the older manuscripts of the Ritual this ascent is
called “the coming forth to the divine powers attached to Osiris”, which are
the four with Horus in the mount, or on the Papyrus-column,
the four that were his brethren first, and who are
afterwards portrayed as his children. But in both
the Ritual and Pistis
Sophia the mount, the
scenes upon the mount, the twelve with Jesus or the
four with Horus on the mount, are all in spirit-world.
As we have seen, Pistis Sophia opens with the
resurrection of the Egypto-gnostic Jesus. The life of
suffering represented on the earth was over, and
the victor rose triumphant after death, to be invested
with the glory of the Father
on the mount. [Page 820]
This is the Peri-em-hru or coming forth to day with which the Egyptian Ritual of the
resurrection begins. Jesus comes forth from Amenta as the teacher of the greater
mysteries to the twelve disciples who are gathered together on the Mount Olivet, which is
the mountain of Amenta in the Kamite eschatology. Thus the mount, the scene upon the
mount, the teaching and the twelve are all post-resurrectional, and therefore the
transactions are not upon our earth. There was a double resurrection in the Osirian
mysteries, just as there is a first and second death. The earliest is a resurrection of the
soul that passes from the body on earth and emerges as the Sahu in Amenta. This is
Amsu-Horus, who is still a mummy, but who has risen to his feet with one arm loosened
from the bandages of burial. It has the look of a corporeal resurrection, for the body is
semi-corporeal. But Horus has not yet attained the garment of his glory.
The
typical mountain likewise had a twofold characters
in the mythology and the eschatology. As solar, it
was the mount of sunrise or of the great green olive-tree
of the
Egyptian dawn. As eschatological, it was the mountain
of Amenta, up which the manes climbed — the mount of glory and the glorified. It was the mount on
which the human Horus was transfigured and regenerated
to become pure spirit in the likeness of the Father.
Hence it is the mount of transfiguration, of regeneration,
of healing, and also the means
of ascent into the land of spirits (Rit., ch. 17).
The second resurrection is from Amenta. When Horus has transformed and made his
change into the likeness of his Father and become pure spirit he ascends from the mount
and rises into Heaven from Bakhu, the mount of the olive-tree, or the Mount of Olives in
the later rendering. This was the meeting-place of Horus and his heavenly Father Ra when
they conversed together in the mount. It is that Mount of Olives on which Horus, the
Egypto-gnostic Jesus, met the twelve disciples after his resurrection from Amenta, which
meeting-place is repeated when the Gospel-Jesus makes the appointment for the Eleven
to meet him in the mountain after he has risen from the dead (Matthew XXVIII. 16). The
Kamite founders of the astronomical mythology had placed the equinoxes high up on the
horizon, or the summit of the mount, as it was figured, at the meeting-point of equal night
and day. Thus the equinox or level place was one with the top of the mount, and where
one writer speaks of the equinoctial station as being
on the mount another might assign it to the “level place” or plain, when neither of them possessed the proper clue.
In this way one discrepancy may be explained concerning
the delivery of the sermon on the mount.
According to Matthew, Jesus delivered it upon the mount.
According to Luke, he came down from the mount and “stood on a level place” (ch. VI. 17). Both places meet in one,
but only on the mountain of the equinox, the Egyptian
mountain of Amenta. According to Matthew, the sermon
was delivered
to the four brethren in the mount. This follows the
Ritual. According to Luke, the sermon was delivered to
the twelve on the mount by Jesus standing on the level
place.
No rational explanation has ever been suggested why the divine
healer on earth should have compelled the sick and ailing,
the obsessed, the halt and maimed, the deaf and dumb
and blind who [Page 821] besought him for a cure, to climb a lofty mountain with the
cripples on crutches in order that they might come into
his presence and be healed. When Jesus
was followed by the clamorous multitude he went up into
the mountain and sat there. “And
there came unto him great multitudes, having with them
the lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and they
cast them down at his feet, and he healed them”. The answer
is that the mount was mythical, not geographical; the divine
healer was no human thaumaturgist; the multitudes were
manes, not mundane mortals.
The
only mountain mentioned by name in the Gospels as
the scene of the miraculous occurrences is Mount Olivet.
There was such a mountain to the east of Jerusalem,
but
beyond that was the mythical Mount of Olives, which was
localized in many places under various names as the
typical mount of the astronomical mythos. At first
the mount was a
figure of the earth that rose up in the waters of the
Nun,
or space. Then it was a type equivalent to the horizon.
To be upon the horizon in the mythos is to be upon
the mount — the mount of the double equinox — the four quarters or the twelve divisions of the ecliptic.
It is shown in the Pistis Sophia that the twelve disciples, teachers, or supporters who sat
with Jesus on the Mount of Olives had originated as the
twelve aeons or rulers in the
zodiac. As such they were the teachers of time and the
preservers of the treasures of light. Their stations
were in an aërial region. This is otherwise called the sphere or circle
of the zodiac, in which the twelve seats or thrones were
finally established, with the central
throne of the Egypto-gnostic Jesus towering over all.
In the early Christian iconography the cross of Christ is
erected on a mount. This is shown to be the mount of
the four quarters, or the equinox, by means of the four
rivers flowing
from the summit. The Christ stands on the top along with
the cross. Sometimes the ram or lamb is portrayed on
the mount of the four quarters in place of the Christ;
and Horus was
likewise the lamb as well as the calf upon the mount. The
Christ is also accompanied by seven lambs=seven rams,
supposed by Didron to represent the twelve apostles! (Didron,
Fig. 86). But the ram (Mithraic lamb) is the Egyptian ideograph
for the ba-spirit, and seven rams or lambs that accompany
the Christ are equal to the seven spirits which served
Horus
in the octonary of the mount. The ram also appears with
seven eyes and seven horns, which identify it with the
seven rams as seven spirits, or the seven souls of Ra.
This shows
an earlier stratum of the astronomical mythos in survival.
It is the Egypto-gnostic Jesus, who was Horus, with the
seven great spirits that were earlier than the twelve upon
the
mount. When Jesus has transformed, or spiritualized in
his baptism, he is “led up of the
spirit to be tempted of the devil” (Matt. IV. 1). He is then a spirit on the mount that is
exceeding high, like the mountain of Amenta, which is said
to reach the sky. To meet upon the mountain after death
could only be as spirits meet in spirit-world upon the
mount of
re-union in the mysteries of Amenta. Thus it is obvious
that the meeting-point of Sut and Horus, or of Satan and
the Christ, was no earthly hill; and that the teacher and
the
teaching on the mountain are the same in the canonical
Gospels as in Pistis Sophia and
the Ritual, that is, they are in spirit-world, and therefore
the total [Page 822] transactions on the
typical mountain are post-resurrectional and not humanly
historical.
According to John, the earliest discourse of Jesus is not
the sermon on the mount as given by Matthew. In place
of this, John presents the discourse upon regeneration
which is the
same subject as that of the sermon on the mount in the Divine Pymander. Jesus says to
Nicodemus, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born anew
(or from above) he cannot see the kingdom of God”. Nicodemus saith unto him, “How can a man be born
when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus
answered, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of
water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom
of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh: and
that
which is born of the spirit is spirit. Marvel not that
I said unto thee, ye must be born from above. The wind
bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice
thereof, but knowest
not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: So is everyone
that is born of the spirit”.
Nicodemus answered and said unto him, “How
can these things be?” Jesus answered and
said unto him, “Art thou a teacher in Israel and understandest not these
things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that
we do know, and bear witness of that we have seen:
and ye receive not our witness. If I told you earthly
things and ye believe them not, how shall ye believe
if I tell you heavenly things? And no man hath ascended
into heaven but
he that descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, which
is in heaven” (John III. 1-14). This
is a sermon on regeneration. The sermon of Hermes is
in the mount of regeneration. The subject is the same
in both. Previous to this discourse Hermes had told Tat
that “no man
can be saved before regeneration”. At a previous ascent into the mount Hermes had
promised Tat that if he would estrange himself from the
world and prepare his mind for this mystery to be unfolded,
he would then impart it to him. “Now”, says Tat, “fulfil my defects
and instruct me of regeneration either by word of mouth,
or secretly; for I know not, O Trismegistus, of what
substance or what womb, or what seed a man is thus born”. That
is, how he is to be reborn in the process of regeneration?
Hermes replies, “O son, this
wisdom is to be understood in silence, and the seed is
the true good”. “Who soweth it, O
father? for I am utterly ignorant and doubtful”. “The will of God, O son”. Now, this is called
“the secret sermon in the mount”, on the subject of “regeneration and the profession of
silence”. The subject is the same, the characters of teacher and
doubtful inquirer are identical, and the physical misinterpretation
regarding the mode of rebirth is one and the
same in both interviews. Hermes describes a form of the
Son of Man who is in heaven, otherwise the heavenly man,
when he says, “I see in myself an unfeigned sight or
spectacle made by the mercy of God: and I am gone out
of myself into an immortal body, and am not now what
I was
before, but am begotten in mind”. He also says of the physical
and spiritual, “He that looketh only upon that which is carried upward as
fire, that which is carried downward as earth, that which
is moist as water, and that which bloweth or is
subject to blast as air; how can he sensibly understand
that which is neither hard nor moist, nor tangible, nor
perspicuous, seeing it is only understood in power and [Page 823] operation:
but I beseech and pray to the mind, which alone can understand
the generation that is in God”. But Hermes, who wrote the Ritual in hieroglyphics as the
scribe of the Egyptian gods, did not derive his matter
from the Gospels collected by Eusebius and his
co-conspirators in Rome (Divine Pymander, B. 7).
After
the prophecy of the immediate coming of the Son, who
is supposed to be speaking of himself, we have the
real meaning of the manifestation identified in the
very next verse,
which contains a representation of the entrance of Osiris
and his transfiguration as Horus in the mount on the
sixth day of the new moon. We are told that “after six days” — it would
have been more correct if “on the sixth day”; the discrepancy, however, is but slight —
“Jesus taketh with him Peter and James and
John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain
apart. And he was transfigured before them. And his face
did shine as the
sun, and his garments became white as the light. And behold
there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him.
And Peter answered and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is
good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will make here
three booths, one for thee, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.
While he was yet speaking, behold, a bright cloud
overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud,
saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased:
hear ye him” (Matt. XVII. 1-5). Then Jesus retires into his
secrecy, saying, “Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of Man has risen
from the dead”.
This identifies the mount of resurrection, which is one
with the mount of regeneration, the sermon on which is
obviously post-resurrectional. There is a scene of Transfiguration
on
the Mount in the mysteries of Amenta. “Ra
maketh his appearance at the mount of glory with the cycle
of gods about him”. The Osiris deceased acquireth might with Ra, and is
made to possess power with the gods — and when men or the manes see him they fall
upon their faces. He is seen in the nether-world “as the image of Ra.” So in the Gospel, the
face of Jesus “did shine as the sun”. The disciples likewise fell upon their faces, and “were
sore afraid”. Not only is Jesus seen in the likeness of Ra, the father
in heaven; the voice from the father proclaims that this
is the beloved son. In coming down from the mount the
witnesses are commanded to “tell the vision to no man”, and of the scene in the
mysteries, it is said by the speaker in the Ritual, “the Osiris N hath not told what he hath
seen; he hath not repeated what he hath heard in the house
of the god who hideth his face” (ch. 133). The point here is the identity of the mythical
mount, whether astronomical or as the seat of the teacher;
and the twelve; or as the mount of the mysteries; the mount
of resurrection, of regeneration and of transfiguration.
It is the same mount when those
multitudes that meet upon the summit are described as the
blind, the halt, and maimed. The mount on which the dead
were raised to life, the blind were made to see, the dumb
to speak, the impotent to become virile, like the risen
ithyphallic Horus; the mount upon
which the famished multitudes were fed from the illimitable
loaf, or loaves, was the mount of resurrection that rose
up from the nether earth for the departed to ascend as
spirits.
Hence it is the mount on which the miracles in the Gospels
are alleged to have been [Page
824] performed. The mount of glory in the Ritual becomes the mount
of the glorified in the Gospels. This, according to the
gnosis, was the mount that has been localized in Judea,
to which the people were bidden to flee for refuge when
the end of all things should come;
not a geographical mount, but the mount of the manes in
Amenta; the mount of the resurrection, which only spirits
could ascend; the mount from which the swine obsessed
by devils were driven down into the lake when the evil
Apap and his host of fiends is hurled back at dawn from
the horizon to be drowned in the bottomless pit of Putrata
(Rit., ch. 39).
Horus
in the solar mythos is the prototype of Jesus on
the mount. He is described as the sovereign lord upon
the
mount=horizon (ch. 40). Elsewhere he says, “I come before you
and make my appearance on the seat of Ra, and I sit upon
my seat which is on the mount”
(or on the horizon) (Rit., ch. 79). Horus has alighted
on the mount or is lifted on his monolith, when he says, “I
make my appearance as that god in the form of a man that
liveth like a god, and I stand out before you in the
form of that god who is raised high upon his pedestal (of
the mount, or the papyrus-column) to whom the gods come
with
acclamation”. He maketh his appearance on the mount of glory or upon
his pedestal with the cycle of gods about him (ch. 133).
The papyrus being a figure of the earth, Horus, on
his papyrus-column or lotus-plant, is Horus in the mount.
Also the four brethren, Amsta, Hapi, Tuamutef, and Kabhsenuf,
who stand upon the papyrus (or column), are the gods
of the four quarters with Horus in the mount. Now, when
the four brothers, Simon and Andrew with James and John,
are called upon to leave their nets and follow Jesus,
they became straightway the four with Jesus in the mount.
For,
according to Matthew, the
disciples were only four in number when the sermon was
delivered in the mount (Matt. IV. 5). Again, the typical
group of four in the mount are represented by Jesus,
James, Peter
and John at the time of the transfiguration (Matt. XVII.
1). Mount Bakhu having been named in Egyptian from the
olive-tree of dawn as a celestial summit was localized
in Olivet,
the mountain eastward. This, as solar, was the one sole
mount of the mythos; and in the
Gospels, although the mount is mentioned several times,
and apparently in different localities, there is but
one name given to it, that of Mount Olivet=Bakhu the
solar
mount,
the one typical mount, the Egyptian mount, equivalent
to the horizon, as the summit of the earth and figure
of the
ascent into heaven.
The
canonical Jesus is also shown to be a form of the son
of Ra, the father in heaven, in his retiring from the
world at eventide and passing the night alone on the
mount. It may be
worth noting that there was a temple of the solar Horus,
as ancient as the time of Sebek, upon the eastward
side of Mount Bakhu. As it is said in the Ritual (ch.
108), “Sebek the
Lord of Bakhu is at the East of the hill, and his temple
is upon it”. And Sebek was very
possibly the most ancient form of Horus the young solar
god. Horus wars against the serpent of darkness on behalf
of his father in the mount by night, and is the teacher
in the
temple of heaven by day. Jesus obviously makes use of both
the mount and the temple, for he went up into [Page 825] the mountain when “he opened his mouth and taught” the
multitudes (Matt. V. 2). The devil took him up into an
exceeding high mountain when he was in the spirit. He was
transfigured on a “high mountain apart” (Matt. XVII. 1, 2). He sat
upon the Mount of Olives when expounding the consummation
of the cycle and the gospel of the kingdom to the disciples
privately (Matt. XXIV. 3). Many details are of course omitted
from the “history” and there is no guidance in the Gospels to the secret meaning
of the mysteries. For that we must “search the Scriptures” which are genuine and self-explanatory
as Egyptian; the scriptures of Maati and Taht-Aan. Of Jesus
and his doings in the mount by night we are told that he
went into the mountain to pray; and he continued all night
in
prayer to God (Luke VI. 12). “And when it was day, he called his disciples; and he chose
from them twelve” (VI. 13). It is said in the Ritual that “Horus is united at sunset with his
Father Ra who goeth round the heavenâ€. So Jesus at sunset
is united with his father in prayer all night in the mount.
The sun-god has to fight the adversary Sut
for
his
passage
through the mount by night. Horus is said to come at
evening and “seize upon the tunnels of Ra” for making his passage through the mount.
These are elsewhere called the tunnels of Sut; a synonym
for darkness. The sun-god entered the mountain each night
for rebirth every morning. Horus came forth from the
Mount of Olives. He is portrayed in the Ritual walking
over the waters. He ascends the Mount Bakhu to enter the
solar bark. It is said that his “sister goddesses stand in Bakhu”
; they receive him there as the two mothers, they lift
him up into his boat (Hymn to Harmachis). There is a curious
conjunction of the Temple and the Mount in Luke’s
description of Jesus as the teacher. Like so many other
fragments it stands by itself in the Gospel. “Every day he was teaching in the Temple; and every night
he went out and lodged in the mount that is called of Olives. And all the people came early in the morning to him,
in the Temple, to hear him” (ch. XXI. 37, 38). This passage identifies the mount as
being named from the olive-tree, on which the temple of
Sebek-Horus stood, and therefore with
Mount Bakhu. On coming forth from the mount of Amenta Horus
entered the bark that was rowed or towed round by the twelve
who were called the twelve kings in the solar mythos,
and afterwards twelve teachers or apostles who were servants
to Iu the son of Atum, the Egyptian Jesus in the eschatology.
It
is Horus in the mountain with his father who says — “I am the Lord on high. I make my
nest on the confines of heaven”, that is, aloft on the mount. “Invisible is my nest”. “From
thence I descend to the earth of Seb” his foster-father, “and put a stop to evil”. “I see my
father, the lord of the gloaming, and I breathe” (ch. 85, Renouf). Horus in the mount is
designated “lord of the Staircase” or steps at the top of which his father sat enthroned. In
this dual character the peripatetic Jesus is made to
journey, betwixt plain and mountain, town and country,
in a vain endeavour to make the track of Horus become
historical. Horus
enters the mountain by night and comes forth by day as
the “lord of daylight” divinized. On
coming forth he says, “I have ascertained what there is in Sekhem”, the shrine in the
mount, where dead Osiris lay. “I have touched [Page 826] with my two hands the heart of
Osiris, and that which I went to ascertain I have come
to tell. . . . Here am I, and I come that I may overthrow
mine adversaries on the earth (even) though my dead body
be buried” as the Osiris (ch. 86, Renouf). In entering the mountain
at sunset he has seen the great mystery of Osiris, his
death, his transformation, and his resurrection, and
he comes forth
as a spirit divinized to make the experience known as
a teacher of the mysteries to those that became his followers,
his children who were adopted by him as the four brethren
two
by two, then the seven, and finally the twelve who row
the solar bark or reap the harvest of eternal plenty
in
the Aarru paradise of the Amenta.
A
specially important feature in the “history” is this retirement of Jesus into a mountain at
sunset to commune with his Father. Jesus “when even was come went up into the
mountain apart to pray, and was there alone” (Matt. XIV. 23). “He went out into the
mountain to pray; and he continued all night in prayer
to God” (Luke VI. 12). It is noticeable
that he goes into the mountain, and in the mythos the
sun at evening entered the mount which is a figure of
the earth. The type was continued in the eschatology.
God the Father
as Osiris had his dwelling-place and shrine in the mount
of earth and it was there that Horus interviewed the
father. The speaker in the “Book of the Dead’ says, in the character
of Horus the son, “I seek my father at sunset, compressing my mouth”. This latter phrase
is Renouf’s rendering of the words “hapet ru”, the sense of which is determined by the
ideograph of closing or enclosing. Therefore the meaning
is “I close my mouth” as the
synonym for silence in the mount. He seeks his father
in the character of Horus with the silent mouth. “I seek my father at sunset in silence, and I feed on life”, is the complete
declaration made in this line. Horus feeds on life in
silence when alone with the father in the mount of earth
where souls were fed on sustenance divine. This is the
meat referred
to by Jesus when he said, “I have meat to eat that ye know not of”, “My meat is to do the
will of him that sent me, and to accomplish his work”. Horus says, “I live in Tattu, and I
repeat daily my life after death, like the sun”. For he is Horus risen in Amenta, where he
is the instructor of the manes in the mysteries, otherwise
he preaches to the “spirits in
prison”.
In
building the house of heaven, which was annually repeated
in the mysteries, the fourfold foundation, the four
supports or cornerstones, were laid in the mount. These
four supports
were personalized in the four children of Horus, Amsta,
Hapi, Tuamutef, and Kabhsenuf, who had already been
four of his brothers in the earlier mythos when they
were the four
sustainers of the heaven at the four corners of the mount,
and also as the four who stand upon the flower of the
papyrus-plant. Now we have to bear in mind that the
rock is
identical with the mount, and that the house or temple
of Horus built upon the mount was founded on the rock.
In establishing his father’s kingdom of the beatified, Horus built upon
the typical rock. In the Gospel Simon is told by Jesus
that he will build his church upon this
rock, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against
it. The gates of Hades or Amenta opened in the rock of
the Tser Hill to let the dead come forth in the glorified
train of Horus
the conqueror [Page
827] whose temple, from the time of Sebek, had been built upon
the rock with the four brethren as the pillars of support,
which were finally extended to the twelve in
keeping with the complete number of zodiacal signs. Peter,
in the Gospels, has been assigned the place and position
of the rock or mount (or Tat of stability) because in the
Greek the word petra signifies the rock. But the rock was the same as the mount;
the mount was one and the same all through; and it was
the site of the building, whether this
is called the Church of Rome, the temple of Sebek,
or the house of Tum, that was built by his son Jesus for
the divine abode, at the level of the equinox.
Horus
in the character of Har-Makhu was the sun-god of
the double horizon, who passed from west to east and
united
the two in one. These two horizons of the double
earth have
been a source of endless perplexity to the students of
the history. The two horizons reappear in the Gospels
as those of the two opposite countries, Judea and
Galilee. Both
have been used independently; the result is that one
writer localizes the works of Jesus in the one region,
whilst
another places the scenes in the country opposite,
as if they did not
know which leg to stand on, or on which horizon to take
their stand. Horus of the double horizon is reproduced
in Jesus, who itinerated in two lands or two parts
of the one land
which takes the place of the Egyptian double earth. Horus
passes from one horizon to the other by making his
passage through the mount. He makes the passage in
the stellar Atit,
or Maatet-boat, which he enters with the seven glorious
ones at sunset. Horus in the mount is one with Horus
in the boat, and thus as teacher of the four, or
the seven, or the twelve, he is the teacher in the
boat. In this character Jesus likewise teaches in
the boat. It is
said that “he sat down and taught the multitudes out of the boat” (Luke V. 3, 4). Horus, with
the seven on board the boat, who were portrayed in heaven
as the Sahus in Orion, is usually depicted standing.
The nearest likeness to the passage through the mountain
in
the Maatet-boat by night occurs when Jesus “withdrew again into the mountain himself
alone”. whereas the disciples go by water. “When evening came, his disciples went down
into the sea; and they entered into the boat and were
going over the sea unto Capernaum. And it was now dark”. The scribe hardly dared to send them through the mountain
by the boat of the mysteries, therefore Jesus comes to
them by walking on the water, “and
straightway the boat was at the land whither they were
going”, (John VI. 15-21) that is, by
magic or by miracle.
At
the summit of the mount the glorified deceased who
came up from Amenta were now given a seat upon the
bark of Ra. In one of his many characters Horus is
the divine teacher
called “the teller”, on board the boat. He says, “I am the teller in the divine ship. I am the
unresting navigator in the bark of Ra” (Rit., ch. 109). As the teacher in the boat he also
says, “I utter the words of Ra (his father) in heaven to the men
of the present generation (or to the living on earth),
and I repeat his words to those who are deprived of breath
(or
to the manes in Amenta)” (Rit., ch. 38). This, then, is Horus as the teacher in the
solar boat, who utters the words or sayings of his father
Ra, by day and night, to the living on
earth and the manes in Amenta. These are spoken of as those
who are in their [Page 828]
shrines,
but who are also said to accompany Horus as his guides.
Horus further says, “I
have made my way and gone round the celestial ocean on
the path of the bark of Ra, and standing on the deck (bekasu)
of the bark”. It is in this position on the boat that he utters
the words of Ra — the word of God — to both the living and the dead. He says, “I come forth
from the cabin of the Sektit bark, and I raise myself up
from the eastern hill. I stoop upon the eastern hill. I
stoop upon the Maatet (or Atet) bark that I may come and
raise to me
those who are in their circles, and who bow down before
me” (Renouf, ch. 77). The boat
or bark of the sun has been made historical in the Gospels.
In the time of the celestial Heptanomis there were seven
on board the bark with Horus. And seven is the number on
board the ship with Jesus after his resurrection. In the
heaven of ten nomes there were ten
on board the solar bark with Horus, and there are ten on
board the boat with Jesus (not twelve) in a very early
picture given by Bosio. In this scene, Jesus with the ten
in the
boat is the child of twelve years, not the man of thirty
years. Ten in the solar boat preceded the twelve in the
heaven of ten divisions, which were earlier than the seventy-two.
(Lundy, Monumental Christianity, fig. 56.)
Horus
in the boat is another of the mythical characters
assigned to Jesus by the “sacred
historian”. Jesus likewise plays the part of Horus in the boat as the teller of parables. “There were gathered unto him great multitudes so that he
entered into a boat and sat; and all the multitude stood
on the beach. And he spake to them many things in parables” (Matt.
XIII. 2, 3). Four of the parables are then told to the
people by Jesus, the teller in the boat, which is a co-type
with the sayer or logos in person. We find that the Teacher,
now
become historic, also addresses two classes or kinds
of people when he utters the words of his father from
the boat. One audience consists of the twelve disciples
to whom he is
supposed to communicate a knowledge of the mysteries
of the kingdom of heaven. These correspond to the glorious
ones who are enshrined, and who accompany Horus as his
guides. The others are called the multitude. To these
it is not given to know the mysteries
because “seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do
they understand”
(Matt. XIII). If the thing were historic, the supposed
great democratic Teacher would be excluding the “swinish
multitude” from all knowledge of the kingdom of heaven. They were
not to be enlightened because they were too densely,
darkly ignorant. They are to be put off with parables,
according to Luke (VIII. 10), “that seeing they might not see, and hearing
they might not understand” these heavenly stories which had for them no earthly meaning.
Thus, in this process of transmogrifying the Kamite mythos
into Christian history, the common people, the ignorant
multitude, are assigned the status of the Pait, the breathless,
non-intelligent, unilluminated dead who were slumbering
darkly in the coffins of Amenta,
and these are inevitably mixed up, in the teaching of
Jesus, with the deaf and blind who do not hear and cannot
see,
and may not perceive, as mortals on this earth.
Moreover
the bark in which the sun-god made his celestial voyage
was double under two different names. “I am the great one among [Page 829] the gods”, says the speaker in the
Ritual (ch. 136B), “coming in the two barks of the lord of Sau”. In the morning it was the
Sektit boat, in the evening the Maatet bark. “Let the soul of the deceased come forth with
thee (the god) into heaven; let him journey in the Maatet
boat till he reach the heaven of the setting stars” (Rit., ch. 15). Two boats are also mentioned by Luke where
Matthew only speaks of one —“ while the multitude pressed upon him and heard the word
of God, Jesus saw two boats standing by them”. He asks that one of these may put out from the
land in order that he may address the multitude from the
shore. And he sat down and taught the multitudes out of
the boat (Luke V. 4). Again, we meet with Jesus on board
the
Maatet bark at evening. In the Gospel according to Matthew
there is a scene in which Jesus is asleep on board the
boat. At sunset, “when even was come”, he entered into a
boat and his disciples followed him. And behold, there
arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the boat
was covered with the waves, but he was asleep”. Then “he arose
and rebuked the winds and the sea, and there was a great
calm” (Matt. VIII. 24). The
scene may be paralleled with that on board the bark of
Ra at evening (Rit., ch 108). In this conflict between
Apap and Ra the evil is in the western mountain, and it
is said of him,
“Now at the close of day he turneth down his eyes to Ra: for there cometh a standing
still in the bark, and a deep slumber within the ship”. Here the solar god as Ra, or Horus, when
sinking to rest in the boat, is described as being asleep
on board when the evil one makes his attack. There is a contest. “Then Sut is made to flee with a chain of steel upon him,
and he is forced to vomit all that he hath swallowed. Then
Sut is put into his prison” (Rit., ch.
108). The western mountain overlooks the lake of Putrata. “I know the place”, says the
speaker, “where Ra navigated against adverse winds” (ch. 107). The lake that is crossed
by night amidst the terrors of the tempest is a replica
of the dreadful lake of darkness which the followers of
Horus have to cross in Amenta. It is mentioned in the pyramid
texts
(Pepi I, 332, and Merira, 635) as a lake that is traversed
by the glorified personage. In the chapter by which “one dieth not a second time” (Rit., ch. 44, Renouf) it is spoken of as the
lake or chasm of Putrata, where the “dead fall into darkness”, if not supported by the eye
of Horus, their moon by night. Elsewhere it is described
as the void of Apap over which the bark of heaven sails;
the void in which the Herrut-reptile lurks to prey on those
who fall
down headlong in the dark (ch. 99). In this place the deceased
pleads that he may be brought into the bark “ as a distressed mariner”, for safety. After crossing the lake of
darkness, the solar god is thus addressed — “O thou who art devoid of moisture in coming
forth from the stream, and who restest upon the deck of
thy bark, as thou proceedest in the direction of yesterday
and restest
upon the deck of thy bark, let
me join thy boatmen”. “O Ra, since thou passest through those who are perishing
headlong, do thou keep me standing on my feet”. That is, in crossing the water— but not walking on it. Some of the
matter may have sunk down a little too deep to dredge
for, but as Herod the monster is the Herrut-reptile, the
dragon-Apap,
in an anthropomorphic guise, we may complete the
parallel by pointing out that the murder of John by Herod [Page 830] immediately precedes the
crossing of the stormy-lake=the lake of darkness called
the void of Apap in Amenta. John is slain, but Jesus
escapes to cross over and to save those who were sinking
in the
waters
and who are described in the Ritual as “falling down headlong”, and finding nothing to lay
hold on by which they can be saved from the bottomless
abyss, until Horus comes to the rescue of the “distressed mariners” in the “divine form which revealeth the solar orb”, and
with the eye that was an emblem of the moon; the sun
by day and moon by night being called the two eyes of
Horus.
In
the original mythos the boat is the solar bark; in
the eschatological phase it is the boat of souls.
It is steered by Horus, who is called the oar that
guides.
It is rowed by his
followers, who may be the “four paddles”, or the seven great spirits, or the twelve mariners;
and it is the ark of salvation for souls when Horus the
Saviour is at the look-out. This ark or bark has served
for a model in the New Testament as the boat of souls
distressed that
is nearly swamped, and only saved from sinking by the
God who is on board. On entering the bark the speaker
pleads: “O Great One in thy bark, let me be lifted up into thy bark” (ch.
102). The data for comparison with the story in the Gospel
are — the divine bark, which is
solar in the mythos, and the boat of salvation, or of
safety, in the eschatology. In crossing the terrible
lake from which the Apap monster emerges, and the storms
and tempests rise
to overwhelm the bark, the god rises unwetted from the
water to rest upon the deck of the bark and insure the
safety of those on board. This is identical with Jesus,
who comes on
board by walking upon the water, whilst the individual
speaker that makes the appeal for safety in the place
of perishing headlong is equivalent to Peter, who calls
for help when
sinking in the lake, saying, “Lord save me”, and is “lifted into the bark” (Matt. XIV. 22-33),
like the rescued manes in the Ritual. Jesus on board
the boat with his disciples in the storm sustains the
character of Horus in the boat, who is the oar, paddle,
or rudder of Ra, and
who exclaims, “I am the kheru (paddle or rudder) of Ra who brings the boat to land” (Rit.,
ch. 63). In this passage Horus is the oar or rudder to
the boat of the sun, with the ancient ones on board,
in the mythos, and to the boat of salvation for souls
in the
eschatology. It
is he who brings the boat to the shore.
The
germ of the Gospel story concerning Peter sinking
in the waters may be detected in this same chapter.
The
speaker is a “wretched one” in the water who was to be saved by
him who is an oar or a boat to the shipwrecked (cf. ch.
125, 38). In the Ritual it is hot water that the
sinking manes has got into, the imagery being solar,
and he
speaks of being
helpless as a dead person. But Horus, the oar of the
boat, the rudder of Ra, is obviously his saviour,
like Jesus
with Peter in the Gospel. A shipwrecked spirit is
the inspiring
thought, and Horus was the rescuer as the pilot, or figuratively
the paddle to the boat by which the sinking soul
was saved from drowning in the overwhelming waters.
The
Lord appears on the water in the morning watch, the “fourth watch of the night”, that
is, the πρωὶ or dawning (cf. Mark XIII. 35), at which time the Sun-God
begins his march or his “walking”, as it is termed, upon the waters of the Nun. It is said
to the God who walks [Page 831] this water at sunrise, “Thou art the only one since thy coming forth upon the Nun”.
And here we may discover the prototype of the Gospel version.
The deceased addresses Ra at his coming forth to walk the
water and pleads, like Peter, that he may do so likewise.
“Gran”, he
says, “that I too may be able to walk (the water) as thou walkest
(on the Nun) without making any halt”. The sun was seen to rise on the blue above, which was imaged
as the water of heaven. His follower prays that he also
may walk the water and make the passage successfully and
without sinking, like the solar God. In another chapter the
deceased exclaims, “I fail, I sink into the abyss of the flowing that issues
from Osiris”, that
is, the water of which Osiris is the source; and in these
we find the parallel and prototypes of Jesus walking on
the water and Peter sinking into its engulfing depths.
Horus
commands in the boat. Ra annihilates his enemies
from the boat. It is in the boat of the Sun that Ra
puts
a limit to the power of his enemies when they pursue
him to the
water’s edge; that is, to the horizon of day. So Jesus takes refuge
in the boat and finds protection when he perceives that
he is about to be taken by force; he likewise walks upon
the water to the boat. Death by drowning in the lake
was the mode of execution appointed
for the evil Apap and his host of darkness who attacked
the solar bark by night. The fiends of Sut are also
included in this sentence of death by drowning in the
emerald lake
of heaven, or of dawn. Now the fiends of the evil Sut
were represented as swine. And immediately after the
great tempest in the sea which Jesus stills, the devils
are made to
enter the swine, and, like the emissaries of Apap and
of Sut who “causes storms and
tempests”, they are driven down the mountain-side to suffer death
by drowning in the lake. It was on the mount that Jesus met with the man obsessed with a legion of devils
who “entreated him that he would not command them to depart into
the abyss”. “Now there
was a herd of swine feeding on the mountain”, “and the devils came out from the man and
entered into the swine”, and the herd rushed down the “steep into the lake and were
choked” (Luke VIII. 33). It was by Sut, in the shape of a great
black boar, that Horus was gored in the eye. It was also
the Pig of Sut that devoured the arm of Osiris in the
burial-place. And when the evil spirits are cast out,
as represented in the judgment-scenes, they enter the
swine
of Typhon and are driven down the side of the mount to
be
submerged in the Lake of Putrata or the fathomless abyss
of outer darkness.
SUT AND HORUS AS HISTORIC CHARACTERS IN THE CANONICAL GOSPELS
The
Gospel story of the devil taking Jesus, or the Christ,
up into an exceeding high mountain from which all
the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them could
be
seen,
and of the contention on the summit, is originally a
legend of the astronomical mythos which, in common
with so
many others, has been converted into “history”. As legend it can be explained by means of the Egyptian
wisdom. [Page 832] As “history” it
is, of course, miraculous, if nothing else. Satan and Jesus are the representatives of Sut and
Horus, the contending twins of darkness and light, of
drought and fertility, who strove for supremacy in
the various
phenomena of external nature, and in several celestial
localities
belonging to the mythology. In the Ritual (ch. 110) the
struggle is described as taking place upon the mount,
that is, “the mountain in the midst of the earth”, or the mountain of
Amenta, which “reaches up to the sky”, and which in the solar mythos stood at the point
of equinox where the conflict was continued and the twins
were reconciled year after year. The equinox was figured
at the summit of the mount on the ecliptic, and the scene
of strife
was finally configurated as a fixture in the constellation
of the Gemini, the sign of the twin-brothers who for
ever fought and wrestled “up and down the garden”, first one, then
the other being uppermost during the two halves of the
year, or of night and day. The mountain of the equinox “in the midst of the earth” joined the portion of Sut to the portion
of Horus at this the point midway betwixt the south and
north. It was on the mountain of the equinox and only
there the twins were reconciled for the time being by
the star-god
Shu
(Rit., ch. 110) or by the earth-god Seb (text from Memphis).
Sut the Satanic is described as seizing the good Horus
in the desert of Amenta and carrying him to the top of
the mount
here called Mount Hetep, the place of peace, where the
two contending powers are reconciled by Shu, according
to the treaty made by Seb. Thus, episode after episode,
the
Gospel history can and will be traced to the original
documents as matter of the Egyptian mysteries and astronomical
mythology.
The
battles of Sut and Horus are represented in both the
apocryphal and canonical Gospels. In the Gospels of
the Infancy there are two boys — the bad boy and the good boy.
In this form the two born antagonists continue their altercation
with a root-relationship to the Osirian mythos. Sut
is the representative of evil, of darkness, drought,
sterility,
negation, and non-existence. It is his devilry to undo
the good work that Horus does, like Satan sowing tares
amongst the wheat. It was Sut who paralyzed the left
arm of Osiris and
held it bound in Sekhem (Rit., ch. 1). It is the express
delight of the bad boy, the child of Satan, to destroy
the works of Jesus, the child of light. There is one
particularly
enlightening illustration of the mythos reproduced as Märchen. The power of resurrection
was imaged by the lifting of the arm from the mummy-bandages;
Horus in Sekhem is the lifter of the arm. Whilst the arm
is fettered in death, Sut is triumphant over Horus in the
dark. When Horus frees his arm, he raises the hand that
was motionless (Rit., ch. 5). He
strikes down Sut, or stabs him to the heart. The power
of darkness, one form of which was Sut, is designated the “eater of the arm” (ch. 11). This act of the Osirian drama is rendered
in the apocryphal Gospels by the bad boy persistently aiming
at injuring the good boy’s arm
or shoulder. In the Gospel of pseudo-Matthew (29) the bad
boy, who is called a son of Satan and the worker of iniquity,
runs at Jesus and thrusts himself bodily against his
shoulder with the intention of breaking or paralyzing his
arm In the Gospel of Thomas the boy ran and thrust against
the shoulder of Jesus [Page 833] (ch. 4). Again, the bad boy threw
a stone and hit him on the shoulder (Gospel of Thomas,
B. 2, ch. 4). Several times when this occurs the bad boy
is smitten dead by Jesus, just as Sut is pierced to the
heart by
Horus. Other evidence might be cited from these Gospels
to show that the bad boy who tries to destroy the arm of
Jesus is one with Sut who renders the arm of Horus (or
Osiris)
powerless in Amenta. This being established, we are enabled
to identify Judas the betrayer of Jesus, his brother, with
Sut the enemy of Horus. According to “the Arabic Gospel of the
Infancy”, “In the same place” (with Lady Mary and her child Jesus), “there dwelt another
woman whose son was vexed by Satan. He, Judas by name, whenever Satan obsessed
him, bit all who approached him. He sought to bite the
Lord Jesus, but he could not, yet he struck the right side
of Jesus”. “Now this boy who struck Jesus and from whom Satan
went out in the form of a dog, was Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him to the Jews” (ch. 35).
We
now have the original matter with which to compare
the remains, and the comparative process will prove
that these “apocrypha” are not perversions of the canonical Gospels, but
that they preserve traditions derived from the Kamite
mythology and eschatology. This can be determined
once for all
by the contests of Horus with Sut, and by his warfare
with the
Apap-serpent or dragon, which are assigned to the child-Jesus,
as they were previously ascribed to the child-Horus.
There
are two types of evil, or, according to modern terminology,
the devil, in the Kamite mysteries. One is zoomorphic,
as the Apap-reptile, the other anthropomorphic, as
Sut, the
personal adversary of Osiris. Apap is the Evil One in
the mythology; Sut is Satan the adversary in the eschatology.
In the 108th chapter of the Ritual there is a curious
fusion
of Apap with Sut, the anthropomorphic type of Satan.
The
serpent of darkness, the old enemy of Osiris-Ra,
is portrayed in the vignette as Apap, and spoken of
in
the text as Sut.
After the battle “Sut is made to flee with a chain of steel upon him, and he
is forced to disgorge all that he hath swallowed. Then
Sut is made fast in his prison”. At the same time
the serpent is described as “the bright one who cometh on his belly, his hind parts, and
on the joints of his back”. To him it is said, “Thou art pierced with hooks, as it was decreed
against thee of old” (ch. 108). The battle here, betwixt Ra and Apap, or Sut,
is finished on the horizon, that is, on the mount, from
which the devil is hurled down defeated into the
abyss. In the canonical Gospels, Jesus and Satan occupy
the place of the two opponents Horus and the Apap, or
Horus and Sut. The Herrut-reptile has been paralleled
with the
monster Herod; Satan is now to be compared with Sut.
Sat=Satan in Egyptian is a name
of the Evil One (Budge, Vocabulary, p. 268).
In
Africa the primal curse was drought. Drought was a
form of evil straight from nature. This was figured
as the fiery dragon, “hellish Apap”, that was drowned by Horus in the
inundation when he came as saviour to the land of Egypt
in his little ark of the papyrus plant. Sut warred
with Horus in the wilderness as representative of drought,
when the
“father of the inundation was athirst” (Rit., ch. 97), a cry of Horus that was echoed on the
Cross (John. XIX. 28). Drought, [Page 834] as we have said, was the earliest devil. In the
Osirian cult the whole of nature was expressed in a twofold
totality according to the doctrine of Maati. Night and
day, body and soul, water and drought, life and death,
health
and disease, were modes of the duality manifested in phenomena.
Sut and Horus were the representatives of this alternation
and opposition personified as a pair of twins, now called
the children of Osiris. Osiris Un-nefer is the Good Being,
but as with nature he includes
both the good and the evil in the totality. In the mythos,
however, Horus represents the good and Sut the bad. Sut
is said to undo the good that Horus does. Hence he is the
adversary or Satan when personified. As Prince of Darkness
he puts out the eye of Horus,
or the light by night. He sows the tares amidst the grain.
He is the “eater of the arm”. He
dries up the water of life with the desert-drought. He
lets loose the locusts, the scorpions and other plagues.
He represents negation and non-being in opposition to being,
and to
the Good Being who is divinized in Osiris and manifested
by Horus. The triumph of Horus over Sut is frequently referred
to in the Ritual. In one of his battles Horus destroyed
the
virile member of Sut, as the symbol of his power. (Ch.17,68,69).
In another Sut and his associates were overthrown and pierced
by Horus so
long
as blood would
flow. In his
resurrection Horus comes to put an end to the opposition
of Sut,
and to the troubles he had raised against Osiris his father
(Rit., 137 B). He says: I am the beloved son. I am come
to see my father Osiris, and to pierce the heart of Sut
(Rit., ch. 9).
He is armed with horns against Sut (ch. 78, 42). Horus, “who giveth light by means of his
own body”, is the God who is against Sut when Taht is between them
as adjudicator in their dispute (Rit., ch. 83, 4). In the
discourse of Horus to his father he says to Osiris, “I
have brought thee the associates of Sut in chains”.
In
the Gospels of the Infancy, which contain some remains
of the more ancient legendary lore, the grapple of
child-Horus with the deadly Apap-reptile is frequently
portrayed, as in
the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, when the boy has been
bitten by the serpent, and the Lord Jesus says to
his playmates, “Boys, let us go and kill the serpent”. He proves his
power over the reptile by making it suck the venom from
the wound. Then the Lord Jesus curses the serpent, “whereupon the reptile was instantly rent asunder” (ch. 42). But the
war of Horus with the Apap-dragon, or serpent of evil,
is not fought out directly by Jesus in the canonical
Gospels. Sut as the power of darkness and as the opponent
in the moral
domain had taken the place of the old first adversary
of man in the phenomena of external nature. Jesus promises
to give his followers power over the serpent and the
scorpion, but
there is no personal conflict with the pre-anthropomorphic
Satan recognized in the four Gospels. Sut, as Satan
in a human form, was a somewhat less unhistoric-looking
type
of the devil than the Apap-reptile. Satan, however, retains
his old primitive form of the dragon in “the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy”. In this it is related that a damsel was afflicted
by Satan, the cursed one, in the form of a huge dragon,
which from time to time appeared to her and prepared
to swallow her up. He also sucked out all her blood, so that she
remained like a corpse.
She is cured by a strip of the clothing that had been worn
by the
child, Lord Jesus (ch. 33). [Page 835] This
is a form of the woman with an issue of blood. Her
persecutor is the dragon of darkness who is the eternal
devourer of the light in the Egyptian mythology,
and of
condemned souls in the eschatology. In the gnostic version
it is Sophia who suffers from the issue of blood
and who is restrained and supported by Horus when her
life
is flowing
away into immensity. The woman suffering from the swallowing
dragon of darkness was the mother of the child of
light in the moon. Expressed in human terms, Horus
the bull,
or
fecundator of the mother, stopped her female flow and
filled her with the glory of the light, and thus
he overthrew the monster that assailed her in the dark,
which was figured as the
wide-mouthed crocodile or devouring dragon (Rit., ch.
80,
10). Horus puts a boundary round about Sophia. The
child-Jesus cures the damsel with a strip of his
raiment; and in
the Gospel according to Matthew the woman who is flowing
away like Sophia with her issue of blood is healed
by touching the border of the garment worn by Jesus
(Matt. IX. 20, 21). Here the dragon is omitted. The suffering
lunar
lady has been humanized, together with the Divine
Healer; the cure is wrought; the modern miracle remains
in
place of the
mystery according to the ancient wisdom.
The
conflict between Sut and Horus (or Osiris), who are
represented by Satan and Jesus in the Gospels, commences
immediately after the baptism in the river Jordan.
One form
of baptism in the solar mythos was derived from the setting
of the sun-god in the waters of the west, the waters
in which Un-nefer washes when he has his dispute
with Sut — either
in the character of Horus or Osiris. Asar in his baptism
is said to plunge into the waters with
“Isis and Nephthys looking on”. Apuat (Anup) is present apparently conducting the
submersion of the god (Inscrip. Of Shabaka from Memphis,
line 42). In his baptism the god Un-nefer was prepared for
his struggle with Sut, the power of drought in the desert
of
Anrutef. So, in the Gospels, Jesus is prepared by John
in his baptism for the conflict with Satan in the wilderness,
on the pinnacle, and upon the exceeding high mountain. It
was
only after he had entered spirit-life that Horus could
grapple with Sut, or Jesus with Satan, in the desert, on
the pinnacle of the temple, or on the summit of the mount;
consequently
the earth-life had ended when the contest betwixt Satan
and Jesus first began, in the phase of eschatology. The wilderness
of Satan in the Gospel represents the desert of Sut
in Amenta. When Satan seized on Jesus and bore him bodily
up into the mountain Jesus had just risen from his baptism
and was led up “of the Spirit”. Otherwise he had made his
transformation from the state of manes to the status
of a spirit. This was in the phase of eschatology and
the
transaction is in spirit-world.
When
Jesus was “led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of
the devil” he is
said to have “fasted forty days and forty nights”, and, afterwards, to “have hungered”, whatsoever that may mean. This contention in the wilderness
was one of the great battles of Sut and Horus, or, in the
other version of the mythos, of Sut and Osiris. As Egyptian,
the
wilderness is the desert of Anrutef, a desolate, stony
place where nothing grew. It was here that Horus was made
blind by Sut, and was a sufferer from hunger and thirst
in this
region of stony sterility, and rootless, waterless sand.
Horus in [Page 836] Amenta had to make
way through the barren desert, in the domain of Sut, as
sower of the seed from which the bread of life was made,
much of which must have fallen on stony ground in the region
of
Anrutef. Forty days was the length of time in Egypt that
was reckoned for the grain in the earth before it sprouted
visibly from the ground. It was a time of scarcity and
fasting in
Egypt, which gave a very natural significance to the season
of Lent, with its mourning for the dead Osiris, and its
rejoicing over the child of promise, the germinating green
shoot
springing from the earth. This is represented in the Gospel
as a fast of forty days and forty nights, during which
Jesus wrestled with the devil and was hungry. The struggle
then of
Jesus with the devil in the wilderness is a repetition
of the conflict between Horus and Sut in the desert of
Amenta; on the mount and on the pinnacle of the ben-ben
or temple in
Annu. During the forty days that Osiris was typically buried in the nether-earth as seed, from which the bread of heaven
was made, the struggle was continued by Sut and Horus in
the mountain. This is repeated in the Gospels as the contest
of Christ and Satan for the
mastery in the mount. The conflict is between the powers
of light and darkness, of fertility and sterility, betwixt
Osiris (or Horus) the giver of bread, and Sut, whose symbol
of the
desert was a stone. The fasting of Jesus in the desert
represents the absence of food that is caused by Sut in
the wilderness during forty days of burial for the corn,
and Satan asking
Jesus to turn the stones into bread is playing with the
sign of Sut. Satan’s jape about
converting stones into loaves of bread is likewise reminiscent
of the mythos. The stone was an especial symbol of the
adversary Sut. Also the place of the temple in Annu, and
the
pinnacle, or Ha-ben-ben, was the place of the stones by
name. Moreover, Annu was the place of bread, or the loaves.
As it is said, “there are seven loaves in Annu with Ra”, the
Father in heaven (Rit., ch. 53B).
As
represented in the Ritual, Sut and Horus are more
upon a footing of equality, whether in the wilderness
or
on the summit of the mount of glory. Their triumph
is alternate, though
that of Sut is much the more limited. As the power of
drought and darkness he is master in the desert, and
chief
of the powers called the “tesheru deities”, or gods of the desert.
The speaker in chapter 96 exclaims, “I have come to propitiate Sut and to make offerings
to the God Akar and to the deities of the desert”, where Sut attained supremacy over Horus
for a time. The desert was the natural domain of Sut
the adversary of Horus. Hence Horus at his second coming
exclaims, “I am Horus, the Lord of Kamit and the heir of tesherit”
(Rit., ch. 138, lines 3 and 4), which he has also seized.
Kamit is Egypt as a mythical locality: the dark and moist,
fat and fertile land. Tesherit, the red land, is the desert.
So that
in taking possession of the “two
worlds”, or the double earth, Horus has also seized the
domain of Sut, the wilderness, which was a subject of
contention in Amenta. Hence he says, “I have also seized the desert — I, the invincible one, who avengeth his father and is
fierce at the drowning of his mother” (ch. 138).
In
his resurrection Horus cometh forth as “the heir of the temple” in Annu. He is called “the
active and powerful heir of the temple, [Page 837] whose arm resteth not” in the mummy
bandages (ch. 115). That is, as the avenger of his father
Osiris in Annu, where he rises with the whip or flail in
his hand to drive the adversaries from the temple. Now
Annu, the
station of the temple, was the place of the pillar. The
temple itself in Annu, or Heliopolis, was known by the
name of Ha-ben-ben, the house of the pyramidion or temple
of the
pinnacle, and the struggle of Satan with Jesus on the pinnacle
of the temple may be traced to that of Sut and Horus the
heir of the temple or the Ha-ben-ben of Annu, following
the
contention of the twin powers of darkness and light, or
of food and famine in the wilderness. “All the kingdoms of the world” are more definitely presented to view as
celestial localities upon Mount Hetep. There are ten divisions
of this divine domain. The three scenes of struggle betwixt
Jesus and Satan are (1) in the wilderness, (2) on the
pinnacle, and (3) on an exceeding high mountain; and these
can be paralleled in the conflicts between Horus and Sut.
The forty days’ struggle in the wilderness was in Amenta.
Next, there was a struggle on the ben-ben or pinnacle in
Annu. And thirdly, Horus was carried off by Sut to the
summit of Mount Hetep, where the two combatants were
reconciled by Shu. The mount was a figure of the horizon
in the solar mythos. On this the warring twins were constellated
as the Gemini, and may be seen continuing their old
conflict still, as Sut and Horus in the mythos, or as Satan
and Jesus in the Christian eschatology. The earth, or heaven,
that was first divided in two halves between Sut and
Horus in the mythology is finally claimed to be the sole
possession of Horus, the conqueror and the legitimate heir
of God the father in the eschatology. The triumph of Horus
over Sut
is denoted by his kindling a light in the dark of death
for the Ka or spiritual image in Amenta (Rit., ch. 137A).
He was not only the light of the world in the mortal sphere.
As it is said in
the Ritual, “O light! Let the light be kindled for the ka!”. “Let the light be kindled for the night
which followeth the day”. The light is called the eye of Horus, the glorious one,
shining like Ra from the mount of glory, putting an end
to the opposition of the dark-hearted Sut (Rit.,
ch. 137B).
The
question of an historic Jesus is by no means so simple
as the grossly simple early Christians thought. It
is equally a question of the historic devil. From first
to last the Lord
and Satan are twin, and without Satan there is no Christ-Jesus
nor any need of a redeemer. In the mythology Horus
was the lord of light and Sut the adversary, or the
Satan
of drought and darkness, from the time when the two contended
as the black bird and the white (or the golden hawk),
or as the two lions (our lion and unicorn a-fighting
in the
moonlight for the crown), as the Rehus are described in
the 80th chapter of the Ritual. As there was no Horus
without Sut in the mythos, so there is no Jesus without
Satan in the
history. The brotherhood or twinship of Horus and Sut the
betrayer is repeated in the canonical Gospels. Sut
was the brother of Horus, born twin with him in one
phase of the
mythos, or with Osiris in another. In like manner Judas
is a brother of Jesus. Now, when Horus the youth of
twelve years makes his transformation into Horus the
adult, the man of thirty years, it is as the enemy and
eternal conqueror
of Sut who in the earth-life often had the upper hand.
But the contest [Page 838] of the personal Christ with a personal Satan
in the New Testament is no more historical fact than the
contest between the seed of the woman and the serpent
of evil in the Old. Both are mythical; both are Egyptian
mysteries.
In the earlier narrative we have the struggle between Horus
and the Apap-serpent of evil reproduced as Gospel truth
by a writer in Aramaic. In the later the conflict between
Horus
and Sut (or Satan in his anthropomorphic guise) has been
repeated as Christian history. As mythos the Ritual
explains both, and for ever disproves their right to
be considered
historical. In one of the sayings assigned to Jesus it
is promised that “in the regeneration
when the son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory,
the disciples also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging
the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matt. XIX. 28). Now, when this was said
according to Matthew, Judas the traitor was one of the
twelve. Moreover, as reported by Luke, the same thing is
uttered by Jesus after “Satan entered into Judas who was called
Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve”, and therefore one of those who are to sit on
the twelve thrones in the future kingdom, and judge the
twelve tribes of Israel. No defection of the son of perdition
is foreseen, no treachery allowed for. Judas is reckoned
as one of
the twelve who are to sit at the table of the Lord and
eat and drink in the kingdom that is yet to come (Luke
XXII. 4-30). There is but one way in which the traitor
could remain one
of the twelve in heaven. This belongs to the astronomical
mythology, not to any human history, as when the sign of
the scorpion is given to Sut-typhon. In the newly-recovered
Gospel of Peter there is no sign of Judas the betrayer
having been one of the twelve.
Immediately after the resurrection, it is said, the feast of the Passover being ended, “We
the twelve disciples of the Lord wept and grieved, and
each of us in grief at what had happened withdrew to his
house” (Harris, page 56). At the same time, in Matthew, the
disciples are but eleven in number when they go to meet
Jesus by appointment on the mount, with Judas no longer
one of them. Sut is as inseparable from Jesus in the Gospels
as from Horus in the dual figure of the Egyptian twins.
The name alone is changed;
otherwise it is Sut the devil who is the tempter of Jesus
during forty days and forty nights in the wilderness. It
is Sut who carries Jesus to the summit of an exceeding
high mountain.
It is Sut who, as personal opponent, is seen to fall as
lightning from heaven. It is Sut the betrayer who enters
Judas to become the betrayer of Jesus. Also an historical
Christ
implies, involves, necessitates an historical devil. According
to the canonical record the two must stand or fall together
as realities. Both are personal or neither. And both were
pre-extant as Horus and Sut, who were neither personal
nor historical. Indeed, it is
asserted by Lactantius (Inst. Div., B. 2, ch. 8), that the Word of God, the logos of John,
is the first-born brother of Satan. That is honestly spoken
and true, if we re-identify the word
with the Horus who was born twin with Sut. He is wrong
in making Horus the logos the first-born, but that is of
little importance. Otherwise, he has got the twins all
right. Sut
was the first-born, but the birthright belonged to Horus
who was the real heir. Now the “word of God” is made flesh in Jesus, and the contention of the twin-powers
of darkness and light is rendered [Page 839] historically in the conflicts between Jesus and Satan in
the wilderness, upon the pinnacle, or the mount, or in
the harvest-field. The contest is also
illustrated by Luke (VIII. 12): “Then cometh the devil and taketh away the word from their
heart that they may not believe and be saved”. This is one with Sut in undoing what Horus
the Word had done, especially in sowing the seed of the
logos. The contention of Sut and Horus is carried out betwixt
Satan and Jesus to the last. Sut, the king in his turn,
was
triumphant over Horus in his suffering and death. “I go away”, says Jesus, “for the prince
of this world cometh, and he hath nothing in me” (John XIV. 30).
Beelzebub,
God of flies, is the particular name assigned to
Satan in the Gospels as the prince of devils. And as
Sut
was Prince of the Sebau, it seems probable that the “zebub”,
or infernal flies, may have been identical with and therefore
derived by name from that spawn of Satan the Sebau, the
associates of Sut on the night of the great battle in the
Ritual. In the parable of the sower it is said, “When
anyone heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth
it not, then cometh the evil one (the adversary Sut or
Satan) and snatcheth away that which hath been sown in
his heart” (Matt. XIII. 19). And
in “the parable of the tares” it is said, “He that soweth the good seed is the son of man”;
and of the good seed, “these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the
sons of the evil one; and the enemy that sowed them is
the devil” (Matt. XIII. 36-39). This is the
contention of Horus and Sut in the harvest-field of Osiris
represented in parables instead of in the mysteries.
Horus sows the good seed and Sut the tares. When Horus
rises
in
Amenta after death it is as the husbandman or harvester
who comes to gather in the harvest previously sown for
the father by Horus in the earth of Seb, and to vanquish
Sut,
the sower of the tares, the thorns, and thistles in Anrutef.
The
judgment of the world by Horus and the casting out
of Sut is spoken of as a present fulfilment. “Now is the (or a) judgment of this world. Now shall the prince
of this world be cast out” (John XII. 31, 32). This judgment was annual in the mysteries
of Amenta. Sut as prince of this world and the son
of perdition was cast out and judgment passed on
those
who were to be no more. This was at the time when Horus
as the son of man was glorified, and Sut with his
associates were once more overthrown by him on the
highways of the
damned. In John’s account of the betrayal and arrest, when Jesus declares
himself, the soldiers and officers who are with Judas
are “struck to the ground”, or “they went
backwards and fell to the ground” (John XVIII. 6, 7). So when “Horus repulses the
associates of Sut”, they see the diadem upon his head and “fall upon their faces in
presence of his Majesty” (Rit., 134, 11). Sut put out the eye of Horus. This is parodied
in the Gospels when Jesus is blindfolded and then asked
to tell who struck him in the dark?.
We
get one other passing glimpse of Sut and Horus the
contending twins in the parable of the marriage feast
(Matt. XXII). The wisdom of the Kamite mysteries was
memorized in
the sayings, and made portable in the parables. And in
this the parable represents the marriage in the mystery
of Tattu (Rit., ch. 17). Horus was the king’s son for whom the feast
was made. He is Horus of the royal countenance in the mythos;
the wearer of the Greek cloak of [Page 840] royalty in the Roman catacombs. The king is Ra who issues
the invitation to the festival of “Come thou hithe”, which is represented by the Gospel marriage feast,
to which those invited would not come. Sut as the adversary
of Horus is the unbidden marriage guest who had no
wedding garment on. The murderers who slay the servants
of
the king are the Sebau and co-conspirators of Sut, and
the vindictive treatment that followed becomes intelligible
only by means of the mythos.
The
conflict betwixt Satan and Jesus attains a culmination
astronomically. In the betrayal of Osiris the Good
Being by the evil Sut there are seventy-two conspirators
associated with
the adversary. Seventy-two on the one hand as the powers
of darkness imply the same number of opponent powers
fighting on behalf of Horus or, it may be, Jesus
on the other,
the battle being in the seventy-two duodecans of the
zodiac. This war of Sut and Horus is repeated once
more in
the Gospel when the seventy-two or the seventy “returned with joy,
saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us in
thy name”. And he said unto them, “I
beheld Satan fallen as lightning from heaven”. “Behold, I have given you authority to tread
upon serpents and scorpions and over all the powers of
the enemy”. The enemy was Sut,
and as a symbol in the zodiac Sut was at one time figured
in the scorpion-sign. Thus, the betrayal of Osiris happened
when the sun or the bull of eternity, as the divinity
is also
called, was in the sign of Scorpio. The sign of the bull
being secretly assaulted by the scorpion is well known
from the Mithraic monuments according to Hyde (Drummond, Aedipus Judaicus , Plate 13). In some of the Greco-Egyptian planispheres,
given by Kircher, Sut is also identified as the scorpion
which
slew Osiris (Drummond, Plate 13). In the Gospel,
power is given for the seventy-two to tread on the scorpion
and to triumph over all the powers of the enemy (Luke
X. 17-20). The two different numbers of seventy and
seventy-two for those whose names were written in heaven
show that both belong to the planisphere which had been
divided at two different periods into the heaven of seventy
and
the heaven of seventy-two divisions. We can now see how
and why the betrayer keeps his place as one of the twelve
in the Gospel of Peter, and why he has been cast out
in the
Gospel according to Matthew. The Gospel of Peter was
not historical, which means that it was astronomically
based;
and according to the gnosis the twelve whose thrones
were set in heaven are zodiacal, not ethnical characters.
Sut
the betrayer was assigned the
scorpion as a type of evil. And as the scorpion he keeps
his place, like Judas in the Petrine
Gospel, as one of the twelve who were to sit on twelve
celestial thrones in spite of his defection, because
the twelve originated as astronomical and not as historical
realities.
The
Gnostics maintained that Jesus was the Lord for one
year only, and that he suffered in the twelfth month,
as did Osiris with the sun in the sign of Scorpio.
Thus, the
Egypto-gnostic Jesus throned upon Mount Olivet with the
twelve around him — he being a
“little apart” — is a figure of the solar god with the twelve who row the
bark of Ra around the zodiac.
One result of turning the Egyptian mythos into Christian
history has been to inflict the most nefarious injustice
on the Jews. By [Page 841] shifting the scene of the Mysteries from the
nether-earth of Amenta to the land of Judea the ethnical
Jews have been thrust into the position of the Typhonian
enemies of the Good Being, the Sebau and the Sami, the
powers of evil in the mythos and the condemned manes in
the eschatology. The Jews have been transmogrified into
the associates of Sut and the spawn of Satan. That is why
the
father of the Jews is called the devil, and a murderer
from the beginning; the liar and the father of all lying.
That is why Judas is a devil; and the Jews as a people
figure in the same
category with Herod, slayer of the innocents, with Judas
the betrayer of Jesus, and with the fiends of Sut, because
they were charged with doing those things on earth which
had
only been and could only be enacted according to the mysteries
in Amenta. For this perversion of the mythos the Jews have
been hunted over the earth and persecuted ever
since. They have suffered precisely in the same way as
the red-haired Typhonian animals suffered in ancient Egypt (Plutarch, Of Isis and Osiris, 30, 31), which were dedicated and
doomed to be slain in an avenging sacrifice because they
represented the associates of the wicked Sut, the liar,
the betrayer, the murderer, who put to death and mutilated
the
body of the good Osiris. The sufferers on account of the
mythos were the Typhonian ass, the pig, and the goat. The
sufferers on account of the “history” have been and still are the
children of Israel. Whereas the Jews were no more racial
in the Gospels than the accursed Sebau are Egyptians in
the Ritual. That they should be made to appear so is but
a result
of literalizing and localizing the Osirian drama in a spurious
Judean history.
And here the present writer would remark that, in his view,
the Jewish rejection of Christianity constitutes one
of the sanest and the bravest intellectual triumphs
of all time.
It is worth all that the race has suffered from the persecution
of the Christian world. The Jews, like the Gnostics,
knew well enough that the Christian schema was a “fake”, and,
although they were unable to explain how it had been
manufactured from the leavings of the past, they knew
that it was false,
non-natural and unnecessary. Up to the present time
their victory may have been comparatively negative, in
consequence of their failure to retell the story in the
only one authentic way, that is, with a sufficient grasp
of the data. They
have not been able to reinstate the truth once confounded
and overthrown, but they have borne witness dumbly, doggedly,
unceasingly, with faces set like flint unflinchingly
against the lie. They would not believe that their God,
though
imaged anthropomorphically, had
become a man, and so they have remained non-Christian
to this day, never to be converted now. For at last the
long infernal Juden-Hetze nears its end; the time of
their justification and triumph is at hand, when the
persecutor
with the stone in his grasp will
drop it suddenly and flee helter-skelter for his life.
THE GROUP IN BETHANY
The
canonical Gospels may be described as different collections
of “episodes” and
“sayings”, and one of the most disconnected of these episodes is to
be found in the raising of Lazarus from the tomb that [Page 842] “was a cave” (John XI. 38), which contains a version
of the resurrection of Osiris from the cave. The subject
of all subjects in the religious mysteries of the Egyptians
was the resurgence of the human soul from death and its
transformation into an eternal spirit. This is the foundation
of the Book of the Dead or Ritual of the resurrection. So
far as we know, this resurrection was originally represented
in the
mysteries of Memphis, where Kheper-Ptah was the divinity
that rose again in mummy-form from which the soul was seen
to issue forth as a divine hawk. On entering Amenta as a
still
living being, though but a soul in matter, the Osiris,
late deceased, addresses the god in the character of those
powers who effect the triumph of Osiris over all his adversaries,
the chief of whom is Horus, in whose name he is magically
assimilated to the Son of God,
and thus is one with Horus in his resurrection from the
dead.
It
has now been shown that the resurrection of Osiris
in Annu has been partially reproduced as the raising
of Lazarus in Bethany. Osiris reposing in Annu is
an image of
the soul inert in matter or in decay and death. Hence
he was portrayed in the likeness of the mummy called “the breathless one”, also the god with the non-beating heart, who is laid
out in the burial-place as a corpse-like form lying extended
at full length, awaiting his resurrection from the
funeral couch, or the transfiguration into the risen
sahu of the
glorified. In his first advent Horus is the son of Seb,
God of earth. In his second, he is the son of Ra,
the Holy Spirit. It is in this latter character that
he
enters Amenta to represent
the resurrection of the Osiris in the earth of eternity.
The
resurrection of the sun from out the grave of night;
the re-arising of vegetation from the grip of winter;
and of the waters returning periodically from their
source; that is the
resurrection in external nature; it was, in short, the
resurrection of new life from the old, in a variety
of phenomena, mystically imaged by zootypes like
the serpent of Rannut; the frog
or beetle of Ptah; the shoot of papyrus, or the green
branch of endless years. The doctrine culminated in
a resurrection
of the soul of human life from the body of death
that was
imaged by the mummy-Osiris, the god who in his rising
again united all phases of the doctrine under one type
of
the resurrection, viz., that of the risen mummy defecated
to the
consistency of a sahu, or a spiritual body. It is as
the reconstituter of his father in Amenta that Horus
raises
Osiris from the tomb. He calls the mummy to come
forth and assume the
likeness of Ra the later god. Osiris is now glorified
by Ra the Holy Spirit. The mummy being an image of
the
earlier body-soul that was transubstantialized into
spirit. As it is said, Osiris is “renewed in an instant”, and it is his son Horus who thus establishes him upon “the
pedestal of Tum” (Atum Ra) the god in spirit (Rit., ch. 182).
The
resurrection of the human soul in the after-life was
the central fact of the Egyptian religion, and the
transfigured, re-erected mummy, otherwise called the
Karast, was a
supreme symbol. The opening day of New Year, the day of “Come thou to me”, was named
from the resurrection, which was solar in the mythos and
spiritual in the eschatology. The mummy-type was divinized
to preserve intact that bodily form which suffered dissolution
after death. This, as mummy [Page 843] of the god in matter, was a type inviolate and
imperishable. Osiris in his coffin does not see corruption.
In him was life for evermore. And as with the divine exemplar,
so was it postulated for all who died in Osiris. He was
terribly
mutilated by the evil Sut, and his mummy had to be joined
together again piecemeal, for as it is said to Osiris, “I come to embalm thee”, thou hast existence “with thy members”
when these were put together. And again, “I
have come myself and delivered the god from that pain and
suffering that were in trunk, in shoulder and in leg”. “I have come and
healed the trunk, and fastened the shoulder and made firm
the leg” (ch. 102, Renouf). This
was in reconstituting the personality, which was performed
in a mystery when the different parts of Osiris, the head,
the vertebrae, the thigh, the leg, the heel were collected
at the coffin (Rit., ch. 18). But the god in matter was
also the
god in spirit according to the mystery or modus operandi of the Resurrection; or he became so by being blended with
Ra in his
resurrection.
In
the Kamite mythos as in the totemic sociology, the
son (of the mother) was earlier than the father. When
it is said in the texts, “I am a son begotten of his father; I am a father
begotten of his son”, the sense of the expression turns on the son of the mother
having been earlier than the father of the son. Child-Horus,
Har-si-Hesi, is the mother’s son.
Mother and son, as As-Ar; Isis and child, passed into the
complex of Asar or Osiris, the one great god in whom all
previous powers were merged and unified at last. Isis had
embodied a soul in matter or flesh, as her child, when
there was as yet no God the Father,
no God the Son, no Horus in spirit. This fatherhood of
the spirit was founded in Atum-Ra the father of spirits.
Thence followed the sonship in spirit of Horus in his second
character
as divine adult. Ra in spirit represented the supreme type
of deity whose symbol is the sun or solar hawk. Osiris
remained the god in matter as the mummy in Amenta; Ra is
described
as calling on Osiris in the resurrection and is also said
to bid the mummy “come forth”,
when the deity in matter was to be united with the god
in spirit. But Horus, the Son of God, the beloved only
begotten son, is now the representative of Ra and the chief
agent in the
raising of the mummy-Osiris from the dead. He is the son
who comes to the assistance, not only of the father, for
the mummy-Asar is both Isis and Osiris in one body. Hence
it is
said in the chapter by which the tomb is opened for the
Osiris to come forth, “I
am Horus the reconstituter of his father, who lifteth up
his father, and who lifteth up his mother with
his wand (rod or staff)” (Rit., ch. 92, Renouf). As it is said in the Ritual (ch.
78), “it is Horus
who hath reconstituted his father and restored him — “after the mutilation of his body by the
murderer Sut. He descends into the funeral land of darkness
and the shadow of death. He opens the Tuat to drive away
the darkness so that he may look upon his father’s face. He
says pathetically, “I am his beloved son. I have come to pierce the heart of
Sut and to perform all duties to my father” (ch. 9, Renouf). Horus the prince in Sekhem also uplifts
his father as Osiris-Tat with his two arms clasped behind
him for support (ch. 18). In this mythical character of
the son who gives life, reconstitutes, restores and re-establishes
his
father, the Egyptians continued an inner African type of
the “Son who makes [Page 844] his
Father”. Miss Kingsley called attention to a function of the Oil-river-Chief
who has to observe the custom of “making his father” once every year. The custom is sacred and
symbolical, as the deceased chief need not be his own real
father, but must be his predecessor in the headmanship
(Kingsley, M., West African Studies, p. 146). This custom
of “making his father” by the son survived and was perpetuated in the mythology
of Egypt, in which Horus is the son who makes, or “reconstitutes”, his father once a year, and
describes it as one of his duties in the Book of the Dead.
This resurrection of the father as the soul of life in
matter, i.e., the mummy-soul, by Horus the son, is the great mystery
of the ten mysteries which are briefly described in the
18th chapter of the Ritual.
In
a later scene there is another description of the
resurrection of Osiris, in which the mummy-god is raised
by his
son Horus from the tomb. As it is said, “Horus exalteth his
father Osiris in every place, associating Isis the Great
with her sister Nephthys” as the two
women at the tomb. “Rise up, Horus, son of Isis, and restore thy father Osiris” — that was
Osiris in the inert and breathless condition of the mummy. “Ha, Osiris, I have come to thee.
I am Horus, and I restore thee unto life upon this day
with the funeral offerings and all good things for Osiris”. “Rise up, then, Osiris. I have stricken down thine enemies
for thee; I have delivered thee from them”. “I am Horus on this fair day at the beautiful coming forth
of thy powers (in his resurrection), who lifteth thee
up with himself on this fair day as thine associate God”. “Ha, Osiris, thou hast received thy sceptre, thy pedestal,
and thy flight of stairs beneath thee”. On the coffin of Nes-Shu-Tefnut, at Vienna, it is said: “Horus openeth
for thee thy two eyes that thou mayest see with them
in thy name of Ap-Uat”. (Renouf, Book of the Dead, ch. 128, note 8.) Horus as son of Ra the Holy Spirit in
the eschatology is now higher in status than the mummy-god,
the father and mother in matter. Hence he
rises in Amenta as the resurrection and the life to his own
father Osiris.
Horus
as the divine heir had now been furnished with the
double force. The gods rejoice to meet him walking
on the way to Annu, and the hall of the horizon or
house in Annu
where divine perfumes are awaiting him and mourning does
not reach him, and where the guardians of the hall
do not overthrow the mysterious of face who is in the
sanctuary of
Sekhem. That is Osiris, who is not dead but sleeping in
Annu, the place of his repose, awaiting the call that
bids the mummy to “come forth to day”. Horus, the deliverer of his
father, reaches him in the train of Hathor, who is Meri,
the beloved by name in the Ritual. Thus Horus follows
Meri to the place where Asar lies buried in the sepulchre,
as Jesus
follows Mary, who had come forth to meet him on the way
to Bethany (John XI. 29, 33). Jesus reaches the tomb
of Lazarus in the train of Mary and Martha. Horus makes
the way
for Osiris. He repulses the attack of Apap, who represents
negation or non-being=death. The portrait of Horus
in this scene is very grand. His face is glorified
and greatened by
the diadem which he wears as the lord of strength. His
double force is imaged by two lions. A loud voice is
heard upon the horizon as Horus lifts the truth to
Ra, and the way is made
for Osiris to come [Page 845] forth at his rising from the cave. So Jesus “cried with a loud voice,
Lazarus, come forth!” and “he that was dead came forth bound hand and foot with
grave-bands”. In the original the mummy-Osiris comes forth as Amsu,
with one arm only released from the bandages. In the “discourse of Horus” to his Father at his coming forth
from the sanctuary in Sekhem to see Ra, Horus says, “I have given thee thy soul, I have
given thee thy strength, I have given thee thy victory,
I have given thee thy two eyes (mertae), I have given thee
Isis and Nephthys”, who are the two divine sisters, the Mary
and Martha of Beth-Annu (Records, vol. 10, p. 163). In showing that “mourning does not
reach him”, Jesus “abode at that time two days in the place where he was”. After the
sisters had sent to say that Lazarus was sick he waited
until he was dead on purpose to perform the more effective
miracle. He was in Bethany, “the place where John was at the
first baptizing” (cf. John I. 28 with John X. 40, 41), but it took him two
more days to get there at this particular time. So that
Lazarus had been buried four days when Jesus
arrived in the village. The tomb of Osiris was localized
in Annu, the solar birthplace. Osiris, under one of his
titles, is the great one in Annu. Annu is the place of
his repose. “I go to
rest in Annu, my dwelling”, says Osiris. The deceased also goes to rest in Annu because
it was the place of repose for Osiris the god (ch. 57,
4, 5). Jesus goes to rest in Bethany. The place of repose
for Osiris was his sepulchre in Annu. The place of repose
for Lazarus
is the cave in Bethany. It was in Annu that the soul was
united to its spiritual body. Annu is termed the place “where thousands reunite themselves” soul and body. The speaker
says, “Let my soul see her body. Let her unite herself to her sahu” —that is, to the glorified
body which can neither be destroyed nor injured; the future
body in which the soul would be incorporated to pass from
out the tomb. Annu is called the abode of “those who have
found their faces”. These are the mummy-forms, from whose faces the napkin
had been removed. The house or beth of Osiris, then, was
in Annu. “He rests in Annu, which is his
dwelling”. The names of its builders are recorded. Num raised it on
its foundation. Seshet (or Sefekh) built it for him as
his house of refuge and of rest (Rit., 57, 4, 5). The house
of
Osiris in Annu was called Hat-Saru, the house of the Prince — that is, the abode of Horus
when he came to raise Osiris from the tomb. It was the
sanctuary of Osiris who was attended by the two Mertae
or Merti, the pair of divine sisters better known by the
names of Isis and Nephthys. The household proper consists
of Osiris and those two sisters who
watch over him. Mer denotes the eye, ti is two, and these
are the two eyes or two watchers over Osiris in the abode
that is the place of his burial and rebirth. The two sisters
as
watchers are the two Mer, one of whom becomes Mary, the
other Martha, as the two merti in Bethany=Beth-Annu. The
triumph of Osiris was effected over his adversaries by
Horus
in the house of the Prince in Annu or Heliopolis, and
his supreme triumph was in his resurrection when he was
recalled to life and raised up from the sepulchre by Horus
(Rit.,
ch. 1). The raising up of Osiris the father by Horus the
son is doctrinally based upon the father living over again
in the son. Under the beetle-type Kheper [Page 846] as father
transformed into the son. It was the same with Atum-Iu,
in whom the father became the son and then the son transformed
into the father. The mystery was deepened in the
Osirian drama by super adding a more spiritual form of
the fatherhood in Ra the Holy Spirit. The deceased Osiris
is
in possession of the funeral meals in Annu. He sits beneath
the
trees of Annu in the train of Hathor-Meri (Rit., ch. 68,
10). Annu is the place of provisions for the manes. Thousands
are nourished or fed in Annu (89). Deceased in Annu (82)
receives his vesture or Taau-garment from the goddess Tait,
who is over him. This is an
illusion to the mummy-case from which the left arm was
not yet freed when Amsu-Horus rose up in the sepulchre.
The goddess Tait is a form of one of the two divine sisters.
She
cooks the food and brings it to the deceased, who is either
Osiris, or the Osiris, the God
or the manes. Annu was also the place of the festivals
of Osiris. One of these was kept on the sixth day of the
month. “I am with Horus”, says the speaker on the day when the
festivals of Osiris are celebrated, “on the feast of the sixth day of the month” (ch. 1, lines
23, 24). With this we may compare the following statement: “Jesus therefore six days
before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was,
whom Jesus raised from the dead. So they made him a supper
there” (John xii.) The two sisters were present. “Martha
served, and Mary anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped them
with her hair”.
Annu
is described as a green and pleasant place, an oasis
in the desert of Amenta created for the suffering
Osiris, and the two divine sisters were given him there
for
his comfort and
delight (ch. 17, 138, 139). The tree of life stood in
Annu, as the sycamore, tamarisk, or persea tree, which
was
personified in Hathor-Meri or Isis. The manes were
feasted “under
the foliage of the tamarisk” (ch. 124, 6), the branches of which are described as the
beautiful arms of the goddess, and the foliage as her
hair, when she herself was the tree beneath which the
Osiris found refreshing shade. It seems that not only
the clouds of
dawn, but also the foliage of the tamarisk tree may have
imaged the hair of the goddess. Osiris-Ani is found in
Annu with the hair of Isis spread over him (Rit., ch.
17). In another
text the hair is assigned to Hathor — one of whose names is Meri (ch. 35, 1). And this is
probably related to the story of Mary wiping the feet
of Jesus with the hair of her head. Isis is frequently
portrayed kneeling at the feet of Osiris in Annu. It
is she who says: “I who
drop the hair which hath loosely fallen upon my brow — I am Isis, when she concealeth
herself” (ch. 17, 135). Osiris in Annu, like Lazarus in Bethany,
was not dead but sleeping. In the text of Har-hetep (Rit.,
ch. 99) the speaker who personates Horus is he who comes
to awaken Asar out of his sleep. Also, in one of the
early funeral texts it is said of the
sleeping Asar: “The Great One waketh, the Great One riseth; Horus raises
Osiris upon his feet”. Jesus denies that Lazarus is dead. “Our friend Lazarus is fallen asleep. I go that I
may awake him out of his sleep” (ch. XI, 11), which is genuine Egyptian doctrine. The
manes in Amenta were not looked upon as dead, but sleeping,
breathless of body, motionless of heart. The deity Osiris
was not dead. And in his likeness the Osiris lived.
Hence Horus comes to wake the sleepers in their coffins,
or Osiris in his cave. [Page 847]
It
was in Bethany that “Jesus wept”. It is the place of weeping for the dead Lazarus. Mary
wept, the Jews wept, and “Jesus wept”. No wonder. This is the place of weeping by name
in the Ritual, where the Osiris lay in his burial. It
was here he was inert and motionless. The Osiris says: “I am motionless in the fields of those who are dumb in death.
But I shall wake, and my soul will speak in the dwelling
of Tum, the Lord of Annu”. The abode of Tum in
Annu being=Bethany. Then he rises from the tomb and
appears at the door, and says, “I
arrive at the confines of earth. I tread the dwelling
of the god Rem-Rem”. Rem signifies
weeping: and in the Litany of Ra this god is designated “Remi the Weeper”. Thus Jesus
is portrayed in the character of “Remi the Weeper” in the place of weeping for the dead
Osiris in Beth-Annu, who is here represented as the dead
Lazarus in Bethany (Rit., 75, Renouf). Jesus comes as “Remi the Weeper” to weep for the inert Osiris, that is, as Horus
who comes to the motionless Osiris on the day which is
called “Come thou to me”. Ra is
said to make the mummy “come forth” (The Litany of Ra, 68; Rit., 17). Jesus cries with a
loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!” and “he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot
with grave-bands: and his face was bound about with a
napkin” (John XI. 43, 44). The
picture is completed in the Roman catacombs, where the
risen Lazarus is an Egyptian mummy: the likeness of the
mummy-Osiris, who is beckoned forth by Horus with his staff.
According
to the dramatic representation in the Mysteries,
Osiris is slain by the adversary Sut, and is imaged
in Amenta
as a mummy. The father lives again in the son; hence
his
son Horus descends into the nether-world to avenge, reconstitute
and raise Osiris from his corpse-like state. He comes
as a living soul from Ra the Holy Spirit, who is
the Father in
heaven, “to raise up the hand which is motionless” (Rit., ch. 5). “He lifts inert Osiris with his
two arms” (ch. 18). He exclaims, “Ha! Osiris, I am come to thee: I am Horus, and I restore
thee to life upon this day, with the funerary offerings and all good things for Osiris. Rise up,
then, Osiris (ch. 128). Horus hath raised thee”. It is said, “Hail, Osiris, thou art born twice” (Rit., ch. 170). In some texts it is Ra who bids the mummy
come forth on the day of “Come
thou to me” (Rit., ch. 17). Taht says: “I give Ra to enter the mysterious cave in order that
he may revive the heart of him whose heart is motionless” (ch. 182). After the raising of
Osiris, Taht says, “I have celebrated the festival of Eve’s provender”, or supper, which
came to be called the Last Supper. The raising of Lazarus
is likewise commemorated by
a supper. “So they made him a supper there” (John XII. 2).
When Osiris, or the Osiris, “takes the form of a living soul” (Rit., ch. 181), it is said, “thy son
Horus reconstitutes thee. Arise, Osiris, thy hands have
been given to thee” — he is freed
from the mummy-bandages — “stand up living for ever”.“The two sisters Isis and Nephthys
come to thee; they will fill thee with life, health, and
strength, and all the joy that they possess. They gather
for thee all kinds of good things within thy reach” (ch. 181). Amongst
other ceremonies performed in the Amenta at the raising
of the mummy who is “called
aloud” from the sepulchre the Osiris is freed from the bandages
with which the corpse was bound. So when Lazarus [Page 848] was called in a loud voice to come forth, “He that was
dead came forth bound hand and foot with grave-bands, and
his face was bound about”.
In the resurrection ceremony of Osiris he is divested of
his funerary garment and receives a bandage of the finest
linen from the hands of the attendant of Ra, the Father
in heaven
(Rit., ch. 172). He eats of “the
meat which has been prepared by Ra in his holy place”; he
washes his feet in silver basins, which have been sculptured
by the divine architect Ptah-Sekari (ch. 172). In the Gospel,
Jesus, “knowing that the Father had given all things
into his hands, and that he came forth from God and goeth
unto God, riseth from supper, and layeth aside his garments;
and he took a towel and girded himself. Then he poureth
water into a basin and began to wash the disciples feet,
and to wipe them with the towel
wherewith he was girded” (ch. XIII. 4-6).
Taking
Lazarus, then, to represent the mummy-Osiris, we
find the “raising of Lazarus” celebrated in a hymn expressly devoted to the subject. It
is one of the ceremonies that were performed in the
underworld. The Osiris is designated him “who is called aloud”. “O
thou who art called aloud, thou who art called aloud,
thou the lamented, thou art glorified. O thou who
art raised up, thou art raised up. N. has been raised
up by means of all the
manifold ceremonies performed for him”. The mummy-Osiris lay upon the funeral couch
in the mysterious cave with the two sisters in attendance.
Horus enters this cave as representative of Ra, to revive
the heart of him whose heart is motionless. He says, “Hail,
Osiris, thou art born twice! Arise on thy bed and come
forth! Come! Come forth”. Osiris or the Osiris is called with a loud voice. In the hymn of the resurrection,
he is addressed nine
times over in the words “O
Thou who art called aloud!” (chs. 170-2). They call him to come
forth “like a god” from the mysterious cave “to meet the powers of Annu”. The resurrection
is celebrated with rejoicings, “thou hearest how thou art glorified through all thy house!” There are nine verses in the hymn and each one opens with
the address, “O thou who art
called aloud!” That
is for his rising up and coming forth from the cave in
Annu (ch. 172). The words “O thou who art called aloud” had become the title of the hymn, as we say “the
Magnificat”, or “the Te Deum” (Naville, Rit., ch. 172).
The
latest dynasty of Egyptian deities were born of Seb
the earth-father and Nut the mother-heaven. This was
the Osirian group, consisting of five persons, viz.,
(1) Asar, (2)
the elder Horus, (3) Sut, (4) Isis, (5) Nephthys, which
may be called the family in Annu and shown to be the
originals of the group in Bethany. Sut, the betrayer,
is the only one omitted
from the Gospel. The remaining four — Lazarus=Asar; Jesus=Horus; Mary=Isis;
Martha=Nephthys — are also represented sometimes in the Ritual without Sut
(ch. 128). When it is said that Horus exalteth his father
Osiris in every place he associates Isis the
Great with her sister Nephthys. Sut is not included in
the group at Annu. On the other hand, Sut, in the person
of the betrayer, is present at the mortuary meal in the
canonical
Gospels. At present we only need to identify Lazarus with
Osiris, Jesus with Horus, and the two sisters of Lazarus
with the two sisters of Osiris. Osiris lying as a breathless
mummy
in the cave, [Page 849] when Horus comes to raise him from the dead, is watched
over and protected by the two Mertae-sisters, one at the
head and one at the feet as keepers of the body, and watchers
in the burial-place. The two
mertae are mentioned in chapter 58. In this
the Osiris cries, “Let the door be opened to me” as the Osiris buried in Amenta. “Who is
with thee?” is asked. The reply is, “It is the mertae”, the two watchers over Osiris in the
sepulchre. The deceased then asks that he may have milk,
cakes and meat given to him at the house which is in Annu,
the Kamite prototype of Bethany. On the way to the
sepulchre in Annu Horus meets the two sister-goddesses,
saying to them “Hail, ye pair of
goddesses Mertae, sister pair, Mertae! I inform you of my words of power. I am Horus, the
son of Isis, and I am come to see my father Osiris”, and to raise him up from the sepulchre.
Jesus on his way to the cave of Lazarus likewise informs
Martha of his words of power, saying “thy brother shall rise again”. “I am the resurrection and the life”. “He that believeth
on me shall never die” (John XI. 25, 26). “Now as they went on their way a certain woman
named Martha received him (Jesus) into her house. And she
had a sister called Mary, which also sat at the Lord’s feet (like Isis) and heard his word”. And because Mary took her
place at the feet of Jesus it is said that she had “chosen the good part” (Luke X. 38, 42).
The two sisters in Bethany are the Aramaic or Hebrew replica
of Isis and Nephthys, who are the attendants upon Osiris;
the two divine sisters of Osiris in Annu. Mary and Martha
are the two sisters of Lazarus in Bethany. Horus loved
the two dear sisters Isis and
Nephthys, and is especially denominated the son who loves
his father, i.e., Asar, whom he
raises from the tomb according to the dramatic representation.
Jesus is said to have “loved
Martha and her sister, and Lazarus” (John XI. 5).
Jesus
saith, “Our friend Lazarus is fallen asleep, but I go that I may
awake him out of sleep” (John XI. 4, 11). So is it in the Ritual. Horus says, “I go to give movement to the
manes. I go to comfort him who is in a swoon”, which is equivalent to Lazarus who sleeps
(ch. 64). He goes to give life at some particular spot
and in doing this he comes from Sekhem to Annu where the
mummy of Osiris rested in the house there=Beth-Annu or
Bethany. The Osiris does not die. The Ritual has no recognition
of death, save as final extinction when death and evil
die together. Osiris sleeps, he is breathless or in a swoon.
He lies inert, his heart is motionless pro tem. Osiris thus awaits his change and
resurrection; but he cannot die who is the conqueror of
death and the bondage of the grave. The resurrection of
Osiris at the coming of Horus is glanced at when the speaker
personates him and says, “I am the great first heir (or inheritor) taking possession
of Urt-hat” — otherwise the inert, sleeping, motionless Osiris. “Strength of Osiris is my name.
I save him” from the impurities of matter. “He lives by me”. The speaker is Horus with his
father Ra, just as Jesus is with his father in the scene
of raising Lazarus (John 11, 45). The resurrection applies
to Osiris in matter whom Horus comes to quicken and raise
up from
the dead or, as it is rendered, “from the impurities of Osiris” in matter. The “corruption
which befell Osiris” in [Page 850] his mummy-condition is mentioned in the Ritual more than
once. This also befalls the corpse of Lazarus, but is more
grossly stated in the Gospel. Jesus comes to raise up Lazarus
when he has been in the tomb four days, and Martha
saith, “Lord, by this time he stinketh” (John XI. 39). In the Ritual, when Horus comes to
those who are in their cells he utters the words of Ra
to raise the dead, and says, as the passage is rendered
by Budge, “I am the herald of his words (his father’s) to him whose
throat stinketh”; that is, to the sufferer from corruption in the tomb (Book of the Dead, ch.
38B, line 4).
Isis
not only stands or sits at the feet of Osiris, she
is the Seat personified. She carries the sign of
the seat upon her head. Her name of Hes signifies the
seat.
And Mary, who takes
the place of Isis, is described as sitting at the feet
of Jesus, whilst Martha is busy working about the
house and left serving alone. A further allusion to
the Lady
of the Seat may be
found when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, and went
forth to meet him, whilst “Mary
still sat in the house” (John XI. 20, 21), thus fulfilling the character of Isis,
the seat, or the sitter. There is more than meets the
eye in the sign of the seat which is borne by Isis. To
sit is also to brood as a bird. Isis as sitter is the
brood-hen, the incubator in Annu. Under
this type of the sitting-hen she sits at the feet of
Osiris to bring him to rebirth. Mary also sat in the
house, and kept her seat at the feet of Jesus. Nephthys,
the other divine sister in
Annu, carries the sign of a house on her head. She is
called mistress of the house. She is the benevolent,
saving sister. This in the “history” is rendered by Martha being the
housekeeper and by Mary sitting in the house while her
sister goes forth to meet the Lord (John XI. 21). In
Aramaic, Martha denotes the mistress of the house, and
Nephthys, one
of the two mertae, is the mistress of the house, who
carries the house as a symbol in her head-dress. The
name of Nephthys in Greek
represents nebt-hat, the mistress of the
house in Egyptian. The two sisters are the merti or mertae,
who were the keepers of the double house in attendance
upon Horus, or Jesus. They
receive the Sun-God at his entrance to the mountain in
the West, and stand together by him when he issues forth
at
dawn from Beth-Annu, or Bethany, in the East. The name
of the secret shrine in which the mummy-Osiris was upraised
by “the two arms of Horus, Prince of Sekhem”, is “the witness
of that which is raised”, or the witness to the Resurrection (ch. 17). Those who
are present in this scene are “Osiris, Isis, Nephthys, and Horus the reconstituter of his
Father”, and
these, as we maintain, are the prototypes or original
characters of Lazarus, Mary, Martha and Jesus in the
scene of the Resurrection in Bethany.
Osiris
rose from the dead to enter the little golden ark of
the moon on the third day. He was buried on the 17th
of Hathor and the resurrection in the lunar ark was
on the 19th; that is,
on the third day. In the solar mythos he rises again the
day after the burial, and as the grain he rose again
in forty days. But there is another mystery of Osiris,
an account of which is
given by Plutarch, probably from the writings of Manetho.
This he calls the “Mourning of
the Goddess”, which began on the 17th of Hathor, the day on which
Osiris was betrayed at the last supper and mutilated by
the adversary Sut. He says the “Mourning of the
Goddess” lasted [Page 851] “four” days altogether, beginning on the 17th, the day of betrayal
and death of Osiris; and on the 19th it was proclaimed
by the priests that the lost Osiris was found because he
had then entered into the ark of the moon where the light
was once
more safe. He tells us that amongst other melancholy things
that were acted on this occasion, as the mourning of the
cow for Osiris the bull of Amenta, a gilded cow, the
golden Hathor, was covered with a black linen pall and
exposed to public view for four days
at the mourning of the goddess, or of the cow, for the
lost Osiris. Here, then, are
the four
days of mourning which are repeated in the one Gospel that chronicles the
raising of Lazarus from the dead after “he had been in the tomb four days already”. Plutarch calls this
mystery the mourning of the goddess. But there are always
two mourners for Osiris, Isis and Nephthys, who are his
sisters.
The
process of reducing the fairy-godmother’s coach-and-six to the status of a one-horse
cab may be seen in the Gospel according to Luke in getting
rid of Osiris. The pair of sisters, Martha and Mary,
appear in this Gospel, but without their brother
Lazarus, and also
without the resurrection. After all that has now been
done towards identifying Bethany with the house in
Annu
and the nest of the two sisters, the two sisters
with Isis and Nephthys,
and the Christ with Horus, it cannot be considered far-fetched
if we look upon Lazarus as a form of the Osiris that
was dead and buried and raised to life again. As
to the name,
the Egyptian name of the Greek Osiris is Hesar, or Asar.
And when we take into consideration that some of
the matter came from its Egyptian source through
the Aramaic
and Arabic languages (witness the Arabic Gospel of the
Infancy) there is little difficulty, if
any, in supposing that the Al (article the) has been
adopted through the medium of the Arabic, or derived
from the Hebrew prenominal stem , to emphasize a thing,
as
in the Osiris, which passed into the article Al for “the” in Arabic, and was prefixed to the
name of Osiris as Al-Asar, which, with the Greek “s” for suffix becomes L-azarus. The
connecting link whereby Al-Asar was turned into Lazarus, the Osiris, was in all likelihood
made in the Aramaic language, which had its root-relations with the Egyptian. Hieroglyphic
papyri are among its monumental remains, as well as the inscription of Carpentras.
Various
representations of the raising of Lazarus in the Roman
catacombs show the mummy risen and standing in the
doorway of the tomb. The figure of the supposed Jesus
Christ is in front of the sarcophagus calling upon Lazarus
to come forth, whilst touching the
mummy with a wand or rod which he holds in his hand. In
the chapter “by which the tomb
is opened to the soul and to the shade of the person that
he may come forth to day and have the mastery of his
feet” (Rit., ch. 92) the deliverer Horus says, “I am Horus who
lifteth up his father with his staff”. This mode of raising Osiris by Horus with his staff or
rod completes the picture of the resurrection of Lazarus.
The
rod that is waved by Jesus at the raising of Lazarus is
the symbolic sceptre in the hand of Horus when he raises
the Osiris.
In every instance Lazarus is a mummy made after the Egyptian
fashion. It is a bandaged body that had been soaked in
salt and pitch which was at times so hot that it charred
the
bones [Page 852] (Budge, “The Mummy”, pp.153-155). Seventy days was the proper length of
time required for embalming the dead body in making an
Egyptian mummy. Lazarus when portrayed in the Roman catacombs
comes forth from the tomb as an eviscerated,
embalmed and bandaged mummy, warranted to have been made
in Egypt. Now, according to the Gospel narrative, there
was no time for this, as Lazarus had only been dead four
days. The mummy, anyway, is non-historical; and it is the
typical mummy called the Osiris,
Asar in Egyptian, El-Asar in Aramaic, and Lazarus with
the Greek terminal in the Gospel assigned to John. The
coffin of Osiris, constellated in the Greater Bear, was
known to the
Arab astronomers as the Bier of Lazarus. Asar, or the Osiris,
is the mummy in the coffin, and with the coffin of Osiris
identified as the bier of Lazarus it follows perforce that
the
mummy-Osiris in the coffin is one with Lazarus on the bier.
The gnostic pictures in the Roman catacombs suffice to
prove the identity. They show that Lazarus was buried as
a
mummy, and that he rose again in mummy-form. Thus the dead
Osiris of Egypt, El-Asar or Lazarus, as portrayed in Rome,
and the story of the death, burial, and resurrection are
the same wheresoever and howsoever that story may be told.
The bier of Lazarus,
followed by the mourning sisters, was only known by that
name because it had been constellated in the starry vault
of the heavens ages earlier than the present era as the
coffin of Osiris.
It is satisfactory to find that both forms of Asar are preserved in the Gospels, one of which
was the god Osiris, the other the Osiris as manes. Lazarus in his resurrection represents
the God; Lazarus the poor man of the parable represents the manes in Amenta who is
designated the Osiris.
The
story of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus related
in the Gospel of Luke (ch. XVI. 19) is told at length
in the second tale of Khamuas as Egyptian. This contains
a scene from
the Judgment in Amenta which is represented in the vignettes
to the Ritual. Setme and his son Si-Osiris enter the
Tuat as manes. They pass through the seven halls (Rit.,
ch. 144)
into the great judgment hall. They see the figure of Osiris
seated on his throne of gold, “Anup the great god being on his left hand, the great god
Taht upon his right, the balance being set in the
midst before them”. Anup gives the word, Taht writes it down. The
rich man and the poor man enter to be judged. “And behold Setme saw a great man
clothed in garment of byssus (fine white linen), he being
near to the place in which Osiris was”, in which position he is great exceedingly. Si-Osiris says, “My father Setme, dost thou
not see this great man who is clothed in garment of byssus,
he being near to the place in which Osiris is? That poor
man whom thou sawest, he being carried out from Memphis,
there not being a man walking after him, he being wrapped
in a mat, this is he”. This refers
to the funerals of the rich man and the poor man on earth
previously described (lines 15-21). When the rich man was
judged it was found that his evil deeds were more
numerous than his good deeds; therefore they outweighed
them in the scales of justice; consequently he was cast
to the devourer of souls who did not allow him to breathe
again
for ever. “It was commanded before Osiris to cause to be thrown the
burial outfit [Page 853]
of that rich man whom thou sawest, he being carried out from
Memphis, the praise that was made of him being great, unto
this poor man named, and that they should take him
(the poor man) amongst the noble spirits as a man of God
that follows Osiris-Sekari (the god in his resurrection),
he being near to the place in which Osiris is” (Griffith, second tale
of Khamuas, pp. 149, 158). Thus the parable of the rich
man and Lazarus found in a folk-tale of the first century
written in Demotic is provably Egyptian and demonstrably
ancient by application of the comparative process to the
language. Neither the name of
Lazarus nor Osiris appears in the tale of Khamuas, which
is good evidence that the story was not derived from the
Gospels. Thus we identify Lazarus with Osiris the mummy-god
and Lazarus the poor man with Alasar as the Osiris.
THE FOUNDERS OF THE KINGDOM
The elder Horus represented the wisdom of the Mother as her word or logos in the earth
of Seb until he reached the age of twelve years. Then, according to the drama of the
Osirian mysteries, he passed into Amenta, where he rose again as Horus in spirit. It was
in this, the earth of eternity, that he made his second advent when he came again to
establish the kingdom of the father. In his death and resurrection or transformation from
the body-soul to an eternal spirit, he had found the father in heaven, who is Ra the holy
spirit. And at his second advent Horus came to tell the joyful tidings to the manes and
to found the kingdom in Amenta for the father who is now Osiris-Ra instead of the
mummy-Osiris. Thus the kingdom of the Christ was founded for the father by Horus and
his followers at his second coming to be represented in the mysteries of Amenta and the
drama of Egyptian eschatology as the second advent which was in the spirit, now set forth
by Horus the immortal Son of God.
The
universe of Ptah, the supreme architect, had been divided
into the three regions of Amenta, earth and heaven.
In these there were three successive forms of a god
the
father – Seb was the god of earth, as father of physical sustenance;
Osiris was the father in Amenta, where the dead were reconstituted
and made to live again, and Ra the holy
spirit was the father of spirits in heaven. Thus the typical
seven loaves of plenty were called the bread of Seb on
earth, the bread of Osiris in Amenta, and the bread of
Ra in heaven.
Human Horus was the heir of Seb, his foster-father, in
the life on earth. At his resurrection in Amenta, Horus,
as half-human, half-divine, is the heir of Osiris. In the
resurrection from
Amenta when he had become pure spirit he was Horus divinized
as heir of Ra, the father on high. And on behalf of this,
the newly-found father, now the supreme god, he returns
to found the kingdom as the teacher of the mysteries in
Amenta, and the saviour of the
manes from the second death. Seb the father on earth
was of the earth earthy. Osiris in Amenta was a god in
matter; hence his mummy-form. The nature of these had been
expounded in the lesser mysteries. Ra as father in heaven,
or Huhi the eternal, is the god
in spirit now, and Horus manifesting in the spirit comes
to elucidate the greater mysteries to the twelve who, as
the gnosis shows, had previously [Page
854] been
the teachers of the lesser mysteries, and who now become
the twelve with Horus, or Jesus, on the mountain
in the phase of eschatology. Horus as the son of Ra was
the representative of power superior to that of Osiris
in Amenta, the god in matter, who was annually overthrown
by Sut
in physical phenomena, and in this character he came to
the assistance of Osiris in the sepulchre. Hence he disperses
the darkness from his face. He reconstitutes the body that
Sut dismembered. He raises the arm that was paralyzed in
death. He lifts the mummy to
its feet. He is the link which unites matter with spirit,
or Osiris with Ra. He brings the gnosis or word of life
from the father in heaven to the previous ruling powers
which include the
earlier father on earth and in the nether-earth, and therefore
to the men on earth and manes in Amenta. Thus, at his second
coming, Horus had found his father, the father in
heaven. He rises as a spirit in Amenta from the dead to
tell them of his father. He repeats his father’s words to those who are “deprived of breath” (Rit., ch. 38).
These are the words of salvation that “bring about the resurrection and the glory to the
manes” (ch. 1) by means of the gnosis.
We
have now to follow Horus in his second Advent. He
passed from the life on earth into the dark of death
as Horus-Anaref,
the sightless Horus. Death was imaged as the putting
out of sight by Sut the power of darkness, the manes
being the blind. At his second coming
Horus is the giver of sight, or the beatific vision,
to the blind. He shines into the tombs of those who
are
slumbering darkly in their cells and wakes them from
the trance of death.
At this advent of Horus “the people which sat in darkness saw a great light, and
to them which sat in the region and shadow of death
did light spring up” (Matt. IV. 16; also the
Gospel of Nicodemus II. 2). But this, according to the
Ritual and the “Pistis Sophia”, was
in Amenta, the hidden earth, where the blind are made
to see; a mouth is given to the dumb; the lame are enabled
to walk; and the dead to rise again. Amenta, as he comes,
is
all in motion with dead matter turning into spirit-life;
and when he rises from the sepulchre we are in the midst
of those mysteries which have been rendered as Christian
miracles
in the Gospels.
“I am come”, says Horus, “as
a sahu in the spiritual body, glorious and well equipped;
and that is given to me which lives on amidst all overthrow”. This, we repeat, is the second
coming of Horus at the new birth in spirit which followed
the old death in matter, or on earth, when Har-Ur,
the child of Isis, was reborn, and this time begotten
as the anointed
and beloved son of God the father. This time he who was
the Word is the doer, the word-made-truth. He comes
to found the kingdom for the father in the earth
of eternity or
in spirit-world, not in Judea or Palestine. The work
of Horus in his resurrection from the dead was to
fulfil
the kingdom of heaven on this foundation of the nether-earth,
as foothold
for eternity, the kingdom of heaven being spirit-world
made palpable in the mythical representation of the
mysteries.
All
along the line of descent the astronomy supplied the
mould of the eschatology. There was a heaven astronomically
raised upon the two pillars of Sut and Horus south
and north.
Also on the two [Page 855] horizons of Harmachis, the double Horus. The Heptanomis had
its sevenfold foundation. The heaven built upon a fourfold
basis was the heaven founded on
the four cardinal points, in the solstices and equinoxes.
Lastly, the zodiac with twelve signs is the figure of heaven
raised upon a foundation that is twelve fold. The mythical
rulers
corresponded numerically to the signs: the two, the four,
the seven, the nine, and finally the twelve, at first as
astronomical types, the gnostic Aeons, and afterwards as
spirits or gods in the phase of eschatology. Thus there
are two categories
in phenomenal manifestation, one being astronomical, the
other spiritual or eschatological, as shown and
explained in “Pistis Sophia”. It now became the mission of Horus to make known the
newly-found father in heaven to those who had not so much
as heard of the holy spirit. It was the work of the anointed
and beloved son to found the kingdom of heaven for the
father in the father’s name. He became the teacher of the coming kingdom, previously
proclaimed by Anup the herald and forerunner who was his
John the Baptist crying in the wilderness of the underworld.
When
Horus in his second advent comes to establish the
kingdom for his father, who is Ra in the solar mythos
and the
holy spirit in the eschatology, he has Two Witnesses
who
testify that he is verily the son of God the father in
heaven and the true light of the world. These are
the two Osirian Johns, Anup and Aan, or rather they
are
the originals of the two
Johns in the canonical Gospels. They are portrayed as
the two witnesses to the bird-headed Horus in his resurrection
at the vernal equinox. The planisphere of Denderah
shows the jackal of Anup and the cynocephalus of Taht-Aan
figured back to back upon the equinoctial colure
as
the two principal witnesses for Horus, who are thus
portrayed as
supporters of the Eye which was renewed in Annu once
every year (Planisphere in a Book of the Beginnings).
As
Egyptian, these two witnesses for Horus are Anup
the baptizer and
Aan the divine scribe who is the penman of the gods in
the Ritual. We have seen them acting as the two witnesses
for Horus in the Osirian judgment hall (see p. 705).
They are also described as the two magi, or magicians.
Where
John begins his preaching in the canonical Gospel Anup
is the typical opener of the way (Rit., ch. 26). He
is the forerunner who announces the day of reckoning;
he makes the
call to judgment; he judges the world, just as John is
the judge of the world who calls men and baptizes them
to repentance (Rit., 31, Birch). Anup is also the educator
preparatory
to the advent of Horus who comes after him although he
was before him in status and authority (Rit., ch. 44).
Anup abode darkling in the desert of Amenta until the
day of his
manifestation in the heliacal rising of Sothis, the morning
star of the Egyptian year, which heralded the birth
of Horus. John dwelt in the wilderness till the day
of his theophany or “shewing unto Israel” (Luke I. 80). The solar god was superior to either the lunar
or stellar deity. As star-god, Anup had been the precursor.
The moon-god, Aan, was the witness for
Horus by night as reflector of the hidden sun. This, however,
was but the mythical mould for the eschatology, in
which Horus was no longer merely the “little sun” of winter, but the
son of Ra in spirit and the typical demonstrator of [Page 856] immortality to the manes in
Amenta and to men upon the earth. The two Johns might be
distinguished from each other in the Gospels; John the
Baptist from John the Divine, by means of Anup, the baptizer,
and
Aan, the writer of the record in the Ritual. The baptism
does not actually take place in the Gospel according to
John. In this there is only a description of the scene. And, although
one John is present as the baptizer, there is no attempt
made to distinguish John the baptizer from John the scribe.
But John the speaker is John the scribe, and therefore
to
be discriminated from John the Baptist, who is not named
as the baptist by John the writer. John the scribe is,
of course, the writer, and he likewise bears witness as
well as John the
Baptist. For it is he who says, “and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from
the Father”. This was manifested in the baptism when the heavens were
opened and Jesus “saw the spirit of God descending as a dove and coming upon
him; and lo! a voice out of the heavens saying, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased” (Matt. III.
16, 17). Consequently John the scribe was present at the
baptism to have beheld the glory of the only begotten of
the Father which was manifested in the one particular way
at one
particular time, but he was not John the Baptist. Anup, like child-Horus, was born of the
motherhood but not of the fatherhood, whereas the Horus
of thirty years was the only begotten Son of God the Father.
So, in the Gospel, John the Baptist is among the greatest
of those who were born of woman (minus the fatherhood,
in accordance with the
primitive status), whereas Jesus, the Christ, was begotten
of God. The first Horus was born, the second Horus is begotten.
Such is the status of John and Jesus. Hence the
saying “among them that are born of women there hath not arisen a
greater than John the Baptist; yet he that is least in
the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matt. XI. 11). The
characters all through are to be determined and differentiated
by the doctrines. John the Baptist does not enter the kingdom
of heaven, which he helps to found as preparer of the
way. So Anup is the guide of ways in the wilderness of
the under-world; he makes straight the path for the future
life, but he does not enter the coming kingdom of the Son
of God
when the double earth is unified in the future heaven.
His place is with the dead awaiting their resurrection.
He watches, he bends over the mummy; he embraces and supports
it
with tenderest solicitude; he is master in the mountain
of rebirth for heaven, but he himself remains in the lower
earth. His rôle and his domain come to an end where those of the
divine heir of Osiris as the son of Ra begin. When Horus
rises again to take possession of his kingdom, Anup is
portrayed as crouching in the tomb. He gives Horus his
shoulder.
He raises him up, but does not pass from out Amenta. Therefore
the least in the kingdom of Horus, which is a spiritual
kingdom, is greater than the highest in the kingdom of
Anup
or John the Baptist, who was only the precursor and proclaimer
of the Christ or the Horus
of the resurrection.
A
glimpse of the cyclical and non-human nature of the
witness, John, may be inadvertently given in the
words attributed to Jesus, “If I will that he tarry till I come, what (is that) to
thee?” “Yet, Jesus said not unto him that he should not die”. The ending here [Page 857]
predicated
was not in the category of human phenomena, and may therefore
be claimed as pertaining to the astronomical mythos,
which was at the root of all the mysteries of
Amenta. Once a month the lord of light, as Horus, was
reborn in the moon, and Aan=John was his attendant. “Let him stand unchanged for a month” is equivalent to his tarrying until
Horus came again.
It
is said of John, “this is the disciple which beareth witness of these things,
and wrote these things”. Aan, in Egyptian, is the scribe by name, and he was the
divine scribe as Taht-Aan, the lunar deity and registrar
of time. Aan was the witness to Horus; his writings
are the Ritual, and “we know that his witness is true”. It was Taht-Aan=John who had
power to confer the Ma-Kheru on the solar god himself,
that is, the gift of making truth by means of the word,
because he told time for the sun and was his true witness
in the
moon. “Let him stand unchanged for a month”, may be read by the legend which tells us
that Ra created Taht-Aan to be his lamp by night and
his witness in heaven, and whether we reckon nightly
or monthly,
Taht-Aan=John was the witness until Horus came again
at the end of the period. Anup the baptizer and Aan the
saluter
are the first two witnesses for
the risen Horus as his helpers in establishing the kingdom
for the father in heaven. Next there is a group of four,
as followers of Horus and founders of his fold (Rit.,
ch. 97). These
four were born brothers with Har-Ur, the elder Horus,
in the company of the seven powers that were from the
beginning
in relation to certain phenomena of external nature.
They are
now called upon to become foundational pillars of support
to the new heaven in the eschatology. In this phase the
group commences as four and terminates as twelve, who
reap the harvest in the fields of Amenta, for Horus-Khuti,
the master of joy and lord of the spirits, who are called
the glorified elect, the heirs to the kingdom of heaven,
which, as
Osirian always was but which as Christian is always coming.
The change from Horus the mortal to Horus divinized in spirit, as the son of Ra, is indicated
as occurring at the time when the four brethren became the four children of Horus, and,
as it is said, when his name became that of Horus upon his column (Rit., ch. 112, Renouf).
Now Horus on his column, pedestal, or monolith is equivalent to the Egypto-gnostic Jesus
with the disciples on the mount. In this position the four brethren are his four arms of
support, the same as the four brothers with Jesus in the mount. In their several characters
they are the servants of Horus, whether as four supports, four fishers, four shepherds, or
other forms of the primordial four who are characterized as the foremost of the final twelve.
The issuing forth from Amenta on the day of the resurrection
is described in the opening chapter of the Ritual as
the coming to the divine powers attached to Osiris. These
divine
powers are Amsta, Hapi, Tuamutef and Kabhsenuf, the four
children of Horus who stand upon the papyrus-symbol of
the earth amidst the waters of the Nun, otherwise rendered
on the mount or on the monolith. The pyramid text of Teta
(270) refers to this raising of the
dead. It is said that Horus hath given his children power
that they may raise thee up. These children are the
four who were foremost of the seven (or later, twelve)
great spirits in Annu.
This did not mean that four [Page 858] human followers of Horus on earth had the power to
raise the dead on earth. But so mis-rendered has the teaching
been in the Gospels when Jesus bids his disciples to go
forth on earth and raise the dead (Matt. X. 8). In the
chapter
of the baptism (Rit., ch. 97) the speaker “propitiates” “those four glorified ones who follow
after the master of all things”. They are the four supporters on whom Horus relies in
founding the kingdom for his father. Speaking, as it may
be, of his sheep-fold in the character of the good shepherd,
Horus says, “Now let my fold be fitted for me, as one
victorious against all adversaries who would not that right
should be done to me — I (who)
am the only one, just and true”, or faithful and true (Rit., ch. 97). These four, then,
are founders of the fold that is to be fitted for the good
shepherd with the crook upon his shoulder as Amsu-Horus
in the resurrection scenes. They are the four brethren
who, in the
later phase, are called his children. Hence Horus is described
as coming to light in his own children and in his name
of Horus (Rit. ch. 112) on his column=on the mount. To
found the
fold was to establish the kingdom. That was founded on
the four supporters at the four corners of the mount.
There
is a rebirth of Horus at his second coming. It is the
same with his train of companion-powers, the four of
the seven who had been with him as his brothers in
the
astronomical mythos. These in the rebirth become his four
children, who, at the same time, are designated by
him “brothers of this my own body” (Rit., ch. 112). Whether called the
brothers or the children of Horus they are the same four
in the two characters. These four reappear in the Gospels
also in both characters. The four as brothers are the
fishers,
Peter, Andrew, James and John. The other four, called James,
Joseph, Simon and Judas, are represented as brothers
of his own flesh and blood. At their birth Amsta, Hapi,
Tuamutef and Kabhsenuf were the brothers of Horus Anaref.
These had no father. In the
rebirth Horus has himself attained the status of a father
or begetter in spirit. Hence it is said, “As for Amsta, Hapi, Tuamutef and Kabhsenuf, Horus is their
father and Isis is their mother”, in this new setting of the four. In the Gospel Cleopas
and Mary take the place of Horus and Isis as the actual
father and mother in the flesh. When Horus rises in
Amenta
he is the active and powerful one of Annu filled with might
divine as the son whom the father hath begotten (Rit.,
ch. 115), whereas in his previous advent he was the
child of the
Virgin Mother as the puny impubescent impotent weakling
who was born but not begotten. Horus now beseeches
Ra to grant that he may have his four brothers or his
children for his
assistants. He says, “Give me my brother in the region of Pa; give me my brother
in Nekhen — my brother for my tender affection”, or give me my brothers to love. Only two
brethren of the four are mentioned here, and for these
Horus asks of his father that his brothers may sit with
him in his kingdom as eternal judges, as benefactors of
the world, as
extinguishers of the Typhonian plagues and as the bringers
of peace (Rit., ch. 112). The prayer of Horus is followed
by the Osiris deceased, who identifies the two brethren
as
Amsta and Hapi, and he exclaims: “Rise up, gods, who are in the lower heaven, rise up for
the Osiris, make him (also) to [Page 859] become a great god”. The deceased continues: “I
know the mystery of Nekhen”. The mystery is that which the mother of Horus (who was
also the mother of the two brethren) had done for him when
she said “let him live” (ch.
113), in which we have the mother making her request on
behalf of her son.
This
new foundation for the kingdom of heaven was made
on the night of erecting the flagstaffs (or pillars)
of
Horus, and of establishing him as heir to his father’s property. The
pillars were erected when Horus said to the four who
followed him, “Let the flagstaffs be
erected there”, on the night of one of the ten great mysteries of Amenta
(Rit., ch. 18). The two brothers first given to Horus
in Pa were Amsta and Hapi (ch. 112). The other two that
were given to Horus in Nekhen are Tuamutef and Kabhsenuf,
the adorer of the mother and the refresher of his brethren.
Thus, the kingdom announced by Anup the baptizer, and
founded by Horus for his father, was established upon
the
four supports. These in one shape were four brothers,
only one of whom, Amsta, wears the human form. They are
adopted by him as his Shus, his servants or fishers,
two by two — two in Pa and two in
Nekhen, the region where Sebek was the great fisher in
the marshes. The four are given by Ra to Horus as his
children who are brothers of his own body, to be with
him in token
of everlasting renewal and of peace on earth, and these
are the four pillars, flagstaffs,
fishermen, or supports, on which the kingdom of heaven
was to be founded in Amenta, as a spirit-world by Horus,
who was the fulfiller for the father at his second coming.
We
repeat that Horus had four brothers with him in the
mythos who had been with him from the beginning,
just as Jesus has his four brothers on earth; and when
Horus
makes
his change and rises in Amenta from the dead the four
brothers become his children as the four supports of
the future
kingdom (Rit., ch. 112), the “four glorified ones” who are
foremost among the seven great spirits of Annu (Rit.,
ch. 97). They who were the brothers of Horus when
he was
the son of Seb, or, as we say, on the earth, are,
after his
resurrection, called his children. Coincident with this
change the risen Lord, in the Gospels, addresses
his disciples as his children when he has risen from
the
tomb. He
comes to the seven fishers in the boat, and says to them, “Children, have ye aught to eat?” (John XXI. 5). This being after the resurrection. It is the only time that the disciples
are addressed as the children of Jesus, and the conditions
are identical with those in the Ritual
where the brethren of Horus in the earth-life become
his children in the spirit-life beyond the tomb. Thus,
to recapitulate, Horus of the resurrection at his second
coming was
accompanied by Anup, the baptizer, Aan, the divine scribe,
as lunar god, and the four brethren Amsta, Hapi, Tuamutef
and Kabhsenuf, one of which four was Amsta, the only
brother in the human form. These four are the divine
powers who were with Horus in the mount when he rose
from the dead and came forth to day. They can be paralleled
thus
with characters in the canonical Gospels as: Horus, or
the Egypto-gnostic Jesus=Jesus; Anup, the baptizer=John
the Baptist; John, the divine scribe=Aan, the divine
scribe;
Amsta, the one human brother of the Lord=James, the one
human brother of Jesus;
Hapi=Andrew; Tuamutef=John; Kabhsenuf=Peter. [Page 860] Simon
Peter is the one who perceives and proclaims that
Jesus is the Christ. “Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. XVI. 16). The name of Peter is here identified with
the Greek Petra for a rock. But if the other characters,
Jesus=Horus; John=Aan; James=Amsta, are Egyptian, it
follows that Peter is Egyptian also. The word Petra or
Petar
is Egyptian; it signifies to see, look at, to perceive,
to show forth, to reveal. Moreover, Petar
is the name or title of an Egyptian god who had been already divinized as the one who
discovered and made known the only begotten son of that living god, who was
Atum-Ankhu, the father of Iusa, the Egyptian Jesus (Budge, Vocabulary, p. 122). Probably
the deified perceiver, or Petar, was the hawk-sighted Kabhsenuf, the refresher of his
brethren, one of the four children of Horus, who had previously been his brothers from the
beginning in the astronomical mythology.
Horus
in one character is the Fisher. “Know ye what I know”, saith the manes, “the name
of him who fishes there, the great prince who sits at
the east of the sky?” (Naville, Rit.,
153B). “I know the name of the table on which he lays them (the fishes);
it
is the table of
Horus”.
In this character the Osiris saith, “I
shine like Horus. I govern the land, and I go down
to the land in the two great boats. I have come as a fisher” (Naville, ch. 153A). Horus
or Jesus in the Roman catacombs also comes as the fisher
who at the same time is portrayed as the bringer
of the grapes for the Uaka festival (Lundy, Monumental
Christianity,
fig. 54). The four as fishers for Horus are depicted
as the fishers in
the Ritual. They are spoken of as having been amongst
the earlier elemental powers called “the
ancestors of Ra”. Otherwise stated, they are four of the seven souls of Ra.
In fact, they are Hapi, Tuamutef, Kabhsenuf and Amsta,
now to be identified as the four children who
became the four fishers for Horus, and who are one with
the four fishers for Jesus in the canonical Gospels.
A vignette to the Book of the Dead (ch. 153A, pl. 55, Naville and
Renouf) shows the four fishers as four men pulling the
drag-net through the water in the act of fishing for
Horus. These are they who are described as fishers for
the great prince
who sits at the east of the sky (ch. 153B), and who is
said to mark them as his own
property.
Horus
was the prototypal fish, the same type of sacrifice
that is still eaten in the penitential meal to-day
as it was in On when Sebek-Horus was the Saviour as
the fish that brought
the food and water of [Page 861] the inundation. Horus as the fish preceded Horus as the fisher
when Sebek, the crocodile-headed god, was the typical great
fisher. It is said of the first two fishers, “These are the two hands of Horus which had become fishes”, that is as types
of Horus the fisher according to the mystery of Nekhen
(Rit., ch. 113). The followers of Horus as fishers (ch.
153A) are called “the fishermen who are fishing”. Thus the total group
who were the twelve as reapers in the harvest-field of
Amenta are also the twelve as the fishers. Hence the twelve
fishermen of the later legend. The two first fishes caught
for
Horus are then eaten at the sacramental meal. As it is
said (Rit., ch. 153A), the fishes are laid on the table
of Horus. They had been brought to him when the festival
was founded
by Ra; “they were brought to Horus and displayed before his face
at the feast of the 15th day of the month, when the fishes
were produced” (Rit., ch. 113).
In
the Ritual (ch. 97) there is a scene of the Seven
Fishers at the boat with Horus, which can be paralleled
in
the Gospel of John. The scene in John’s Gospel is post-resurrectional,
therefore not in the earth of time. As it is said, “This is now the third time that Jesus was
manifested to the disciples after that he was risen from the dead” (John XXI. 14). And that
which follows the resurrection is in spirit-world. Therefore
Jesus and the seven disciples in this scene are spirits
like the seven with Horus, which were the seven great
spirits of
Annu, four of whom became the first fishers for Horus
(Rit., chs. 97 and 153A). This view is corroborated by
the appearance
of Peter, “for he was naked”, and a naked man in
Sign-language means a spirit. Thus the seven with Jesus
at the boat are a form of the seven great spirits with
Horus at the bark in Annu, four of whom — the foremost
four — become the founders of the fold for the Good Shepherd, in
the same chapter of the Ritual but in another character.
In this character Horus had shepherded the flocks of
Ra,
his heavenly father, in the deserts of Amenta (Book of
Hades). In this character of the shepherd Horus of the
resurrection rose up from the sepulchre with a crook
instead of the
later lamb or kid upon his shoulder. And it is in this
character Horus chooses the first four of the seven great
spirits of Annu to become the founders of his fold as
well as his first four
fishers. In the Gospel Jesus likewise assumes the character
of the so-called good shepherd. Hence the injunctions
to Peter, and the sayings, “Feed my lambs”, “Tend my
sheep”, “Feed my sheep” (John XXI. 16-18).
According to Matthew, the four brethren first chosen by Jesus are Simon, Andrew, James
and John. It is noteworthy, however, that in the Johannine account the first four followers
of Jesus are Andrew and Peter, Phillip and Nathaniel. Moreover, Nathaniel was one of
those who were under the fig-tree aforetime with Jesus. There is no Zebedee, father of the
fishers, and there is no fishing in the opening chapter of John; that is, as supposed in the
life on earth. The fishers only appear in this Gospel after the resurrection of Jesus, which
takes us, as does the baptism, into the spirit-world of the mythos, where the seven fishers
answer to the other group of the seven in the boat with Horus.
The mysteries of Amenta show us Anup calling the world to
judgment in the character of the judge. He is the precursor
of [Page 862] Horus in the wilderness, and the announcer of the
kingdom that follows at the second coming. Under the title
of Ap-Uat he is the opener or guide of roads who “makes ready the way of the Lord”, and levels the path in the equinox.
In the Gospels the proclamation that the kingdom of heaven
is at hand was first made by John the baptizer and precursor
of Jesus. The cry of the coming kingdom immediately
at hand is then taken up by Jesus after the baptism in
which he has become the adult of thirty years, and the
co-type of Horus the anointed son of God the second born
who was
Horus in the spirit. Also in the Gospel of Nicodemus, John
the Baptist is the teacher in the earth of eternity. The
baptism and transformation of Jesus into the spirit symbolled
by the
dove was in the earth of eternity. The descent of the holy
spirit, as God the father, in authentication of the anointed
son was enacted in the earth of eternity, not in the world
of
time. According to the genuine mythos or gnosis which is
Egyptian, and we have no other criterion, the double advent
of Horus depended on his birth and rebirth, in the two
earths;
the birth of a human soul in matter and the rebirth of
an immortal in Amenta. The
second coming of Horus is the mystery of that second birth
in which the human soul is divinized from its two halves
as an enduring spirit or eternal entity. This transformation
follows death and burial, and therefore can only take place
in spirit-world. When it does
take place the second advent is accomplished as represented
both in the Ritual and the Egypto-gnostic writings. But
it is otherwise in the canonical Gospels, because in making
out a history solely human the concocters were limited
to the human life in the earth of
time. For example, in the Gospel according to John, when
Jesus is about to leave the disciples and is telling them
of the second advent, he says, “I have yet many things to say
unto you, but ye cannot bear them now” (ch. XVI. 12). These things that are to come, in
some indefinite future (which has not come yet), relate
to the nature of God the father. They constitute the mysteries
which are to be unfolded in the future at the second coming
of the son in the person of the judge, the avenger, the
harvester, the spirit-of-truth, the
comforter, the fulfiller who fulfils both in the Ritual
and in the gnostic Gospel. Jesus had hitherto taught in
parables. Now he says the hour cometh when he will tell
them “plainly of
the father” and speak to them no more in parables (XVI. 25). This is
at the second coming which had been already fulfilled in the Gospel of “Pistis Sophia” and in the Ritual of the
Resurrection. The Egypto-gnostic Jesus who, as the “little Iao” of “Pistis Sophia”, only
spoke in parables, and was not empowered to expound the
profounder mysteries of the fatherhood, is a form of the
child-Horus whom Plutarch called the “inarticulate discourse”.
At his second coming he unfolded the spiritual mysteries.
The chief of these was the mystery of mysteries, namely,
the mystery of “the
father in the likeness of a dove” (B.
1, 1). Nevertheless, the second advent, and the mysteries
pertaining thereto (according to the
genuine gnosis), do leak out in the canonical Gospels, however carefully disguised or
surreptitiously inserted. The gnostic manifestation of
the first mystery, namely, that of the father as a dove,
is made to the Gospel-Jesus at the time of his baptism,
in the life on
earth. The second [Page 863] coming is also illustrated in the scene of transfiguration
on the mount. Likewise in the resurrection when the risen
Christ has transformed into a spirit,
Luke notwithstanding, with power to impart the holy spirit
and share it with his followers (John XX. 22). Each of
these manifestations, with others belonging to the second
advent
of Horus in Amenta, are assigned to Jesus in the human
life in fulfilment of the history. In the Ritual the father,
as the holy spirit, calls from heaven to Horus (or Osiris)
the anointed
son, “Come thou to me”. This is Ra the bird-headed, whose likeness is then assumed
by Horus the beloved son. In the Gospel, the Father, as
the holy spirit, descended on Jesus
in the form of a dove, and in that guise “abode upon him”. The exigency of a human history
with only a single advent did not permit of the death and
resurrection of Jesus occurring at the time when the youth
of twelve years made his change into the adult of thirty
years.
Yet the baptism and ascension of Jesus from the water into
the opening heavens are identical with the Egypto-gnostic
resurrection. The Horus or Jesus of twelve years is the
mortal on this side of death. The Horus or Jesus of thirty
years is a spirit on the other side,
in spirit-world. The baptism of Jesus represents the resurrection
of Horus from the water. Hence Jesus in his baptism becomes
a spirit. He is led up from the water “of the spirit”,
“in the spirit”, or as a spirit into which he had made his transformation. When Sut put
out the eye of Horus, the darkness represented death. But,
in the Gospel, death, or the
transformation, is only represented at this point by the
baptism. If it had been actualized the history must have
ended there and then, which was not in accordance with the
Gospel
schema. Still, the “history” notwithstanding, Jesus does become a spirit in this scene
of transformation which belongs to the mysteries of Amenta.
Bird-headed beings are spirits,
not historical Jews. Only as a spirit could the foster-child of Seb, or Joseph, transform into
the son of Ra the holy spirit; and only in the earth of
eternity could the change occur in which the Virgin’s child became the father’s son by being born again of Nut the heavenly
mother, one of whose names was Meri. According to the gnosis,
the following are a few of the events that occur after the resurrection: the transformation of Jesus, the Virgin’s
child, into the beloved son of the father with the spirit
of God descending on him as a dove; the contests with Satan
in the spirit; the adoption of the four disciples in the
mount; Jesus
with the seven on board the bark; the founding of the fold;
the miracles of healing; giving sight to the blind; raising
the dead; casting out the devils; causing evil spirits
to enter the
swine; walking upon the water; founding the kingdom of
heaven on the four fishers, or disciples, and conferring
the holy spirit, after death, upon the twelve.
The
Gospel doctrine of the Holy Spirit is true enough,
according to the Egyptian wisdom, when properly applied,
but only as Egyptian is it to be understood. Certain
manifestations
of the holy spirit in the Gospels are strictly in keeping
with the mysteries of the Ritual or Book of the Dead.
In the words of John “the holy spirit was not given” at the time when
Jesus “was not yet glorified” (ch. VII. 39). The glorifying was by descent of the holy
spirit; the spirit that was given to Horus and by him to
the disciples in the mystery [Page 864] of Tattu
upon the resurrection-day when the God in heaven called
to the mummy-Osiris in Amenta “Come thou to me”, when the two halves of the soul were blended in the eternal
oneness, and human Horus, the soul in matter, was transformed
to rise again as Horus divinized.
This was in the resurrection after death, in baptismal
regeneration, or in the Christifying of the Osiris-mummy.
The
Ritual shows us how the apostles were established
on the same foundation, beginning with the two brothers,
who were followed by the four brethren, the cycle
being
completed
by the twelve in the fields of divine harvest. The four
as brothers of Horus had been figures in the astronomy.
The four as his children are figures in the eschatology;
the four who are “foremost among the spirits of Annu” with the aid of whom “the fold” was constructed for
him, as for one victorious against all “adversaries” (Rit., ch. 97). The two fours are thus
equated in the Gospels. The four brothers of Horus=the
four brothers of Jesus. Amsta, Hapi, Tuamutef, Kabhsenuf=James,
Joseph, Simon, Judas. The same four in the character
of his children with Horus=the four brethren, Simon,
Andrews, James and John, whom Jesus addresses as his
children (John XXXI. 5). At a later stage the followers
in the train
of Horus are the twelve who are his harvesters in the
cornfields of Amenta. “Pistis Sophia”
in agreement with the “Book
of Hades” shows us how the twelve as followers of Horus
were constituted a company that consisted at first of
seven to which the five were added in forming the group
of twelve. The disciples of Jesus likewise become the twelve
who reap
the harvest. “Then saith he unto his disciples, the harvest truly is plenteous
but the labourers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord
of the harvest that he send forth labourers
into his harvest. And he called unto him his twelve disciples” — who were previously but four
(Matt. IV. 18, 21) — “and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them
out, and to heal all manner of disease and all manner
of sickness”. At this point the names of the
twelve are for the first time given (Matt. X. 1-5). The
same words are uttered in Luke concerning the harvest
and its reapers, but now the number of disciples appointed
and
sent forth for the ingathering of harvest-home is seventy
or seventy-and-two — one for each
subdivision of the decans in the twelve signs, both the
seventy and seventy-two being identifiable astronomical
numbers.
The
twelve with Horus in Amenta are they who labour at
the harvest and collect the corn (otherwise the souls)
for Horus. When the harvest is ready “the bearers of sickles reap the
grain in their fields. Ra says to them, on earth as bearers
of sickles in the fields of Amenta”,
“Take your sickles, reap your grain” “Book
of Hades”, Records, vol. 10, 119). Here the
labourers who reap the harvest in Amenta are the object
of propitiatory offerings and of adoration on the earth,
as the twelve disciples of Horus, son of Ra, the heavenly
father.
And this was ages before the story was told of the twelve
fictitious harvesters in Galilee. Moreover, the Harvest is
identical with the Last Judgment. Atum-Ra says at the same
time,
“Guard the enemies, punish the wicked. Let them not escape
from your hands. Watch over the executions, according to
the orders you have received from the Founder, who has
marked you out to strike” — as executioners. So is it in the Gospels, where the harvest
is one [Page 865] with the judgment at the end of the world, or consummation
of the age.
As
before said, when the narratives in the canonical scriptures
had taken the place of the primitive drama, certain
mysteries of Amenta were made portable in parables,
and
thenceforth the Gospels repeat the same things in parables
and logoi that were represented dramatically in the
mysteries. The harvest-home and judgment-day, described
in the Gospels, which are to occur at some indefinite time
in the future on this earth, belong
to the Osirian mysteries of Amenta. The great judgment
at the last day supplies an illustration of the mystery
extant in parable. A first and second death occur,
likewise a first
and second resurrection in the mysteries of Amenta. The
first is the death which takes place on earth, and
the apparition of the manes in the nether-world constitutes
the first
resurrection from the dead. Then follows the great judgment
of the righteous and the wicked. Those found guilty
are doomed to suffer the second death. There is for
them no
other resurrection. Those who escape from the dread tribunal
uncondemned pass on to
the second resurrection as the spirits of the just
made perfect, called the glorified. These are the inheritors
of eternal life. Jesus says, “This is the will of my Father, that every one
that beholdeth the Son, and believeth on him, should have
eternal life, that I should raise him up at the last
day”, “and I will raise him up at the last day” (John VI. 40, 44). The pitiful
pretence of an historical Jew being the raiser up of the
dead at the last day is a miserable mockery of the actual
transaction in the mysteries of Amenta with Horus as the
resurrection
and the life. In these, the deceased is shown as Ani in
the hall of judgment. He has emerged from the earth-life
and risen in Amenta, but not yet from it. He must be judged in
the Maat or great hall before he rises from the dead as
one of the just made perfect for the life to come. If he
passes, sound of heart and pure in spirit, he will enter
the presence of
the great god. Ani succeeds and passes pure. His resurrection
from the dead and from Amenta, the world of the dead, is
assured. Horus the Son of God, the Intercessor, the
paraclete, now takes him by the hand as the raiser of the
dead to life and introducer of the risen Ani to his father.
In one scene the hair of Ani is black. The next shows him
kneeling
in presence of Osiris with his hair turned white. He has
passed in purity. He has been raised by Horus at the “last day” or at the end of the cycle when the dead were judged,
once every year or other period at the great gathering
of “all souls”. This took place “in
presence of the gods”, as one of the ten great mysteries described in the Ritual
(ch. 18) when “the glorious ones were rightly judged, and joy went its round
in Thinis”; when
judgment was passed upon those who were to be annihilated “on the highway of the
damned” ; when “the evil dead were cast out”, and the goats divided from the sheep. As
it is said —”when the associates of Sut arrive, and take the form of goats,
they are slain in presence of the gods so long as their
blood runneth down, and this is done according to
the judgment of those gods who are in Tattu”, the place of establishing the soul for ever,
from its two halves, as the double Horus, the divine avenger
of the suffering Osiris, who at his second coming was the
revealer of [Page 866] eternal justice. This culminating event,
which was the subject of so much Old Testament prophecy
that is reproduced in the New, is here fulfilled, according
to the knowledge of the wise men “which knew the times” and
who also “knew the law and the judgment” (Esther I. 13). The advent might be on the
millennial scale of Horus in the house of a thousand years
according to the cycle, but there was a Coming once a year
and an ending of the cycle, the age, or the world as it
was
called by the Christians every year. And it is on this one-year period derived from the solar
mythos that the second advent and the immediate ending of the world were ignorantly
based. The end of the world or the cycle of the annual
sun came once a year in the Egyptian mythos. The second
advent of Horus, like the first, was also annual. He came
in
the terror of his glory as avenger of his father; as the
great judge, as lord of the harvest with the glorious ones
for reapers who were the typical twelve in number, and
as the fulfiller
of the heavenly kingdom in which he reigned according to
the mythos for one year, whether as Horus the shoot, the
fish, the fisherman, or the harvester. The gnostic Christ
was
likewise known to be the ruler for one year.
At
the festival of Ha-ka-er-a, or “Come thou to me”, the blessed ones were welcomed by
Horus to the kingdom which had been prepared from the foundation
of the world, or the earlier cycle of time, in the
Kamite astro-mythology, if anywhere on earth, but which
preparation and founding were repeated every year as a
mode of the mysteries in Amenta.
These mysteries were extant, and periodically performed
some thousands of years ago. So ancient is some of
the imagery in the Maat, that when Ani passes pure,
the crown of
glory placed upon his head to be worn in heaven is a form
of the top-knot, which is still
assumed at puberty by the Kaffirs and other African black
races. But this great judgment, in common with the
other events that were fulfilled at the second advent,
still remains the
subject of prophecy in the Hebrew and Christian scriptures.
In the Gospel according to Matthew the last judgment
is to take place at the veritable ending of the world
(Matt. XXV.
31-46). “When the Son of Man shall come in his glory, and all the
angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his
glory, and before him shall be gathered all the nations,
and
he shall separate them, as the shepherd parteth the sheep
from the goats; and he shall set the sheep on the right
hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say
unto
them on his right hand, Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit
the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world: for I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was
thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger and ye
took me in: naked and ye clothed
me, sick and ye visited me. Then shall he say unto them
on the left hand, Depart from me ye cursed, into the eternal
fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels”. In the
original, the devil and his angels are Sut and his Sami,
and the goats on the left hand are also the representatives
of Sut. Nevertheless, the two judgments of the Ritual and
in the
gospel are fundamentally the same; there was but one origin
and one meaning for both. The great judgment in the hall
of righteousness which remained the subject of Hebrew
prophecy gone dateless was an annual occurrence in the [Page 867] Kamite mysteries. In this
the Osiris pleads: “I have done that which man prescribeth and that which pleaseth
the gods. I have propitiated the god with that which he
loveth. I have given bread to the hungry,
water to the thirsty, clothes to the naked, a boat to the
shipwrecked. I have made oblations to the gods and funeral
offerings to the departed: deliver me therefore; protect
me
therefore: and report not against me in presence of the
great God. I am one whose mouth is pure, and whose hands
are pure, to whom it is said by those who look upon him,
Come, come in peace” (Ritual, ch. 125, Renouf).
The
great judgment was periodic in Amenta at the end
of a cycle, which might be a year, a generation, or,
as
it was also exoterically figured, at the end of the
world. The uninitiated,
who had but an outside view, mistook it for the actual
and immediate ending of the world. “The harvest is the end of the world” (Matt. XIII. 39). “The end of all things is at hand” (1
Peter IV. 7). “It is the last hour” (1 John II. 18). “The kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt.
III. 2; IV. 17; X. 7). This was according to the literalization
of the Illiterate. Paul is the only writer or speaker
in the New Testament who knew better. He warns his followers
amongst
the Thessalonians against believing this teaching of
the uninitiated. He says: “We beseech
you, brethren, touching the coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and our gathering together unto him; to the end
that ye
be not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled,
either by spirit or by word, or by Epistle as from us (i.e., by a forged “Epistle of Paul”;),
as that the day of the Lord is (now) present: let no
man beguile you in any wise” (2 Thess.
II. 1, 3). He was the only one who knew the esoteric
nature of this end of the aeon, and the
coming of Christ or Horus, the anointed, the Messiah
in Israel, or the Jesus who was Iu the Su of Atum, whom
he calls the second Adam=Atum, and who had been to him
the
pre-Christian Christ, the spiritual rock, from which
the people drank the water of life whilst in the wilderness.
When Tertullian denounced Paul as “The Apostle of the Heretics” he
meant the Egypto-gnostics. Paul was epopt and perfect
amongst those who knew that the historic version was
a lying delusion. This we hold to have been aimed at
in his Second
Epistle to the Thessalonians”, when he says of his opponents, the fleshifiers of the Christ,
“for this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that
they should believe a lie”.
The
mould of the mythos being solar, once every year the
heir of Ra assumed his sovereignty as Horus of the
kingly countenance, whose rule was for one year. Every
year
Osiris, the great green one in vegetation, died to rise
again in the fruits of the earth. Every year in the
solar drama he was buried in Amenta to make the road
that united the two
earths in one, for establishing the coming kingdom on earth
as it was in heaven. Every year the prophecy was fulfilled
in natural phenomena, and every year the coming kingdom
came. Every year was celebrated this foundation of the
world that was laid and relaid by
the buried body of the god; this union of the double earth
in Tanen, at the equinox, this resurrection of the
soul that supplied the bread of life, this completion
of the cycle by the
sun that rose and travelled on the eternal round as representative
of the author of eternity. A glimpse of this annual
coming is permitted when the Christ is made to say, “Ye shall not
have gone through the cities of [Page 868] Israel till the son of man be come” (Matt. X. 23).
“There be some of them that stand here which shall in no wise
taste of death till they see the son of man coming in his
kingdom” (Matt. XVI. 28). Such prophecy is in accordance
with the true mythos, but for ever fatal to the falsely-founded
history.
THE LAST SUPPER: THE CRUCIFIXION AND THE RESURRECTION
As
the legend is related by Plutarch, the death of Osiris
was preceded by his betrayal, and the betrayal, which
was the work of his twin brother, Sut, took place
in the
banqueting-room. Sut, having framed a curious ark just
the size of Osiris’s body, brought
it to a certain banquet. As this was on the last night
of Osiris’s life or reign, and on the last
night of the year, the meal may fairly be called the Last Supper (Of Isis and Osiris, 13).
Now this mystery of the Last Supper can be traced in
the Ritual as the first of a series acted in Amenta.
Sut and
his associates had renewed the assault upon Osiris on
the night
of laying the evening provisions upon the altar, called
the night of the battle in which the powers of drought
and darkness were defeated and extinguished. The coffin
of Osiris is
the earth of Amenta. Dawn upon the coffin was the resurrection;
and this provender is imaged as “the dawn upon the coffin of Osiris”, which shows that the evening meal, or
eucharist, was eaten in celebration of the resurrection
and the transubstantiation of the body into spirit. The
night of laying provisions on the altar is mentioned
twice: once when
Osiris is in the coffin, provided by Sut and his associates,
the Sebau, who entrapped him in the ark. The second mention
follows the erection of the Tat-sign which denoted the
resurrection; hence the “dawn upon the coffin of Osiris”, which is equivalent to the
resurrection morn. The resurrection on the third day
originated in lunar phenomena. Twenty-eight days was
the length of
a moon, and this is no doubt the source of the
statement that Osiris was in his eight-and-twentieth
year at the time of his betrayal. The moon is invisible
during
two nights, which completed the luni-solar month of thirty
days.
The
assault upon Osiris the Good Being made by Sut was
periodically renewed. This has just occurred when
the first of the ten mysteries is enacted (Rit., ch.
18).
The scene is in
the house of Annu (Heliopolis), where Osiris lay buried
and Horus was reborn. The triumph of Osiris over
his adversaries is in the resurrection following the
dramatized
death of the
inviolate god. This is called the night of the battle,
when there befell the defeat of the Sebau and the
extinction of the adversaries of Osiris. It is also
described
as “the night of
provisioning the altar”, otherwise stated “the night of the Last Supper”, when “the calf of the
sacrificial herd” was eaten at “the mortuary meal”, which represented the body and blood
of Osiris, “the bull of eternity” (Rit., ch. 1).
The second mystery of the ten is solemnized upon the night
when the Tat-pillar was set up in Tattu, or when Osiris
in his resurrection [Page 869] was raised up again as a type of the
eternal. The third mystery is on the night of the things
that were laid upon the altar in Sekhem which imaged
the altar and the offering in one. This was the circle
of Horus in the
dark, the sufferer made blind by Sut, the victim in the
Tat who was the prototype of Jesus on the cross, and
representative of the god in matter.
As we have seen, a great Memphian festival, answering to
the Christmas-tide of later times, was periodically solemnized
at the temple of Medinet Habu in the last decade of the
month Choiak (from December 20th to 30th), which lasted
for ten days. One day, the 26th
of the month=December 24th, was kept as the feast of
Sekari, the god who rose again from the mummy, and this
was the principal feast-day of the ten. In all likelihood
the whole
ten mysteries were performed during the ten days of the
festival that was celebrated at Memphis (Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, Eng. translation, pp. 277-9). Prominent among these was
the feast of the erection or re-erection of the Tat-pillar
of stability, which was an image of Ptah-Sekari, the
coffined one who rose again, and who in the later religion
becomes
Osiris-Sekari, “Lord of resurrections, whose birth is from the house of death”. The
resurrection of Osiris, which, like other doctrines,
was based on the realities of nature, would be appropriately
celebrated in the winter solstice. At that time the powers
of
darkness, drought, decay and death, now personalized
in Sut, were dominant, as was shown in the lessening
water and the waning light of the enfeebled sun. The
tat-type of
stability was temporarily overthrown, by the adversary
of Osiris and his co-conspirators, the Sebau. Here begins
the great drama of the Osirian mysteries, in ten acts,
which is outlined
in the Ritual. The putting of Osiris to death — so far as a god could suffer — was followed by
the funeral, and the burial by the resurrection. The
opening chapters of the Ritual, called the Coming forth
to day, are said to contain “the words which bring about the resurrection
and the glory”, also the words to be recited on the day of burial that
confer the power of coming forth from the death on earth,
and
of entering into the new life of the manes in
Amenta. Horus is described as covering Tesh-Tesh (a title
of the mutilated Osiris); as opening the life-fountains
of the god whose heart is motionless, and as closing
the
entrance to the hidden things in Rusta (ch. 1, 18-20).
The two divine sisters are present as mourners over
their brother in the tomb. They are called the mourners
who weep for
Osiris in Rekhet (line 15, 16). The mysteries thus commence
with the burial of Osiris in Amenta — as a mummy. The mummy-making that was first applied to preserving
the bones and body of the human being had been afterwards
applied to the god or sun of life in
matter, imaged as the typical mummy of Osiris that was
buried to await the resurrection in and afterwards from
Amenta. In both phases it is Osiris, as the god in matter,
who is
represented in the nether-earth. And the re-arising
of the human soul and its blending with the eternal spirit
were dramatically rendered in the mysteries as the resurrection
of the
Osiris or the soul of mortal Horus re-arisen in Amenta as
the son of Ra.
In the Gospels, Judas the brother of Jesus in one character,
elsewhere called the familiar friend, is the betrayer
on the night of the last [Page 870] supper, and Judas “the son of
perdition” answers to Sut the twin-brother of Osiris (in the later
Egyptian mythos), who was his betrayer at the last supper
called the messiu or evening meal that was eaten on the
last
night of the Old Year, or the reign of Osiris. The twelve
disciples only are present at the last supper in the Gospels.
In the betrayal of Osiris by Sut the number present in
the
banqueting-hall is seventy-two. These were officers who
had been appointed by Osiris. The number shows they represent
the seventy-two duo-decans as rulers in the
planisphere, but the twelve have been chosen to sit at
supper with the doomed victim in the Gospels instead of
the seventy-two who were also appointed by the Lord, and
are
dimly apparent in their astronomical guise, as the seventy-two
(or seventy) who are present in the scene where Jesus triumphs
over Satan as he falls like lightning from his place in
heaven (Luke X. 17).
One
of the most striking of the various episodes in the
Gospel narrative is that scene at the Last Supper in
which Jesus washes the feet of the disciples, compared
with “the washing”
that is performed by the Great One in the Ritual. In the
Gospel Judas is waiting to betray his master. Jesus says
to the betrayer, “That
thou doest, do quickly”. Now it should be
borne in mind that the Ritual, as it comes to us, consists
to a large extent of allusions to the matter that was made
out more fully in performing the drama of the mysteries.
Washing
the feet was one of the mysteries pertaining to the funeral
of Osiris, when the feet of the disciples or followers
of Horus were washed. It was one of the funeral ceremonies.
As it
is said in the Ritual (ch. 172), “Thou washest thy feet in silver basins made by the skilful
artificer Ptah-Sekari”. This was preparatory to the funeral feast, as is shown
by the context (ch. 172). In the Gospel (John XIII.) the
funeral
feast becomes the “Last Supper” when
Jesus “riseth from supper and layeth aside his garments; and he
took a towel and girded himself. Then he poureth water
into a basin and began to wash the disciples feet”. And
here is a passage of three lines, called the chapter by
which the person is not devoured by the serpent in Amenta. “O Shu, here is Tattu, and conversely, under the hair of Hathor.
They scent Osiris. Here is the one who is to devour me.
They wait apart. The serpent Seksek passeth over me. Here
are wormwood bruised and reeds. Osiris is he who prayeth
that he may be buried. The eyes of the great one are
bent down, and he doeth for thee
the work of washing, marking out what is conformable to law and balancing the issues”
(Rit., ch. 35, Renouf). This brief excerpt contains the
situation and character of the great one, who with eyes
bent down in his humility does “the
work of washing”, and explains why
this ceremony has to be performed by him in person. The “washer” is he who is in
presence of the one who waits to betray him, devour him,
or compass his destruction, and he beseeches a speedy burial.
Osiris in this scene is a form of the typical “lowly one” who
had been in type as such for ages previously. But the most
arresting fact of all is hidden in the words “O Shu, here is Tattu (the place of re-establishing) under
the wig (or hair) of Hatho”, the goddess of dawn, one of whose names is Meri. And it
is here, beneath the hair of Hathor-Meri, they perfume
and anoint Osiris for his burial. This when written out
as
“history” [Page 871] contains the anointing and perfuming of the feet of Jesus
by Mary, who wiped them with her hair (Luke VII. 38). The
two bathings of the feet are separate items
in the Gospels, whereas both occur in this one short chapter
of the Ritual in which Osiris is anointed for his burial,
and at the same time he does for others the work of washing
and
purifying, “marking out what is conformable to law and balancing the
issues”.
Osiris
also is “he who prayeth that he may be buried”, and Jesus, “knowing that his hour
has come”, says to Judas the betrayer, “That thou doest, do quickly”. And later, “Friend,
do that for which thou art come” (Matt. XXVI. 50), which is the equivalent of Osiris praying
that he may be buried. The wormwood bruised, or crushed,
and the reeds are utilized in the crucifixion for furnishing
the bitter drink, which was offered to the victim with
a
sponge placed upon a reed. A reed was also put in his
right hand. These things were portrayed in the drama
of Amenta.
They were acted in the mysteries and explained by the
mystery-teachers. The Osiris passes through the same scenes and makes continual
allusion to the sufferings of Osiris (or Horus) his great
forerunner, and finally the drama was staged on earth
and reproduced as history in the Gospels. That is the
one final and
sufficient explanation of episode after episode belonging
to the mysteries of Amenta reproduced according to the
canon as veritable Gospel history.
The scene in Gethsemane may be compared with the scene in
Pa, where Horus suffered
his agony and bloody sweat when wounded by the black boar Sut.
Pa was an ancient name of Sesennu, a locality in
the lunar mythos, which was also called Khemen, later
Smen, a word signifying number eight, applied to the enclosure
of the eight; and the
suffering of the wounded Horus in Am-Smen is, as now suggested,
the Osirian original of Jesus bleeding in Gethsemane.
Pa is not called “a garden”, but it is described as a “place
of repose” for Horus that was given to him by his father for his place
of rest. Ra says, “I
have given Pa to Horus as the place of his repose. Let
him prosper”. The story is told in
“the chapter of knowing the powers of Pa” (Rit., ch. 112). The question is asked, “Know ye
why Pa hath been given to Horus?” The answer is, It was Ra who gave it to him in amends
of the blindness in his eye, in consequence of what Ra
said to Horus: “Let me look at what
is happening in thine eye to-day”, and he looked at it. Ra said to Horus, “Pray, look at
that black swine”. He looked, and a grievous mishap befell his eye. Horus
said to Ra, “Lo,
mine eye is as though Sut had made a wound in it”. And wrath devoured his heart. Then
Ra said to the gods, “Let him be laid upon his bed that he may recover”. “It was Sut who
had taken the form of a black swine, and he wrought the
wound which was made in the eye of Horus. And Ra said to
the gods, “The swine is an abomination to Horus; may he get
well” And the swine became an abomination to Horus. (Rit., ch.
112, Renouf.) It was in Pa that Horus was keeping his watch
for Ra by night when the grievous mishap befell his eye.
He was watching by command of Ra, who had said to Horus, “Keep your eye on the black
pig”. The eye was lunar, with which Horus kept the watch for
Ra; and Sut in the form of the black boar of darkness pierced [Page 872] the eye of Horus with his tusk, the moon being the
eye of Horus as the watcher by night for Ra. Sut on whom
he kept the watch transformed himself into a black boar,
and wounded Horus in the eye whilst he was watching on
behalf
of Ra as his nocturnal eye in the darkness. Jesus in the
Gospels keeps the watch by night in Gethsemane, as is shown
by the disciples failing to keep it. The watch by Horus
was
necessitated on account of Sut, who is the typical betrayer
in the Kamite mythos, as Judas is in the Christian version.
Sut knew the place in the original rendering and sought
out
Horus there when he caused the agony and bloody sweat by
mutilating him. “Now Judas
also which betrayed him knew the place” (to which Jesus “often restored’‘ with his
disciples) and there the betrayer seeks him out to betray
him, not in the form of a black boar that put out the eye
which was the light of the world, but as a dark-hearted
person
befitting the supposed historical nature of the narrative.
The scene of the drowsy watchers in Gethsemane is apparently
derived from a scene in the mysteries. There is a reference
in the Ritual (ch. 89) to “those undrowsy watchers who keep watch in Annu”. In the
Gospels Jesus asks his followers to watch with him in the
garden, and on both occasions he found them sleeping. The
moral is pointed by the “undrowsy watchers in Annu” being
turned into the drowsy watchers who slept in Gethsemane,
and who failed to keep the watch. “I know the powers in Pa”, says the speaker; “they are Horus, Amsta and Hapi”.
That is, Horus and the “two
brothers”, who correspond to the two brethren James and
John, the sons of Zebedee, in the Gospels, and who are
here the two with Jesus in the garden. The conversation
betwixt Horus the son and Ra the father, the watching by
night,
and the bloody sweat are followed by the glorification
of Horus. Ra gives back the eye, the sight of which was
restored in the new moon. In the Gospel (John XVII.) this
glorification
of Horus as the son of the father — Horus, who had previously been the son of the mother, Har-si-Hesi only — is anticipated and described as about to occur when the
torment and the trial are over. “These things spake Jesus; and lifting up his eyes to heaven,
he said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy son, that
thy son may glorify thee; even as thou gavest
him authority over all flesh” — that was in the character of Horus the mortal — “Now, O
Father, glorify me with thine own self” — in the character of Horus divinized or glorified. The
temporary triumph of the treacherous Sut (the power
of darkness) is acknowledged by Jesus when Judas betrays
him with a kiss and he succumbs. “This”, he says to his captors,
“this is your hour, and the power of darkness (Sut). And they
seized him” (Luke XXII. 53,
54). But when the associates of Sut saw the double-crown
of Horus on his forehead they fell to the ground upon their
faces (Rit., ch. 134, 11). And when the associates of
Judas=Sut the betrayer, came to take “Jesus of Nazareth”, and he said “I am!” (not I am
he!) “They went backward and fell to the ground”. Scene for scene, they are the same. One
of the titles of Horus is “Lord of the Crown” (ch. 141, 9), which possibly led to Jesus being
crowned “King of the Jews”. In this scene the title of “Jesus of Nazareth” has the same
effect on the associates of Judas that the [Page 873] assuming of his crown by Horus had upon
the associates of Sut when it caused them to fall on their
faces before him. The crowning of Jesus on the cross is
as Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. The crown of triumph
is
assigned to Horus by his father Atum, and all the adversaries
of the Good Being fall on their faces at the sight of it
(Rit., ch. 19).
The
scene in the garden of Gethsemane, and the cry to
the father from the sufferer on the cross are very
pitiful — the essence of the tragedy working most subtly on account
of the supplication that was all in vain, which makes
all the more profound appeal to human
sympathy. In the Egyptian representation there is no
such cruel desertion by the father of his suffering
son in his agony of great darkness. It is far otherwise
in the Ritual. When
Horus suffers his agony in the darkness, after being
pierced and made blind by Sut, Ra, the father-God,
is with him to comfort and sustain him. He tenderly
examines the bleeding
wound and soothes him in his great affliction. Ra charges
his angels concerning Horus, or bids the gods to look
to his safety and see to his welfare. Ra said to the
gods, “Let him be
laid upon his couch that he may recover”. He also gives the eye of Horus fire to protect
him, and consume the black boar of darkness. There is
no sightless sufferer groping helplessly with empty hands
outstretched and left unclasped in the dark void of death;
no vain and unavailing cry of the forsaken son that stuns
the brain and scars the human
conscience, and is of itself sufficient to empty the
Christian
heaven of all fatherhood, and ought to be sufficient
to empty earth of all faith in such a father.
According
to the synoptists, Jesus did not carry his own cross
to the place of execution; it was borne thither by
one Simon of Cyrene. This is denied in the Gospel
attributed to
John, who declares that Jesus went out from the Judgment
Hall “bearing the cross for
himself”. John is generally truest to the Egyptian original, and
here the figure of Jesus bearing his own cross is equivalent
to the figure of Ptah-Sekari or Osiris-Tat. The Tat of
a
fourfold foundation was the prototype of the cross, and
the victim extended or standing with arms akimbo is equivalent
to the victim stretched upon the cross of suffering.
Sekari
was the sufferer in, or on, or as the Tat, and Osiris
was raised in, or as the Tat where Jesus carries the
cross. The scourging of Jesus previous to his being crucified
has never
been explained. According to the record he was not condemned
to both modes of punishment. It is probably a detail
derived from the mysteries of Osiris-Sekari, Jesus
scourged at the pillar being an image of Osiris or Ptah
as the suffering Sekari in or on the Tat, the pillar
with arms, that was superseded by the cross in the Christian
iconography. In the Egyptian drama of the passion Horus
was blinded by Sut and his
accomplices, in suffering his change from being the human
Horus to becoming Horus in spirit. The incident that
is almost omitted from the
Gospel account was preserved in the
mysteries. It is a common subject in the passion-play
and in religious pictures for the Christ to be blindfolded
and brutally buffeted by the soldiers before he is crucified.
This occurs
in the Townley mysteries and in the Coventry mysteries,
and is referred to in the “Legends
of the holy rood” (pp. 178, 179, E. E. Text Society). [Page 874] Christ blindfolded to be made
a mockery of suggests a likeness of Horus without sight
in An-arar-ef, the region of the blind. In one representation
Horus has a bandage over his eyes, and the grotesque
image of the humorous Bes appears to introduce a comic
element
into the tragedy of the blind
sufferer. The blinding, buffeting and scourging, practiced
in the mysteries, as in passing through fire and water,
was evidently continued and extended in the sports and
pastimes.
Still, the blindfolding of the victim for the buffeting
is implied in the Gospel according to Matthew. “Then did they spit in his face and buffet him; and some smote
him with the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto
us, thou Christ: who is he that struck thee?” (Matt. XXVI. 68).
It
was a common popular tradition that the Christ was
of a red complexion, like the child or calf which
represented the little red sun of winter and also the
Virgin’s infant in its more
mystical character. Moreover, there is a tradition of
a crucified child-Christ who was coloured red like “the calf in the paintings”. Among “the portraits of God the son” Didron
cites one in a manuscript of the fourteenth century which
answers to the red Christ as a co-type of the red calf.
The manuscript “contains a miniature of the priest Eleazar
sacrificing a red cow”, and “opposite to this miniature is one of Christ on the cross”. “Jesus
is entirely naked, and the colour of his skin is red;
he is human, poor and ugly”. The red
Christ, equivalent to the red Horus, is here identified
with the red cow and therefore with the red calf of the
Ritual, which was a symbol of the little red sufferer,
the “afflicted one” in
the winter solstice. In some of the mystery-plays the
Christ wore a close-fitting, flesh-coloured garment,
through which the nails were driven into the wood of
the cross.
The resurrection robe was always red. Satan wants to
know who this man in the “red coat”
may be. And when Horus rises again, in the character of
the avenger, it is as the “red
god”.
The manes thus addresses him, “O
fearsome one, who art over the two earths; Red God, who
orderest the block of execution!” (Rit., ch. 17, Renouf). Jesus likewise appears to have
been represented as the red God, or the god in red. For “they stripped him and put on him
a scarlet robe” (Matt. XXVII. 28). A papyrus reed was the throne and sceptre
of Horus, the sign of his sovereignty. In the pictures
he is supported by the reed, and one of his titles is
“Horus on his papyrus” (Rit., ch. 112, Renouf). The reed also has been turned to
historic account in making a mockery-king of Jesus. “And they plaited a crown of thorns and put
it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand; and they
kneeled down before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, king
of the Jews! and they spat upon him, and took the reed and
smote him on the head” (Matt. XXVII. 27, 29, 30). Jesus is posed in another form
of the Osirian sacrificial victim. One meaning of the
word “sekari” is the silent. This is the typical
victim that opened not his mouth, as the inarticulate
Horus. So, having been assigned the character of the
silent one before Pilate, “Jesus no more answered anything”.
It is possible that the crown of thorns placed upon the head
of the crucified was derived from the thorn-bush of Unbu,
the solar god, especially if we take it in connection
with the
papyrus reed, another [Page 875] type of Horus, And they plaited a crown of thorns and put
it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand” (Matt. XXVII. 29). The god and the branch,
which is a bush of flowering thorn, are identified, the
one with the other, under the name of Unbu, and the god
in the Unbu-thorn is equivalent to the crucified in the
crown of thorn.
Moreover, Unbu, the branch, was a title of the Egyptian
Jesus. “I am Unbu of An-arar-ef,
the flower in the abode of occultation” or eclipse (Rit., ch. 71). And if Horus was not figured
on a cross with the Unbu-thorn upon his head, as the crown
was afterwards made out, he is the sacrificial victim in
the place of utter darkness or sightlessness. Horus in
An-arar-ef
is Horus, Lord of Sekhem — Horus in the dark. He is also “Unbu”, that is, Horus in the
thorn-bush. Thus the Unbu-thorn was typical of the god,
who was personified as Unbu by name, and who is Unbu as
Horus the sufferer in the dark, equivalent to and the prototype
of the victim on the cross as wearer of the crown of thorn.
It is also possible that Pilate’s
question, “What is truth?” may now be answered for the first time. Jesus says, “I come into
the world that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone
that is of the truth heareth my voice” (John XVIII. 37, 38). And, in his second character, Horus
the king, Horus the anointed and beloved son, not only
came into the world as testifier to the truth, he was also
given the title of Har-Makheru, the name of the Word that
was made truth by the doing of
it in his death and resurrection, and the demonstration
of a life hereafter at his second coming.
The
typical darkness at the time of the crucifixion might
be nocturnal, or annual, according to the mythos.
When Atum, god of the evening sun, is setting from
the land
of life, at the
point of equinox, with his hands drooping, which is equivalent
to the victim who was extended on the cross, a great
darkness overspread the earth, and Nut, the mother,
is said
to be obscured as she receives the dying deity in her
supporting arms. The figure is the same, whether the
scene be
on the cross or at the crossing (Rit., ch. 15). Still
more
express is the darkness spoken of in the Egyptian faith,
or gospel (ch. 17), which contains the kernel of
the credo. Here we learn that “the darkness is of Sekari”. Sekari is a title of
Osiris as the mutilated and dismembered god. It is explained
that this darkness of Sekari, the god who is pierced,
wounded, cut in pieces, is caused by Sut “the slayer”, who has
“terrified by prostrating”. Sekari is Osiris in the sekru, or coffin; and to be in
the coffin, or in the cruciform figure of the mummy, has
the
same meaning (with a change of type) as
if the divine victim might be embodied in the Tat, or
extended on the cross. The darkness of sekari was in the
coffin; the
darkness of Jesus is on the cross.
It
is observable that the sixth division of the Tuat in
Amenta, corresponding to the sixth hour of the night,
has no representation of Ra the solar god, and in his
absence naturally
there was darkness. But the three hours’ darkness that was over all the earth at the time
of the crucifixion has no witness in the world to its being
an historic event. In the mythical representation it was
natural enough. As the night began at six o’clock, the sixth hour
according to that reckoning was midnight, and from twelve
to three there was dense darkness. This was then applied
to the dying sufferer in the eschatology, and [Page 876] there
was darkness for three hours in the mysteries. The great
darkness is described in the Ritual as the shutting up
of Seb and Nut, or heaven and earth, and the Resurrection
as the
rending asunder. The manes saith, “I am Osiris, who shut up his father and his mother
when (or whilst) the great slaughter took place. I am Horus,
the eldest of Ra, as he riseth. I am Anup on the day of
rending asunder” (Rit., ch. 69, Renouf).
In
the coming forth from the cavern the risen one exclaims, “Let the two doors of earth be
opened to me: let the bolts of Seb open to me: and let
the first mansion be opened to me, that he may behold me who hath kept guard over me, and let him enclose me who hath
wound his arms about me, and hath fastened his arms around
me in the earth” (ch. 68).
The one who had held him fast with his arms about him in
the earth, and who was the keeper of the dead on earth,
is Seb; hence it is he who kept guard over the body
that was
buried in the earth. The part of Seb is also assigned
to Joseph of Arimathea, who took the body when it was
embalmed with a hundred pounds of myrrh and aloes,
and made a
mummy of, and laid it in his own tomb. The tomb of Seb,
the earth (John XIX. 38-41), becomes the garden of
Joseph; the “bolts of Seb” are replaced by the great stone that
Joseph rolls against the door of the sepulchre (Matt. XXVII.
60), and he who kept guard over the mummy-Osiris in
the sepulchre is represented by the guard who watches
over the
tomb in the history. “Pilate said unto them, Ye have a guard, go your way, make
it sure as ye can. So they went and made the sepulchre
sure, sealing the stone, the guard being with
them” (Matt. XXVII. 66). The guard that is set to keep watch and
ward at the sepulchre may be compared with the “wardens of the passages”, who are “attendant upon Osiris” in the
tomb. These are the powers that safeguard the body or mummy
of Osiris and keep off the forces of his adversaries. The
Passages are those which lead to the outlet of Rusta in
the
resurrection (Rit., ch. 17). In the chapter by which one
arriveth at Rusta, the deceased has risen again. He says, “I am he who is born in Rusta. Glory is given to me by those
who are in their mummied forms in Pa, at the sanctuary
of Osiris, whom the guards receive at Rusta
when they conduct (the) Osiris through the demesnes of
Osiris”. In this scene of the
resurrection the deceased comes forth triumphant as Osiris
risen (ch. 117). The dead are there in mummied forms, and
these are received by the guards as they rise and reach
the
place of egress in Rusta. In the Gospel according to Matthew
a watch was set upon the sepulchre; the guard is spoken
of as “the centurion, and they that were with him watching
Jesus” (Matt. XXVII. 54). These were watching when the graves were
opened and the dead
“in their mummied forms” were raised to come forth from the tomb. As nothing occurs
in the Gospel except by miracle, the graves are opened by
an earthquake for the passages
to be made, which passages were very ancient in the geography
and pictures of the Egyptian nether-world. The guards, or
soldiers, in attendance on Jesus are four in number.
At least it is said that they took the garments of the
dead body and “made four parts, to
every soldier a part” (John XIX. 23). These guards correspond to the four guardians
of the coffin Hapi, Tuamutef, Kabhsenuf and Amsu, who watch
by the sarcophagus [Page 877] of the
dead Osiris, one at each of its four corners. In a German
passion-play the four are invincible knights named Dietrich,
Hildebrant, Isengrim, and Laurein.
At the time of the death upon the cross there is a resurrection
which is not the resurrection.
This is a general rising of the Manes, not the resurrection
of the Christ. “And behold the veil
of the sanctuary was rent in twain from the top to the
bottom: and the rocks were rent and the tombs were
opened: and many bodies of the saints that had fallen
asleep were
raised”.In short, a general rising must have preceded the personal
resurrection of Jesus on the third day after the crucifixion.
It is added, however, that the manes who had already
risen came forth “out of the tombs after his resurrection and” appeared unto many”.
Therefore they stayed in the open tombs a day or two longer
in order that he might have the precedence. When Horus
rises as a spirit, the Lord of Mehurit, the risen one,
is
represented by a hawk, and he says, “I
am the hawk in the tabernacle, and I pierce through the
veil”, or, in another lection, through that which is upon the
veil. To pierce through the veil of the sanctuary is equivalent
to rending the veil of the temple. The hawk is a type of
the sun-god in the solar mythos and of the spirit in the
eschatology. Thus the veil was
pierced or rent asunder when Horus rose in the shape of
a divine hawk to become the Lord of heaven. In the Gospel
(Matt. XXVII. 51), at the moment when Jesus “yielded up his
spirit”, it is said, “and behold the veil of the sanctuary was rent in twain from
top to bottom: and the earth did quake: and the rocks were
rent: and the tombs were opened”, and, in
brief, this was what the Ritual terms “the day of rending asunder”. when the rocks of the
Tser hill were opened, which is the day of resurrection
in the mysteries of Amenta. The death of Osiris was followed
by the saturnalia of Sut, in a reign of misrule and lawlessness
which lasted during the five black days or dies non of the Egyptian calendar when
everything was turned topsy-turvy — a saturnalia, which to all appearance, is yet celebrated
in Upper Egypt (Frazer, Golden Bough, I, p. 231). The mutilation of Osiris in his coffin, the
stripping of his corpse and tearing it asunder by Sut,
who scattered it piecemeal, is represented by the stripping
of the dead body of Jesus whilst it still hung upon the
cross,
and parting the garments amongst the spoilers. In John’s account the crucifixion takes
place at the time of the Passover, and the victim of sacrifice
in human form is substituted for, and identified with,
the Paschal lamb. But, as this version further shows, the
death
assigned is in keeping with that of the non-human victim.
Not a bone of the sufferer was to be broken. This is supposed
to be in fulfilment of prophecy. It is said by the Psalmist
(XXXIV. 20), “He keepeth all his bones; not one of them is broken”. But this was in strict
accordance with the law of totemic tabu. No matter what
the type, from bear to lamb, no bone of the sacrificial
victim was ever permitted to be broken; and the only change
was in
the substitution of the human type for the animal, which
had been made already when human Horus became the type
of sacrifice instead of the calf or lamb. When the Australian
natives sacrificed their little bear, not a bone of it
was ever broken; when the Iroquois
sacrificed the white dog, not a bone was broken. This was
a common [Page 878] custom, on
account of the resurrection, as conceived by the primitive
races, and the same is applied to Osiris. Every bone of
the skeleton was to remain intact as a basis for the future
building.
After the murder and mutilation of Osiris in Sekhem, the
judgment is executed on the conspirators in the mystery
of ploughing the earth on the night of fertilizing the
soil with
the blood of the betrayer Sut and his associates. This
is done before the great divine chiefs in Tattu! In the
Gospels (Matt. XXVII. 6) the chief priests take the place
of the divine chiefs
in the mystery of ploughing the earth and fertilizing or
manuring it with the blood of the wicked: they buy the
potter’s field, and this was called Aceldama, the field of blood.
The field of blood here bought with the price paid for
the betrayal takes the place of the field
that is fertilized with blood in the Ritual. In the Acts
it is Judas himself, not the “chief
priests”, who “purchased a field with the reward of his iniquity”. According to this version,
Judas fertilizes or manures the field with his own blood,
as does the betrayer Sut, on the night of fertilizing the
field in Tattu. When, in his resurrection, Jesus reappeared
to the
disciples, they thought it an apparition. This it should
have been if the life had been human, the death actual,
the story true. In the Egyptian, however, the day of reappearance
is
termed the “day of apparition” ; but reappearing=apparition is not necessarily manifesting
as the human ghost. The Christ as Horus was not a human
ghost reappearing on the earth; and Horus the pure spirit,
the typical divine son of god, the reappearing one, might
have denied being a phantom or a ghost, for he would not
be manifesting to men, but to
other characters in the religious drama. This being denied
on behalf of the divinity, the carnalizers then had recourse
to their human physics to illustrate the denial by making
the
risen Christ corporeal. In John’s account, which is always the nearest to the Egyptian
original, there is no denial of the ghost theory, no declaration
that the risen one is not a spirit but a veritable human
body of flesh and bone. He merely “showed unto them his
hands and side”, as Horus might have shown his wounds, and no doubt did
show them, in the mysteries — the wounds that were inflicted by Sut. In fact, when Sut
has wounded Horus in the eye, he shows the wound to Ra,
his father (Rit., ch. 112).
When Horus, or the Egypto-gnostic Jesus, rises in the sepulchre
on coming forth to day it is in the semi-corporeal form
of the Karest-mummy that is not yet become pure spirit
and
therefore has not yet ascended to his father in the hawk-headed
likeness of Ra. This figure can be studied in the tomb
as that of Amsu. The scene of the resurrection is in
Amenta,
the earth of eternity, the earth of the manes, not on the
earth of mortals. It is here the risen Horus breathes
the breath of his new life into the sleeping dead to
raise them from their
coffins, sepulchres and cells. When the Egyptian Christ,
or Karest, rose up from the tomb as Amsu-Horus it was
in a likeness of the buried mummy, as regards the shape,
with one
arm loosened from the swathes or bandages. But this resurrection
was not corporeal on
earth. Osiris had been transformed
into Horus, and although the mummy-shape was still retained,
the texture had been transubstantiated; the corpus was transfigured into the
glorious body of the Sahu or divine mummy. The mystery
of transubstantiation [Page 879]
was
not understood by the writers of the Gospels, who did not
know whether Jesus reappeared in the body or in spirit,
as a man or as a god. They carried off all they could,
but were not in possession of the secret wisdom which survived
amongst the Egypto-gnostics. They wrote as carnalizers
of the Christ. It follows that the risen Jesus of
the canonical Gospels is not a reality in either world;
neither in the sphere of time, nor as divine Horus transfigured
into spirit. “Tis but a misappropriated type; the spurious spectre
of an impossible Christ; a picture of nobody. The Christian
history fails in rendering Horus as an apparition of Osiris.
When Horus came from Sekhem he had left the earthly
body behind him in the sepulchre, and was greeted as pure
spirit by the glorified ones who rejoiced to see how he continued walking as the risen Horus, he who “steppeth onward
through eternity” (Rit., ch. 42). Jesus in this character comes forth from
the tomb in the same body that was buried and still is
human, flesh and bones and all. Thus, as a
phantom, he is a counterfeit; a carnalized ghost, upon
the resurrection of which no real future for the human
spirit ever could or ever will be permanently based. A
corpse that has
not made the transformation from the human Horus into Horus
the pure spirit offers no foundation for belief in any
known natural fact. Horus in his resurrection is described
as
being once more set in motion. At this point he says, “I am not known, but I am one who
knoweth thee. I am not to be grasped, but I am one who
graspeth thee. I am Horus, prince of eternity, a fire before
your faces, which inflameth your hearts towards me. I am
master
of my throne, and I pass onwards”. “The path I have opened is the present time, and I have
set myself free from all evil” (ch. 42, Renouf). But when he is transubstantialized, it
is said of the deceased in his resurrection: “The gods shall come in touch with him, for he shall
have become as one of them”. Now let us see how this was converted into history. Jesus
is the prince of eternity in opposition to Satan, Sut,
or Judas, the prince of this world. In his resurrection
he is supposed to have opened the pathway from the tomb
historically and for
the first time some 1800 or 1900 years ago. When he rises
from the dead he is unknown to the watchers, but he knows
them. Mary knew not that the risen form was Jesus. He is
not to be grasped, saying, “Touch me not”, or do not grasp me, “for I am not yet ascended
unto my Father” (John XX. 14, 17). On the way to Emmaus Jesus appears and
inflames the hearts of the disciples towards him, after
calling them “slow of heart”, and “they said
one to another, Was not our heart burning within us?” (Luke XXIV. 13, 32). Horus had
opened a path from the tomb as the sun-god in the mythos,
the divine son of God in the eschatology, and he ascended
to his father and took his seat upon the throne of which
he
had become the lord and master. So Jesus goes on his way “unto the mountain”, where
he had appointed to meet his followers (Matt. XXVIII. 16).
The mountain in the Ritual is the mount of rebirth in heaven,
whether of the sun-god or of the enduring spirit.
The change from bodily death to future life in spirit was
acted as a transformation-scene in the mysteries of the
resurrection. The mummy-Osiris was an effigy of death.
The
Sahu-mummy [Page 880] Amsu-Horus is an image of the glorious body into which Osiris
transubstantiated to go forth from Sekhem as pure spirit.
It is the mummy in this second stage that is of primary
import. First of all the dead body was smeared over with
unguents
and thus glorified. During the process of anointing it
was said, “O Asar (the deceased) the
thick oil which is poured upon thee furnishes thy mouth
with life” (Budge, “The Mummy”, p. 163). It is also said that the anointing is done to give sight to the eyes, hearing to the
ears, sense of smell to the nostrils and utterance to the mouth. To embalm the body thus
was to karas it and the embalmment was a mode of making
the typical Christ as the Anointed. Thus the mortal Horus
was invested with the glory of the only God-begotten Son.
Now this making of the Krst, or mummy-Christ, after the
Egyptian fashion is apparent in the
Gospels. When the woman brings the alabaster cruse of precious
ointment to the house of Simon and pours it on the head
of Jesus he says, “In that she poured this ointment upon
my body, she did it to prepare me for my burial” (Matt. XXVI. 12). She was making the
Christ as the anointed-mummy previous to interment. After
the description of the crucifixion it is said that Nicodemus
came and brought a “mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred
pound” and “they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths
with the spices as the custom of the Jews is to bury” (John XIX. 39, 40). This again denotes the making of the
Karest-mummy=the Christ. Moreover, it is the dead mummy
in one version and it is the living body in the other which
is anointed, just as Horus was anointed with the exceedingly
precious Antu ointment, or oil, that was poured upon his
head and face to represent his
glory.
The
two Mertae-sisters are the watchers over the dead Osiris.
They are also the mourners who weep over him when he
is anointed and prepared for his burial. It is said of
Osiris that
he was triumphant over his adversaries on the night when
Isis lay watching in tears over her brother Osiris (ch.
18). But the Mertae-sisters both watch and both weep
over the dead
body. In the vignettes to the Ritual one of the two stands
at the head and one at the feet of the body on the bier.
These two mourners, weepers, anointers, or embalmers, appear
in the Gospels as two different women. According to John
it was Mary the sister of Martha
who anointed Jesus for his burial. And as these are the
two divine sisters in historic guise we ought to find one
at the head of the victim and one at the feet, as, in fact,
we do so find
them. In the account furnished by Luke it is said that the woman who stood behind at the
feet of Jesus weeping “began
to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair
of her head” (Luke VII. 38). No name is given for the woman who was “a sinner”, which
seems to denote the other Mary called Magdalene. Matthew
also omits the name of the woman with an alabaster cruse
or flask. In keeping with the mythos this other one of
the
two Mertae-sisters should be Martha, but the point is that
the woman with the cruse does not anoint the feet of Jesus.
She poured
the ointment “upon his head as he sat at meat”
(Matt. XXVI. 7). Thus we see there are two different women
who anoint Jesus, one at the head, one at the feet, even
as the two divine sisters of Osiris called the Mertae,
or watchers, stand at the head and feet of Osiris, when
preparing him for his burial, or
watching in [Page
881] tears, like Isis, the prototype of the woman who never ceased
to kiss the feet of Jesus since the time when he had come
into the house (Luke VII. 45-6). We
have identified the other sister Nephthys, the mistress
of the house, with the housekeeper Martha, and as Nephthys
also carries the bowl or vase upon her head, this may account
for the vessel of alabaster that was carried by the “woman” who poured the ointment on
the head of Jesus, whereas Mary the sister of Martha poured
it on his feet. Martha is one of the two Mertae by name.
In the Egyptian mythos the two Mertae are Isis, the dear
lover
of Horus the Lord, bowed at his feet, and Nephthys mourning
at his head (Naville, Todtenbuch, v. 1, kap. 17, A. g. and B. b.).
The
Karast-mummy was the body of the dead in Osiris who
were prepared by human hands to meet their Lord in
spirit when wrapt in the seamless vesture of a thousand
folds,
which was typically the robe of immortality, when they
were baptized and purified and anointed with the
unction of Horus taken from the tree of life. The process
of
preparing,
embalming and Christifying the mummy obviously survives
in the Chrisome or krisum of the Roman Catholic Church.
The chrisome itself is properly a white cloth which
the “minister of baptism places on the head of the newly-anointed
child”.The chrisom as
ointment is made of oil and balm. In the instructions
for private baptism it is charged that the minister
shall
put the white vesture, commonly called a chrisome,
upon the child. The
chrism-cloth is still the vesture of immortality, for
if the infant dies within a month after birth, the
chrisome
is its shroud and the chrisom-child becomes an image
in survival of the
Karast-mummy in Amenta.
Let it be assumed that to all appearance the resurrection
in Amenta is corporeal. The human Horus, or the Osiris, who had passed through death, and been laid out
as the mummy in the Tuat, still retains the form of the
mummy that was made on earth. The
difference is in Horus having risen to his feet and freed
his right arm from the burial bandages. Indeed, the dead
were reincorporated in Amenta as the Sahu-mummy. The
Egyptian word Sahu signifies to incorporate, and in this physical-looking form they were
reincorporated for the resurrection in the earth of eternity. Amsu had made a change in
rising to his feet, but was not yet the Horus glorified
with the soul of Ra; therefore he has not yet ascended
to the father. To the sense of sight he is corporeal still,
and has not
transubstantiated into spirit. When he does, the hawk or
Menat will alight to abide upon him and he will assume
the likeness of his father Ra, the bird-headed holy spirit.
It is the
body-soul that rises in Amenta which has to suffer purgatorial
rebirth before it can become “pure spirit” as the Ritual of the resurrection has it, to attain eternal
life. So far as reincorporation of the soul in Sahu-shape
could go, the resurrection is corporeal. Yet this
was only a dramatic mode of representation in the mystery
of transubstantiation, which included several acts. It
is in this character of Amsu-Horus reincorporated as the
Sahu-mummy issuing from the tomb that Jesus is described
by Luke: “See my hands and
my feet, that it is I myself” (ch. XXIV. 39). In the absence of the gnosis the reincorporation
in Amenta led to the doctrine of a physical resurrection
at the last day on this earth. The
power of resurrection was imparted by [Page 882] Ra, the father in spirit, to the anointed and
beloved son. And Horus is said to be the “bringer of the breaths” to his “followers” (Rit.,
chapters on breathing 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59). Horus as
he issues forth to day, in his resurrection, comes to give
the breath of life to the manes in Amenta, saying, “I give the
breezes to the faithful dead amid those who eat bread”. This chapter of the Ritual follows
the decease of Horus, which is equivalent to the crucifixion
of Jesus. In this the speaker says, “I have come to an end on behalf of the Lord of heaven. I
am written down sound of heart, and I rest at the table
of my father Osiris” (ch. 70). It is also said in the Rubric, “if
this scripture is known upon earth he (the Osiris) will
come forth to day; he will have power to walk on the earth
amid the living”. Jesus in the Gospel has “come to an end for the Lord
of heaven”. He likewise manifests on earth “amid the living”. He gives “the breezes to the
faithful dead” when he breathes on them, saying, “Receive ye of the holy spirit”.
It
is “the women” in the Gospels who announce the resurrection and proclaim
that Jesus has left the tomb. According to Matthew “the woman” are “Mary Magdalene and the other
Mary”, who “ran to bring the disciples word” (XXVIII. 1, 8). According to Mark (XVI. 1) the
women were Mary Magdalene and Mary (the mother) of James,
and Salome, who discovered that Jesus had arisen but were
afraid to make it known. Here it is Mary
Magdalene, who proclaims the resurrection. It is Mary Magdalene
in John (XX. 1, 2) who first announces that the Lord has
arisen. Luke XXIV. 10 has it that “Mary Magdalene and
Joanna, and Mary (mother) of James and other women” first found the sepulchre empty
and “told these things unto the apostles”. These conflicting accounts agree in the one
essential point, that it was the woman or the women who
proclaimed the resurrection, and this is as it should be
according to the data in the Ritual. When the deceased
comes forth
from the tomb and reaches the horizon of the resurrection
he exclaims, “I rise as a god
amongst men. The goddesses and the women proclaim me when they see me!” It is the
goddesses and the women who see the risen Horus first and
proclaim him to the others. Usually the women and the
female deities are identical as the two divine sisters
who are
represented in the Gospels by the two Marys, but in some
of the scenes there are other
women in attendance as well as the two sisters-Mertae.
Now, as the two Marys are originally goddesses we have
the same group of goddesses and “the women” (in Luke
XXIV. 10) as in the Ritual (79, 11) and both agree in proclaiming
the resurrection and hailing the risen Lord with jubilation.
This chapter contains all the data necessary to
construct the story of the “historic†resurrection in which the Christ arises as a god
amongst men, and is proclaimed by the women. The allusions
in the Ritual are very brief. The style
of the writing is economical as that of the lapidary. The
Egyptians neither used nor tolerated many words; verbosity
was prohibited by one of their commandments. But these
allusions refer to a drama that was represented in the
mysteries, the characters and scenes of which were all
as well known as are those in the Christian Gospels when
the
play is performed at Ammergau. And this statement, made
at the moment of his resurrection —“ I rise as a god [Page 883] amongst men. The goddesses and the women
proclaim me when they see me” — contained a germ that was pregnant with a whole
chapter of the future Gospel “history”.
In
the Gospel according to John there is but one woman
weeping at the tomb. This was Mary Magdalene, who
corresponds to the first great mother Apt, she who
bore the seven
sons that preceded the solar Horus of the pre-Osirian
cult. She, like Anup, lived on in the
burial-place with those that waited for the resurrection.
She is called Apt, the “mistress of
divine protections”. Apt is portrayed as kindler of the light for the deceased
in the dark of death (ch. 137, Vig. Papyrus of Nebseni).
Thus the old bringer to rebirth is the kindler of
a light in the sepulchre. Mary Magdalene who takes her
place comes to the tomb, “early,
while it was yet dark”, and finds the stone moved away and light enough to see
by kindled in the tomb. Isis also was a form of the great
mother alone. She is mentioned singly as
watching in tears over her brother Osiris by night in
Rekhet (Rit., ch. 18). So Mary Magdalene is described
as “standing without at the tomb weeping” alone as the one
woman. But, according to Matthew, there were two women
at the tomb. “Mary Magdalene
was there and the other Mary, sitting over against the
sepulchre (ch. XXVII. 61). And in the Osirian representation
Isis and Nephthys are the two women called the “two mourners who
weep and wail over Osiris in Rekhet” (ch. 1). Isis and Nephthys, the two divine sisters, are
the two women at the sepulchre of Osiris. They are portrayed,
one at the head the other at the feet of the mummy. They
sing the song of the resurrection as a magical means
of
raising their dear one from the dead. A form of this
is to be found in the evocations addressed to the dead
Osiris by the two sisters, who say: “Thy two sisters are near thee,
protecting thy funeral bed, calling thee in weeping,
thou who art prostrate on thy funeral bed” (Records of the Past, vol. 2, pp. 121-126). Horus rises in his Ithyphallic form
with the sign of virility erect; the member that was
restored by Isis when the body had been torn in
pieces by Sut. This may account for the Phallus found
in the Roman Catacombs as a figure of the resurrection,
which, if the Gospel story had been true, would denote
the
phallus of an historic Jew, instead of the typical member
of Horus whose word was thus manifested with pubescent
power in the person of the risen Amsu.
In
the Osirian legend there are three women, or goddesses,
who especially attend upon Osiris to prepare him for
his burial. These are the great mother, Neith, and
the two divine
sisters, Isis and Nephthys. It was related in the ancient
version that Neith arrayed the mummy in his grave-clothes
for the funerary chamber called “the good house”, the house
in which the dead were embalmed and swathed in pure white
linen. This is described in the Book of the Dead (ch.
172) when it is said to the Osiris N, “Thou receivest a bandage of
the finest linen from the hands of the attendant of Ra”. The raiment put on Osiris by Neith
was said to be woven by the two watchers in the tomb. In
the preparation of Osiris for his burial, the ointment
or unguents were compounded and applied by Neith. It was
these that
were to preserve the mummy from decay and [Page 884] dissolution. These three may be
compared with the three Marys in the Gospels, thus: Neith,
the great mother=Mary Magdalene, the great mother; Isis=Mary;
Nephthys=Martha. There was also a group of
seven ministrants in attendance at the birth of Horus or
rebirth of Osiris. These, in the astronomical mythology,
were constellated in the female hippopotamus — our Great Bear —
as those who ministered “of their substance” to the young “bull of the seven cows” (Rit., ch.
141-3), which were seven forms of the great mother, seven
Fates or Hathors in the birthplace, from the time when
this was in the year of the Great Bear, with the seven
in
attendance on the child. In the legend related by Luke,
the whole of the seven women who ministered of their substance
to Jesus (or the sacrificial victim), appear to have been
grouped together with the dead body in the sepulchre. “Now they were Mary Magdalene
and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women
with them” (Luke XXIV.
10). These are called “the women which had come with them out of Galilee”. They are also
termed “certain women of our company” (ch. XXIV. 22). The number is not specified; this
being one of those sundries that were safest if left vague.
Thus we find the foremost Great Mother at the tomb; the
two divine sisters; the three women with Neith included,
and as we
suggest, the company of ministrants, who were the seven
mothers, seven Hathors, seven Meri, or seven women in three
different versions of the historic resurrection.
In
the version given by Matthew there is but one divine
visitant at the tomb, in addition to the two women
here called the two Marys. As the Sabbath day began
to dawn “came Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And behold there was a great
earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away
the stone and sat upon it. His appearance was as lightning, and his raiment was as white
as snow” (Matt. XXVIII. 2, 3). The angel that rolls the stone away
from the tomb in the Gospel for the buried Christ to
rise corresponds to the god Shu in the Ritual, who is
described as uplifting the heaven when the god Atum or
Horus comes forth from the sarcophagus and passes through
the gate of the rock to approach the land of spirits.
It
is
said the gate of Tser is where Shu stands when he lifts
up the heaven (Rit., 17, 56-7). The Tser was the rock
of the horizon in which the dead body of Osiris was laid
for
its repose
when it was buried in Annu. Shu is not only the uplifter
of heaven or raiser of the gravestone, he is also the
opener of the sepulchre as the bringer of breath to the
newly
awakened soul.
The
Egyptian knew well enough that his body would remain
where it was left when buried. For that it had been
mummified. His difficulty was concerning his soul,
and how to get this
freed from its surroundings in the speediest fashion and
the most enduring form. The Ritual speaks of the “shade”, the “soul” and “spirit” as being in the tomb with the mummy-Osiris
who rises from stage to stage according to the evolution
of his spirit from the bonds of matter. Chief of these
are the body-soul and spirit-Ka. The deceased, when
in the tomb,
is thus addressed, “Let the way be opened to thy Ka and to thy Soul, O glorified
one; thou shalt not be imprisoned by [Page 885] those who have the custody of souls and spirits and who
shut up the shades of the dead” (Rit., ch. 92). Thus the body-soul and Ka made their
appearance in the tomb previously to being blended in the
manifesting soul, called the double of the dead which constituted
the risen Horus, and which was the only one of the
seven souls that bore the human lineaments (Rit., ch. 178.
The god who rises again is described in the Egyptian litany
of Ra (58) as “he who raises his soul and conceals his
body”. His name is that of Herba, he who raises the soul.
The body being hidden as Osiris, the soul was raised as
Horus.
Hence, as it is said, the mummy of Osiris was not
found in the sepulchre. In one sense the body vanished
by transubstantiation into spirit. The night of the evening
meal on which the body was eaten sacramentally is called “the
night of hiding him who is supreme of attributes” (Rit., ch. 18). The body was eaten typically
as a mode of converting matter into spirit; this was the
motive of the eucharist from the beginning when the mother
was the victim eaten. In one of the texts cited by Birch
concerning the burial of the god Osiris at Abydos, it is
said the sepulchral chamber was
searched but the body was not found. The “Shade, it was found” (Proceedings Bib. Archy.,
Dec. 2, 1884, p. 45). The shade was a primitive type of
the soul; it is the shadow of an earthly body projected
as it were into Amenta, and was portrayed in some of the
vignettes
lying black upon the ground of that earth, like the shadow
of the human body on this earth. In Marcion’s account of the resurrection there is no body to be found
in the tomb; only the phantom, or the shade, was visible there. So in the Johannine version (ch. XX.
17) the buried body of Jesus is missing; the Shade is present
in the tomb; but this is of a texture
that must not be touched. Like Amsu it neither represents
the dead corpus nor the spirit
perfected. It is quite possible that we get a glimpse of
the “Ka” as that personage in the
sepulchre described by Mark, who relates that when the
women entered the tomb they
“saw a young man sitting on the right side, arrayed in a white
robe and they were amazed” (ch. XVI. 5). According to the gnosis, the Ka had here taken
the place of the missing mummy which had risen, or as the
Egyptians said, Osiris had made his transformation into
Amsu-Horus. According to Luke, when the women came to the
tomb with their spices and ointments they “found not the body of the Lord Jesus”. But, “behold, two men stood by
them in dazzling apparel”, who said to them “why seek ye the Living (One) among the
dead?” (Luke XXIV. 5). These, in the Johannine Gospel, are “two angels in white, sitting
one at the head and one at the feet, where the body of
Jesus had lain” (John XX. 12). Now,
if the “young man” represented the Ka-image in the human form we may suppose
the “two
men” to have been the soul and spirit called the Ka and the soul
of the glorified, that were portrayed in the Egyptian sepulchre
and which are to be read of in the Ritual. One of the
numerous Egypto-gnostic scriptures which at one time
were extant has lately been discovered in the fragment
of a gospel assigned to Peter. This from the orthodox point
of
view is considered to be “docetic” — which is another name for non-historical. From this we
learn that in the [Page 886] resurrection “the heavens opened and two men descended thence
with great radiance” “and both the young men entered” the tomb. Two men entered and
three figures issued forth. “They behold three men coming out of the tomb, and two of
them were supporting a third, and a cross was following
them; and the heads of the two men reached to the heaven,
but the head of him who was being led along by them was
higher than the heavens”. And they heard a voice from heaven which said, “Hast thou
preached to them that are asleep?” And a response of “Yea” was heard from the cross.
This has no parallel in the canonical Gospels, but, as
Egyptian, it is the scene of Atum (Ptah or Osiris) rising
again in or with the two sons Hu and Sau. Also, in the
pre-Osirian
mythos, Hu and Sau, the two sons of Atum-Ra, support their
father when he issues from the tomb and makes his exit
from Amenta. These are two young men who are in the
retinue of Ra, and who accompany their father in his resurrection
daily (Rit., ch. 17).
To
a spiritualist the doctrines of the fleshly faith are
ghastly in their grossness. The foundation of the creed
was laid in a physical resurrection of the body; and
the flesh and
blood of that body were to be eaten in the eucharistic
rite as a physical mode of incorporating the divine.
It is true the doctrine of transubstantiation was added
to gild the
dead body for eating. But the historical rendering of the
matter necessitated the substitution of the physical
for the spiritual interpretation. The founders only
carried off the
carnalized Horus, the Karast-mummy, for their Christ. They
raised him from the grave corporeally; whereas the
Egyptians left that type of Osiris in matter, that
image of Horus
on earth in the tomb. Horus did rise again, but not in
matter. He spiritualized to become the superhuman or
divine Horus. The Egyptians did not exhume the fleshly
body, living nor
dead, to eat it with the expectation of assimilating Horus
to themselves or becoming Horus by assimilating the
blood and body of his physical substance. This was
what was done by the Christian Sarkolatrae. Hooker asks: “Doth any man doubt that even from the flesh
of Christ (eaten sacramentally) our very bodies do receive
that life which shall make them glorious at the latter
day?” This was an inevitable result of making the Christ historical,
and of continuing the carnalized Horus in a region beyond
the tomb by means of a physical
resurrection of the dead. The Christians having carried
off the Corpus Christi, which the
Egyptians transubstantiated in the sepulchre, have never
since known what to do with it. But as the Christ rose
again in the material body and ascended with it into heaven,
leaving
no mummy in the tomb, they can but nurse the delusive hope
that a physical saviour may redeem the physical corpse,
so that those who believe may be raised by him at the last
day
and follow him bodily into paradise. In this way the foundations
of the faith were corporeally laid. Also in this way the
pre-extant “types” of the Christ are supposed to have been
realized: the fore-shadows substantialized, and Horus
the Lord who had been the anointed Christ, the immortal
Son of God in the Egyptian religion for at least ten thousand
years, was at last converted into a Judean peasant as [Page 887] the unique personage of the
Gospels, and the veritable saviour of the world.
It
is not alleged in the Gospel history that the victim
was torn piecemeal as well as crucified. And yet
the bread which represents his body in the eucharistic
meal is religiously
torn to pieces in commemoration of the event that does
not occur in the Gospels; a performance that is suggestive
of those poor Norway rats which lose their lives
in
trying to
cross the waters where there was a passage once by land.
Jesus is not torn in pieces, but Osiris was. When
Sut did battle with Un-Nefer, the Good Being, he tore
the
body into
fragments, and that is the sacrifice still commemorated
in the Christian eucharist. Under one of his many
titles in the Ritual Osiris is “the Lord of resurrections”. But this does not
merely denote the periodicity of the resurrection. There
were several resurrections of the god in matter and
in spirit. Osiris rose again to life in the returning
waters of the Nile. He
rose again in the renewal of vegetation represented by
Horus the branch of endless years; and as the papyrus
shoot. He rose again upon the third day, in the moon;
or as the sun,
the supreme soul of life in physical nature. These were
followed in the eschatology by the god who rose again
from Amenta as Horus in spirit; as the Bennu-Osiris,
or as Ra the holy
spirit. Jesus is likewise portrayed as the Lord of resurrections.
He is said to have risen on the third day; also on
the fourth day, after being three nights in the earth;
also after forty
days, when he ascended into heaven from the mount; and
when he rose up from the dead with power to pass where
doors were shut, and to impart the Holy Spirit (John
XX. 19)
to his followers, the same as Horus in the Ritual (ch. 1). The first act of Horus in his
resurrection is to free his right arm from the bandage
of the mummy. The next is to cast aside the seamless
swathe in which the body had been wrapped for burial.
Now, after so
much of the mythos has been established in place of the “history”, it will not be so very
incredible if we suggest a mythical and recognizably
Kamite origin for an episode in the Gospel according
to Mark which has no record elsewhere. When Jesus is
arrested in the
garden or enclosure of Gethsemane preparatory to his
death and resurrection it is said that: “A certain young man followed him having a linen cloth cast
about him over his naked body; and they laid hold on
him; but he left the linen cloth and fled naked” (Mark XIV. 51).
Such a statement standing alone, purposeless and unexplained,
is perfectly maniacal as history; clearly it is a fragment
of something that is otherwise out of sight. The Greek
word
sindon represents the Egyptian shenti, a linen garment
which is derived from shena, a name for the flax from
which the fine linen of the mummy was made. The shenti
is a linen
tunic. The mummy-swathe was also made from shena, and
this was the garment woven without a seam. Therefore
we infer that the “young man” was a form of the manes risen
with the bandages about him, and that when he “left the linen-cloth and fled naked” he had
made his transformation into spirit like any other of
the mummies.
So soon as the risen Lord had ascended into heaven from the
summit of Mount Olivet, after the space of forty days,
the disciples [Page 888] are described as meeting in the “upper
chamber” with Mary, the mother of Jesus, and his brethren who were
gathered together for the purpose of prayer (Acts I. 13,
14). Now, “the upper chamber” was the cubiculum
attached to the sepulchre, both in Rome and Egypt, for
the meeting of the bereaved relatives and the solemnizing
of the mourning for the dead. One of the inscriptions in
the
catacombs calls it “the upper chamber to celebrate the memory of the dead” (“Cubiculum
superius ad confrequentandum memoriam quiescentium”. De Rossi, Roma Sotteranea,
3, 474.) There were two funerary chambers in the Egyptian
sepulchre; one was for the mummy and one for the Ka. Also
the Ka-chamber was without a door, it being held that the
risen spirit could pass through matter without a doorway.
This is repeated in the Gospel
according to John. When Jesus came into the room, “the doors being shut”, and stood in
the midst of the disciples, it was in the character of
the Ka or double of the dead endowed with power to rise
again, to pass through matter, and reappear to the living.
The same dual
figure is to be found in the pre-Christian catacombs with
the subterranean sepulchre for the mummy or corpse beneath,
and the chamber above which was known as the cubiculum or cubiculum memoriae. It was the pre-Christian custom for the relatives and
friends of the deceased to meet together in this upper
chamber at the funeral feast, or eucharistic meal, for
the purpose of celebrating the resurrection from the dead,
and of
making their offerings and oblations to the ancestral spirits
in the mortuary sacrament.
The
last scene in the personal “history” coincides with the ascent of Atum-Horus from
Amenta, and the soul ascending into paradise, called the
Aarru-fields. Jesus, in his final disappearance from
the earth, ascends the typical mount, called Olivet,
at the end of forty
days. “And when he had said these things as they were looking, he
was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And while they were looking steadfastly into heaven
as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel
which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking
into heaven?” (Acts I. 9-11). The ascent of Jesus from the
mount into the clouds of heaven can be traced twice over,
in the two different categories, mythical and eschatological.
It was made “from the mount called Olivet”. This, we repeat,
was Mount Bakhu, the mount of the olive-tree of dawn. The
ascent at the tree was made each day, and also yearly in
the annual round, by the god in his resurrection from Amenta.
Thus the sun-god in the mythos makes his ascent by the
Mount of Olives, or the olive-tree
of dawn, when “approaching to the land of spirits in heaven” (Rit., ch. 17). In this character
Nefer-Tum the young sun-god is the Egyptian Jesus risen
from the northern door of the tomb, or the northern gate
of the Tuat. In the phase of eschatology it is the risen
soul upon
its upward journey to the circumpolar paradise “north of the olive-tree” where the eternal
city was eventually attained. The olive (Bakhu) also figures
in the eschatology as well as in the astronomical mythology. “He who dwelleth in the olive-tree” is a name of Horus in
the burial-place; and in his resurrection the Osiris says,
when coming forth from the [Page 889]
judgment-hall, “I
pass on to a place that is north of the olive-tree”. Or it might be the fig-tree
at the meeting-place of Jesus with Nathanael. It was no
earthly mount on which the typical teacher gave instruction
to the four called fishermen or to the twelve as reapers
of the
harvest. It was the mountain of Amenta and the double earth
that we have traced all through the Ritual called the mount
of resurrection and of glory. This, in the mythos, was
the mount of the green olive-tree of the Egyptian dawn
and a figure of the ascent to heaven in the eschatology.
Up this mount the risen manes attained the circle of the
divine
powers attached to Osiris (Rit., ch. 1 in the older MSS.).
And up this mount the solar god, as Atum-Horus, makes his
ascent to heaven, termed the land of spirits; that is,
from the
Mount of Olives, the track which is here followed by the
canonical Jesus (Rit., ch. 17). Moreover, in his coming
forth to day and making the ascent to heaven, Atum was
attended
by his two sons, Hu and Sau, who are said to accompany
their father daily. The copy, in
this instance, is so close to the original that it may
be possible to identify the “two men in
white apparel” who say to the disciples, “Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing into
heaven?” (Acts I. 10, 11). Those two men in white apparel correspond
to Hu and Sau in the Ritual (ch. 17, 60-64) who accompany
the sun-god in his resurrection from the place
of burial in Amenta. In the vague phase, Jesus disappears
into a cloud and passes out of sight. In the Ritual of
the resurrection the departed spirit is received with greetings
by the
lords of eternity, who open their arms to embrace and bid
him welcome to the table of his father at the festival
that is to be eternal in the heavens.
THE RESURRECTION FROM AMENTA, OR COMING FORTH TODAY.
In
Annu shines the ray
Of resurrection on the judgment-day.
The
dark Amenta quakes
As with diviner dawn Osiris wakes
And
with his key[The Ankh-key of life.] hath risen
To free the arm of Amsu from its prison.
Out
of our mortal night
He suddenly flashed and fleshed his lance of light.
Jaw-broken
lies the black
Grim Boar, mouth open, with its fangs turned back.
Egypt the living Word
Of the eternal truth once more is heard;
Nor shall her reign be o’er
While language lasts till time shall be no more.
THE SAYINGS OF JESUS
[Page
890]
Of
late years certain Sayings of Jesus or Iή, as the name is abbreviated, written in Greek
on the leaf of a papyrus-book, have been discovered in
the rubbish-heaps of Oxyrhynchus. These were at once
assumed to be the sayings of Jesus, an historic Jew.
The present
object is to prove that all such Logia were the sayings of him who is here set forth as the
Egypto-gnostic Jesus, who had many types and names but no individual form of historic
personality.
The
Book of the Dead, or Ritual of the resurrection, chiefly
represents the mysteries of Amenta in the Osirian phase
of the religious drama. But there is an older stratum
than that
of the Osirian eschatology. The Sayer of the Kamite Logia Kuriaka is identifiable in at least
three different Egyptian religions; in one as the Osirian
Horus who predominates by name in the Ritual; in another
as Iu, the Sa or son of Iusãas and Atum-Ra; and a third
as
Iu-em-hetep, the son of Ptah. Two of these titles of
the typical Egyptian “sayer” are cited
in the “Festal dirge” when it is said, “I have heard the words of Iu-em-hetep and Hartatef.
It is said in their sayings”, some of which sayings are then quoted. These two answer
to the Horus and Jesus of the Egypto-gnostics, which
are two names of the same original
character that was Egyptian from the root. The so-called “Christian eschatology” may be
said to have had its origin in the mysteries of Ptah
at Memphis. So far as known, it was there the doctrine
of
immortality was first taught; there that the Son of God
was figured in
the act of issuing from the mortal mummy as a living
spirit. It was likewise there the teacher of the religious
mysteries
was first impersonated as the sayer, Iu-em-hetep, who,
as Iu the
coming Su, was the son of Ptah.
Iu
as a form of Tum, proclaims himself to be the Sayer
in the Ritual (ch. 82). He says: “I
have come forth with the tongue of
Ptah and the throat of Hathor that I may record the
words of my father, Tum, with my mouth which draweth to itself the spouse of Seb”. That
is the mother on earth who was Isis in the Osirian mythos,
and Hathor-Iusãas in the cult of Tum or Atum-Ra. The speaker
here is Horus as Iu the coming Su, or son, who in
Egyptian is Iu-su, or Iusa, the child of Iusãas, the consort of Atum-Ra. This sayer
as Iu, the Su or son in one character, is Tum himself
as father in the other. As Ra the father he
is the author of the sayings; as Iu the son (Iusu) he
is the utterer of the sayings “with his
mouth” or in person on the earth as the heir of Seb. To the Egyptians “the words of Tum”
were the teachings of an everlasting gospel of truth, law,
justice and right, “not
to be altered is that which Tum hath uttered” (Rit., ch. 78) by the mouth of the sayer, Iu-em-hetep, or
by the pen of the writer, Taht-Aan. Thus we can identify
Tum or Atum-Ra as the author of the
sayings which are to be spoken on earth by God the Son.
Tum was the earlier name of Atum-Ra, when the character
was that of child-Horus, or the infant Tum, and the sayings
together with the sayer were pre-Osirian. In other words
the “sayer” is Iu-em-hetep, the
prince of peace in the [Page 891] cult of Annu, whom we trace back to the time of Ptah as the
Egyptian Jesus. Hence this 82nd chapter is the one by which
the manes is said to “assume
the form of Ptah” in the course of becoming a pure and perfect spirit.
Upon
this line of descent, distinguished from the Osirian,
Ptah represented the grandfather of the gods; Atum
the father, and Iu the Su, the ever-coming son of
Atum at Annu. It was
Ptah, the opener of the nether-earth, who made the resurrection
of the manes possible that was acted in the mysteries
of Amenta. And Iu the Su came to say what he had
seen and
had to tell as witness for the father (Rit., ch. 86),
that is, as the “sayer” to whom the sayings
were attributed. Hence the speaker tells us that he comes with “the tongue of Ptah” “and
the throat of Hathor” to record the words of his father Tum with his own mouth,
or as the sayer who was reborn at Annu as Iusu, or Iusa
of Hathor-Iusãas, she who was great with
Iusa, the son of Atum-Ra, and grandson of Ptah.
The “sayings” may be divided and differentiated in two categories corresponding
to the two characters of the double-Horus, the child
of twelve years, and Horus the adult of thirty
years; Horus the afflicted one who suffered and died
and was buried, and Horus who rose again as the demonstrator
of eternal life in his resurrection from the dead. At
first
child-Horus was the word-made-flesh as Logos of the mother.
This was Hathor-Iusãas in relation to Atum-Ra (Rit.,
ch. 82). Next he was the word-made-truth as sayer for
the
father and teacher of the greater mysteries. Thus there
are two classes of the sayings —
those of the childhood and those of the adultship; those
that pertain to the earth of Seb and those that are uttered
in Amenta the earth of eternity. It is said in the Ritual
that the words
of Taht are “written
in the two earths”, the earth of Seb or time, and the earth of eternity or
Amenta (Renouf and Naville, ch. 183). So the sayings
were uttered by Horus, Tum, Iu, or Jesus, in the double
earth of time, and of eternity. It is also said of certain
sayings in
“Pistis Sophia” (or Books of the Saviour, 390, Mead), “Jesus spake these words unto his
disciples in the midst of Amenta”, whence they went forth three by three to the four points
of heaven to preach the gospel of the kingdom. This likewise
was in the earth of eternity, versus the earth of time. But, whether the god be represented as the heavenly father
by Ptah at Memphis, by Atum-Ra at Annu, or by Osiris
at Abydos, the infant was Horus or
Heru the lord by name, who was the only lord as a
little child. Iu, Iusu, Iusa, Tum, Aten, Sekari, Iu-em-hetep,
are but titles of Horus the lord of the Logia Kuriaka who became the “Sayer” as the Egypto-gnostic Jesus, Iu-Su, the ever-coming Messianic
son.
Now,
amongst the gods of Egypt that were canonized as Christian
saints the deity Tum has been converted into the Apostle
Thomas. The Gospel according to Thomas is also known
to have existed in several forms, some of which are yet
extant in the Gospels of the
Infancy, assumed to be the childhood of an historic Christ.
Hippolytus cites one of these as a Gospel of the Nasseni.
He says they hand down an explicit passage occurring
in the
Gospel inscribed “according to Thomas”, expressing themselves thus: “He who seeks [Page
892] me (the higher soul) will find me in children from seven
years old; for there concealed I shall, in the fourteenth
year (or aeon), be made manifest” (Refut. V. 7). This passage
contains the doctrine of the double-Horus, the Horus of
the incarnation and Horus of the resurrection, or the child-Horus
and Horus the adult. The duality of Horus as the word
made flesh and the word made truth is also exemplified
in the Gospel of Thomas by the boy whose every word at
once became a deed (ch. 4).
In
the introductory word to the “New Sayings of Jesus”, found on the site of Oxyrhynchus
by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, it is said: “These are the (wonderful) words which Jesus the
living (Lord) spake to . . . and Thomas, and he said
unto (them) everyone that hearkens to these words shall
never taste of death” (p. 11). The wonderful words, the words of power
in the Ritual, are the words of Atum-Ra the holy spirit.
The speaker is Horus or Iu the living, he who rises from
the grave and does not die a second time, or who is the
resurrection and
the life, that was represented as the first fruit or
type of them that slept. He is one of those to whom Nut,
the mother heaven, has given birth or rebirth (Rit.,
ch. 1), and this power he
afterwards confers on his four brethren or children that
they likewise may raise up the dead (Pyramid Texts, Teta,
270). It is in this character he says, “I am the living soul” (Rit., ch. 5).
That is, as Horus the lord of the resurrection from the
land of death. “I am he that cometh
forth”. “I open all the paths in heaven and on earth” (ch. 9). “That has been given to me
which endureth amidst all overthrow” (ch. 10). Thus Horus is the demonstrator of a
resurrection for the human soul in a mystery of Amenta.
He says, “I am he who establishes
you for eternity”. “I am he who dieth not a second time” (ch. 42). “I am he whose orbits are
of old; my soul is divine, it is the eternal Force” (ch. 85). “It is I who proceed from
Tum” — the father of a soul that is immortal.
An
original Egyptian source for the Gospels of the Infancy
is recognizable in the Ritual. In his incarnation
Horus, or Iu the Su, indicates that he “disrobes himself” to “reveal himself”
when he “presents himself to the earth” (ch. 71). In his birth he says, “I am the babe” born
as the connecting link betwixt earth and heaven, and
as the one who does not die the second death (ch. 42).
He
issues from the disc or from the egg. He is pursued by
the
Herrut-reptile, but, as he says, his egg remains unpierced
by the destroyer. He escapes from the slaughter of the
innocents or the Hamemmat in Suten-Khen. On entering
the earth-life Horus knows it to be in accordance with
his
lot that he should suffer death or
come to an end and be no more (Rit., ch. 8). He also
knows that he is a living soul. As
such he has that within which surviveth all overthrow; even though he may be buried in the
deep, dark grave, he will not be annihilated there. He will rise again (ch. 10 and ch. 30A).
But before quoting further what Horus says, we cite a few more of the Logoi which tell
us what Horus is. And what Horus is in the Osirian religion the same was the Egyptian
Jesus in the cult of Atum-Ra, and Iu-em-hetep still earlier in the mysteries of Memphis and
the cult of Ptah.
Apart
from the Osirian dynasty of deities, the two chief divine [Page 893] personages
in the Ritual are Atum-Ra and Atum-Horus, as Huhi the
eternal father, and Iu the ever-coming
Messianic son, who as the Su is Iusu, the Egyptian Jesus.
Now Tum, or Atum-Ra the inspiring spirit, was the author
of the sayings in the Ritual which he gave to Horus the
Iu-su
or coming son, as Sayer, for him to utter to men and manes
in the two characters of the infant Horus and Horus the
adult. Tum as Egyptian, is the earlier form of Atum’s name; and
in the Greek inscriptions Tum (or Atum) is called Tomos.
We also find that the twin-totality of Tum is registered
in the name of “Thomas called Didymus”; Thomas the twin being
equivalent in name to the character of the twofold Tum.
From this we infer that the apocryphal Gospel of the Infancy
assigned to Thomas is, or was, based upon the Egyptian
Gospel of Tum. This duality may also explain the relationship of Jesus
to Thomas in the “sayings” or Logoi, recently recovered from the mounds of Oxyrhynchus, which
are called “the sayings of Jesus”, who is described as the Lord, and the living one.
Now
Tum, in the Ritual, is pre-eminently “the lord”. In one chapter (79) he is addressed as
“the lord of heaven”, “the lord of life”, “the lord of all creatures”, “the lord of all”. Thus the
Ritual contains “the sayings of the lord”. The Hebrew formula “thus saith the lord” had been
anticipated in the Ritual by the “so saith Tum” whose word is “not to be altered” (Ritual, ch.
78). As Egyptian, Tum is the one god called “the living”. And the sayings are the words
which Jesus “the living” is said to have spoken to Thomas, the son Iu here being
given the foremost position of the two. The sayings of
the lord, in the Ritual, then, are the sayings
spoken by Tum the father to Iusa the son, who utters
them to men on earth and to the manes in Amenta. It is
as Atum-Horus that the son says, “I am the bright one in glory whom
Tum himself brought into being, who hath made and glorified
and honoured those who are to be with him”, as his followers or his children (Rit., ch. 78). It is
the same speaker who says, “I have come upon this earth and I take possession of it with
my two feet. I am Tum, and I come from my own place”. That is as Iusa the manifesting son. Thus the sayings of
Horus Iu-em-hetep can be traced to Tum as Ra the inspiring
spirit and to Horus as the sayer in the Ritual.
“Tum” in Egyptian was also a name for the mythical child as the
inarticulate one, the little Tum, who survives in various
countries. For the child Tum passed out of Egypt into
Europe
to become the Tom Thumb and little Thumbkin of our nursery
tales. We also consider that this was the Tum who passed
into India as the “historic” Thomas and who is claimed by
Christians to have been the Apostle of that name. The god
Tum is there identifiable in half-a-dozen features assigned
to the Apostle or Saint Thomas. For one thing he is the
patron of builders and architects, and his symbol is the
mason’s square. He is reputed to
have built a superb palace in heaven for the poor of earth.
Tum survives by name as the Thoma of the Indian Christians
on a peninsula of the Indus this side of the gulf: also
in
Cochin and beyond. The so-called Christians of India who
are frequently supposed to have been the followers of an
historic Thomas have their own tradition which is [Page 894] both
congruous and explicable. They say that “a certain holy man called Mar-Thome, a Syrian,
first came to them with a number of beasts from Syria and
Egypt” (Calmet, Thomas). That
is with the hieroglyphic signs. Thome we take to be the
Egyptian god, Tum. The Mar or Mer, as the surname of the
holy man, is an Egyptian title for a superintendent. The
“Mer-Tetu” was the superintendent of books, and also the royal mage
in one person. Thus read “Mar-Thome” was one of the Egyptian Magi or Rekhi as the superintendent
of a college or body of priests who went to India from
Syria as missionaries and who
promulgated the worship of Tum as God the Father, and Iusa
as the son in the religion of Annu.
This
dual character of Tum as the father and Iu the Su or
son, equal to Jesus, will enable us to identify the
child-Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas and that Gospel
itself as a form of
the Egyptian Gospel. This is one of the most ancient of
the Gospels of the Infancy called Apocryphal, the origin
and true significance of which are hitherto unknown.
These have
been denounced as idle tales, foolish traditions: pious
frauds, disguised heresy, anti-evangelical representations
and fables forged to supply an account of “Our Lord’s
History”, in that infancy which the evangelists have perforce omitted.
The representations, however, are anti-evangelical; hence
they are supposed to favour Docetism: in other
words, they are non-historical. As already demonstrated, the great god Tum was the father
in one character, and Iu or Horus in the other; he is the
divine son who is Iu-em-hetep the Egyptian Jesus. Tum is
Tomas or Thomas in Greek, and the Gospel of Tomas in Greek
is the Gospel of Tum as Egyptian. Also Tum the father and
Iu the son will show why the
history of the infancy should be related of a mythical
Jesus in the Gospel of Tum or Thomas, and in relation to
Thomas. Thus we can identify Tum as the author of the sayings
which are to be spoken by Iu-em-hetep, in the person of
God the Son. Tum was the earlier
name of Atum-Ra, when the character was that of child-Horus,
or the infant Tum, and the sayings together with the sayer
were pre-Osirian. In other words, the “sayer” is
Iu-em-hetep, the prince of peace in the cult of On, whom
we trace back to the time of Ptah as the Egyptian Jesus.
Hence this chapter is the one by which the manes is said
to
“assume the form of Ptah” in the course of being spiritualized. In one of the sayings
ascribed to Jesus he says, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy-laden, and
I will give you rest” (Matt. XI. 28). This had then become “one of the sayings”. But the sayer
himself had been personalized or typified in earlier ages
as Iu-em-hetep at Memphis, and again at On, and later still
at Alexandria. And Iu-em-hetep the bringer of peace by
name
was the giver of rest by nature as the Egyptian Jesus;
he who settled the matter of immortality in his resurrection
from the tomb. As we have already seen, a tap-root of the
Jesus legend in the eschatological phase can be traced
in the Egyptian Ritual to the time
and to the cult of Ptah at Memphis (Rit., ch. 82). Ptah
was the earliest form of an eternal father manifesting
in the person of an ever-coming son, who, as the coming
one, was Iu,
or Iu-em-hetep, he who comes with peace. Hence we derive
the name or title of the Egypto-gnostic Jesus from Iu-Su,
or Iusa, the coming son. Indeed, the question asked by
the messengers of John in the Gospel, [Page 895] art thou he that should come, or must we
look for another? is equivalent to asking “art thou Iu-em-hetep, he who comes with peace
as manifestor for the father?”
It
is also said of Jesus that he had compassion on the
people “because they were as
sheep without a shepherd”. And this has been looked upon as one of the foundational
pillars of the history, and proof positive that he was
the original Good Shepherd. But Horus had long been extant
as the good shepherd in the mythos, the eschatology,
and the
iconography of Egypt. Again, it is said of Jesus (Matt.
VII. 29), that he taught the multitude as one having
authority, and not as their scribes. So was it with Horus,
who claims that
authority to teach had been divinely delegated to him
as the beloved son of God the Father. Hence the sayings, “I have come forth with the tongue of Ptah and the throat
of Hathor that I may record the words of my father Tum
with my mouth” (Rit., ch. 82). “I am
arrayed and equipped with thy words of power, O Ra” (ch. 32). “I utter his words to the men
of the present generation, and I repeat his words to
him who is deprived of breath” as the
manes in Amenta (ch. 38).
It
was the work of Horus to exalt the father at all times
and in every place. He is exalted as Un-Nefer, the
good being who is the one alone that is good, perfect
and unique. The same
mission is assigned to the Gospel-Jesus. Hence the saying, “Why callest thou me good?
None is good save one, even God alone . . . the Father alone” (Mark X. 18), who
represents the same Good Being Un-Nefer as did Osiris.
This duality of the Deity as father and son is also manifest
in the saying, “Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son
of Man it shall be forgiven him, but whosoever shall speak
against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven him” (Matt. XII. 32). That is said in exaltation of the father
in heaven who was the holy spirit represented by the son
on earth or in Amenta. The Ritual likewise
proves that Seb, the god of earth and foster-father of
Horus, when he was the child of the virgin mother only,
is the prototype or original of Joseph. Horus says that
as the heir of
Seb, from whom he issued, he was suckled at the breast
of Isis, the spouse of Seb, who gave him his theophanies
(Rit., ch. 82). Horus on earth lies down to embrace the
old man
who keeps the light of earth, and who is Seb the earth-father
(Rit., ch. 84). Horus is lord of the staircase or mount
of rebirth in heaven. In his first advent as the heir of
Seb Horus
says, “I am come as a mummied one” (that is, in his embodiment when made flesh, the
Hamemmat being the unmummied ones) (Rit., ch. 9). “I come before you and make my
appearance as that god in the form of a man who liveth
as a god” — otherwise stated, as
Iusu the son of Atum-Ra (ch. 79). “I repeat the acclamations at my success on being
declared the heir of Seb” (Seb was the father on earth (ch. 82), Osiris in Amenta,
Ra in heaven). “I descend to the earth of Seb and put a stop to evil” as the bringer of peace,
plenty, and good will on earth. “I shine forth from the egg which is in the unseen world” (ch.
22). “Lo, I bring this my word of power” from out the silence in which the gods originated.
“I am arrayed and equipped with thy words of power, O Ra” (ch. 24, 32). “I utter his words
to the living and to those who are deprived of breath.
I am Horus, prince of eternity” (ch.
42). “I am yesterday, to-day, and to-morrow” [Page 896] (ch. 64). “I am” (or, am I not) “the bull
of the sacrificial herd. Are not the mortuary gifts upon
me, and the supernal powers?” (ch.
105). “Witness of Eternity is my name, the persistent traveller
on the highways of heaven. I am the everlasting one, I
am Horus, who steppeth onwards through eternity”. But Horus
in the Ritual is chiefly the son of God the Father in heaven,
and the subject-matter is mainly post-resurrectional.
After
the life with Seb on earth, Horus is reborn in the
earth of eternity for the heaven of eternity (78,
25). He is divinized with the flesh or substance of
god
(ch. 78). By means of
Horus, his manifestor, Osiris is said to re-live. Horus
is Osiris in his rebirth. Horus rises as a god and
is visible to the gods (or divine spirits) (79) in
his resurrection. Horus rises as the
living soul of Ra in heaven (127). Horus strikes the
wakers in their cells or coffins for the resurrection
of the
manes in Amenta (ch. 84). “I raise myself up, I renew myself, I grow
young again” (ch. 43). “Not men or gods; or the glorified ones, or the damned, can
inflict any injury on me” (ch. 42). “I do not die a second time in the nether-world” (ch. 44). “I am
the victorious one” (ch. 47). “I am seized (in possession) of the two earths” (ch. 50). “There
hath been assigned to me eternity without end. Lo, I
am the heir of endless time and my attribute is eternity” (ch. 62). “I, even I, am he who knoweth the paths of heaven. Its
breezes blow upon me. I advance whithersoever there lieth
a wreck in the field of eternity, and I pilot myself
towards the darkness and the sufferings of the deceased
ones of Osiris”
(ch. 78), as the deliverer or saviour of souls whose supreme
concern and object is to be saved from the second death
in Amenta by earning and attaining the life of the soul
that
is eternal. “It
is I, even I, who am Horus in glory. I am the lord of
light and I advance to the goal of heaven”. Jesus says, “I go unto him that sent me” (John VII. 33). “I know whence
I came and whither I go” (John VIII. 14). “I go to prepare a place for you”. ‘I am the way,
the truth, and the life. No one cometh to the Father
but through me” (John XIV. 6). “I go
unto the Father” (XIV. 12). But there is nothing so striking in the Gospel
as this image of Horus the saviour in the boat of souls
who steers his own bark that tosses in distressful
agitation over the water, whilst he carries rescue wheresoever
there has been a wreck amongst the suffering and deceased
ones of his father Osiris.
Horus
was the sole one of the seven great spirits born
of the mother who was chosen to become the only-begotten
son of God the Father when he rose up from the dead.
This is
he who says in the Ritual, “I am the bright one in glory, whom Atum-Ra hath called into
being, and my origin is from
the apple of his eye. Verily before Isis was, I grew
up and
waxed old, and was honoured beyond those who were with
me in glory” (Rit., ch. 78,
Renouf). Those who were with him in glory were the seven
great spirits, the Khuti or glorious ones. Amongst these,
Horus became the divine heir of all things, the son of
God
who claims to have existed before Isis his mother, when
speaking as manifestor for the holy spirit. This is the
son and heir of God who is described in the Epistle to
the Hebrews
as the “appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the
worlds”. [Page 897] He
was thus exalted above the angels or great spirits
through “having become by so much
better than the angels” and by inheriting a more excellent name than they. “For unto which
of the angels said he at any time, thou art my son?” Horus exalts his father in every place;
“associating himself with the two divine sisters, Isis and
Nephthys”, as his two mothers. It
is Taht-Ani who speaks by him the favourable incantations
which issue from his heart through his mouth. Horus overthrows
the serpent Apap daily for Ra. Horus unites both
Osiris and Ra in one triune personality, or trinity in
unity.
The
sayer personalized as son of God and utterer of the
logia in the Ritual says: “I am the
one proceeding from the one, the son from a father, the
father from the son” (Sarcophagus
of Seti I). Jesus is credited with having the magical
power of being known or unknown, seen or unseen at
will. When the Jews took up stones to cast at him
he was suddenly
invisible, even in their midst (John VIII. 59). Again,
whilst uttering the sayings to the multitude, he
was hidden from them (John XII. 36). When risen bodily,
he is the unknown
one to Mary at the sepulchre. He is also the unknown
one to the disciples on the way to Emmaus (Luke XXIV).
This character, like all the rest, is according to
copy supplied by the
Ritual. “I am he”, says Horus, “who cometh forth and proceedeth, and whose name is
unknown to men” (ch. 42). The Osiris has a word of power by means of which
he can conceal or manifest himself. He says: “I am in possession of that word of power which is
the most potent one in my body here; and by means of
it I make myself either known or
unknown” (Renouf,
ch. 110), which is equivalent to becoming visible or
invisible at will.
“Before the feast of the Passover, Jesus, knowing that his
hour was come that he should depart out of this world
unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the
world, he
loved them unto the end” (John XIII. 1). The end is here indicated by the feast of
the Passover and the last supper. In the parallel scene
Horus says: “I have come to an end for
the lord of heaven, I rest at the table of my father
Osiris” (Rit., ch. 70). This immediately
precedes his piercing the veil of the tabernacle and
coming forth as the divine hawk of soul (Rit., 70-71,
Renouf). Horus when addressing Ra the father on behalf
of the four brethren,
his followers, says, “Be they with thee so that they may be with me” (Rit., ch. 113). Jesus
says of his followers, “Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given
me that they may be one even as we are”. “I will that where I am they also may be with me” (John
XVII. 11, 12, 24). In the same passage of the Ritual
Sut is referred to as invoking the powers of Nekhen.
In the same passage of the Gospel it is “the son of perdition”.
In
this way the canonical Gospels can be shown to be a
collection of sayings from the Egyptian mythos and
eschatology. The original likeness is somewhat defeatured
at times
in the process, but sufficient remains in the Ritual for
the purpose of comparison and reclamation. When Horus
returns to his father with his work accomplished on
earth and in
Amenta he greets Osiris in a “discourse to his father”. In forty addresses he enumerates
what he has done for the support and assistance of Osiris
in the earth of Seb. Each line commences with [Page 898] the formula, “Hail, Osiris, I am thy son Horus. I have come!”
Amongst other of the assistances he says, “I
have supported thee. I have struck thine enemies dead.
I have brought the companions of Sut to thee in chains.
I have cultivated
thy fields. I have watered thy grounds. I have strengthened
thine existence upon the earth. I have given thee thy soul,
thy strength, thy power. I have given thee thy victory.
I have
anointed thee with the offerings of holy oil”. This last in sign-language is, I have given thee
the glory (Renouf and Naville, Rit., ch. 173). This we
parallel with the sixteenth chapter of John, in which the
position and character of Jesus are the same with those
of Horus, and
in which Jesus addresses the father at the end of his career. “I have come to thee”, says
Horus to Osiris. “Now I come to thee”, says Jesus to the Father. “Father, the hour is come;
glorify thy son that the son may glorify thee”. “I glorified thee on earth, having
accomplished the work which thou hast given me to do. And
now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with
the glory which I had with thee before the world was. I
manifested thy name unto the men whom thou gavest me out
of the world. I am no more
in the world. But now I come to thee. I kept them in thy
name, which thou hast given me. I guarded them, and not
one of them perished, but the son of perdition” (XVII. 5-12). The
glory of God the father was reflected by the sacred oil
upon the face of Horus the anointed son, which was a sign
of his divinity. This was “the glory as of the only-begotten from the
father” who was Horus in spirit, Horus the adult, the anointed one
with the father, and thus the representative type of a
soul of life that is eternal and attainable by all as in
the
only-beloved son.
It
is an utterance of the truth that is eternal to say
that Horus as the son of God had previously been
all the Gospel Jesus is made to say he is, or is to
become.
Horus and the
father were one. Jesus says, “I and my Father are one”. “He that seeth me, seeth him that
sent me” (John XII. 45). Horus is the father seen in the son (Rit.,
115). Jesus claims to be the son in whom the father is
revealed. Horus was the light of the world, the light
that is
represented by the symbolical eye, the sign of salvation.
Jesus is made to declare that he is the light of the
world. Horus was the way, the truth, the life, by name
and in person.
Jesus is made to assert that he is the way, the truth,
and the life. Horus was the plant, the shoot, the natzer.
Jesus is made to say, “I am the true vine”. The deceased says, “I spring
up as a plant” (Rit., 83, 1). The deceased, in the character of Horus,
or one with him by assimilation, also makes these claims
for himself. Hence the sayings — the sayings which
are repeated in the Gospels, more especially in the Gospel
according to John=Aan. To parallel a few of the sayings
in the Gospels with those of the Ritual: In the Gospel
according to John, Jesus says of himself, “I am the bread of life” (VI. 35), “I am the light of
the world” (VIII. 12), “I am the door of the sheep” (X. 7), “I am the good shepherd” (X. 11),
“I am the resurrection and the life” (XI. 25), “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (XIV. 6),
“I am the true vine” (XV. 1). And Horus was the original in all seven characters.
Horus was the bread of life, also the divine corn from
which the bread of life was made (Rit., ch. 83).
Horus was the good shepherd who carries the crook upon
his shoulder. [Page 899] Horus was
the door of entrance into Amenta, which none but he could
open. Horus was the resurrection and the life. He carries
the two symbols of resurrection and of life eternal, the
hare-headed sceptre, and the Ankh-key in his hands. Horus
was the way. His name is written with the sign of the road
(Heru). Horus was the true vine, as the branch of Osiris,
who is himself the vine in person. Now the original of
all these identifiable characters could
occur but once, and that prototype was Horus, or Jesus
in the cult of Atum-Ra. Horus says, “It is I who traverse the heaven. I go round the Sekhet-Aarru
(the Elysian fields). Eternity has been assigned to me
without end. Lo! I am the heir of endless time, and my
attribute is eternity” (Ritual, ch. 62). Jesus says, “I am come down from heaven. For this
is the will of the Father that every one who beholdeth
the son and believeth in him should have eternal life,
and I will raise him up at the last day”. He, too, claims to be the lord of
eternity. When Horus is “lifted up” to become glorified and is “Horus in his glory” (ch. 78),
“master of his diadem”, he says, “I raise myself up”. Then he adds, “I stoop upon the
Atit-bark that I may reach and raise to me those who
are in their circles, and who bow down before me” as his worshippers (ch. 77). “And I”, says Jesus, “if I be lifted up out of
the earth (as Horus was lifted up from out the nether-world),
will draw all men after me”
(John XII. 32, 33). Horus says, “I
open the Tuat that may drive away the darkness”. Jesus
says, “I am come a light into the world”. Horus says, “I am equipped with thy words of
power, O Ra” (the father in heaven) (ch. 32), “and repeat them to those who are deprived
of breath” (ch. 38). These were the words of the father in heaven.
Jesus says, “The Father
which sent me, he hath given me a commandment, what I
should say and what I should speak. The things therefore
which I speak, even as the Father hath said unto me,
so I
speak” (John XII. 49, 50). “The word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s who sent
me “(John XIV. 24). Horus repeated to his followers that which
his father Osiris had said to him in the early time (Rit.,
78). Jesus says, “As the Father taught me, I speak these
things” (John VIII. 28). “All things that I heard from my Father I have made known
unto you”
(John XV. 15). Horus comes on earth to report what he has
known and heard and seen and handled with the father. “I
have touched with my two hands the heart of Osiris”. “That
which I went to ascertain I have come to tell”. “I know the mysterious paths and the gates
of Aarru (or Paradise) from whence I come. Here am I,
and I come that I may overthrow mine adversaries on earth,
though my dead body be buried” (Renouf, ch. 86).
Horus
eats the bread of Seb on earth, but he teaches the
manes in Amenta to pray for the bread of heaven. Let
him ask for food from the Lord, who is over all (ch.
78). In this we
have the germ of the Lord’s Prayer addressed to “our Father in heaven” for “our daily
bread”: Ra being the heavenly father of Horus and the supplier
of food to souls; the daily giver of eternal life, that
was represented by the typical seven loaves of plenty.
There is a
prayer in the Ritual (ch. 71) which opens with an address
to the Lord of Heaven who
“reveals himself, who derobes himself, and presents himself
to the earth” in the person of
Horus his son, the divine hawk or soul that [Page 900] pierces through the veil of the
tabernacle. It is here referred to for the refrain which
occurs seven times over “May his
will toward me be done by the Lord of the one
face”, that is, by the one and only God who
is the father in heaven, he who “revealed himself, who disrobed himself, and presented
himself to the earth” (Renouf, ch. 71) in the person of his beloved son.
Horus
who comes from heaven says, “I am the food which perisheth not, in my name of
the self-originating force” (Rit., ch. 85). Jesus says, “I am the bread of life. This is the bread
which cometh down out of heaven that a man may eat thereof
and not die. I am the living bread which came down out
of heaven” (John VI. 48-51). Horus was not only the bread of
life derived from heaven and the producer of bread in
the character of Amsu the husbandman; he also gave his
flesh for food and his blood for drink. This, however,
was
not in the cannibal form of human flesh and blood, but
as the typical calf or the lamb. Jesus says, “The bread which I will give is my flesh”. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man
and drink his blood ye have not life in yourselves”, that is, in the human form, which is
proclaimed to be the bread which came down out of heaven
(John VI. 53, 58). Horus says,
“I am the possessor of bread in Annu. I have bread in heaven
with Ra” (ch. 53A). “There
are seven loaves in heaven at Annu with Ra” (ch. 53B). Ra is the father in heaven. He is
the provider of the bread of life that is given by the
son, and by Jesus in the Gospel. Jesus says, “My Father giveth you the true bread out of heaven. For the
bread of God is that which cometh down out of heaven,
and giveth life unto the world”, that is, in the person of
Jesus or of Horus. “Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life” (John VI. 32-35). Jesus,
like Horus, is the giver of the water of life which likewise
cometh from the Father (John IV. 10 and VII. 37). “Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood
and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto
me and drink. He that believeth on me, as the
scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers
of living water” (John VII. 37, 38). In
passing, we may notice that the great feast corresponds
to the Uaka festival by which the return of the water
of life in the inundation was celebrated; and that Osiris
was the lord of
the water as well as of the wine. Moreover, the miracle
of converting water into wine is very simply illustrated
by the picture of Osiris as the vine and also as the
water of renewal in
which the vine springs out of the water of life that
issues from beneath his throne. On the ground of natural
fact, Osiris was the water of life to the land of Egypt
in the inundation of
the Nile. He was adored in the temple of Isis at Philae
as “Osiris of the mysteries, who
springs from the returning waters”. He was the water of life to the souls in Amenta; and in
the eschatology Osiris is the water of life in Hetep,
the paradise of peace, to spirits perfected. In the Ritual,
Horus is the son of God through whom is given the water
that
cometh from the father, which is called the Ru of Osiris,
the divine liquid that flows from him as the ichor of
life. Horus speaks of quenching his thirst with the drops
(the Ru) of his
father Osiris. So Jesus draws and drinks and gives drink
from the well of living water which is the father’s; not the well of Jacob (John IV. 10, 15), but a well of
water springing up unto eternal life. [Page 901]
Again
and again, the status and character of Jesus as the
Sayer in the Gospels are only to be determined by
the mythical or mystical relationship. “Before Abraham was, I am”, is
one of the sayings ascribed to the supposed historical
Christ. Abraham is of course referred to as the typical
progenitor of the Jews. So in the Gospel of Thomas,
or Tum, the
child-Jesus says to his earth-father Joseph, “It is enough for thee to see me, not to touch
me. For thou knowest not who I am. If thou knewest thou
wouldst not grieve me. And although I am now with thee
I was made before thee” (ch. 5). The son who existed before
the father claims an immense antiquity, as a character
entirely mythical, but if the statement were made a hundred
times over in the märchen the meaning would be the
same. It is a saying of the Divine Child who came into
being earlier than God the Father as the offspring of
the Virgin Mother who is Jesus the fatherless Child of
Mary in the
Gospels, and of Neith or Iusãas in the Ritual. Joseph
also plays the part of Seb, the father, to Horus on
earth. “Seb giveth me his theophanies”, says Horus, but “more powerful am
I than the lord of time (Seb), I am the author and the
master of endless years” (Rit., ch. 82)
as an image of the Eternal.
In
the inscription of Hatshepsu, the child-Horus is
called “the elder of his mother’s
husband”. That is, he was older than Osiris, who became the father
according to the later sociology (Obelisk of Karnak,
l. 4). Such is the sole ground of origin upon which the
father
can be later than the son whether his name is Atum, Osiris
or Abraham.
The sayings involve a sayer who became the typical teacher
in person as Horus in the Osirian cult and Iu-em-hetep
in the religion of Atum-Ra, or Iao of the Egypto-gnostics
in the
Pistis Sophia. These are mentioned in the texts as the divine enunciators
of the “sayings”.
Each of them is a form of the sayer, word, logos, announcer,
or revealer in person, precisely the same as the Jesus
of the gospels, whether Apocryphal, Egypto-gnostic or
Canonical. The elder Horus was the virgin’s
child; he imaged the soul in matter, or, the body-soul
in the life on earth. He was the teacher of the lesser
mysteries in the mythology.
He was solar; hence the leader of that glorious company
of the twelve now stationed in the zodiac as rowers of
the bark for millions of years. The primary twelve were
the great gods
of Egypt twenty thousand years ago as the twelve powers
that rowed the solar bark for Ra around the circle of
the zodiacal signs. They became the Aeons of the gnostics,
twelve in number. As preservers of the light, they were
twelve
teachers in mythology, twelve followers of Horus who
are the twelve
apostles or disciples of the Egypto-gnostic Christ;
the seven and five being grouped together to constitute
the twelve.
At
his second coming when Horus of the resurrection
rose again as a spirit in the image of the holy ghost — he became the teacher of the greater mysteries to the twelve
who likewise had attained the status of spirits in
the eschatology, and who were now the twelve
to whom twelve thrones were promised in the heaven of eternity.
Horus
the word in person was the sayer to whom the sayings
were assigned. Hence the “sayings”, attributed to Iu-em-hetep and Hartatef in Egypt: the one
as child of the mother; the other as son [Page 902] of the father who wore the Atef-crown of Atum-Ra. Now this
mystical “word” of the mother, and the word-made-truth in Har-Mat-Kheru
are both apparent in the opening chapter of the Gospel
according to John. “In the beginning was
the word”, he says; as it had been in Iu-em-hetep, or child-Horus. “And the word became
flesh”, which it did in the virgin-blood of the immaculate Isis
or of Hathor-Iusãas. The doctrine of the second Horus follows,
but is inserted parenthetically. “And we beheld his
glory; glory as of the only begotten from the father”. But the Jesus of the genuine legend
was not yet begotten by or from the father. He was begotten
or christified in his baptism. Matthew has it that when
Jesus was baptized he went up straightway from the water;
and
lo the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit
of God. Descending as a dove and coming upon him; and
lo a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved
son
(ch.
III.
16, 17). In the original transformation scene this occurred
when the
child of the mother made his change into the beloved son
of God the father at the time of the baptism in the Osirian
mystery of Tattu (Rit., ch. 17). It was in his resurrection
from
the dead, here represented by the rising from the water,
and becoming bird-headed as a spirit, that Horus became
the beloved son of the father (Rit., ch. 9). John then
proceeds
to describe the transformation of Jesus in his baptism when “the spirit descended as a
dove out of heaven, and it abode upon him”, which change had already taken place before
the glory of the father could have been visible in the
person of the son. Now, this word that was in the beginning
had already manifested as the “sayer” of the sayings in the Ritual.
This is he who says, “I have come forth with the tongue of Ptah and the throat
of Hathor (Iusãas) that I may record the words of my father Atum with my mouth”. That is, as the
utterer of the “sayings” which were ascribed to the Egyptian Jesus as Iu-em-hetep,
the son of Hathor-Iusãas and Atum-Ra. We have no need to
go further back for the beginning of
the Word, as utterer of the sayings. The canonical Gospels
are based upon the “sayings” of Jesus; the Jesus that we claim to have been the son of
Atum at On; genealogically, the grandson of Ptah at Memphis,
and the author of the books of wisdom attributed to him
as
the Jesus of the Apocrypha, and Gospels of the Infancy.
Enough has been cited to show that the revelation ascribed to Jesus, the Christ of the
canonical Gospels, had been previously published in the Ritual of the resurrection and
uttered by Iu the Su of Atum-Ra (Iusa=Jesus or Tum=Thomas), who was and is and ever
will be the Egyptian Jesus independently of any personal historical character.
The
Egyptian Ritual contains the “sayings” or the words of wisdom that were attributed to
Ra the inspiring holy spirit. As god the father this was Tum (or Thomas). The utterer of the
“sayings” “with his mouth” was god the son, Iu (or Iu-em-hetep) the Su (son) who was
Iu-Su, the ever-coming son in the religion of Annu, and Iusu when rendered through the
Greek is Ιησους or Jesus.
A
large part of the Egyptian Book of the Dead consists
of “sayings”. The forty-second
chapter contains at least fifty sayings uttered by Horus in person respecting himself, his
father and his work [Page
903] of salvation. These are the sayings of Horus, or of the Osiris by
whom they are repeated in character. And as Horus the divine
word in person is the Lord whose name of Heru signifies
the Lord, these sayings of Horus are the Logia Kuriaka;
assuredly the oldest in the world, which we have now traced
to Iu-em-hetep, the Egypto-gnostic Jesus as the sayer for
Atum-Ra. These might be called the sayings of Ra
or Horus, of Tum or Thomas, of Iu or Iu-em-hetep, of Aan,
Taht or Hermes. But above all other names or titles they
were known as the words of Mati.
Also,
the Gospel of the Egyptians, represented by the Ritual,
was the Gospel according to Mati (or Matiu, with the
U, inherent). And as Mati was inculcated by means of
the sayings,
the sayings in the Ritual are the sayings of Mati as the
words of truth, justice, law, and rightfulness, and
the revelation of the resurrection. In Dr. Birch’s translation of “the funeral
Ritual” he has given the word “Mati” as a title of Taht-Aan the divine scribe; and from this
title the present writer deduced the names of Matthias
and Matthew, as the true reckoner, the just reckoner, and
keeper of the tablets for Maati in the hall of Maat.
Taht-Aan might be designated Mati. But, whether we take
the word Mati as a proper name or title of the scribe Taht
(whether called Hermes, Aan or Mati), he was the recorder
of the
sayings or Logia Kuriaka in the Ritual. But even if we do not take the name of Mati
to be a title of Tehuti, whence the names of Matthias and
Matthew, the character remains. Taht
was the scribe in the Maat or judgment-hall, also the
recorder of the sayings that were given by the Father in
Heaven to be uttered by Horus, and written down by the
fingers of
Taht. Now, according to the often-quoted testimony of Papias,
recorded in his last “commentary” on the “sayings of the Lord”, the basis of the canonical Gospels was laid in
a collection of sayings that were attributed to “The Lord”. He tells us that Matthew wrote
the sayings in the Hebrew dialect, and every one interpreted
them as best he was able. This was the current hearsay on the subject as reported by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis.
And here we might repeat, in passing, that the sayings
of Horus the lord in the Ritual were collected and written
down by Taht-Mati the scribe, and that Matthew, or Matthias,
corresponds to Mati both in character and by name. We have
no further use for the
statement beyond noting that the extant Gospel of Matthew
was evidently founded on a collection of those “wise sayings, dark sentences and parables” that constituted the
wisdom of the Egypto-gnostic Jesus, one late version of
which has been preserved in the Book of Ecclesiasticus,
entitled “the wisdom of Jesus”. The present writer has previously
suggested that the “sayings” collected by Matthew, which Papias had heard of as the
source of the Christian Gospels, were a form of the sayings
of Mati collected from the papyri of the Ritual. The Catholic
Christians were sorely troubled about the Egypto-gnostic
Gospels in possession of the “heretics” when they came to hear of them. These are
especially associated with the name of Valentinus,
an Egyptian gnostic, who came with these Egypto-gnostic
Gospels from Alexandria, and to whom Pistis Sophia and the “Gospel
of Truth” have been attributed. The “Gospel of Truth”, known to the Valentinian gnostics
as Egyptian, is [Page 904] the Gospel of Mati, or a collection of the sayings of Mati=Matthew.
The Logia of Matthias was the authentic gospel of the Carpocratean
gnostics. Clement of Alexandria quotes from the “Traditions of Matthias” two sayings which are not to be
found in the canonical Matthew. This proves the existence
of other sayings, oracles and divine words than the canonical
in the time of Clement, which were assigned to
Matthias=Mati. These sayings and traditions were acknowledged
as genuine by the gnostic followers of Carpocrates, Valentinus
and Basilides, who never did acknowledge any
historical founder, and whose Christ was the Egypto-gnostic
Jesus — he who was the
utterer of the sayings and traditions first written down
by the divine scribe Taht-Aan=John; or Taht-Mati=Matthew.
In writing his Gospel, Basilides appealed to a secret tradition which he had received from
Matthias; and Hippolytus reports that this secret tradition was derived by Matthias during
his private intercourse with the Saviour. But the gnostics never did acknowledge any
historic saviour. Their Christ was Horus, or the non-historical Jesus, and therefore the
private intercourse of Matthias with the Saviour was that of Mati with Horus the Christ of
the Ritual which contains the history of that intercourse.
We are told that it was after his Resurrection that Christ revealed the true gnosis to Peter,
John and James. (Clem. Alex. Eusebius, H. E. 2, 1). But
it was only the spiritual Horus or Christ that could
reveal the true gnosis, which is here admitted versus
the historic
personage. This revelation is post-resurrectional, the
same as with the gnostic Jesus in the
Pistis Sophia who expounds the mysteries to his twelve apostles on Mount
Olivet after he has risen from the dead. The “Manifestation of Truth” is the title of the great work of
Marcus the gnostic in the third century. The lost work
of Celsus was the Word of Truth or Logos Alethea.
In these instances the gospel is that of truth, the
word of truth; the true
gospel. And the gospel of Mati, we repeat, is equivalent
to the gospel or the sayings according to Matthew
which had been heard of by Papias as the nuclei of
the canonical
Gospels. Epiphanius, in speaking of the “Sabelian Heretics”, says, “The whole of their
errors and the main strength of their heterodoxy they derive
from some apocryphal books, but principally from that which
is called the Gospel of the Egyptians (which is a name some
have given to it) for in that many things are proposed in a hidden, mysterious
manner as
by our Saviour” (Ad.
Haeres, 26, 2), just as they are in the sayings of the
Ritual, the sayings of Hartatef, Iu-em-hetep or the sayings
of Jesus. In his tirade against gnosticism
Augustine echoes the name of Mati (for truth) and shows
its twofold nature in a peculiar way as “The Truth and Truth”. He says of the gnostics: “They used to repeat ‘Truth and
Truth,’ for thus did
they repeat her name to me, but she was nowhere amongst
them; for they spoke false things, not only concerning
thee who art the Truth in Truth, but even
concerning the elements of this world of ours, thy creation;
concerning which even the philosophers, who declared what
is true, I ought to have slighted for love of thee, O my
father, the supreme God, the beauty of all things beautiful.
O truth! truth! how inwardly did
the marrow of my soul sigh after thee even then, whilst
they were perpetually dinning thy name into my ears, and [Page 905] after various fashions with the mere voice, and with many
and huge books of theirs”.
(The
Gnostics and their Remains, King, p. 157.)
The
Book of the Dead or Ritual of the resurrection virtually
contains the Gospel of the Egyptians which was assumed
to have been lost. This is the Gospel according to
Mati or
Matiu, the original, as we maintain, of that which Papias
attributes to one “Matthew”, and
which was a collection of the sayings assigned to the
Jesus whom the non-gnostic Christians always assumed
to be historical. The Ritual preserves the sayings
of the
Egyptian Jesus who was Iu the Su, or Sa of Atum-Ra and
Iusãas at On, and who was otherwise known as the
Lord in different Egyptian religions. This was the
sayer to whom
the sayings are attributed in the “Festal Dirge” (Records, vol. IV, p. 115), and also in the
Ritual and other Hermetic Scriptures. And now we have
a form of the genuine Gospel of the Egyptians in the
Ritual itself. This is the original Evangelium Veritas: The Gospel
according to Mati=Matthew; to Aan=John; or Tum=Thomas.
From this we learn, by means of the comparative process,
that the literalizers of the legend and the carnalizers
of the
Egypto-gnostic Christ have but gathered up the empty
husks of Pagan tradition, minus the kernel of the Gnosis;
so
that when we have taken away all which pertains to Horus,
the
Egypto-gnostic Jesus, all that remains to base a Judean
history upon is nothing more than an accretion of blindly
ignorant belief; and that of all the Gospels and collections
of “Sayings” derived from the Ritual of the resurrection in the name
of Mati or Matthew, Aan or John, Thomas or Tum, Hermes,
Iu-em-hetep or Jesus, those that were canonized at last
as Christian are the most exoteric, and therefore
the farthest away from the underlying,
hidden, buried, but imperishable truth.
|