My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Have you read the entire Bible?

Have you read the entire Bible?

  • Yes

    Votes: 62 55.4%
  • No, but working on it

    Votes: 19 17.0%
  • No, my VSL isn't the Holy Bible

    Votes: 3 2.7%
  • No

    Votes: 28 25.0%

  • Total voters


Premium Member
A number of the books in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Bible used by Jews and early Christians, were later removed by Jews as being historical rather than divine. Eventually, they were separated out of the Old Testament and became the Apocrypha, and were usually published as part of the KJV, but apparently not anymore. I believe these books, or at least some of them, are still part if Catholic and Orthodox bibles.

The KJV at home when I grew up lacked the Apocrypha so it never occurred to me to look for those books in either the KJV bibles at lodge or in the Tanakh that appeared at lodge. A couple of years ago I finally got around to reading the Apocrypha so those books I've only seen in one translation so far.

I thought the difference was the books of the Tanakh were written in (Ancient) Hebrew while the books of the Apocrypha were written in (Attic?) Greek therefore I would not have expected to see any books from Apocrypha in the Tenakh. Hhhm, the word written here probably means the oldest known version is written in that language so the current best scholarship puts their composition in that language.


Registered User
You read Hebrew, (cool)!!! Have not received enough patience yet to learn a second language, still trying to master english after 55 years!!!

Bro Book
M.W.U.G.L. Of Fl: P.H.A.
Excelsior # 43
At pensacola
It was made easy for me. I started learning modern Hebrew in Kindergarten and Biblical in first grade (I went to Jewish religious private school). We started on Aramaic in 8th grade as we first started studying Talmud. That wasn't too hard because with some letter substitutions and grammar shifts, you can rely on knowledge of Hebrew,'and a short list of key words.

It definitely helped that Hebrew has been revived as a modern language, so that the classes themselves could be conducted entirely in Hebrew and without translation.

It's been a long time since school, so I definitely struggle more than I did when I was younger. It helps, though, that the daily prayers are in Hebrew bit keeps it familiar.

I wish schools would teach second languages as early as mine did. It's so much easier when you are that young. I started learning Frenchnat age 13, and I struggled. So much easier at 5 or 6. You absorb it like a sponge.

Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


Premium Member
One of the reasons I try to read the VSL of every faith I can. They are all sacred to their members and as such sacred to me. Less directly sacred to me, but sacred nonetheless.

I agree totally with your sentiments. Not only the typically "sacred" books, but also some books folks wouldn't consider so sacred.


Registered User
I should. We all should. I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. Which means the so-called books that were left out are not part of the Bible. If God intended them to be, they would be part of the Bible. Good history and interesting maybe but not part of the Bible. I don't try to read the whole thing because much is confusing to me. I tend to look for contradictions, old newspapermans habit. e.g early in Genesis it is written God created.....including man and woman. Then later on, it says Adam is lonely and God does the rib thing and gives him woman. Uh-Oh! In my mind, I question, what happened to the woman God created earlier in the chapter? I let my Pastor explain for me on Sundays.
BTW, old Hebrew writings do 'explain' the first woman. Her name was Lilith.


Premium Member
I don't know what bible it was but I read one In high school I had gotten from my grandmother when I was attending church. But I want to buy and read the bible they have on the alter normally for degrees. I just like that it's bigger and looks nice ;)


Registered User
I don't know what bible it was but I read one In high school I had gotten from my grandmother when I was attending church. But I want to buy and read the bible they have on the alter normally for degrees. I just like that it's bigger and looks nice ;)

I was presented with a Bible when I was raised in Arkansas. It is a large book with many Masonic references. In most large cities there will be a well stocked Christian book store. You should be able to find something that suits you there. Or, that source of everything books, Amazon.


Registered User
I need you help Brothers, I'm working on my research about bible verses for 1st 2nd and 3rd degree on Torah and Quran. (Islamic influence within masonry)


Premium Member
I need you help Brothers, I'm working on my research about bible verses for 1st 2nd and 3rd degree on Torah and Quran. (Islamic influence within masonry)

Since the events of our degrees take place in the Old Testament times you need to reference parts of the Tenach other than the Torah.

I have read the Koran but I have not studied it with that part of history in mind. Stories of the Old Testament do get mentioned in the Koran but I don't remember if stories from 1st and 2nd Kings are among them.


Registered User
Thanks Brothers, I read this article and now I got more confusion and questions on Slam and Freemasonry, at first my only purpose is to research on the bible verses but now I realize I need to expand my research. it mentioned here Prophet Elijah Muhammad connection to Freemason, and how it affects the Shia and Sunni Muslim. I hope you can time time to read this and share your thoughts, because as a young mason I am really eager to learn more.


Registered User
No. And I don't intend to. It is very confusing and I get hung up on apparent contradictions. e.g. Genesis begins: vs 27 ".....male and female He created them." But, wait, there is more. Later Adam is lonely and God does the rib thing (Gen. 2, vs. 22 & 23) and makes another female, Eve, for him. Huh? What happened to the first female from Gen. 1, verse 27? For me, that is an example of why reading the whole Bible is almost impossible for me. I do go to it often for reference however.


Premium Member
Thanks Brothers, I read this article and now I got more confusion and questions on Slam and Freemasonry, at first my only purpose is to research on the bible verses but now I realize I need to expand my research. it mentioned here Prophet Elijah Muhammad connection to Freemason, and how it affects the Shia and Sunni Muslim. I hope you can time time to read this and share your thoughts, because as a young mason I am really eager to learn more.

I found the article strangely organized. It discusses ancient history from before the unification of the two kingdoms then abruptly jumps to the modern era. If the goal is to find Egyptian roots that's a different project than finding Muslim roots and that distinction is glossed over in the article.

If you wish to look to the history of the Southern Kingdom as a root for many modern cultures, the Bible is not the place to look. Moses and the events surrounding him happened after the unification of the Northern Kingdom and Southern Kingdom. You need to look farther back into Egyptian history than appears in the Old Testament. Expect Egyptian history to disagree with the Old Testament on assorted details. Among them is about the time of Moses there was a dynasty of desert men suggesting the Jews were in charge and ejected in a revolt.

If you wish to look into the history of Muslim influence coming into Masonry the place to start is the emergence of records of Masonry in England about the same time as the records of the crusades and the Knights Templar. Following those two threads until they intersect.


Premium Member
Thanks Brothers, I read this article and now I got more confusion and questions on Slam and Freemasonry, at first my only purpose is to research on the bible verses but now I realize I need to expand my research. it mentioned here Prophet Elijah Muhammad connection to Freemason, and how it affects the Shia and Sunni Muslim. I hope you can time time to read this and share your thoughts, because as a young mason I am really eager to learn more.

Did ancient Greek religion and culture derive from Egypt?

The idea that Greek religion and philosophy has Egyptian origins derives, at least in part, from the writings of ancient Greek historians. In the fifth century BC Herodotus was told by Egyptian priests that the Greeks owed many aspects of their culture to the older and vastly impressive civilization of the Egyptians. Egyptian priests told Diodorus some of the same stories four centuries later. The church fathers in the second and third centuries AD also were eager to emphasize the dependency of Greece on the earlier cultures of the Egyptians and the Hebrews. They were eager to establish direct links between their civilization and that of Egypt because Egypt was a vastly older culture, with elaborate religious customs and impressive monuments. But despite their enthusiasm for Egypt and its material culture (an enthusiasm that was later revived in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Europe), they failed to understand Egyptian religion and the purpose of many Egyptian customs.

Classical scholars tend to be skeptical about the claims of the Greek historians because much of what these writers say does not conform to the facts as they are now known from the modern scholarship on ancient Egypt. For centuries Europeans had believed that the ancient historians knew that certain Greek religious customs and philosophical interests derived from Egypt. But two major discoveries changed that view. The first concerned a group of ancient philosophical treatises attributed to Hermes Trismegistus; these had throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance been thought of as Egyptian and early. But in 1614 the French scholar Isaac Casaubon demonstrated that the treatises were actually late and basically Greek. The second discovery was the decipherment of hieroglyphics, the official system of Egyptian writing, completed by 1836. Before decipherment, scholars had been compelled to rely on Greek sources for their understanding of Egyptian history and civilization. Once they were able to read real Egyptian texts, and could disregard the fanciful interpretations of hieroglyphics that had been circulating since late antiquity, it became clear to them that the relation of Egyptian to Greek culture was less close than they had imagined. Egyptian belonged to the Afroasiatic language family, while Greek was an Indo-European language, akin to Sanskrit and European languages like Latin.

On the basis of these new discoveries, European scholars realized that they could no longer take at face value what Herodotus, Diodorus, and the Church fathers had to say about Greece's debt to Egypt. Once it was possible to read Egyptian religious documents, and to see how the Egyptians themselves described their gods and told their myths, scholars could see that the ancient Greeks' accounts of Egyptian religion were superficial, and even misleading. Apparently Greek writers, despite their great admiration for Egypt, looked at Egyptian civilization through cultural blinkers that kept them from understanding any practices or customs that were significantly different from their own. The result was a portrait of Egypt that was both astigmatic and deeply Hellenized. Greek writers operated under other handicaps as well. They did not have access to records; there was no defined system of chronology. They could not read Egyptian inscriptions or question a variety of witnesses because they did not know the language. Hence they were compelled to exaggerate the importance of such resemblances as they could see or find.

Did the theory of the transmigration of souls come from Egypt?

Because he tended to rely on such analogies as he could find, Herodotus inevitably made some false conjectures. Herodotus thought that Pythagoras learned about the transmigration of souls from Egypt, when in fact the Egyptians did not believe in the transmigration of souls, as their careful and elaborate burial procedures clearly indicate. Herodotus tells us that he wrote down what the Egyptians told him; but when they spoke, what did he hear? Since he did not know Egyptian, his informants could have been Greeks living in the Greek colony of Naucratis in the Nile Delta, or Egyptians who knew some Greek. How well-informed were his informants? On the question of origins, at least, it seems that neither group had any more than a superficial understanding of the other's culture. Perhaps someone explained to him about the Egyptian "modes of existence," in which a human being could manifest itself both materially, or immaterially, as ka or baor a name, and that death was not an end, but a threshold leading to a new form of life. Belief in these varied modes of existence required that bodies be preserved after death, hence the Egyptian practice of mummification. Greeks, on the other hand, believed that the soul was separated from the body at death, and disposed of bodies either by burial or cremation. In any case, there is no reason to assume that Pythagoras or other Greeks who believed in transmigration, like the Orphics and/or the philosopher-poet Empedocles, got their ideas from anyone else: notions of transmigration have developed independently in other parts of the world.

Did Plato Study in Egypt?

Plato never says in any of his writings that he went to Egypt, and there is no reference to such a visit in the semi-biographical Seventh Epistle. But in his dialogues he refers to some Egyptian myths and customs. Plato, of course, was not a historian, and the rather superficial knowledge of Egypt displayed in his dialogues, along with vague chronology, is more characteristic of historical fiction than of history. In fact, anecdotes about his visit to Egypt only turn up in writers of the later Hellenistic period. What better way to explain his several references to Egypt than to assume that the author had some first-hand knowledge of the customs he describes? For authors dating from the fourth century and earlier, ancient biographers were compelled to use as their principal source material the author's own works. Later biographers add details to the story of Plato's Egyptian travels in order to provide aetiologies for the "Egyptian" reference in his writings. The most ironic anecdote of all is preserved by Clement of Alexandria: Plato studied in Egypt with Hermes the "Thrice Great" (Trismegistus). This is tantamount to saying that Plato studied with himself after his death. The works of Hermes could not have been written without the conceptual vocabulary developed by Plato and Aristotle, and is deeply influenced not just by Plato, but by the writings of Neoplatonist philosophers in the early centuries AD. In any case, whoever these teachers were, Plato seems never to have learned from them anything that is characteristically Egyptian, at least so far as we know about Egyptian theology from Egyptian sources. Instead, Plato's notion of the Egyptians remains similar to that of other Athenians; he did not so much change the Athenian notion of Egyptian culture as enrich and idealize it, so that it could provide a dramatic and instructive contrast with Athenian customs in his dialogues.

Was there ever such a thing as an "Egyptian Mystery System?"

Even after nineteenth-century scholars had shown that the reports of Greek visitors to Egypt misunderstood and misrepresented what they saw, the myth that Greek philosophy derived from Egypt is still in circulation. The notion of an Egyptian legacy was preserved in the literature and ritual of Freemasonry. It was from that source that Afrocentrists learned about it, and then sought to find confirmation for the primacy of Egypt over Greece in the fantasies of ancient writers. In order to show that Greek philosophy is in reality stolen Egyptian philosophy, Afrocentrist writers assume that there was in existence from earliest times an "Egyptian Mystery System," which was copied by the Greeks. The existence of this "Mystery System" is integral to the notion that Greek philosophy was stolen, because it provides a reason for assuming that Greek philosophers had a particular reason for studying in Egypt, and for claiming that what they later wrote about in Greek was originally Egyptian philosophy. But in reality, the notion of an Egyptian Mystery System is a relatively modern fiction, based on ancient sources that are distinctively Greek, or Greco-Roman, and from the early centuries AD.

In their original form, ancient mysteries had nothing to do with schools or particular courses of study; rather, the ritual was intended to put the initiate into contact with the divinity, and if special preparation or rituals were involved, it was to familiarize the initiate with the practices and liturgy of that particular cult. The origin of the connection of Mysteries to education in fact dates only to the eighteenth century. It derives from a particular work of European fiction, published in 1731. This was the three-volume work Sethos, a History or Biography, based on Unpublished Memoirs of Ancient Egypt, by the Abbé Jean Terrasson (1670-1750), a French priest, who was Professor of Greek at the Collège de France. Although now completely forgotten, the novel was widely read in the eighteenth century..Of course Terrasson did not have access to any Egyptian information about Egypt, since hieroglyphics were not to be deciphered until more than a century later.

Why claim that Greek philosophy was stolen from Egypt?

Perhaps the most influential Afrocentrist text is Stolen Legacy, a work that has been in wide circulation since its publication in 1954. Its author, George G. M. James, writes that "the term Greek philosophy, to begin with is a misnomer, for there is no such philosophy in existence." He argues that the Greeks "did not possess the native ability essential to the development of philosophy." Rather, he states that "the Greeks were not the authors of Greek philosophy, but the Black people of North Africa, The Egyptians." It is not hard to understand why James wishes to give credit for the Greek achievement to the Egyptians, even if there is little or no historical foundation for his claims. Like the other nationalistic myths, the story of a "Stolen Legacy" both offers an explanation for past suffering, and provides a source of ethnic pride.

But although the myth may encourage and perhaps even "empower" African-Americans, its use has a destructive side, which cannot and should not be overlooked. First of all, it offers them a "story" instead of history. It also suggests that African-Americans need to learn only what they choose to believe about the past. But in so doing, the Afrocentric myth seeks to shelter them from learning what all other ethnic groups must learn, and indeed, face up to, namely the full scope of their history.

What people on earth have had a completely glorious history? While we point to the great achievements of the Greeks, anyone who has studied ancient Greek civilization knows that they also made terrible and foolish mistakes. Isn't treating African-Americans differently from the rest of humankind just another form of segregation and condescension? Implied discrimination is the most destructive aspect of Afrocentrism, but there are other serious problems as well. Teaching the myth of the Stolen Legacy as if it were history robs the ancient Greeks and their modern descendants of a heritage that rightly belongs to them. Why discriminate against them when discrimination is the issue? In addition, the myth deprives the ancient Egyptians of their proper history and robs them of their actual legacy. The Egypt of the myth of the Stolen Legacy is a wholly European Egypt, as imagined by Greek and Roman writers, and further elaborated in eighteenth-century France. Ancient Egyptian civilization deserves to be remembered (and respected) for what it was, and not for what Europeans, ancient and modern, have imagined it to be.

What is the evidence for a "Stolen Legacy?"

James's idea of ancient Egypt is fundamentally the imaginary "Mystical Egypt" of Freemasonry. He speaks of grades of initiation. In these Mysteries, as the Freemasons imagined them, Neophyte initiates must learn self-control and self-knowledge. He believes that Moses was an initiate into the Egyptian mysteries, and that Socrates reached the grade of Master Mason. In his description of the Greek philosophy, he emphasizes the Four Elements that play such a key role in Terrasson's Memphis and Masonic initiation ceremonies. He speaks of the Masonic symbol of the Open Eye, which based on an Egyptian hieroglyph but in Masonry has come specifically to represent the Master Mind. As in the University/Mystery system invented by Terrasson, Egyptian temples are used as libraries and observatories.

What then are the Greeks supposed to have stolen from the Egyptians? Are there any texts in existence that be found to verify the claim that Greek philosophy was stolen from Egypt? How was the "transfer" of Egyptian materials to Greece accomplished? If we examine what James says about the way in which the "transfer" was supposed to have been carried out, we will find that that few or no historical data can be summoned to support it. In fact, in order to construct his argument, James overlooked or ignored much existing evidence.

Did Aristotle raid the Library at Alexandria?

No ancient source says that Alexander and Aristotle raided the Library at Alexandria. That they do not do so is not surprising, because it is unlikely that Aristotle ever went there. Aristotle was Alexander's tutor when Alexander was young, but he did not accompany him on his military campaign. Even if he had gone there, it is hard to see how he could have stolen books from the library in Alexandria. Although Alexandria was founded in 331 BC, it did not begin to function as a city until after 323. Aristotle died in 322. The library was assembled around 297 under the direction of Demetrius of Phaleron, a pupil of Aristotle's. Most of the books it contained were in Greek.

Did Aristotle plagiarize Egyptian sources?

If Aristotle had stolen his ideas from the Egyptians, as James asserts, James should be able to provide parallel Egyptian and Greek texts showing frequent verbal correspondences. As it is, he can only come up with a vague similarity between two titles. One is Aristotle's treatise On the Soul, and the other the modern English name of a collection of Egyptian texts,The Book of the Dead. These funerary texts, which the Egyptians themselves called the Book of Coming Forth by Day, are designed to protect the soul during its dangerous journey through Duat, the Egyptian underworld, on its way to life of bliss in the Field of Reeds. Both Aristotle and the Egyptians believed in the notion of a "soul." But there the similarity ends. Even a cursory glance at a translation of the Book of the Dead reveals that it is not a philosophical treatise, but rather a series of ritual prescriptions to ensure the soul's passage to the next world. It is completely different from Aristotle's abstract consideration of the nature of the soul. James fails to mention that the two texts cannot be profitably compared, because their aims and methods are so different. Instead, he accounts for the discrepancy by claiming that Aristotle's theory is only a "very small portion" of the Egyptian "philosophy" of the soul, as described in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. On that basis, one could claim that any later writer plagiarized from any earlier writer who touched on the same subject. But why not assume instead that the later writer was influenced by the earlier writer, or even came up with the some of the same ideas independently, especially if those ideas are widespread, like the notion that human beings have souls?

James also alleges that Aristotle's theory of matter was taken from the so-called Memphite Theology. The Memphite Theology is a religious document inscribed on a stone tablet by Egyptian priests in the eighth century BC, but said to have been copied from an ancient papyrus. The archaic language of the text suggests that the original dates from sometime in the second millennium BC. According to James, Aristotle took from the Memphite theology his doctrine that matter, motion, and time are eternal, along with the principle of opposites, and the concept of the unmoved mover. James does not say how Aristotle would have known about this inscription, which was at the time located in Memphis and not in the Library of Alexandria, or explain how he would have been able to read it. But even if Aristotle had had some way of finding out about it, he would have had no use for it in his philosophical writings. The Memphis text, like the EgyptianBook of the Dead, is a work of a totally different character from any of Aristotle's treatises.

The Memphite text describes the creation of the world as then known (that is, Upper and Lower Egypt). It relates how Ptah's mind (or "heart") and thought (or "tongue") created the universe and all living creatures in it: "for every word of the god came about through what the heart devised and the tongue commanded." From one of his manifestations, the primordial waters of chaos, the sun-god Atum was born. When Ptah has finished creating the universe, he rests from his labors: "Ptah was satisfied after he had made all things and all divine words."

In form and in substance this account has virtually nothing in common with Aristotle's abstract theology. In fact, inMetaphysics Book 11, Aristotle discards the traditional notion of a universe that is created by a divinity or divinities, in favor of a metaphysical argument. If there is eternal motion, there is eternal substance, and behind that, an immaterial and eternal source of activity, whose existence can be deduced from the eternal circular motion of the heavens. The source of this activity is what is called in English translation the "unmoved mover."All that this theory has in common with the Memphite theology is a concern with creation of the universe. On the same insubstantial basis, it would be possible to argue that Aristotle stole his philosophy from the story of creation in the first book of Genesis.

Not out of Africa by Mary Lefkowitz


Registered User
I have it sitting in my bedside drawer. I've considered reading it, but never have gotten to it. I did start reading it when I was in my early teens. I don't recall how much I read, but it ended up being put aside. Maybe I'll try again one day soon.


Registered User

3 - Solomon's Seal and the Treasure of the World


Solomon’s Seal and the Treasure of the World

As with Tolkien’s One Ring, the Ring of Solomon went underground, or under a mountain if you like, disappearing from sight without textual mention for centuries. The legend survived and eventually resurfaced in writing; we can note and anchor it there. Not so the ring itself; the truth is, the fate of the ring can only be guessed.

Before we do that, though, let’s address the legend and the shape it took. There’s the Western tradition and an Eastern one, both of which naturally center on esoteric mysticism and occult practice.

In the Abrahamic tradition of the West, the ring surfaces in one of the books of the historian Josephus, composed in the first century CE. His is the mindset of an aristocratic Hebrew scholar descended from royal lineage on his mother’s side and from the High Priests of the temple of Jerusalem on his father’s. A dynamic Jewish commander and brash opportunist, he survived the destruction of his nation by Rome successfully enough to become a Roman citizen, a diplomat, chronicler, and historian - writing many books about his people and its history. His work constitutes an accurate view of events and concerns at the time (from a certain perspective) as well as a voicing of some of the traditions passed down within Jewish culture. He mentions Solomon and magic rings in the following passage:

“…God also enabled him [Solomon] to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanative to men. He composed such incantations also by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind him the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons, so that they never return; and this method of cure is of great force unto this day; for I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers. The manner of the cure was this: He put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniac, after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils; and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more, making still no mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or basin full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it, and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man: and when this was done, the skill and wisdom of Solomon was shewed very manifestly...” (History of the Jews; 8:2:5)


This remarkable passage doesn’t mention Solomon’s ring, but rather a contemporary magic ring in context with Solomon’s fabled occult skills with demons, incantations which apparently had been transmitted to others down through the ages. It sets the stage for what will come.

Not long afterward, about the 3rd-5th century CE, the Babylonian Talmud is written by Jewish scholars in Mesopotamia, and it contains extensive references to Solomon, Asmodeus, and a ring with the divine name engraved (Tractate Gittin, Mishna).

A long account of Ashmedai appears in the Talmud, relating how King Solomon succeeded in capturing him and forcing him into service for the building of the Temple. Later Aggadic legend depicts him as a merry trickster rather than an evil demon, while according to some sources his influence is actually beneficent and is directed to guarding the moral order of the universe.

The Demon Asmodeus and Solomon Trade Places

For many years after the Temple was completed, Solomon kept the demon Ashmedai prisoner in his dungeon. One day Solomon said to him, “How can you call yourself King of Demons if I, a mere man of flesh and blood, can hold you captive?"

"Release me from my chains and give me your magic ring," answered Ashmedai. "Then we shall see who is king."

Confident of his own power, Solomon granted Ashmedai's wish. Instantly the demon seized the king's crown, and with a single flick of his powerful wing, hurled Solomon four hundred miles from Jerusalem.

Ashmedai then flung Solomon's magic ring into the sea, where it was swallowed by a fish. For Ashmedai thought, "If anyone should gain possession of the ring, he will know what I have done."

Then the Demon King disguised himself as Solomon and sat down upon his golden throne. –


According to the Talmud, Solomon’s ring was engraved with the shem ha-meforesh—the Ineffable Name of GOD. And Islamic authors tell us that it contained “the Most Great Name of GOD,” along with four jewels that had been given to Solomon by angels. The jewels are said to be inscribed with phrases. The first jewel gave Solomon dominion over the winds, and was inscribed “To GOD [Allah] belong power and greatness.” The second gave him dominion over birds and beasts, and was inscribed “Let all living things praise GOD.” The third gave him dominion over earth and water, and was inscribed “Heaven and earth are the servants of GOD.” The fourth gave him dominion over the jinn, and was inscribed “There is no GOD but GOD, and Muhammad is His messenger.” [There exist several curious explanations for the anachronism. Another variant of the story has the jewels bestowing power over the four elements.]

The ring served King Solomon as a signet ring, for sealing letters and decrees. But it was also the source of his supernatural powers. With it he was able to control the winds, and to fly about on a wind-borne carpet. It allowed him to communicate with animals (and even with flowers). But its most notable use involved the jinn. By means of his ring, Solomon could summon these otherworldly spirits and make them do his bidding. He could also exorcise them from possessed persons. –


The legend of the Seal of Solomon was developed primarily by medieval Arabic writers, who related that the ring was engraved with the name of God and was given to the king directly from heaven. The ring was made from brass and iron, and the two parts were used to seal written commands to good and evil spirits, respectively. In one tale, a demon, either Asmodeus, or Sakhr, obtained possession of the ring and ruled in Solomon's stead for forty days. In a variant of the tale of the ring of Polycrates from Herodotus, the demon eventually threw the ring into the sea, where it was swallowed by a fish, caught by a fisherman, and served to Solomon. –Wikipedia


So it was that the Medieval Arabic authors, delving into the implications of Josephus and the Talmud, began to refer to it regularly as the signet ring of Solomon, or the Seal of Solomon, a practice followed later by Jewish Kabbalists and Western occultists and Alchemists, complete with mythology, esoteric symbols and sigils, and prescriptive and ritual incantations with an emphasis on the summoning of spirits and demons. Because of Josephus’s reference to a heritage of magical teachings from Solomon, the validity of an ancient magical/ritual corpus had a foundation that could be pointed to, and lends justification for such claims made to this day. Before long the signet itself would gain emphasis as the source of the ring’s power (in conjunction with incantation), not from the jewels or a holy stone with the name of God written on it. The Seal was depicted in either a pentagram or hexagram shape; the latter also known as Shield of David or Star of David in Jewish tradition. However, the evolution of the tale of the ring into the Great Study of the Seal sprang from medieval Islam in Spain, North Africa, and the Middle East.


Through the study and practice of occult magic the one Seal developed into many seals, or keys - symbols for personal and ritual magic to guide the focus of the magician, as well as talismans for protective shielding against hostile energies, often inscribed on amulets to be worn. Whole systems were developed as an aid to the practice and grimoires were compiled in esoteric fashion, largely for purposes of spirit and demonic contact in pursuit of some magical goal of will.



We know that the hexagram is a very ancient symbol with multi-cultural lineage, the two interlaced triangles representing (a) a twining of dual powers or functions of the phenomenal world or (b) aligned point to point as a conjunction, vortex or wormhole symbol (actually this is a pentagram).


To the hexagram and pentagram were added various other sigils and geometric conflations, often compounding the sacred and magical elements with astrological themes. The evolution of adding sigils and runes of pagan mysticism, numbers, Hebrew letters, and alchemical symbols into format with the hexagram, or with the similarly ancient pentagram, and morphing the geometry into a coherent shape, is said to have developed the subtle tuning of the talisman, to assist the working of energies according to the will and skill of the occult practitioner. Use of the Seals of Solomon for occult practice and study has grown over time, and in modern practice is still associated with the summoning of spirits and demons.



The Eastern tradition concerns the making of the ring, and so we'll turn back to Solomon's time, close on a thousand years BCE.

It begins with a very ancient meteorite, fallen somewhere in the Tibetan/Mongolian mountainous plateau, that was formed in the shape of a shield tetrahedron and was composed of a greenish tektite sometimes called Moldavite (technically, if it doesn’t come from Moldavia, or modern Slovakia, then it’s not Moldavite.) These tektites are glassy and magnetic, formed as the meteor’s surface is vaporized in the atmospheric fireball and re-formed in glassy ripples, found scattered near the impact site or as a skin striated upon the remnants of the meteorite itself, which would have been metallic. They exist in various colors, but are quite rare.


Their magnetic properties are curious and are considered to be psychic accelerators, varying from stone to stone, from meteor to meteor. The stone which concerns us is undoubtedly the most famous tektitic meteor of all.

It’s called the Chintamani stone, or the wish-fulfilling jewel, or the Treasure of the World, and it figures in the traditions of both the Buddhist and Hindu canon. In Buddhism the Chintamani is sometimes said to be one of four relics that came in a chest that fell from the sky. Within Hinduism it is connected with the gods, Vishnu and Ganesha. In Hindu tradition it is often depicted as a fabulous jewel in the possession of the Naga king or as on the forehead of the Makara. --Wikipedia

A maṇi-jewel; magical jewel, which manifests whatever one wishes for (Skt. maṇi, cintā-maṇi, cintāmaṇi-ratna). According to one's desires, treasures, clothing and food can be manifested, while sickness and suffering can be removed, water can be purified, etc. It is a metaphor for the teachings and virtues of the Buddha. … Said to be obtained from the dragon-king of the sea, or the head of the great fish, Makara, or the relics of a Buddha. –Digital Dictionary of Buddhism

Skt: Cinta-mani. This is represented in art as a bluish colored stone as large as a crystal ball. Mani literally means "stone", in contrast to the word "jewel" (ratna). The term Cinta means "thought". The Cintamani is literally the "thought-stone" or the stone which magnifies one's thoughts, i.e., fulfils one's wishes. –China Buddhism Encyclopedia

According to many occult writings, the Stone is kept in the hidden (or sometimes underground) city of Shambhala where live the Ascended Masters, or the Eight Immortals (Taoist), beings of high resonance and consciousness; fragments of it are lent out to humanity to assist them in the time of great change or opportunity. Ancient Tibetan texts reveal a tradition of shards having been sent to King Solomon, Genghis Khan, and Akbar the Great, among others. Nicholas Roerich, the Russian artist and mystic, Rosicrucian Martinist and Kalachakra initiate, received just such a shard in 1923, laid in an antique casket, to present to the League of Nations which was forming at the time; upon the failure of the League, Roerich returned ‘the Stone’ to the East.


Chintamani, the wish-fulfilling jewel mentioned in Tibetan religious tradition and Hindu legend, was one of the names Nicholas and Helena Roerich used for a possession which had two manifestations: firstly as a ‘spiritual treasure’, by which was meant the psychic faculty or ‘instrument’ each of them utilized; and secondly as the symbolic counterpart of the ‘treasure’ in material reality, which was a talisman of mineral nature. This is said to have been a ‘chip’ or piece from the main mass of a large meteoritic stone located at a place known by a legendary name – Shambhala. […]


The ‘chips’ or pieces of the Chintamani stone were believed to have a special property, which was to enhance psychic communication, and in particular to open channels to receive instruction and guidance from the ‘Ascended Masters’ of Shambhala. Pieces of the Chintamani stone were said to maintain a ‘magnetic connection’ with a main stone located at Shambhala – which, for the Roerichs, was likely to have had an identifiable location. The idea is found most clearly in Nicholas Roerich’s book Himalayas – Abode of Light, and the passage in which it occurs is perhaps the most informative statement about the Stone in any of the Roerichs’ writings: ‘Many… wonderful things have been told by educated Buriats and Mongols… of the miraculous stone coming from a far star, which is appearing in different places before great events… The chief body of this stone is lying in Shambhala, and a small piece of it is given out and wanders all over the earth, keeping magnetic connection with the main stone’. –Chintamani of the Roerichs, Chap. 1

Roerich described the stone as greenish Moldavite with an undeniable psycho-magnetic energy; the Russian paranormal scientist Barchenko, who analyzed it in Moscow before sending it on to Roerich in Paris on behalf of the Panchen Lama of Tibet, wrote that the extra-terrestrial stone is stronger than penetrating Radium and its dynamic rays can instantly increase a person’s own vibratory frequency.

Many myths are attached to the stone. It is also considered by some to symbolize an aspect of awakening or attainment, but may not be a physical object - contradicting the old Tibetan tradition of sending out pieces of an actual stone to exceptional persons.

For us, the meteoritic reality of the stone is first alluded to by Madame Blavatsky after she visited the Tashilumpo Monastery in Tibet and its Panchen Lama, late in the nineteenth century. Nicholas Roerich’s extensive contacts with Russian, Mongolian, Indian, and Tibetan personages led to the shard being sent to him. Helena Roerich, Nicholas’s wife, an associate and translator of Blavatsky, was a spiritual medium who encouraged her husband and son to travel to Tibet and Mongolia in 1925 after the failure of the League of Nations, to return the stone and find Shambhala. Helena Roerich handled the stone while her husband had it in his keeping, used it for séances, and wrote about it in her diaries.

There is not enough room in this essay to fully expound on this topic, so we’ll here leave the East and the modern age and return to King Solomon, who reportedly received a shard of the Chintamani as a gift from the ‘King of the World’ in Shambhala, a piece of which he then set into his ring. This then would be the ring that conjured ‘demons’, a greenish stone, a conveyor of great wisdom – a quality for which Solomon was renowned, in some legends found inside a great fish, a psycho-magnetic tektite from an iron meteorite that enabled a resonant connection with its parent specimen and with the Ascended Masters in Shambhala.

It is possible to speculate that if this were in fact the scenario, the high priest and elders of Jerusalem might have distrusted the ringstone’s pedigree and powers, and hid it away deep under the Temple Mount after Solomon had died, so that it may be lost.



Professor Solomon:


Kaballah Online/Practical Kabbala:

China Buddhism Encyclopedia:


Roerich Museum NY:

Roerich and Chintamani: http://roerichandchintamani.wordpre...inary-tales-of-an-extra-terrestrial-talisman/


Biblioteca Pleyades:

good read everyone!!!!!late but FANTASTIC JULY 4TH!!!!!!!!!!blessings!!!!!!!!!always HUMBLED AND ILLUMINATED when come back here!!!!!!!!!always!!!!!!!!!!!always!!!!!!!!!!weekend!!!!!!!!!