Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00346)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Erica Letzerich <eletzerich@y...> 
wrote:
> I am trying to find out is if there is
> anything deeper on the subject.

Well, yes, but it uiis too complex to describe in an e-mail. Think 
Blavatsly's metrological or arithetic key (one of the seven keys.) In 
early Christianity many things came in threes, which invariably 
corresponded to the three parts of the trichotomy, the body, soul, 
and [Holy] Spirit. Bapism was described as an "initiation" in 
ancient writings, but what was only vaguely told to catechumens 
and "babes" (which is what members of the first degree were called( 
was that there were two other degrees. The second was 
called "aspiring to perfection" and the third "rgw pwefwcr degree," 
the Greek word for perfect meaning :of full age" as ditinguished 
from :babes/"

Anyway, these mystics thought, right or wrong, that man iis really 
not an intrinsically evil being, but that he is made so by evil 
eexternal entities which attached themselves to his heart (thinking 
principle) for the purpose of vicariously experienving sensual 
pleasures. The worl of the second degree consisted of srudying 
esoteric theories and going through a series of exorcisms (consisting 
mainly of prayer and fasting) which were believed to expel these evil 
entities and "purify" the heart. When the process was comp;eted the 
ystic was initiated into the third degree and taught the technique of 
Merkabah mysticism, one purpose of which was to attain the Beatific 
Vision. This is the esoteric meaning of the beatitude that the pure 
of heart shall see God.

It was believed that these evil entities could conceal their presence 
so as not to be expelled, so that seemingly normal people could have 
these entities attached to their hearts. The esoteruic meaning of 
the statement that Mary had seven devils cast out of her is therefore 
not that she was crazy but that she completed the wok of the second 
degree under the direct supervision of her teacher, Jesus. None of 
this is supposition, there are ancient documents ine existece which 
support all these statements but the general public is unaware of 
them. That is furthermore only the uppermost tip of the esoteriuc 
Christian iceberg, the content of which is known to only a few people 
in the world and which has never been written plainly in book form, 
despite ghastly productions like the book by A Besant. There is no 
book worth reading on the subject that I know of. The secret 
teachings are still secret after two millenia.

No comment on whether these theories were true in a scientific sense.

> In general lines what researches mention on the
> subject, is that there was an antagonism between Peter
> and Mary

I have never seen evidence of that, but there was a three way 
antagonism between Peter, Paul, and James. The edoteric schools 
which descended from the three were in rivalry with each other.

> everything indicates that Mary indeed
> was one of the greatest disciples of Jesus, not a
> lover as some say.

Not everything. THE GOSPEL OF PHILIP makes it quite clear Mary was 
Jesus' lover. So there was a tradition to that effect in ancient 
times.