The only way for economists to earn public faith in their profession, is to repent, and cease from practicing cabalists’ magic.
One year ago, economists were trusted far less than hairdressers, and the ordinary man or woman in the street.
Today, as the curtain closes on a tumultuous year Two Thousand Seventeen of the Common (until recently, Christian) Era, and the portents of war, of financial, social, ecological and civilisational collapse, and the gloomy dawn of a new Dark Age ruled by a small cabal of neo-feudal globalist oligarchs hang ominously in the air, the economics profession continues to do what it does best.
Bicker in the piazza. While all around, Rome is burning.
Case in point.
A recent protest by rebel economists invoked the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther’s fabled 95 Theses. In reply, the hierarchy issued a pontifical bull defending their “unhealthy intellectual monopoly” (my emphasis):
It has become routine to assault the “dismal science” with a dismal ignorance of what economics actually involves. Writers, students and even some social scientists from other disciplines who have very little exposure to what economists do are quick to point the finger and declare economics as a veil for vested interest, and dismiss it as a way of thinking that is fossilised in numbers.
Sometimes, though, the criticism can even come from within the economics bubble itself.
Oh the irony.
Economic theory has always been a veil for vested interest: the interest of the Usurocracy.
Economists exist in a bubble of historical ignorance. They broadly fail to search outside their prescribed textbooks for knowledge and understanding of the true origin of the fundamental ideas and beliefs within their own discipline. Heterodox economists calling for a Reformation, or revolution in economic thinking, are just as endarkened as the orthodoxy.
Consider a singular example often cited by a leading economic rebel:
Economics doesn’t need a Reformation: it needs a scientific revolution, similar to that triggered by Copernicus’s publication of “On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres” in 1543. [..] This was the first great scientific revolution, and it inverted our understanding of the Universe: rather than the Sun orbiting the Earth, the Earth orbited the Sun; rather than the stars being nearby, they were far away; and gravity, not God, told the “Heavenly Bodies” how to move. [..] The revolution in astronomy that Copernicus triggered with his fundamentally different paradigm took over a century. Galileo played a key role here, by building the first serious telescope and observing four of Jupiter’s moons… [..] This revolution didn’t come peacefully, and it wasn’t led by the Ptolemaic astronomers themselves, but by new entrants to the field—including, crucially, Isaac Newton, whose equations of motion provided a mathematical explanation for why the orbits of planets were elliptical rather than circular.
Let’s unpack this. Historical context is vital.
In the Battle of Ideas between ‘science’ and ‘superstition’, as always, it’s about money:
Then, as now, all wars are bankers’ wars.
Copernicus spent many years in Italy. Evidence suggests that ‘his’ idea crystallised while studying at the University of Padua. This was the seat of libertas scholastica (academic freedom) near Venice: the fertile ground for ideas and schemes offering ‘utility’ in the confrontation, or subversion, of political or religious threats to the Venetian Republic’s profits and power. Its first offered subjects were law, and theology. Copernicus himself is said to have attributed the discovery of heliocentrism to the ancient Greek astronomer, Aristarchus of Samos.
Galileo was a paid agent and likely dupe of Paolo Sarpi, chief of the Venetian intelligence and philosophical ridotto (think tank) networks. The controversy between Galileo and the Church was masterminded by Sarpi – his trial represented “one of the greatest public relations successes of all time.” Galileo’s status as Europe’s premier scientist followed the publication of ‘his’ astronomical findings. Sarpi was the “advisor, author, and director” of the entire project. In March 1610 he wrote that a telescope had been found in Holland two years before (my emphasis):
Once this was found, our mathematician [Galileo] of Padua and some of our other people who are not ignorant of these arts began to use the telescope on celestial bodies, adjusting it and refining it for the purpose….”
The fame of alchemist and cabalist Isaac Newton and his alleged “discoveries” was also engineered by the Venetian “Deep State” network, for financial and political gain, in context of Anglo-French rivalries. The mastermind was Padua native and member of the Venetian nobility, Antonio Schinella de Conti, the duplicitous intermediary in the Leibniz-Newton calculus controversy.
The Church hierarchy may have been empirically wrong in upholding the geocentric model of the Universe. However, the weight of emphasis given to these key historical events by modern academia abjectly fails to identify the vested financial motives underpinning the ‘scientific revolution’.
Throughout the Renaissance – also known as the Hermetic Reformation – the immensely powerful Venetian oligarchy employed its sophisticated pan-European network of agents in active promotion of any ideas convenient to its financial interests. Its chief opponent, and perennial on-again-off-again antagonist or ally, was Europe’s moral and financial regulatory authority: the Catholic Church.
The Church’s teachings on usury, and a spiritual kingdom – in essence, a moral paradigm of patient endurance in suffering, and of doing good in the service of others in this life, in anticipation of spiritual reward – were anathema to a usurious patrician nobility and merchant oligarchy possessed of centuries-old envies and aspirations for earthly rule, through money and the sword.
Modern science did not begin with rare enlightened “free thinkers”, armed with reason and experimental evidence, courageously challenging the authority of superstitious obscurantism.
Nor did economic ‘science’ develop as a result of “physics envy”.
Modern science – including physics, and the ‘science’ of economics – began with thirteenth century cabalist theurgy.
Black (under cover of “white”) magic.
While the Church promoted God as the invisible force telling the Heavenly Bodies how to move (“by the Word of God”), the Venetian oligarchy promoted cabalist theurgy as the means by which man could gain control over the “spirits” controlling the motions of the Sun (gold), Moon (silver) and the planets Above. These heavenly “powers” were the key to the universal order of creation, including the world Below.
Rather than God as the invisible, personal force who could be humbly petitioned to grant requests for health and wealth “according to His will”, cabalist theurgy promoted the idea of acquiring power to command the invisible, intermediary forces responsible for health and wealth.
The secret gnosis (knowledge) of how to do this, was the Art of magic words – magic letters, embedded with magic numbers.
The Duality Principle embedded in the double entry bookkeeping of medieval Italian merchants, and in the “rational”, pleasure/profit-maximising, magic equilibrium assumptions and equations of modern economists, is the “Enlightened” modern gnostics’ scientific title for ancient Babylonian occult philosophistry.
As proponents of black magic, the Venetian Usurocracy was initially hostile to the flourishing development of empirical science in rival Florence during the early Renaissance. Around 1600 however, the Paolo Sarpi network began rebranding the Venetian Republic as the embodiment of the most advanced and sophisticated science, representing the highest expression of scientific values.
Over ensuing centuries, the Usurocracy’s network successfully smuggled its cabalist theurgic principles into all areas of modern science, promoting formalism, reductionist materialism, and in a supremely ironic example of cabalist-derived Orwellian doublethink, the fetishism of institutional (i.e, academic ‘expert’) authority.
Economists have an immensely important role in shaping the policies, regulations, and values of modern society. Few, if any, have the faintest clue that by conflating biological, material, and moral values using the balance sheet ‘logic’ of double entry, the Venetian Giammaria Ortes, and subsequent luminaries of the British Radical liberal philosophical school such as Jeremy Bentham, cleverly eliminated the “moral element” from their ‘scientific’ discipline: one that was once called Moral Philosophy.
Those who do not study history, or who restrict their search for knowledge and truth to within safe reading and thinking distance of academically-approved, textbook lines of inquiry, will never discover the true origin and sign-ificance of the ideas, and (amoral) values that they practice and preach.
One wonders if St. Peter may not have been forecasting the coming of modernity’s neo-Babylonian economic theurgists, and not merely pseudo-Christian theologians, when he wrote his Second Epistle warning against false teachers:
These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption…
– St. Peter the Apostle
 E. Michael Jones, “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its Impact on World History”, Fidelity Press (2008), p. 257 – “On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther sent 95 objections to the Catholic Church’s doctrine on indulgences to Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz. According to legend, he also nailed the theses to the door of the Schlosskirche in Wittenberg.”
 Jerzy Dobrzycki and Leszek Hajdukiewicz, “Kopernik, Mikołaj”, Polski słownik biograficzny (Polish Biographical Dictionary), vol. XIV, Wrocław, 1969, p. 6 (cited in Wikipedia, Nicolaus Copernicus In Italy, fn. 55; online 31 Dec 2017)
 Owen Gingrich, “Did Copernicus Owe a Debt to Aristarchus?”, Journal for the History of Astronomy, vol. 16, no. 1 (February 1985), pp. 37–42. (cited in Wikipedia, Nicolaus Copernicus, fn. 6; online 31 December 2017) – “Copernicus was aware of Aristarchus’ heliocentric theory and cited him in an early (unpublished) manuscript of De Revolutionibus (which still survives), though he removed the reference from his final published manuscript.” (note A)
 George Kish, “A Source Book in Geography”, Harvard University Press (1978), p. 51 (cited in Wikipedia, Aristarchus of Samos, fn 2; online 31 December 2017)
 Richard S. Westfall, “Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton”, Cambridge University 1983, p. 771ff (cited in Wikipedia, Antonio Schinella Conti, fn 1; online 31 December 2017)
 James D. Heiser, Prisci Theologi and the Hermetic Reformation in the Fifteenth Century, 2011
Caught between many worlds,
Three years I carried them all,
Saviour, stranger, danger, betrayer.
The scarlet thread, said to bind eternal,
Whitens when pure sacrifice accepted.
With salted sight I die outside your walls,
Wondering if you kept your half,
Or wrapped it all around my horns.
See here ye Causes why in London,
So many Men are made, & undone,
That Arts, & honest Trading drop,
To Swarm about ye Devils shop, (A)
Who Cuts out (B) Fortunes Golden Haunches,
Trapping their Souls with Lotts and Chances,
Shareing em from Blue Garters down
To all Blue Aprons in the Town.
Here all Religions flock together,
Like Tame and Wild Fowl of a Feather,
Leaving their strife Religious bustle,
Kneel down to play at pitch and Hussle; (C)
Thus when the Sheepherds are at play,
Their flocks must surely go Astray;
The woeful Cause yt in these Times
(E) Honour, & (D) honesty, are Crimes,
That publickly are punish’d by
(G) Self Interest, and (F) Vilany;
So much for monys magick power
Guess at the Rest you find out more.
The South Sea Company was a British stock company founded in 1711. The company was part of the treaty during the War of Spanish Succession, which was traded in return for the company’s assumption of debt run up by England during the war. The South Sea Company was plagued with financial speculation, corruption and credulity that caused the south sea bubble in 1720 (Sperling 5). Hogarth illustrates a scene that reflects the reality of the corruption behind the bubble. When the bubble burst because of rising stock prices due to speculation, a large portion of company investors were left broke as the company crashed. These company investors were people in all walks of society. As a fraud between the company’s directors and cabinet ministers surfaced, political scandal began to cause mass chaos.
The print shows a London scene, with a statue of a giant to the left; a column to the right is erected, its base originally reads “Erected in memory of the destruction of the City by the Great Fire in 1666” but Hogarth alters the inscription to “This monument was erected in memory of the destruction of the city by the South Sea in 1720” (Stevens, 8). Hogarth does this to achieve equalizing the tragic results of the two events. St. Paul’s Cathedral is in the background. The monument represents the city’s greed juxtaposed with St. Paul’s, which represents the city’s charity (Stevens 9). In the center of the print is a large construction, which seems to represent a merry-go-round of figures representing all levels of society, indicating the ways in which the South Sea Bubble affected all classes of people. These figures include a clergyman, a prostitute, a hag, and a Scottish nobleman (Walcot 415). A goat sits atop a sign that says “Who I Ride.” [“Who’l Ride” – CM]. In the upper left, a long line of women are entering a building with a sign that says “raffling for husbands with lottery fortunes in here”. On top of the building is a set of stag antlers (Walcot 413), which is symbolic of women cuckolding or leaving husbands who have lost their money in the crash [or is it? — CM]. To the left, “Fortune” hangs by her hair, blindfolded as the devil chops off parts of her body and throws them to the crowd below (Tate). She is hanging from a balcony of the Devil’s shop, aka Guild Hall (Walcot 413). To the right, the figure of “Honesty” is broken upon a wheel of self-interest (416). A man who represents Villainy, whip in hand and a mask upside down between his legs, stares at a figure representing “Honor” as if ready to beat him. Beneath Villainy stands a monkey wearing [taking, stealing – CM] the cloak of Honor, representing mimicry (Walcot 416). A Puritan, a Jew, and a Catholic stand at bottom left, ignoring the chaos and focused on the gambling, not having learned the harsh lesson about speculation. Finally, the figure of Trade, at the very front, appears to be dead. The corpse of Trade is easy to overlook in the ensuing chaos. 
Let us discover what William Hogarth meant in saying that the “Devil trap[s] their Souls .. Shareing [th]em from Blue Garters down, To all Blue Aprons in the Town.”
A superficial interpretation would be that he was referring to the entire hierarchy of English society, from the highest down to the lowest classes.
In 1348, King Edward III had founded the Most Noble Order of the Garter, the highest order of English chivalry. Membership is limited to the Sovereign, the Prince of Wales, and no more than 24 members, or Companions. The garter itself is made of blue velvet trimmed with gold, and is worn on the left leg, below the knee:
When the ‘Garter’ was instituted, about 1348, its color was light blue — like the color of the regalia in private English Lodges — but soon after the accession of George I, in 1714, this light blue was changed to the present deep blue shade.
But what of the “Blue Aprons”? Were the lowest classes in England associated in any way with this symbol? Not that I am aware.
There is another possibility.
William Hogarth was a freemason. His father-in-law, Sir James Thornhill, was also an active member of the Craft, in “a period when to be a freemason was a fashionable activity in an environment where joining and attending clubs, coffee houses and various societies was very commonplace. Freemasonry stood out as an institution because of the quality and high ranking standing of those who had become members…”
Hogarth “was born into an impoverished family, and he needed Thornhill’s introduction to join a suitable Lodge consisting of men well above his own social standing.” He designed the Grand Steward’s Jewel for the Grand Lodge of England, and eventually became a Grand Steward in 1734.
Perhaps Hogarth, a renowned satirist, was mocking the victims of “The South Sea Scheme” at a deeper level than is commonly understood.
The Blue Apron is likely a cryptic reference to Freemasonry. A white lambskin or leather apron is said to be “the Badge of a Mason and [..] is more honorable than the Star and Garter or any other order that could be conferred upon him by King, Prince, Potentate or any other person except he be a Mason.”
Recall that Hogarth depicted Villainy with a face mask that is hanging, inverted, over his groin.
On March 17th 1721 – shortly after the South Sea bubble had burst – the first Grand Lodge ordained that:
“None but the Grand Master, his Deputy and Wardens shall wear their Jewels in Gold or gilt pendant to Blue Ribbons about their Necks, and White Leather aprons with Blue Silk; which Sort of Aprons may also be worn by former Grand Officers.”
This was the first official mention of Blue Silk as a trimming for aprons, and it is clear that the Blue was originally reserved for Grand Officers. The Rawlinson MS., c. 1740, mentions: “Two Grand Masters aprons Lined with Garter blue silk and turned over two inches with white silk strings.”
Originally Garter Blue was a very pale blue, “of a watery tinge”, changed under Edward VI to a mazarine or light sky blue and changed again during the Hanoverian period [probably 1745] to the current darker hue.
So we see that there is clearly a connection between the Blue Garter of the Most Noble Order of royal chivalry, and the Blue-trimmed Apron of the Grand Masters of Freemasonry.
However, there is still more here than meets the eye.
The Blue Garter is also a symbol of the Sacred Marriage:
“Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Blue, and a Silver Sixpence in her Shoe.”
It represents purity, virginity, and fidelity … and, a confirmation of the deflowering of the bride:
[T]he garter toss originates from an early 14th century French tradition called “Fingering the Garter”. [..] Post-wedding ceremony, couples would retire to the wedding chamber to consummate their marriage in order to make it all legally binding and ascertain the bride was an untouched virgin (and thus all offspring were genetically linked to the groom and his inheritance). Guests were then invited up to the room to see the groom’s deflowering handiwork, usually in the form of showing off the bed linens with their telltale post-virgin blood stain OR claiming the bride’s garter as a symbol of said consummation (likely a leftover from the tradition of the wedding girdle removal). In French the term for this was “fingering the garter,” guests checking to see if the bride was no longer a virgin by feeling near her garter. [..] In English traditions, guests would sneak into the marriage chamber to then attempt to throw discarded lingerie and stockings on the couple, whoever hit the noses of the couple with a stocking being the next to marry. In order to protect the bride from this groping crowd, grooms began throwing the garter to the mobs in order to keep them at a distance from their new bride.
It is also a symbol of good fortune … to the man, other than the husband, who gets his hands on it first.
The Devil traps their souls with lotts and chances,
Shareing them from Blue Garters down,
To all Blue Aprons in the Town
Perhaps what Hogarth really meant, was that the Devil had share-d the souls of the Most Noble (“Blue Garters”), down “To” all the Grand Master Masons (“Blue Aprons”).
In light of the revelations of corruption and “fraud between the company’s directors and cabinet ministers”, our interpretation may be more than merely, err, speculative.
What does all of this have to do with Bitcoin?
For a deeper interpretation and exposition of the occult (hidden) meaning of the stag antlers over the building marked “Raffleing for Husbands with Lottery Fortunes in Here”, see Stags and Unicorns: The Alchemical Root of the Normalisation of Cheating.
 Hogarth Satires, The South Sea Scheme (online; accessed 20 December 2017)
 Leon Zeldis FPS, 33°, PSGC, Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite for the State of Israel Honorary Adjunct Grand Master, Masonic Blue (online; accessed 20 December 2017)
 Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon, A few famous masons (online, accessed 20 December, 2017)
 W. Bro. Yasher Beresiner, William Hogarth: The Man, The Artist, and His masonic Circle (online, accessed 20 December 2017)
 Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon, William Hogarth (online, accessed 20 December, 2017)
 Masonic Dictionary, William Hogarth (online, accessed 20 December, 2017)
 Brooks C. Dodson, Jr., Masonry and the Order of the Garter (online, accessed 20 December 2017)
 Bro. F.R. Worts, M.A., P.A.G.D.C., The apron and its symbolism (online, accessed 20 December 2017)
 Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon, Masonic blue (online, accessed 20 December 2017)
 Nuptial Adventures, Traditions: Fingering the Garter, Symbols of Virginity, and Public Mortification (online; accessed 20 December 2017)
 ibid., – “Weddings in most cultures have been considered a special moment to transfer luck or fortune, be it money, land, inheritance, good fortune, the possibility of future weddings, etc. In ye olden European wedding traditions, obtaining a trinket from the bride was always thought to be a harbinger of luck or at least future nuptials. After the couple exchanged vows, the attendees would sometimes rush up to the bride, ripping sections of her wedding finery off of her in order to obtain some of her wedding providence. The bride, in order to protect herself and her fashion choices, would then sometimes throw favors to the crowd, scarves, tokens, ribbons, garters, in order to make it to her own reception. If not quick enough though, her clothing and her garter would be forcibly removed, attendees flipping over the bride to remove her garters with her skirts over her head.”
The Sages say truly
That two animals are in this forest:
One glorious, beautiful, and swift,
A great and strong deer;
The other an unicorn.
He that knows how to tame and master them by Art,
To couple them together,
And to lead them in and out of the forest,
May justly be called a Master.
For we rightly judge
That he has attained the golden flesh,
And may triumph everywhere;
Nay, he may bear rule over great Augustus.
The Book Of Lambspring
To anyone paying attention, it should be obvious that the inverted moral value (vice) of infidelity that is actively and very profitably promoted in the half light of public consciousness, in adultery-themed “dating” sites, apps, and “reality” TV, is now being actively normalised by mainstream media, along with ‘liberal’ academia.
This “normalisation” of cheating has exactly the same root as the accounting, banking, and money systems.
As we have seen recently, the first step in an alchemical experiment is called nigredo (“blackening”; a synonym for corruption, decay, sacrifice, death, negation).
In double entry bookkeeping, the foundation of the accounting, banking, and money systems, the first rule is also an act of negation:
For every debit there must be an equal credit, and for every credit there must be an equal debit.
In Cabala, the first act of creation by “Ein-Sof” (Infinite God) is said to be an act of self-negation (“tzimtzum”; contraction, concealment).
In mainstream “financial intermediation” theory of banking, the first principle is a pretence of self-negation: supposedly, the mere coupling together of two opposites, Savers and Borrowers.
This “normalisation” of cheating – a direct attack on the cornerstone social bonds of traditional marriage and family – aims to bring about the corruption – and destruction – of human society.
Or, as the “philosophers” of the “royal Art” prefer to frame it, the “transformation” of human society.
The first step in the “experiment”, is the decay, destruction, or negation, of traditional moral values. Only then can the alchemist bring forth “gold” from the “base”; the “higher”, from the “lower”; Order, out of Chaos.
“I hate purity, I hate goodness! I don’t want virtue to exist anywhere. I want everyone to be corrupt to the bones.”
“You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”
Cui bono? (to whose benefit?)
Or, as I have taken to saying, the Usurocracy*.
It should not be necessary to spell out the myriad economic impacts of broken marriages, and broken homes, inclining “preferences” toward an increased “demand” (need) for debt: the Usurocracy’s exclusive monopoly “product”.
One can only wonder at the magnitude of economic inefficiencies – and wealth inequality – associated with the increased “need” to pay billions in fees to the “family” lawyer class, for example.
I would like to draw public attention to the alchemical symbolism evidencing this once covert, and now increasingly overt goal, of normalising infidelity – that is to say, lying and cheating.
In previous essays we have seen that the ancient “Art” of alchemy is an andocentric, misogynous, predatory sex magic system, whose hidden goal is the theft, manipulation, and domination, of the feminine birth-force (life, “growth”) energy, or “gynergy”.
For power and profit.
Throughout recorded history, alchemical adepts have advanced their deception by combining exoteric (outer) and esoteric (inner) doctrines, with the difference between the two cloaked in metaphor, allegory and symbolism – in particular, by means of the rebus (Latin rēbus “by means of objects”) or punning principle – thus hiding the truth in plain sight:
The Rebis (from Latin res bina, meaning dual or double matter) is the end product of the alchemical magnum opus or great work.
As we have also seen, the alchemical “Art” is based on two philosophical principles: the Unity of Opposites (exoteric), and the Law of Inversion (esoteric).
The “profane” are gulled – enchanted – by the outward appearance of beauty, nobility and virtue. Only the “illuminated” understand that the appearance cloaks a diabolic inner doctrine of inversion, that is explicitly contra naturam.
To illustrate this, let us now consider the alchemical allegory of the Stag and the Unicorn, from the Book of [Abraham] Lambspring (Frankfurt, 1625):
It seems that this little book was first published under the title De Lapide Philosophico Triga Chemicum (Prague 1599) compiled by the Frenchman Nicolas Barnaud prominent in the alchemical circles around Rudolf II.
Appearing at face value to be a work of “spiritual” alchemy, “[i]ts verses point to the soul and spirit involved in the alchemical transformation and its fifteen emblems are evocative symbols of these inner processes.”
The parable of the “deer” and the Unicorn appears to explain that the forest is “the Body”, the deer is “the Soul” , and the unicorn “the Spirit”. Knowing how to master all three “by Art” appears to be the goal aspired to.
The tinctures in alchemy relate also to the substances of the Mass, the red wine, the blood, and the white wafer, the body of Christ. Administration of the Sacraments was seen as spiritualising the souls of the partakers. In alchemical terms these white and red stones or tinctures served much the same purpose, though the alchemists achieved this, not through the intermediacy of a priest but by their own inner work of transmutation. Here alchemy links directly with the Grail stories which use similar parallels between the Grail and the Sacraments. The red tincture was occasionally symbolised by a stag bearing antlers. The stag being seen as a noble masculine animal. This links in with the Unicorn as a symbol of the white or feminine tincture. In some alchemical illustrations, such as that of the late 16th century Book of Lambspring, the Stag and Unicorn meet in the forest of the soul as part of the process of inner transformation.
We have already learned, however, that the secret inner doctrine of alchemy is one of sexual magic, and that the inversion (or reversal) of values lies at its heart.
The Stag as a symbol is often associated with the Sun [Sola ☉, Mars ♂, Asset, active, creditor] and the Unicorn is usually linked with the Moon [Luna ☽, Venus ♀, Liability, passive, debtor]. These polarities are to be coupled together through the alchemist’s work.
Seen in this hidden ‘light’ – from the “other side” of the Sun or “Black Sun” – the parable of the Stag and the Unicorn is actually a metaphor for the infidelity and promiscuity (Latin infidēlitas: unfaithful, disloyal, treacherous) that is essential to the alchemists’ sex magic rituals; where, in the act of “coupl[ing] them together”, the initiated adept uses a cunning trick (upaya, method) to steal the seed of the woman for his own empowerment, and enrichment:
He that knows how to tame and master them by Art,
To couple them together,
And to lead them in and out of the forest,
May justly be called a Master.
Rather than the “deer” representing nobility of the Soul, for the alchemical adept it represents the rutting Stag’s “active” (creditor) sexual activity with all the females (debtor) in the herd.
late 12c., probably from Old English stagga “a stag,” from Proto-Germanic *stag-, from PIE root *stegh- “to stick, prick, sting.” The Old Norse equivalent was used of male foxes, tomcats, and dragons; and the Germanic root word perhaps originally meant “male animal in its prime.”
Adjectival meaning “pertaining to or composed of males only” (as in stag party) is American English slang from 1848. Compare bull-dance, slang for one performed by men only (1845); gander (n.) also was used in the same sense. Stag film “pornographic movie” is attested from 1968. Stag beetle, so called for its “horns,” is from 1680s.
Rather than the Unicorn representing the Spirit, for the initiated it represents a cynical mockery of what is to him a mythical creature – the chaste and faithful female; symbolic also of the Holy Spirit, the Wisdom of God, the Virgin Mary, and the Christian saint.
Herodotus, a Greek historian who lived c. 490 to 425 BC, wrote that “the foulest Babylonian custom” was the practice of sacred prostitution. Once in their lifetimes, all women were required to sit in the temple of Ishtar/Inanna (“Aphrodite” to the greek Herodotus) and “have intercourse with some stranger” in return for money which was given to the temple:
Once a woman has taken her place there, she does not go away to her home before some stranger has cast money into her lap, and had intercourse with her outside the temple; but while he casts the money, he must say, “I invite you in the name of Mylitta” (that is the Assyrian name for Aphrodite). It does not matter what sum the money is; the woman will never refuse, for that would be a sin, the money being by this act made sacred. So she follows the first man who casts it and rejects no one. [..] So then the women that are fair and tall are soon free to depart, but the uncomely have long to wait because they cannot fulfill the law; for some of them remain for three years, or four.
It is noteworthy that “a fraction of female gender researchers” dispute Herodotus’ account, claiming that the entire notion began with a few “patriarchal” Greek writers concocting defamatory tales about cultural or political enemies.
What is of importance is that the existence of “holy prostitution” in Babylon has been the widely-held belief, for thousands of years. Given this accepted milieu then, it is little wonder that the adepts of “Hermes, the Sage, the Babylonian” are seen in alchemical texts referring to the “base” subjects of their experiments as “whores”, and in at least one instance, as “the Babylonian whore”.
The final four verses of the parable clearly allude to what is the true goal of the alchemist: the attainment of “golden flesh”, that he may “triumph everywhere” and “rule over great Augustus” (the first Roman emperor).
As we saw in Cheating Females: The Production Of Inequality, By Illusions of Equality, the “gold” sought by the alchemists is threefold:
[T]he “Alchemy of life: he can make his life last as long as the sun and moon[; the] Alchemy of body: he can make his body eternally be but sixteen years old[; and the] Alchemy of enjoyments: he can turn iron and copper into gold”. These three experiments, then, primarily concern two goals: firstly the attainment of immortality, and secondly the production of gold, that is, material wealth.
I would draw your attention to two further points of special interest, before leaving you to contemplate the entire parable for yourself.
Firstly, bear in mind that the exoteric (public) doctrine actively promotes the idea of “equality” of the two “universal” genders. Then observe the subtle, egocentric misogyny implied by the lyrical praise of the Male (“glorious, beautiful and swift”, “great and strong”, etc), sharply contrasted by the absence of any adjectives, much less any superlatives, applied to the Female. One might get the impression (“The other an unicorn”) that the Female is merely an afterthought, barely worth mentioning at all.
Secondly, observe that the Stag is depicted as proudly boasting six (6) tines on each of its antlers, and bear in mind that a stag’s antlers function as objects of sexual attraction, and as weapons in fights for control over harems.
The Book of Lambspring,
A Noble Ancient Philosopher,
Concerning the Philosophical Stone;
Rendered into Latin Verse by
Nicholas Barnaud Delphinas,
Doctor of Medicine, a zealous Student of this Art.
HEAR WITHOUT TERROR THAT IN THE FOREST ARE HIDDEN A DEER AND AN UNICORN
The Sages say truly
That two animals are in this forest:
One glorious, beautiful, and swift,
A great and strong deer;
The other an unicorn.
They are concealed in the forest,
But happy shall that man be called
Who shall snare and capture them.
The Masters shew you here clearly
That in all places
These two animals wander about in forests
(But know that the forest is but one).
If we apply the parable to our Art,
We shall call the forest the Body.
That will be rightly and truly said.
The unicorn will be the Spirit at all times.
The deer desires no other name
But that of the Soul; which name no man shall take away from it.
He that knows how to tame and master them by Art,
To couple them together,
And to lead them in and out of the forest,
May justly be called a Master.
For we rightly judge
That he has attained the golden flesh,
And may triumph everywhere;
Nay, he may bear rule over great Augustus.
For further reading on the topic of sexual “freedom”, I can recommend E. Michael Jones’ Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control:
“Thus, a good man, though a slave, is free; but a wicked man, though a king, is a slave. For he serves, not one man alone, but, what is worse, as many masters as he has vices.”
– St. Augustine, City of God
Writing at the time of the collapse of the Roman Empire, St. Augustine both revolutionized and brought to a close antiquity’s idea of freedom. A man was not a slave by nature or by law, as Aristotle claimed. His freedom was a function of his moral state. A man had as many masters as he had vices. This insight would provide the basis for the most sophisticated form of social control known to man.
Fourteen hundred years later, a decadent French aristocrat turned that tradition on its head when he wrote that “the freest of people are they who are most friendly to murder.” Like St. Augustine, the Marquis de Sade would agree that freedom was a function of morals. Unlike St. Augustine, Sade proposed a revolution in sexual morals to accompany the political revolution then taking place in France. Libido Dominandi – the term is taken from Book I of Augustine’s City of God – is the definitive history of that sexual revolution, from 1773 to the present.
Unlike the standard version of the sexual revolution, Libido Dominandi shows how sexual liberation was from its inception a form of control. Those who wished to liberate man from the moral order needed to impose social controls as soon as they succeeded because liberated libido led inevitably to anarchy. Aldous Huxley wrote in his preface to the 1946 edition of Brave New World that “as political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase.” This book is about the converse of that statement. It explains how the rhetoric of sexual freedom was used to engineer a system of covert political and social control. Over the course of the two-hundred-year span covered by this book, the development of technologies of communication, reproduction, and psychic control – including psychotherapy, behaviorism, advertising, sensitivity training, pornography, and plain old blackmail – allowed the Enlightenment and its heirs to turn Augustine’s insight on its head and create masters out of men’s vices. Libido Dominandi is the story of how that happened.
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
– Jesus of Nazareth (Sermon on the Mount; Matthew 5:27-28)
* Credit for the term “Usurocracy” goes to Dr John Dunn, author of Renaissance: Counter Renaissance
Abraham Lambspring, The Book of Lambspring, Nicholas Barnaud Delphinas Ed.
Adam McLean, A Threefold Journey Through The Book Of Lambspring
Adam McLean, Animal Symbolism In Alchemy
Herodotus, The Histories (1.199), A.D. Godley Ed., Cambridge. Harvard University Press. 1920
V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny
Come, my love, my dove, & pour
From thy cup the serpent wine
Brimmed & breathless -secret store
Of my crimson concubine
Surfeit spirit in the shrine-
Devil -Godess -Virgin -Whore.
In my recent two-part essay “Cheating Females” (Part 1, Part 2) we traced evidences back to circa 3200 BC showing that the ‘modern’ accounting, banking, and economic systems are built on two fundamental principles of cabalist alchemy – the Unity of Opposites, and the Law of Inversion – and are nothing less than a predatory, radically misogynous metaphor for ancient Babylonian sex magic.
A few quotations as a reminder:
“the woman … involved is an object, a representation of power … women are merely spiritual batteries..”
“In European alchemy the coarse starting material for the experiments is known as the prima materia and is of a fundamentally feminine nature. Likewise, as in the tantras, base substances such as excrement, urine, menstrual blood, part of corpses and so forth are named in the alchemic texts, no matter which culture they belong to, as the physical starting materials for the experiments. Symbolically, the primal material is described in images such as ‘snake, dragon, toad, viper, python’. It is also represented by every conceivable repulsive female figure — by witches, mixers of poison, whores, chthonic goddesses, by the ‘dragon mother’ so often cited in depth psychology. All these are metaphors for the demonic nature of the feminine…”
“These misogynous terms for the prima materia are images which on the one hand seek to describe the untamed, death-bringing nature; on the other one readily admit that a secret force capable of producing everything in the phenomenal world is hidden within ‘Mother Nature’. Nature in alchemy has at its disposal the universal power of birth. It represents the primordial matrix [▽] of the elements, the massa confusa, the great chaos, from which creation bursts forth.”
One text talks of ‘the transformation of the Babylonian whore into a virgin’..”
“The general term for body orifice, KA in Sumerian or bãbu in Akkadian, is expressly liminal because it also means door or gate. The vaginal opening, bãb uri and the anus bãb šuburri are imagined then as thresholds. From literary and incantation texts we know that the body and its orifices were regarded as sites of transition, especially when aroused.”
“In an Old Babylonian incantation (spell) .. the ‘chief tools of magic making are the female’s aroused body orifices’.”
“If one sips the sukra out of his mudra’s genitals with his mouth, then the process is described as being ‘from mouth to mouth’. [..] Through this oriental ‘Last Supper’ the power and the strength of the women are passed over to the man.”
Those who have read my two essays should now be able to recognise the alchemical and financial significance of key metaphorical concepts (eg, “spend”) embedded in the following poem written by the infamous ‘magician’, Aleister Crowley, to his “wisdom consort”, the Swiss-American Leah Hirsig:
In 1919, after seeking out Aleister Crowley due to her interest in the occult, she was consecrated as his Babalon or, “Scarlet Woman”, taking the name Alostrael, “the womb (or grail) of God.” Leah Hirsig wrote in her 1921 diary: “I dedicate myself wholly to The Great Work. I will work for wickedness, I will kill my heart, I will be shameless before all men, I will freely prostitute my body to all creatures”.
18+ Do not read if extreme vulgarity offends.
Crowley’s own comments that “I think I’ll collect all my filth in one poem and mark it Leah..” and “an occasional publishable line thrown in when I weakened” should serve as fair warning.
My bold and/or italicised emphasis is added.
by Aleister Crowley
MONDAY JUNE 21 1920
5.25pm to 5.15am
Against all principals, and in breach of two promises, I have sat up all night in the snows, writing a poem to Leah.
One long poem — an occasional publishable line thrown in when I weakened.
7.00 am: I think I’ll collect all my filth in one poem and mark it Leah in plain figures.
10.00 am: I think I did.
Goddess above me!
Snake of the slime
Alostrael, love me!
Our master, the devil
Prospers the revel.
Tread with your foot
My heart til it hurt!
Tread on it, put
The smear of your dirt
On my love, on my shame
Scribble your name!
Straddle your Beast
My Masterful Bitch
With the thighs of you greased
With the Sweat of your Itch!
Spit on me, scarlet
Mouth of my harlot!
Now from your wide
Raw cunt, the abyss,
Spend spouting the tide
Of your sizzling piss
In my mouth; oh my Whore
Let it pour, let it pour!
You stale like a mare
And fart as you stale;
Through straggled wet hair
You spout like a whale.
Splash the manure
And piss from the sewer.
Down to me quick
With your tooth on my lip
And your hand on my prick
With feverish grip
My life as it drinks—
How your breath stinks!
Your hand, oh unclean
Your hand that has wasted
Your love, in obscene
Black masses, that tasted
Your soul, it’s your hand!
Feel my prick stand!
Your life times from lewd
Little girl, to mature
Worn whore that has chewed
Your own pile of manure.
Your hand was the key to—
And now your frig me, too!
Rub all the much
Of your cunt on me, Leah
Cunt, let me suck
All your glued gonorrhea!
Cunt without end!
Amen! til you spend!
Cunt! you have harboured
All dirt and disease
In your slimy unbarbered
Loose hole, with its cheese
And its monthlies, and pox
You chewer of cocks!
Cunt, you have sucked
Up pricks, you squirted
Out foetuses, fucked
Til bastards you blurted
Out into space—
Spend on my face!
Rub all your gleet away!
Envenom the arrow.
May your pox eat away
Me to the marrow.
Cunt you have got me;
I love you to rot me!
Spend again, lash me!
Leah, one spasm
Scream to splash me.
Slime of the chasm
Choke me with spilth
Of your sow-belly’s filth.
Stab your demonic
Smile to my brain!
Soak me in cognac
Cunt and cocaine;
Sprawl on me! Sit
On my mouth, Leah, shit!
Shit on me, slut!
Creamy the curds
That drip from your gut!
Greasy the turds!
Dribble your dung
On the tip of my tongue!
Churn on me, Leah!
Twist on your thighs!
Into my eyes!
Splutter out shit
From the bottomless pit.
Turn to me, chew it
With me, Leah, whore!
Vomit it, spew it
And lick it once more.
We can make lust
Drunk on Disgust.
Splay out your gut,
Your ass hole, my lover!
You buggering slut,
I know where to shove her!
There she goes, plumb
Up the foul Bitch’s bum!
Sackful of skin
And bone, as I speak
I’ll bugger your grin
Into a shriek.
Bugger you, slut
Bugger your gut!
Wriggle, you hog!
Wrench at the pin!
Wrench at it, drag
It half out, suck it in!
Scream, you hog dirt, you!
I want it to hurt you!
From your Cocksucker’s hole!
Belch out the dirt
From your Syphillis soul.
Splutter foul words
Through your supper of turds!
May the Devil our lord, your
Soul scribble over
With sayings of ordure!
Call me your lover!
Slave of the gut
Of the arse of a slut!
Call me your sewer
Of spilth and snot
Your fart-sniffer, chewer
Of the shit in your slot.
Call me that as you rave
In the rape of your slave.
Fuck! Shit! Let me come
I’ve spent in your bum.
Shit! Give me the muck
From my whore’s arse, slick
Dirt of my prick!
Eat it, you sow!
I’m your dog, fuck, shit!
Swallow it now!
Rest for a bit!
Satan, you gave
A crown to a slave.
I am your fate, on
Your belly, above you.
I swear it by Satan
Leah, I love you.
I’m going insane
Do it again!
Source: Hermetic Library
In his essay on cocaine [Freud] gave an account of the religious practices associated with it among South American Indians. [..] These rather irresponsible activities in the quest for a “magical drug” to achieve mood modification, are reminiscent of the whole history of magic. As we shall see when we discuss his essay on demoniacal possession, Freud cites overcoming incapacity for work as a major motive for entering a pact with the Devil. [..] Indeed, perhaps, one of the important reasons for the aversion to “magical drugs” is that they are reminiscent of black magic. A major psychological feature of black magic is that it provides immediate gains without immediate payment. The payment is feared as “really” both deferred and excessive. Thus deferred and excessive payment for immediate gain is characteristically associated with pacts with the Devil. The aversion towards usury, in current times as well as throughout the history of Christianity, is not completely coincidental. For usury is exactly a social expression of the Satanic Pact, immediate gains and excessive deferred payment.
I feel sure that with a little more experience we shall use the new-found bounty of nature quite differently from the way in which the rich use it to-day, and will map out for ourselves a plan of life quite otherwise than theirs.
For many ages to come the old Adam will be so strong in us that everybody will need to do some work if he is to be contented. We shall do more things for ourselves than is usual with the rich to-day, only too glad to have small duties and tasks and routines. But beyond this, we shall endeavour to spread the bread thin on the butter – to make what work there is still to be done to be as widely shared as possible. Three-hour shifts or a fifteen-hour week may put off the problem for a great while. For three hours a day is quite enough to satisfy the old Adam in most of us!
There are changes in other spheres too which we must expect to come. When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value. The love of money as a possession – as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life – will be recognised for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease. All kinds of social customs and economic practices, affecting the distribution of wealth and of economic rewards and penalties, which we now maintain at all costs, however distasteful and unjust they may be in themselves, because they are tremendously useful in promoting the accumulation of capital, we shall then be free, at last, to discard.
“Within a few centuries, the new capitalist spirit challenged the basic Christian ethic: the boundless ego of Sir Gales Overreach and his fellows in the marketplace had no room for charity or love in any of their ancient senses. The capitalist scheme of values in fact transformed five of the seven deadly sins of Christianity – pride, envy, greed, avarice, and lust – into positive social virtues, treating them as necessary incentives to all economic enterprise; while the cardinal virtues, beginning with love and humility, were rejected as ‘bad for business,’ except in the degree that they made the working class more docile and more amenable to cold-blooded exploitation.
In sum, where capitalism prospered, it established three main canons for successful economic enterprise: the calculation of quantity, the observation and regimentation of time (‘Time is Money’), and the concentration on abstract pecuniary rewards. Its ultimate values – Power, Profit, Prestige – derive from these sources and all of them can be traced back, under the flimsiest of disguises, to the Pyramid Age. The first produced the universal accountancy of profit and loss; the second ensured productive efficiency in men as well as machines; the third introduced a driving motive into daily life, equivalent on its own base level to the monk’s search for an eternal reward in Heaven. The pursuit of money became a passion and an obsession: the end to which all other ends were means.” 1
Of course there will still be many people with intense, unsatisfied purposiveness who will blindly pursue wealth – unless they can find some plausible substitute. But the rest of us will no longer be under any obligation to applaud and encourage them. For we shall inquire more curiously than is safe today into the true character of this “purposiveness” with which in varying degrees Nature has endowed almost all of us. For purposiveness means that we are more concerned with the remote future results of our actions than with their own quality or their immediate effects on our own environment.
“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon [money, possessions, fame, status, or whatever is valued more than the Lord].
Therefore I tell you, stop being worried or anxious (perpetually uneasy, distracted) about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, as to what you will wear. Is life not more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow [seed] nor reap [the harvest] nor gather [the crops] into barns, and yet your heavenly Father keeps feeding them. Are you not worth much more than they? And who of you by worrying can add one hour to [the length of] his life? And why are you worried about clothes? See how the lilies and wildflowers of the field grow; they do not labor nor do they spin [wool to make clothing], yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory and splendor dressed himself like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive and green today and tomorrow is [cut and] thrown [as fuel] into the furnace, will He not much more clothe you? You of little faith! Therefore do not worry or be anxious (perpetually uneasy, distracted), saying, ‘What are we going to eat?’ or ‘What are we going to drink?’ or ‘What are we going to wear?’ For the [pagan] Gentiles eagerly seek all these things; [but do not worry,] for your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But first and most importantly seek (aim at, strive after) His kingdom and His righteousness [His way of doing and being right—the attitude and character of God], and all these things will be given to you also.” 2
The “purposive” man is always trying to secure a spurious and delusive immortality for his acts by pushing his interest in them forward into time. He does not love his cat, but his cat’s kittens; nor, in truth, the kittens, but only the kittens’ kittens, and so on forward forever to the end of cat-dom. For him jam is not jam unless it is a case of jam to-morrow and never jam to-day. Thus by pushing his jam always forward into the future, he strives to secure for his act of boiling it an immortality.
Let me remind you of the Professor in Sylvie and Bruno:
“Only the tailor, sir, with your little bill,” said a meek voce outside the door.
“Ah, well, I can soon settle his business,” the Professor said to the children, “if you’ll just wait a minute. How much is it, this year, my man?” The tailor had come in while he was speaking.
“Well, it’s been a-doubling so many years, you see,” the tailor replied, a little grufy, “and I think I’d like the money now. It’s two thousand pound, it is!”
“Oh, that’s nothing!” the Professor carelessly remarked, feeling in his pocket, as if he always carried at least that amount about with him. “But wouldn’t you like to wait just another year and make it four thousand? Just think how rich you’d be! Why, you might be a king, if you liked!”
“I don’t know as I’d care about being a king,” the man said thoughtfully. “But it dew sound a powerful sight o’ money! Well, I think I’ll wait–”
“Of course you will!” said the Professor. “There’s good sense in you, I see. Good-day to you, my man!”
“Will you ever have to pay him that four thousand pounds?” Sylvie asked as the door closed on the departing creditor.
Perhaps it is not an accident that the race which did most to bring the promise of immortality into the heart and essence of our religions has also done most for the principle of compound interest and particularly loves this most purposive of human institutions.
I see us free, therefore, to return to some of the most sure and certain principles of religion and traditional virtue – that avarice is a vice, that the exaction of usury is a misdemeanour, and the love of money is detestable, that those walk most truly in the paths of virtue and sane wisdom who take least thought for the morrow. We shall once more value ends above means and prefer the good to the useful. We shall honour those who can teach us how to pluck the hour and the day virtuously and well, the delightful people who are capable of taking direct enjoyment in things, the lilies of the field who toil not, neither do they spin.
But beware! The time for all this is not yet. For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to every one that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still. For only they can lead us out of the tunnel of economic necessity into daylight.
– John Maynard Keynes, Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren, Essays In Persuasion, The Future, 1930
POSTSCRIPT: Goya’s painting Saturn Devouring His Son depicts the myth of the Greek titan Cronus (“Time”), in Goya’s title Romanized to Saturn; the god of generation/birth/life and dissolution/death (note the Union of Opposites) wealth, abundance, agriculture, periodic renewal and “liberation”.
Have you spotted the ancient alchemical “transformation” allegory for debt-at-compounding-“interest” magick ‘money’ yet?
* One wonders whether the “free speech” of the Saturnalia was similar to that of the role-reversing cult festivals of the Sumerian goddess Inanna (eg, an emphasis on the scatological), where all social taboos were deliberately broken in a debauched (de-value-d), “carnivalesque” celebration of the goddess.
† “Rabbi Nathan met the prophet Elijah. He asked him, ‘What was the Holy One, Blessed be He, doing in that hour?’
“Said Elijah, ‘He was laughing and saying, “My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me.”’”
– Babylonian Talmud, Bava Mezia 59b
 Lewis Mumford, Myth of the Machine (1967)
 Jesus of Nazareth, Gospel of Matthew 6:24-33 (Amplified Bible)
Gold on silver
Is the Autumn
Soft and tender
Are her skies
Yes and no
Are the answers
My true love’s eyes
[If you have not yet done so, I urge you to read Part 1 of this essay, before continuing with this Part 2.]
To fully understand the base principles of alchemical cheating through the ages – did you see what I did then? – we need to travel back in time, to ancient Mesopotamia.
It is here, in the Fertile Crescent – the Cradle of Civilisation – that archaeologists have uncovered abundant evidence for the earliest recorded origins of two fundamental concepts, or principles, that are still with us today. Together, they are the foundation for fully understanding what George Orwell (1984) described as doublethink – “a vast system of mental cheating”.
These two principles are embedded not only in the monetary art of males cheating females but also in Eastern and Western philosophy, politics, religion, occultism, economics (but I repeat myself), science; indeed, in all realms of human thought, belief, and activity.
The Unity (or Union) of Opposites.
And the Law of Inversion (or reversal).
The Unity of Opposites is an abstract idea – a belief – that all things are created out of the union – the Sacred Marriage – of two equal, “gender” opposites.
A male principle (active, creative, “light”, positive, good).
And a female principle (passive, destructive, “dark”, negative, evil).
This is the exoteric (suitable for the public) principle in alchemy – the manipulated or engineered “transformation” of something, from a “lower” form into a “higher” form.
Like, let’s say, “transforming” a female (evil) into a male (good).
As the alchemical principles are believed to be universal, in theory everything can be manipulated and transformed, including minerals (eg, lead into gold), biological matter, ideas, markets, society, and even human consciousness itself.
The only way to do so, however, is by a precise inversion, or reversal, of values.
Lying, and cheating.
In other words, by faking it.
According to Ahmad al-Hassan (Arabic Alchemy ‘Ilm al-San’a: Science of the Art), the Unity of Opposites principle first appears in ancient Babylonia:
The Babylonians believed that the universe originated from water. They noticed also that the universe contains opposite elements. Thus there is day and night; light and darkness; male and female; hot and cold; wet and dry. There is also the good and the evil, and in general, there is for every feature an opposite one. It is also possible to divide matter into two opposite elements, and from these two opposite elements everything can be generated.
The Babylonians were keen observers of the stars; and from their early history they believed that the gods are in control of the planets. They believed also that the sun, the moon and the other planets [five then known; with sun and moon, seven “gates”] have influence on what happens on earth. This was the beginning of astrology. The influence of the planets involves metals; thus sun influences gold, and the moon influences silver, and the other planets control the remaining metals.
The principle of the two opposites of the Babylonians was inherited by Greek philosophers who were thinking about the nature of matter and whose theories were based in part on the Babylonian concept.
The alchemy of the Middle Ages – and the Hermetic Reformation (Renaissance, french “rebirth”), and the 18th century Enlightenment – was built on this Babylonian belief in a cosmic, sexual duality:
[T]he alchemic world view was, just like that of Tantrism, dominated by the idea that our universe functions as the creation and interplay of a masculine and a feminine principle and that all levels of existence are interpenetrated by the polarity of the sexes. “Gender is in everything, everything has masculine and feminine principles, gender reveals itself on all levels”, we can read in a European treatise on the “great art”.
This is also the origin of the Duality Principle in medieval and ‘modern’ bookkeeping by double entry. The Duality Principle is really just the Babylonians’ Unity of Opposites by another name:
For every debit there must be a credit, and for every credit there must be a debit – Alas! How few consider that if this must be the case, the rule to go by, nothing is more easy than to make a set of books wear the appearance of correctness, which at the same time is full of errors, or of false entries, made on purpose to deceive!
According to the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906):
The whole dualistic system of good and of evil powers, which goes back to Zoroastrianism and ultimately to old Chaldea, can be traced through Gnosticism; having influenced the cosmology of the ancient Cabala before it reached the medieval one. So is the conception underlying the cabalistic tree, of the right side being the source of light and purity, and the left the source of darkness and impurity [..] The fact also that the “Ḳelippot” (the scalings of impurity), which are so prominent in the medieval Cabala, are found in the old Babylonian incantations [..] is evidence in favor of the antiquity of most of the cabalistic material.
It stands to reason that the secrets of the theurgic [from “ ] Cabala are not lightly divulged; and yet the Testament of Solomon recently brought to light the whole system of conjuration of angels and demons, by which the evil spirits were exorcised; even the magic sign or seal of King Solomon, known to the medieval Jew as the Magen Dawid [✡], has been resurrected.
The prehistoric clay token/envelope record-keeping system of the Fertile Crescent is the earliest evidence for the Unity of Opposites.
Accounting scholars call it the Input-Output principle; a dualistic, abstract re-presentation of real economic exchanges. Like, let’s say, a transfer of “seed” from a male (Output) to a female (Input) … or vice versa:
[The] ancient people of the Middle East had record keeping systems, the basic logical structure of which was virtually identical to that of modern double entry.
[T]he token-accounting of the ancient Middle East, as well as modern accounting, deal with two distinct but related duality aspects. The first kind of duality involves concrete transactions and belongs to physical reality, while the second kind of duality arises out of ownership and debt relations which belong to social reality.
[The] inconspicuous impressing of the clay tokens upon the surface of the receptacle [..] [was] the precursor of modern double entry bookkeeping; more importantly, it was the major impetus to cuneiform writing as well as abstract counting.
Cuneiform (Latin cuneus: “wedge”) writing was created by making impressions on a wet clay tablet with a stylus made from a reed (Sumerian gi-dub(-ba), Akkadian qan-tuppi; literally “tablet reed”), with its tip cut into a triangular wedge.
As cuneiform clay tablet writing gradually replaced token/envelope record-keeping, naturally there was a need to continue recording this double duality.
The mutual obligations of a Sacred Marriage – a mutual exchange of promises to pay – involves two different identities (a male and a female), and eight recordable actions in total when the promises are both honoured.
The promises to pay and repay “seed” – an abstract Ownership-Debt exchange – is one inverse pair of Output-Inputs (4).
The actual payment and repayment of the “seed” – a real exchange – is another inverse pair of Output-Inputs (8).
But when considered from only one perspective (the male’s), there are two identities, and only four recorded actions.
The abstract Output of the (male) promise (his liability), and the abstract Input of the (female) promise (his asset).
Then, on the honey-moon, the real Output of the promised (male) “seed” (his expense, cancelling his liability), and 9 months later again, the real Input of the promised (female) repayment of the “seed” (his income, cancelling her liability/his asset).
This was now reflected in the number of sides the ancient scribe needed to record different kinds of transactions:
Four-sided tablets were utilized for financial transactions and two-sided clay tablets were reserved for agricultural records.
Early proto-cuneiform (pictogram) writing was steadily refined, and by 3000 BC scribes were able to convey word-concepts (honour), not just word-signs (an honourable man).
By 2600 BC, it was also possible to isolate the phonetic (sound) value of a certain sign. This is known as the rebus principle (Latin rēbus “by means of objects”) – using existing symbols just for their sound, to represent or allude to other words or abstract concepts. It became a favourite form of expression in heraldry of the medieval era – the rebus of Bishop Walter Lyhart of Norwich, for example, consisted of a stag (or hart) lying down.
Ancient scribes – an elite class, thanks to their special knowledge – could now record their puns – “magic” words, that minds inclined to double entendres, deception, or secrecy, purposed to carry double or multiple meanings.
Indeed, scholars believe that cuneiform writing, hieroglyphs, and alphabets, were all based on punning:
The Rebis (from Latin res bina, meaning dual or double matter) is the end product of the alchemical magnum opus or great work.
As we have already seen (Part 1), when stripped bare of all its “authoritative” pretences to mathematical precision, “balance”, and objective impartiality, bookkeeping by double entry is really nothing more than story-telling … with equal positive and negative numbers added.
Most importantly, it is always a story of two (2) opposite perspectives, but it is told from only one perspective – the bookkeeper’s.
By telling his story using puns – words with double or multiple meanings – a cunning bookkeeper can easily deceive any reader or auditor who has not been “initiated” into the occult (hidden, secret) meanings of his code words and symbols:
Thoughout the “Dark” and Middle Ages, the practice of usury (lending at “interest”) – a mortal sin – was officially banned by the Church-State authorities. Following the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), it was also mandatory to make a full confession of one’s sins, at least once a year.
For merchants and money-lenders, it was now all the more important to have trading records with code words and symbols “hidden in plain sight”.
Though not as drastic as the penalty imposed by the Babylonian Hammurabi Code No. 7 for issuing fraudulent “deposit” receipts (“that man is a thief: he shall be put to death”), the penalties for practicing usury were still severe.
Not only was there a spiritual threat of the soul’s eternal damnation to the lowest of circles in the seventh circle of hell in the afterlife, there was also the ever-present, material threats of social condemnation and ostracisation, physical expulsion from the town, city or state, and of gravest concern for most, asset forfeiture:
Giovanni di Bicci de Medici, founder of the Medici Bank and Cosimo de Medici’s father … died intestate because in making out a will “he would have denounced himself as a usurer and might have caused considerable trouble for his heirs.”
Accounting is a form of story telling – giving an account – and stories require an audience, listeners; auditors. In late medieval Italy, the auditor was God. One historian of accounting, James Aho, argues it’s no coincidence that double entry emerged at a time when confession became compulsory for ordinary Catholics. [..] [K]eeping the fullest possible set of accounts is a bit like confessing your sins. Even if you are doing something morally suspect, at least you are making a clean breast of it.
[The “Father of accounting”, Luca] Pacioli [c. 1447-1517] advises merchants to incorporate explicit signs of Christianity into their books as a way of legitimising their profit-seeking activities. The use of double entry itself was like the Catholic confession: if a merchant confessed – or accounted for – all his worldly activities before God, then perhaps his sins would be absolved.
Remarkably, there is a compelling analogue to this in a cuneiform text from the 7th century BC. It comes from the same “fertile” region that had previously birthed the Unity of Opposites principle, punning, primitive record-keeping by double entry, and all the foundational beliefs of alchemy, including – as we will see – the “mystery” cult sex magic rituals, based on the Law of Inversion.
The text is known as the Netherworld Vision or Underworld Vision of an Assyrian Crown Prince, and is the “oldest known visionary journey to hell”:
Scholars have [..] agreed that the text has a great significance for the history of religions and literature. But no one can agree precisely on what that significance is. The text’s interpretation has been hampered by its very distinctiveness: in 2,000 years of cuneiform literature, there are no other examples of the genre it represents…
There are many fascinating and important analogous details to be found in this unique text – so many as to warrant a comprehensive separate study.
Our key observation is that – just as with medieval double entry – in the Underworld Vision it is the telling of the story .. twice .. seemingly from two perspectives .. but both told by the same person .. that absolves the story-teller of “the sin that the vision condemns”.
The tale tells of a crown prince, “surrounded by luxury” and “piling up jewels like dirt”, who is having a profound personal crisis – sleepness nights, uncontrollable weeping, the whole box and dice.
(Did you see what I did then? Try again.)
As it turns out, the “prince” (and narrator) also just happens to be a scribe.
After twice praying to the Queen of the Underworld – the first resulting in a dream (šuttu) where the Queen appears and tells him “I shall not answer” – he has a vision (tabrītu) of himself visiting the Underworld.
The word tabrītu “appears frequently [in period texts] to describe building projects – actually existing physical objects.”
So then, we have the story of a progression from the abstract (šuttu), to the real (tabrītu).
The prince’s “vision” (real building project) begins with … “an overwhelming, pedantic scholarly list of gods and demons”.
These are described by scholars as “hybrid monsters” or “monster-demons”. Most of the monsters have “feet like a man”. About one it is said that “with its left foot it was treading” – a metaphor for conquering and domination.
One is said to be standing upright; another, lacking its hind leg – it will walk with a limp.
The list ends with an ominous figure called the “one” or “unique man” (ištēn etlu) – depicted as the “ideal king”, the mediator between god and man, the “exalted shepherd”, who is given everlasting dominion over all nations from the god(s).
The prince is told that this is his ancestor, a “conqueror” and “high priest of Assur” – a role exclusively reserved for Neo-Assyrian kings. He is also told that this ancestor “ate the taboo and stamped on the abomination” – two noteworthy points, as we will see.
The Anzû or “storm-bird” (Sumerian IM.DUGUD, “heavy rain”, i.e., a flood of waters; in Akkadian, “the wise one of heaven”) is a famous mythic creature – depicted as an eagle with a lion’s face – that is first recorded in the Old Babylonian era.
It is said to be a “worker of evil, who raised the head of evil”. In the Epic of Anzû, this brazen rebel lusts after the Tablets of Destiny – the key to world rule – and proceeds to steal them from the supreme deity, thus gaining total control over the universe, the gods, and the fates of all.
In other words, Anzû was a thieving “time god” … remarkably reminiscent – or rather, prescient – of Mercury-Hermes, “the Sage, the Babylonian”, god of the alchemists.
The “vision” concludes with Nergal, the King of the Underworld, sparing the prince’s life – why? – so that “he may return penitent to the upper world to begin the glorification of Nergal”.
Assyriologists have identified the “crown prince” as Assurbanipal, who “alone among Neo-Assyrian kings, described himself as a scribe”. Indeed, in another text he is depicted in a personal dialogue with Nabû, the god of writing.
Assurbanipal is a most interesting figure for other reasons too, as we will see.
His deceased “father” ([šu]-u zār[û ]ka : “he is your ancestor”) – the “one” or “unique man” referred to in the Vision – is identified as Assurbanipal’s grandfather, Sennacherib (Akkadian: Sîn-ahhī-erība, “Sîn has replaced the brothers”), king of Assyria 705-681 BC.
In biblical texts, Sennacherib is recorded as having besieged Jerusalem, the capital of the rebellious kingdom of Judah, and finally left Hezekiah on the throne as a vassal ruler (c. 701 BC).
In a striking similarity to other idolised figures in freemasonry and related secret societies (King Solomon, Hiram “King of Tyre”, etc), Sennacherib was a great builder – his “Palace Without Rival” is thought to have been the prototype for, or even the actual Hanging Gardens of (not) ‘Babylon’.
Sennacherib is famed for his military campaigns to put down repeated Babylonian rebellions against Assyrian rule.
His assassination “in obscure circumstances” – believed to have been at the hand of one or more of his own sons – was seen as divine vengeance, a punishment for his complete destruction of Babylon in 689 BC.
“Rabbi Nathan met the prophet Elijah. He asked him, ‘What was the Holy One, Blessed be He, doing in that hour?’
“Said Elijah, ‘He was laughing and saying, “My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me.””‘
Babylonian Talmud, Bava Mezia 59b
Sennacherib is identified in the Underworld Vision text as the one who built “the Akitu house.” This was the temple for the twice-yearly festivals celebrating the sowing and reaping of the barley crop.
Importantly, other sources show that Sennacherib rebuilt the Akitu temple, in 683 BC – two of them, one outside the walls of Assur, the other outside Nineveh – some six years after his total destruction of Babylon and its Akitu temple, located directly outside the famous Ishtar gate.
The Akitu (“barley”) New Year festival had begun with the Sumerians. Their calendar had featured two Akitu festivals: one in the Autumn in the month of Tashritu, which celebrated the “barley-sowing”; the other, in Spring in the month of Nisannu, which celebrated the “barley-cutting”.
The Babylonians also celebrated the Akitu but only the Spring (“reaping”) Nisannu – an eleven day festival honouring their supreme god Marduk, and his crown prince Nabû, the god of writing.
Sennacherib was hated by the Babylonians, not only for his dominion over their former empire and ultimate destruction of their capital city but also for his apparent disregard for their religious beliefs, gods, and ceremonies.
The Law of Inversion (or reversal) has a close relationship with the Unity of Opposites principle – like two sides of the same coin. It follows by deductive reasoning.
Because all things are believed to be created out of the natural union of two equal opposites, it is therefore possible to manipulate, and dominate all things, by developing methods to attract (“charm”), and “bind”, the “light” (or, the “dark”) “force” – gender – that one wishes to control.
To do so implies the “need” for deception, and, the precise inversion of natural and sovereign laws, traditional moral and ethical values, and social taboos.
This Law of Inversion (or reversal) is the esoteric (for initiates-only), “revolutionary” principle that lies at the heart of all forms of alchemical “magic” or “transformation”.
In other words, it is the principle of lying, and cheating.
It is the principle of re-presenting the true, with the un-true.
Creating an illusion, or counterfeiting the real thing.
The earliest overt evidence for the practice of values inversion is found in the cult worship of Inanna, the Mesopotamian “goddess” of Sex (union, creation, life) and War (separation, destruction, death).
A vivid embodiment of the Unity of Opposites androgyne principle, “she” was also known – in some or all of “her” aspects – as Ishtar (Akkadia, Assyria and Babylonia), as Ashtoreth or Astarte (Canaan), as Venus (Greece), and as Aphrodite (Rome).
Inanna’s cult celebrations were debauched – meaning, de-valued – “carnivalesque” affairs that deliberately broke all laws, social taboos, natural and social boundaries. They were a time for “disorder and antistructure”.
In a word, chaos.
The rituals were “creative negation” that reminded Inanna’s devotees of “the need to reinvest the clean with the filthy, the rational with the animalistic”.
They are said to “confirm the endless potentiality of dirt and the pure possibility of liminality” – meaning, the ambiguity, and disorientation that is felt by a ritual initiate when “standing at the threshold” of transformation from a previous state into a new, opposite state (from Latin līmen, “a threshold”).
To turn a man into a woman and a woman into a man are yours, Inanna….
Business, great winning, financial loss, deficit are yours, Inanna….
She (Ishtar) [changes] the right side (male) into the left side (female), she [changes] the left side into the right side, she [turns] a man into a woman, she [turns] a woman into a man, she ador[ns] a man as a woman, she ador[ns] a woman as a man.
The representations of the “goddess” are their own testament to this shattering and confusion of boundaries – the “Queen of the Night” is a deity in human form, and also, part woman and part owl.
“She” has been compared to the Jewish demon Lilith, a seducer, a kidnapper and slayer of children “who appear[s] to human beings, to men in the likeness of women and to women in the likeness of men” – “[t]he traditional depiction of Lilith from ancient Mesopotamia through medieval Kabbalah presents an antitype of desired human sexuality and family life.”
Pleased to meet you,
Hope you guessed my name,
But what’s confusing you
Is just the nature of my game
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me Lucifer
The medieval alchemists saw their androgyne “time god” – the “Grand Sorcerer”, Mercury-Hermes: a silver-tongued liar and thief, a “producer” of gold, a hegemonic “Master of the Universe” who transcends life and death, a traveller and merchant, a mediator between the real and unreal worlds – as boasting the same power of inversion, enabling mimickry (i.e., faking it, counterfeiting):
The male tantric master [..] has the power to assume the female form of the goddess (who is of course an aspect of his own mystical body), that is, he can appear in the figure of a woman. Indeed, he even has the magical ability to divide himself into two gendered beings, a female and a male deity. He is further able to multiply himself into several maha mudras.
Outside of Luciferianism, Satanism, and various “magick” cults and male-only (“brotherhood”) societies of the ancient past and present, the primary purveyor of the Law of Inversion in the modern era is Jewish Cabala. In particular, the world-wide Chabad-Lubavitch sect, founded in 1775.
As we have seen, its theurgic (“magic”) doctrine has been traced back “ultimately to old Chaldea”. The Jewish Encyclopedia tells us that “the apocalyptic literature belonging to the second and first pre-Christian centuries contained the chief elements of the Cabala”.
Unsurprisingly then, the Law of Inversion principle also appears in Cabalist doctrine, precisely as it does in the Inanna-Ishtar cult, medieval Tantric Buddhism, and medieval Western alchemy:
It appears that the acosmic background of Habad thought influenced the acceptance of the nihilistic doctrine of inversion, for in a doctrine where the existence and nonexistence of reality are one and the same for God, and a religious view in which Yesh [Something] and Ayin [Nothing] are equal, good and evil are also equated with one another, as are positive religious action and transgression [..] The more extreme formulations, which deny the substantiality of every gradation and commonly accepted dichotomy, doubtless influenced the denial of significant value to reversals, inversions, and oppositions. [..] if “everything is absolutely as nothing and naught in relation to His being and essence,” then neither traditional distinctions nor relative and absolute values have any validity.
“Worship in inversion,” “descent for the purpose of rising up” [..] were seen to be theurgical [“magic”] missions [..] fulfilling the reverse of the divine commandment for the sake of the divine will to be revealed in all dimensions.
[T]hrough breaking a taboo for which there is often a high penalty, the adept confirms the core of the entire Buddhist philosophy: the emptiness (shunyata) of all appearances. “I am void, the world is void, all three worlds are void”, the Maha Siddha Tilopa triumphantly proclaims — therefore “neither sin nor virtue” exist. The shunyata principle thus provides a metaphysical legitimization for any conceivable “crime”, as it actually lacks any inherent existence.
In both Eastern and Western alchemy, the starting point for an alchemical “transformation” is the realm of primal matter – the impure, ignoble, or base.
The female (passive, negative, liability; also, since the 1789 French Revolution, “conservative”, “Right”).
According to the Law of Inversion – and a monstrous Ego – the “skilled” magician can transform it (the “female”) into something pure, noble and divine.
The male (active, positive, asset; since 1789, “progressive”, “Left”):
In European alchemy the coarse starting material for the experiments is known as the prima materia and is of a fundamentally feminine nature. Likewise, as in the tantras, base substances such as excrement, urine, menstrual blood, part of corpses and so forth are named in the alchemic texts, no matter which culture they belong to, as the physical starting materials for the experiments. Symbolically, the primal material is described in images such as “snake, dragon, toad, viper, python”. It is also represented by every conceivable repulsive female figure — by witches, mixers of poison, whores, chthonic goddesses, by the “dragon mother” so often cited in depth psychology. All these are metaphors for the demonic nature of the feminine [..] Shakyamuni compared women in general with snakes, sharks and whores.
These misogynous terms for the prima materia are images which on the one hand seek to describe the untamed, death-bringing nature; on the other one readily admit that a secret force capable of producing everything in the phenomenal world is hidden within “Mother Nature”. Nature in alchemy has at its disposal the universal power of birth. It represents the primordial matrix [▽] of the elements, the massa confusa, the great chaos, from which creation bursts forth.
There are also European manuals of the “great art” which require that one work with the “menstrual blood of a whore”.
One text talks of “the transformation of the Babylonian whore into a virgin”.
But in order to transform the female into the male, a negative into a positive, a liability into an asset, lead into “gold”, evil into “good” – and so possess the secret birth-force in himself – there is something the lying cheating “time god” must do.
He must kill the essential feminine.
He must destroy the “mother” nature:
Experimenting around with the primal material sounds quite harmless to someone who is not initiated. Yet a symbolic murder is hidden behind this. The black matter, a symbol of the fundamental feminine and of powerful nature from which we all come, is burned or in some cases vaporized, cut to pieces or dismembered. Thus, in destroying the prima materia we at the same time destroy our “mother” or, basically, the “fundamentally feminine”.
The European adept does not shy away from even the most crass killing metaphors: “open the lap of your mother”, it says in a French text from the 18th century, “with a steel blade, burrow into her entrails and press forward to her womb, there you will find our pure substance (the elixir)”. Symbolically, this violent first act in the alchemic production is located within a context of sacrifice, death and the color black and is therefore called nigredo, that is “blackening”.
A sacrifice of the feminine [..] may be found in the logic of the entire Buddhist doctrine. Woman per se – as Buddha Shakyamuni repeatedly emphasized in many of his statements — functions as the first and greatest cause of illusion (maya), but likewise as the force which generates the phenomenal world (samsara). It is the fundamental goal of every Buddhist to overcome this deceptive samsara. This world of appearances experienced as feminine, presents him with his greatest challenge. “A woman”, Nancy Auer Falk writes, “was the veritable image of becoming and of all the forces of blind growth and productivity which Buddhism knew as Samsara. As such she too was the enemy — not only on a personal level, as an individual source of temptation, but also on a cosmic level”. In this misogynist logic, it is only after the ritual destruction of the feminine that the illusory world (maya) can be surmounted and transcended.
“In … Tantrism … woman is means, an alien object, without possibility of mutuality or real communication”. The woman “is to be used as a ritual object and then cast aside”. Or, at another point: the yogis had “sex without sensuality … There is no relationship of intimacy with an individual — the woman … involved is an object, a representation of power … women are merely spiritual batteries”.
And Winter’s coming
I think that I’ll be moving along
I’ve got to leave her
And find another
I’ve got to sing my heart’s
Is it for this reason that maya (illusion), the mother of the historical Buddha, had to die directly after giving birth? In her early death we can recognize the original event which stands at the beginning of the fundamentally misogynist attitude of all Buddhist schools. Maya both conceived and gave birth to the Sublime One in a supernatural manner. It was not a sexual act but an elephant which, in a dream, occasioned the conception, and Buddha Shakyamuni did not leave his mother’s body through the birth canal, but rather through her hip. But these transfeminine birth myths were not enough for the tellers of legends. Maya as earthly mother had [..] to be proclaimed an “illusion” (maya) and destroyed.
Every type of passion (sexual pleasure, fits of rage, hate and loathing) which is normally considered taboo by Buddhist ethical standards, is activated and nurtured in Vajrayana with the goal of then transforming it into its opposite. The Buddhist monks, who are usually subject to a strict, puritanical-seeming set of rules, cultivate such “breaches of taboo” without restriction, once they have decided to follow the “Diamond Path”. Excesses and extravagances now count as part of their chosen lifestyle. Such acts are not simply permitted, but are prescribed outright…
[T]he Kalachakra Tantra exhorts its pupils to commit the following: to kill, to lie, to steal, to break the marriage vows, to drink alcohol, to have sexual relations with lower-class girls. A Tantric is freed from the chains of the wheel of life by precisely that which imprisons a normal person.
A central role in the rites is played by the tantric meal. It is absolutely forbidden for Buddhist monks to eat meat or drink alcohol. This taboo is also deliberately broken by Vajrayana adepts. To make the transgression more radical, the consumption of types of meat which are generally considered “forbidden” in Indian society is desired: elephant meat, horsemeat, dogflesh, beef, and human flesh. The latter goes under the name of maha mamsa, the “great flesh”.
In the Hevajra Tantra the adept must drink the menstrual blood of his mudra out of a skull bowl. But rotten fish, sewer water, canine feces, corpse fat, the excrement of the dead, sanitary napkins as well as all conceivable “intoxicating drinks” are also consumed.
As a tantric saying puts it, “What binds the fool, liberates the wise”, and another, more drastic passage emphasizes that, “the same deed for which a normal mortal would burn for a hundred million eons, through this same act an initiated yogi attains enlightenment”. According to this, every ritual is designed to catapult the initiand into a state beyond good and evil.
[The third] justification for the “transgressions” of the Vajrayana consists in the Bodhisattva vow of Mahayana Buddhism, which requires that one aid and assist every creature until it attains enlightenment. Amazingly, this pious purpose can render holy the most evil means. “If”, we can read in one of the tantras, “for the good of all living beings or on account of the Buddha’s teaching one should slay living beings, one is untouched by sin. … If for the good of living beings or from attachment for the Buddha’s interest, one seizes the wealth of others, one is not touched by sin”, and so forth. In the course of Tibetan history the Bodhisattva vow has [..] legitimated numerous political and family-based murders, whereby the additional “clever” argument was also employed, that one had “freed” the murder victim from the world of appearances (samsara) and that he or she thus owed a debt of thanks to the murderer.
These two principles – the Unity of Opposites and the Law of Inversion – were evidently the foundation of all human reasoning for the “philosophers” of the “royal art” of cheating “females” in ancient Mesopotamia.
The Unity of Opposites explained all things, in the heavens (Above) and the earth (Below).
The Law of Inversion explained how to gain control over all things, Above and Below.
By deception, and reversal.
All that remained, is a question of method.
Since all things are believed to contain both a masculine and a feminine principle, then the method for gaining control over all things, is to use the “magnetic” power of sexual attraction, to tempt or “draw in” the force or power that one wishes to “bind”.
Which organ has maximum utility (usefulness) for achieving this?
In Inanna’s words to her shepherd-king “bull” bridegroom Dumuzi, a “honey-sweet” tongue:
Make your milk sweet and thick, my bridegroom,
My shepherd, I will drink your fresh milk,
Wild bull, Dumuzi, make your milk sweet and thick.
I will drink your fresh milk.
Let the milk of the goat flow in my sheepfold,
Fill my holy churn with honey cheese,
Lord Dumuzi, I will drink your fresh milk.
My honey-man, my honey-man sweetens me always.
My lord, the honey-man of the gods,
He is the one my womb loves best.
His hand is honey, his foot is honey,
He sweetens me always.
He laid me down on the fragrant honey-bed,
My sweet love, lying by my heart,
Tongue-playing, one by one,
My fair Dumuzi did so fifty times.
[There ended the “honey-moon”]
Or, in Mercury-Hermes’ words, a mercurial (quicksilver) tongue:
Since at the end of the sexual magic rituals the masculine principle alone remains, the verbal praise of the goddess, beauty and love could also be manipulative, designed to conjure up the devotion of a woman. [..] [W]e must regard such charming flattery of the female sex as at the very least a non-committal, albeit extremely lucrative embellishment. But they are more likely to be a deliberately employed manipulation, so as to draw attention away from the monstrosities of the tantric ritual system. Perhaps they are themselves a method (upaya) with which to appropriate the “gynergy” of the women so charmed. After all, something like that need not only take place through the sexual act. There are descriptions in the lower tantras of how the yogi can obtain the feminine “elixir” even through a smile, an erotic look or a tender touch alone.
One example of this manipulation of sexual “magnetism”, is an Old Babylonian method for controlling the forces of good or evil fortune, by an incantation (“s.p.e.l.l.”) spoken over a magic figurine:
A pair of supernatural beings, demons of some kind, are said to accompany man [..] one is called mukīl rēš daniqti, or rabis damiqti, “he who offers good things,” or “good demon”; the other is mukīl rēš lemutti, or rabis lemutti “he who offers misfortune” or “evil demon.” [..] A similar reference can be found in Greek literature – suffice it to mention here the scales of Zeus and his mixing of the “good and bad things” from the two jars (Iliad 24:527).
Mukīl rēš lemutti, inscribed in cuneiform Sumerian syllabograms as (d)SAG.ḪUL.ḪA.ZA and meaning “he who holds the head of evil”, was an ancient Mesopotamian winged leonine demon, a harbinger of misfortune associated with benign headaches and wild swings in mood, where the afflicted “continually behaves like an animal caught in a trap.”
The [evil] demon frequently appears in prescriptions such as those for the fashioning of a figurine for a neurological disorder caused by a pursuing ghost, where “The evi[l confusional stat]e (causing ghost or) mukīl rēš lemutti-demon [which] was set [on] (personal name) son of (personal name)–he is your husband. You are given [t]o him (as wife).”
The production of magico-religious objects such as figurines and erotic plaques was widespread in Old Babylonia. They were strategically positioned at thresholds – zones of transformation, or a change in state between two equal opposites.
Like, say, the transition between Inside and Outside your house.
Or, let’s say, between a Credit and Debit “balance” of your “account” rented from a cheating time lord:
Ancient Mesopotamians envisioned liminal zones in general as having great magical potency, for better or for worse. Gates, doorways, windows, crossroads, shrines, beds and even the sexually aroused body, to name some, were the perceived spacial correlates of an invisible membrane through which the worlds of the seen and the unseen, of the magical and the mundane interacted. Since these intersections amplified paranormal activity, they were usually manipulated to ensure activity of a positive nature.
Old Babylonian plaques were themselves liminal, serving as points where inhabitants of the non-physical universe could emerge and affect every day reality.
Old Babylonian visual erotica inserts the liminal by structuring scenes around sexual anatomy. The general term for body orifice, KA in Sumerian or bãbu in Akkadian, is expressly liminal because it also means door or gate. The vaginal opening, bãb uri and the anus bãb šuburri are imagined then as thresholds. From literary and incantation texts we know that the body and its orifices were regarded as sites of transition, especially when aroused. In the Old Babylonian period, it is usually Inanna’s excited thresholds that work to effect white magic [..] whereas in the first-millennium BCE Gilgamesh Epic Ishtar and her vulva bring only death or castration.
We have already seen that what many call “white” and “black” magic are closely associated with the Cabala of Old Chaldea, and the “All-Wise” alchemical King Solomon – he of the “magic sign or seal” “known to the medieval Jew as the Magen Dawid” [✡], the Cabalistic key to “the whole system of conjuration of angels and demons.”
The development of the rēbus (punning) principle in ancient Sumer helps shed light on the true origin of a biblical saying that, according to rabbinic tradition, was written by King Solomon.
“Cast your bread on the surface of the waters, for you will find it after many days, Give a portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth”, has long been used by slick salesmen – including economists, financial advisors, fund managers, televangelists, trans-national corporate executives, politicians and bankers – in their sales pitches for charitable giving, diversified investing, and globalised “free” trade.
The Marriage of the Sea
Every year on Ascension Day, the doge of Venice dropped a consecrated ring into the sea, and with the Latin words “Desponsamus te, mare, in signum veri perpetuique domini”
(“We wed thee, sea, as a sign of true and everlasting domination”) declared Venice and the sea to be indissolubly one.
In Sumer, most aspects of life appear to have revolved around the production and consumption of beer. This was the official libation (ritual drink offering) to Inanna-Ishtar, patron goddess and harimtu (prostitute, or libidinous single female) of the tavern.
It was also a common cause of insolvency due to unrepayable bar debts, incurred by offering alcohol on credit – a trading method that was broadly repeated in the Russia Empire in the 18th-19th centuries.
In Sumer, beer was made by casting bread into jars of water:
The passage of Qoh. xi 1-2 has traditionally been understood as a call for charity or international trade. However, in the light of the procedure by which beer was made in the ancient Near East … a more likely interpretation is that Qoheleth is recommending beer production and consumption in perilous times.
In other words, this “wisdom of Solomon” is a (profitable, for some) command to brew, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we may die.
For the Sumerians, beer was considered a magical potion. It was commonly compared to an attractive and promiscuous female. Both had the ability to “seize” or “bind” the drinker. In an Old Babylonian incantation (spell) recited by a woman “to bend her straying lover to her will”, the “chief tools of magic making are the female’s aroused body orifices”.
Inanna-Ishtar is the central figure in these rites and incantations. An Old Babylonian hymn to “Inanna-Nine-galla” (galla: androgynous demons) is set at dusk, when the two clear opposites of day and night blur.
Exactly like Lucifer in biblical writings, Inanna-Ishtar identifies “her”self in the texts with both the morning and evening star.
Inanna’s celestial body has the nature of a shape-shifter: as “her” star rises through the transition of light to dark (and vice versa), so too does Inanna-Ishtar the harimtu. When named Kilili (“Lady Owl”), “she” is “the harlot who like the owl comes out at dusk”, and sits at the door of the tavern to entice customers.
From a namburbi incantation, we learn that Inanna’s presence was invoked to create an ambiance of enchantment, with the purpose being to “effect magical gains of a non-sexual nature” – that is, to secure “brisk trade”.
It is here too, that archaeologists have discovered cuneiform fragments in Nineveh and Babylon, from which we learn that alchemists have had secret recipes for creating fake silver since before the reign of Nebuchadnezzar I (c. 1124-1103 BC). Word puns in the recipe suggest that it was made in a form that counterfeited the royal standard ingots:
“When rubbed and polished these (objects) are ziqpu (or ziqiptu) of silver. This (kind of) silver [can]not [be detected].”
What makes this severely mutilated prescription so interesting and intriguing is the [..] passage which addresses the chemist directly: “Do not be careless (with respect to these instructions). Do not [show] (the procedure) to anyone!” References to secrecy do not occur anywhere else in the cuneiform texts dealing with instructions written for specific crafts.
These recipes are remarkable for a multitude of reasons.
The older of the two ends in a colophon stating that it is a copy, and is the property of Nebuchadnezzar I, King of Babylon.
The other (above) was found as part of the famous royal library of King Assurbanipal (c. 685 BC – 627 BC) in Nineveh; a collection of around 30,000 tablets and fragments, said to be the most compelling discovery of the ancient Near East. Assurbanipal – who we met earlier – is the Assyrian “prince” who (as king) is reported to have taken the Israelite population into captivity, and replaced them with a mixture of tribes from other parts of his empire.
(This may offer an explanation for why archaeologists have discovered evidence in Israel from the 7th century BC, of the Epic of Anzû – the rebel “storm-bird” who stole the Tablets of Destiny.)
There are numerous parallels between the method for producing this fake silver, and the methods cryptically described in medieval alchemical texts for producing the longed for “elixir” or “gold” of “the philosophers”.
Even more remarkable though, is the ingredients.
According to a renowned Assyriologist, whose technical expertise was expressly sought to interpret the two fragments, a “red alkali” used as a “binder” in the recipe “occurs to my knowledge only here” and in no other technical texts from the ancient world.
Similarly, the alchemical texts mention a mysterious substance called “Red Mercury”. What this actually is has been the subject of speculation for hundreds of years – and more recently, lucrative hoaxes, with far-reaching geopolitical, and economic ramifications – because it is supposed to possess a massive destructive power:
When red mercury first appeared on the international black market 15 years ago, the supposedly top secret nuclear material was ‘red’ because it came from Russia. When it resurfaced last year in the formerly communist states of Eastern Europe it had unaccountably acquired a red colour. But then, as a report from the US Department of Energy reveals, mysterious transformations are red mercury’s stock in trade. (New Scientist, 1992)
The only thing we can be sure of is that it’s a ripping yarn. Rumours that Soviet nuclear experts had produced a mysterious explosive material with unimaginable destructive power first circulated in the 1970s, and despite several official investigations and subsequent denials the story refuses to die. (The Guardian, 2004)
For decades, aspiring bomb makers — including ISIS — have desperately tried to get their hands on a lethal substance called red mercury.
Legends of red mercury’s powers began circulating by late in the Cold War. [..] Chief among its proponents was Samuel T. Cohen, the American physicist and Manhattan Project veteran often called the father of the neutron bomb [..] In one edition of his autobiography, he claimed red mercury [..] “is a remarkable nonexploding high explosive…” (New York Times, 2015)
It is an interesting coincidence that this “ripping yarn” first emerged in the 1970s, at the same time a special kind of “gate” opened – one that has flooded the world with a “nonexploding high explosive”, a red “binder”, for the past 45 years.
Two other ingredients are similarly remarkable. Milk and honey. And in a quantity that “seem[s] excessive”.
It is difficult not to be reminded here of the fascinating tale told in the Old Testament account of the Exodus, written in 273-272 BC by Jewish scholars at Alexandria in Egypt, quite possibly as a reactionary polemic against the Egyptians.
We are told that once upon a time, a messianic intermediary named Moses (meaning “I drew him from the waters”) was saved from infanticide when his mother chose to hide him among the reeds of the river Nile, in a basket weaved from papyrus (used for making writing paper, and boats).
As an adult, Moses is minding sheep when God “appears” to him – a voice speaking from a “burning bush” which doesn’t burn.
Round and round
The burning circle
All the seasons
One, two and three
And then the Winter
Spring is born
And wanders free
God tells Moses to throw his “staff” or “rod” on the ground; it is transformed into a “snake”. When God tells him to grab it by the tail, it transforms back again.
The magic “rod” becomes famous as the “staff of God”, or the “rod of God”.
Moses magically brings a series of ten plagues on the Israelite’s alleged captors, the final plague killing all the “firstborn” of Egypt. On finally being allowed to exodus, he is told to “raise up” his “rod” and “stretch out” his hand over the “Red Sea”, which is divided in two, allowing the “chosen” “children” of Israel to go to the land of the Promise (“Promised Land”).
The “Land of Milk and Honey”.
Indeed, it is said to be “flowing with milk and honey.”
Milk and honey also feature in the alchemical sex magic rituals. Both words are used to describe the “virgin milk”; the female sexual fluids or gynergy which the male adept aims to steal for himself:
As the female correspondence to male sperm the texts nominate the seed of the woman (semen feminile). Among Tantrics it is highly contested whether this is a matter of the menstrual blood or fluids which the mudra [young virgin female] secretes during the sexual act. In any case, the sexual fluids of the man are always associated with the color white, and those of the woman with red. Fundamentally, the female discharge is assigned an equally powerful magic effect as that of its male counterpart. Even the gods thirst after it and revere the menses as the nectar of “immortality”.
Outside of the gynocentric and tantric cults however, a negative valuation of menstrual blood predominates [..] This idea is also widely distributed in Hinayana Buddhism. Menstrual blood is seen there as a curse which has its origins in a female original sin: “Because they are born as women,” it says in a text of the “low vehicle”, “their endeavors toward Buddhahood are little developed, while their lasciviousness and bad characteristics preponderate. These sins, which strengthen one another, assume the form of menstrual blood which is discharged every month in two streams, in that it soils not just the god of the earth but also all the other deities too”. But the Tantrics are completely different! For them the fluids of the woman bear Lucullan names like “wine”, “honey”, “nectar”, and a secret is hidden within them which can lead the yogi to enlightenment.
According to the tantric logic of inversion, that precisely the worst is the most appropriate starting substance for the best, the yogi need not fear the magical destructive force of the menses, as he can reverse it into its creative opposite through the proper method.
Thousands of years before the medieval Tantrics, we find another remarkable parallel in the ancient mythology of Inanna.
In the tale of Inanna and Šu-kale-tuda, having gone up into the mountains on a quest to “detect falsehood and justice, to inspect the Land closely, to identify the criminal against the just” – in other words, to learn to discern the difference between the moral opposites of right and wrong – Inanna is violated by a callow youth while sleeping under a tree. On waking and discovering the offense, the enraged goddess asks “What should be destroyed?”, and floods the Sumerian water supply with “her” menstrual blood:
[E]very woman knows that she has two kinds of flow that come from her vagina. Ancient sources called these the River of Life and the River of Death, meaning the clear or white flow at the time when a child is more likely to be conceived; and the forbidden flow of menstruation, when it is most unlikely that a child can be conceived.
Similarly, in the tale of the Exodus we are told that the first of the ten biblical plagues invoked by Moses magically transformed the Egyptian water supply into blood. In the river Nile – source of life for the Egyptians – all the fish died, and the river became foul smelling, when Aaron (Moses’ brother) touched the water with the “rod of God”.
The second plague?
The magical invocation of frogs: another classic alchemical symbol of the prima materia or base matter – the “evil” fundamental feminine, containing the secret birth-force.
It should not surprise us to discover that the biblical “Moses” is revered as a great alchemist in both ancient and not-so-ancient texts.
According to the Encyclopedia Judaica:
The Jewish association with alchemy dates from ancient times. Zosimos, a fifth-century Greek historian, states that the Jews acquired the secrets of the “sacred craft” of the Egyptians and the knowledge of the “power of gold” which derives from it by dishonest means, and they imparted the knowledge of alchemy to the rest of the world. In ancient Greek manuscripts, which contain lists of writings on alchemy, a number of alchemic and magic writings are attributed to Moses…
The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) elaborates:
There is [..] scarcely a single important ancient work upon the science which is not directly related to the Jews, with their traditions and their science.
Alchemy had already in the second or third century assumed a mystical and magical character, exemplified in such recipes as appear in the magic papyri. The whole syncretism of the East—Jewish and Egyptian gnosis, Greek mysteries, and Ophite speculations—combined to produce a current of thought which affected every mental production of the age.
Adam and Abraham have in their turn been described as authors of alchemistic treatises, and Moses is repeatedly met with as the author of such works. To Moses are ascribed the Greek treatise known as “Diplosis” (that is, the art of doubling the weight of gold ), and the treatise “The Chemistry of Moses”…
“Do not touch the philosopher’s stone with your hands;
you are not of our race, you are not of the race of Abraham.”
Gold and silver
Burnt my Autumns
All too soon
They’d fade and die
Aye, there were no others
Milk and honey
Were their lies
autumnal (adj.) 1570s, “maturing or blooming in autumn;” 1630s, “belonging to autumn,” from Latin autumnalis “pertaining to autumn,” from autumnus (see autumn). From 1650s in figurative sense “past the prime.”
END OF PART II
Let us summarise then. Consistent with the alchemists’ Babylonian metaphor, your “account” (story) at the bank, is a magic “threshold”, “gate”, or liminal zone.
A rented hole.
Your bank “account” is a metaphor for ‘cock’ hole, rented from a cheating “time god”.
Within a liminal zone – the “source” of all creation – all opposites are equal. They are “unified”. They become one and the same thing.
Within a liminal zone, any one idea, any one word (the “Word” of “God”), is “magic” – it has two, simultaneous, precisely opposite meanings.
Confusion (“chaos”) reigns.
In your rented orifice, the banking high priest shows a magic number. It represents – to you – either a positive (credit), or negative (debit) “balance”.
It represents the opposite to the banking high priest.
Every time that you make a “payment” to someone, the high priest will reduce the amount of sukra (mixed semen-blood) in the orifice you are renting, and increase the amount of sukra in the orifice they are renting.
Every time that you “receive” a “payment” from someone, the reverse happens.
Even if you have no debt owed to any bank or financial institution, metaphorically, as a “customer”, you are still a “whore” of the bank. You are renting an orifice from the bank, for the purpose of ingesting and regurgitating the sukra rented by other people.
In essence then, by participating in the lying cheating time lords’ “money of account” fake “deposit” payments system, you are acting as a “Babylonian whore” for the “Grand Sorcerer” and misogynist thief, Mercury-Hermes.
Let that sink in.
My thanks to readers who have confirmed and connected more dots, by informing me that multiple languages (eg, Danish, French, Italian, Russian) use their native words for “Actives” and “Passives” as synonyms for “Assets” and “Liabilities”, in their double entry bookkeeping balance sheets.
 Jackson C. Frank, Milk and Honey, Jackson C. Frank (1965). My thanks to visual artist John Stark for bringing this lyric to my attention.
 Richard A. Werner, How do banks create money, and why can other firms not do the same? An explanation for the coexistence of lending and deposit-taking (2014)
 Edward Thomas Jones, Jones’ English System of Book-Keeping by Single or Double Entry, 1796; cited in Jane Gleeson-White, Double Entry: How The Merchants of Venice Created Modern Finance, 2013 (Kindle)
 Cabalistic Dualism, Jewish Encyclopedia 1906 (online), 30 June 2017
 Richard Mattessich, Accounting and the Input-Output Principle in the Prehistoric and Ancient World, ABACUS, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1989, p. 81 — “The significance of the input—output principle for double entry accounting is well recognized in the literature. For example; ‘The writer wishes to emphasize the merit that comes from understanding a double entry bookkeeping as an input-output system of data calculating the amount of capital charged’ (Kishi, 1984, p. 359).” (p. 77, fn 7)
 ibid., p. 81 — “[R]elatively soon after the emergence of the original envelopes (c. 3200 BC) it was already customary to impress the softer clay surface of those envelopes with the hardened clay tokens before putting them into the receptacle and sealing the
latter. This enabled one to determine at a first glance the content of the envelope while the seal and other markings may have informed about the debtor and other details. . This enabled one to determine at a first glance the content of the envelope while the seal and other markings may have informed about the debtor and other details. There can be little doubt that inserting a token into a receptacle was equivalent to a debit entry in an asset account. Yet there were two other requirements: first, to indicate, on the outside of the clay envelope, the individual items contained in it; and second, to disclose instantaneously the total equity represented by the receptacle. By a lucky stroke these two requirements could be met in a single step: impressing the hardened tokens upon the softer, unburned surface of the clay container. The resulting indentations are mirror pictures and true counter-entries (credit entries) on the equity side of this prehistoric record keeping system.”
 Murray, Stuart (2009) The Library: An Illustrated History. New York, NY: Skyhorse Publishing. pp. 3-10; cited in Ashurbanipal, Wikipedia
 Joshua J. Mark, Cuneiform, Ancient™ History Encyclopedia (13 July 2017)
 Rebus, Wikipedia (21 June 2017)
 Rebis, Wikipedia, (21 June 2017)
 Richard A. Werner, To a new understanding of the function of the banking sector: the mechanism of productive credit creation and quantitative easing; presentation to the Russian Academy of Sciences, round table “Anti-crisis fiscal policy of the state in the interests of economic development of Russia” (2015). (watch video)
 Miroslav Novák, Heritage of Alchemical Cryptography (2013), Il Chimico Italiano 24: 17-24 — “Medieval European alchemists used a disorganized way of coded expressing together with a very complicated system of diverse graphical symbols... The symbols, besides their shorthand role, also serve as a specific cryptographic system, for very often the alchemists tried to conceal the results from the Christian church, avaricious noblemen and possible competitors. [..] The cryptography (or cryptology; from Greek κρυπτός, “hidden, secret”; and γράφειν, “writing”, or λογία, “study”, respectively) is the practice and study of techniques for secure communication in the presence of third parties (called adversaries) (Wikipedia). And these adversaries were the main reason, why alchemists coded their written products.”
 Dante’s Inferno, Canto XIV — Wikipedia: “Ring 3: Against God, Art, and Nature: The third round of the seventh circle is a great Plain of Burning Sand scorched by great flakes of flame falling slowly down from the sky, an image derived from the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19:24.) The Blasphemers (the Violent against God) are stretched supine upon the burning sand, the Sodomites (the Violent against Nature) run in circles, while the Usurers (the Violent against Art, which is the Grandchild of God, as explained in Canto XI) crouch huddled and weeping. Ciardi writes, ‘Blasphemy, sodomy, and usury are all unnatural and sterile actions: thus the unbearing desert is the eternity of these sinners; and thus the rain, which in nature should be fertile and cool, descends as fire’ (John Ciardi, Inferno, Canto XIV, pg. 112).”
 Jolyon Jenkins, How Men In Grey Suits Changed The World, 2010
“Francesco di Marco Datini in late 14th century Italy opened a new ledger with the dedication: ‘in the name of God and of the Virgin Mary and all the Saints of Paradise, that they may give us grace to do right both for body and soul.’
His factor, Monte d’Andrea, followed this with the ten commandments – ‘not always to be observed, perhaps – but there at the head of the ledger they stood.'” — (cit. Origo, Iris, The Merchant of Prato: Francesco Di Marco Datini, Penguin Books, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1963, p. 279)
 Seth L. Sanders, The First Tour of Hell: From Neo-Assyrian Propaganda to Early Jewish Revelation (Brill, 2009), Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp. 151-169 — “As a forerunner of the apocalyptic otherworldly journey and the visionary tour of hell, its lineage includes the books of Enoch, the Revelation of John, and Dante’s Inferno.”
 ibid., p.156 — “[The vision] switches without warning into a first-person confession, and in an exquisite narratological twist, the story itself becomes its narrator’s expiation for the sin that the vision condemns.”
 ibid., p. 160 — After the prince awakes from his “vision”, the story changes focus to a character called “that scribe”, who is portrayed as “a double of the crown prince: like the prince a sinner who occupies the post of his father”. It is also noteworthy that the narrator of the vision self-identifies as a scribe (p. 162).
 ibid., p.161 — On observing the prince’s actions, “that scribe” also takes the King of the Underworld’s warning to heart: “[the scribe] went and repeated [the story] to the palace, saying ‘Let this be my expiation.’”
 What Does “Box and Dice” Mean?, WiseGeek, (17 July 2017) — “‘Box and dice’ is an idiomatic English expression, most common in Australian English, which means ‘the whole thing.’ It is usually part of a longer phrase, most commonly ‘the whole box and dice.” The expression is one of a number of similar terms called merisms.
The phrase ‘the whole box and dice’ probably originates from dice games. In many such games, players store the dice in a small box or cup, often made of wood or leather, when not in use. In some games, the box or cup actually forms part of play. For example, in the game ‘liar’s dice,’ players cover their dice with a box to conceal the value of the score they have rolled.
In games of this type, the box and dice are the only pieces of equipment required to play. To have them is therefore to have everything necessary for the game. This is the most likely origin for the use of this expression as a term for “the whole thing.”
 ibid., p.157 — “The prince’s sequence of actions has mythic and ritual connotations, albeit ones we do not fully understand. Certainly, the reference to descent to the netherworld evokes a long tradition in both myth and exorcistic ritual of journeys to the realm of the dead, since both Ishtar and terminally ill patients are said to ‘set their mind to going down to the netherworld.’ This suggests that Kummay [titular name of the “crown prince”] is attempting to deliberately induce a vision or even travel to the netherworld of his own volition.”
 ibid., p. 158 — “While a šuttu is simply a dream, tabrītu appears frequently in the vocabulary of Sennacherib and Essarhaddon to describe building projects—actually existing physical objects. It refers to awe-inspiring things seen with the eye. Far from a strictly mental event, numerous Sargonid occurrences of tabrītu refer to material things seen in daylight. The way this vision is narrated emphasizes its reality.”
 The “gods and demons” are described by various scholars as “hybrid monsters” (Collins 1990) and “monster-demons” (Kvanvig 1981) – that is, they combine animal-bird or human-animal features. Most of the monsters have “feet like a man” (Kvanvig 1981). About one it is said that “with its left foot it was treading” (Kvanvig 1981). One is lacking its hind leg; it will walk with a limp. The last monster is composed of two bodies, has “the head of a man” on the second body, and wears a crown (Kvanvig 1981).
 John J. Collins, Review of Roots of Apocalyptic: The Mesopotamian Background of the Enoch Figure and of the Son of Man by Helge S. Kvanvig; Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 109, No. 4 (Winter, 1990), p. 717
 John J. Collins, Review of Roots of Apocalyptic: The Mesopotamian Background of the Enoch Figure and of the Son of Man by Helge S. Kvanvig; Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 109, No. 4 (Winter, 1990), p. 716
 Donald A. Mackenzie, Myths of Babylonia and Assyria (1915), p. 74 (via Sacred Texts, 17 July 2017) — “Another Sumerian storm demon was the Zu bird, which is represented among the stars by Pegasus and Taurus. A legend relates that this ‘worker of evil, who raised the head of evil’, once aspired to rule the gods, and stole from Bel, ‘the lord’ of deities, the Tablets of Destiny, which gave him his power over the Universe as controller of the fates of all. The Zu bird escaped with the Tablets and found shelter on its mountain top in Arabia. Anu called on Ramman, the thunderer, to attack the Zu bird, but he was afraid; other gods appear to have shrunk from the conflict. How the rebel was overcome is not certain, because the legend survives in fragmentary form.”
 Seth. L. Sanders, The First Tour of Hell: From Neo-Assyrian Propaganda to Early Jewish Revelation (Brill, 2009), Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions, Volume 9, Issue 2, p. 159 — “The vision culminates in a theophany of Nergal, the king of the underworld, enthroned. Kummay quivers in terror at his splendor and falls to his knees before the god. Nergal siezes him by the forelock [..] and roars, intending to kill him, but his advisor Ishum instead advises him to spare Kummay, that he may return penitent to the upper world to begin the glorification of Nergal that results in the story we now read.”
 ibid., p. 165, cf. Dialogue Between Assurbanipal and Nabû — “Of further interest for the identification of the circle in which this text originated is the string of stereotyped wisdom epithets that describe Sennacherib: ‘the eminent one, experienced in matters, wide of understanding, comprehensive in the seat of ordaining fate, who scanned the plans of the foundation of the earth’ (r. 66 uurāti ša markās qaqqari īru).”
 Temple, Masonic Dictionary (13 July 2017)
 Sennacherib, Wikipedia, citing Von Solden (1994) p. 58,100; Foster & Foster (2009) p. 121-123; Stephanie Dalley (2013) The Mystery of the Hanging Garden of Babylon: an elusive world Wonder traced, OUP — “..his building projects included the beautification of Nineveh, a canal 50 km long to bring water to the city, and the ‘Palace Without Rival’, which included what may have been the prototype of the legendary Hanging Gardens of Babylon, or even the actual Hanging Gardens.”
 Seth. L. Sanders, The First Tour of Hell: From Neo-Assyrian Propaganda to Early Jewish Revelation (Brill, 2009), Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions, Volume 9, Issue 2, p. 160 — “The specific historical identification with Sennacherib is made clear when Nergal says that he built the Akitu house, an act uniquely identified with Sennacherib in this period.”
 Joshua J. Mark, Sennacherib, Ancient™ History Encyclopedia (17 July 2017) — “The Book of II Kings 19:37 states, ‘One day, while [Sennacherib] was worshiping in the temple of his god Nisrok, his sons Adrammelek and Sharezer killed him with the sword, and they escaped to the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son succeeded him as king.’ Assyrian inscriptions also maintain that he was killed by his sons but differ on whether he was stabbed or crushed to death. The historian Stephen Bertman writes, ‘Sennacherib was stabbed to death by an assassin (possibly one of his sons) or, according to another account, was crushed to death by the monumental weight of a winged bull that he just happened to be standing beneath’. Whichever way he died, it is thought that he was killed because of his treatment of Babylon.”
 Jewish Holy Scriptures: Halakha/Aggadata/Midrash, Encyclopedia Judaica (17 July 2017)
 Seth. L. Sanders, The First Tour of Hell: From Neo-Assyrian Propaganda to Early Jewish Revelation (Brill, 2009), Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions, Volume 9, Issue 2, p. 160 — “For Sennacherib’s rebuilding of the Akitu-house at Assur, see OIP 2:135-43.”
 Given his connection with the “crown prince” and self-professed scribe Assurbanipal – the grandson of Sennacherib – Nabû is an important figure. According to A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology (G. Leick, Routledge 1991):
“He was first called the ‘scribe and minister of Marduk’, and when the latter was assimilated into the official pantheon as the son of Ea, Nabû in turn became known as the son of Marduk from his wife Sarpanitum. He was also accorded the office of patron of the scribes [..] With his elevation to the ranks of the great gods, Nabû became a cosmic deity, entrusted with the Tablets of Destiny, ‘pronouncing the Fate’ of mankind. The texts equate him with Ninurta [elsewhere thought to be the god sent to take back the Tablets of Destiny from the thieving Anzû storm-bird]. He was also sometimes mentioned as a god of water and the fertility of fields, maybe through his descent from Ea; he also shares the epitheton of ‘god of wisdom’. (Pomponio 1978)”
 ibid., p. 276-277 — “The chief participants and actors in the goddess’s cult are well known by name [..] Their transvestism simulated the androgyny of Inanna-Ishtar. It was perhaps the inversion of the male/female binary opposition that thereby neutralized this opposition. By emulating their goddess who was both female and male, they shattered the boundary between the sexes. [..] The cultic personnel of the goddess in their costumes, words, and acts had but one goal: ‘to delight Ishtar’s heart, give themselves up to (otherwise) for[bidden] actions.'”
 Rebecca Lesses, Lilith, Jewish Women’s Archive, citing Montgomery (117). (3 July 2017)
 Antiquity of the Cabala, Jewish Encyclopedia 1906 (online), 30 June 2017
 Rachel Elior, The Paradoxical Ascent to God – The Kabbalistic Theosophy of Habad Hasidim (1992), pp. 217-218 — “‘Before Him, blessed be He, for He is omnipotent, Yesh and Ayin are equated with each other, for before Him, blessed be He, heaven and earth are called one, and Yesh and Ayin are entirely equal to each other’ (Rabbi Aharon Halevi, ‘Avodat ha-Levi, I, p. 1)”
“[..] the Habad teachers posited the vital importance of the equalization of the opposites in human worship. The quality of the equalization of opposites that characterizes God deprives contradictions of all validity. Likewise it permits Him to possess dual and contradictory wills that are susceptible to being equalized and unified from the divine point of view. Thus, a divine paradigm is transformed into a pattern for human worship, which also equalizes between nether and upper worlds by descent and ascent, unifying sanctity and sin, commandment and transgression, divine manifestation and inversion.”
“‘Worship in inversion,’ ‘descent for the purpose of rising up,’ ‘self-prostration,’ and ‘sacrifice of the soul’ were seen to be theurgical missions based on the conflict of fulfilling the reverse of the divine commandment for the sake of the divine will to be revealed in all dimensions. [..] This form of worship is the radical conclusion of the view of divinity as the unity of opposites and the understanding of human vocation as being to equalize the opposites.”
 V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny, p. 104, p. 103; cf. p. 80; — “The five taboo types of meat are granted a sacramental character. Within them are concentrated the energies of the highest Buddhas, who are able to appear through the ‘law of inversion’. The texts thus speak of the ‘five ambrosias’ or ‘five nectars’. Other impure ‘foods’ have also been assigned to the five Dhyani Buddhas. Ratnasambhava is associated with blood, Amitabha with semen, Amoghasiddhi with human flesh, Aksobhya with urine, Vairocana with excrement (Wayman, 1973, p. 116).”
“The Candamaharosana Tantra lists with relish the particular substances which are offered to the adept by his wisdom consort during the sexual magic rituals and which he must swallow: excrement, urine, saliva, leftovers from between her teeth, lipstick, dish-water, vomit, the wash water which remains after her anus has been cleaned (George, 1974, pp. 73, 78, 79). Those who “make the excrement and urine their food, will be truly happy”, promises the Guhyasamaja Tantra (quoted by Gäng, 1988, p. 134). In the Hevajra Tantra the adept must drink the menstrual blood of his mudra out of a skull bowl (Farrow and Menon, 1992, p. 98). But rotten fish, sewer water, canine feces, corpse fat, the excrement of the dead, sanitary napkins as well as all conceivable “intoxicating drinks” are also consumed (Walker, 1982, pp. 80–84).”
“There exists a strict commandment that the practicing yogi may not feel any disgust in consuming these impure substances. ‘One should never feel disgusted by excrement, urine, semen or blood’ (quoted by Gäng, 1988, p. 266). Fundamentally, ‘he must eat and drink whatever he obtains and he should not hold any notions regarding likes and dislikes’ (Farrow and Menon, 1992, p. 67).”
 ibid., p.124 — “In one relevant text can be read: ‘Eve keeps the female seed’ (Jung, 1968, p. 320). Even the retention of sperm and its transmutation into something higher is known in the west. Hence the seventeenth-century doctor from Brussels, Johannes Baptista Helmont, states that, ‘If semen is not emitted, it is changed into a spiritual force that preserves its capacities to reproduce sperm and invigorates breath emitted in speech’ (Couliano, 1987, p. 102). Giordano Bruno, the heretic among the Renaissance philosophers, wrote a comprehensive essay on the manipulation of erotic love through the retention of semen and for the purposes of attaining power.”
 ibid, p. 75 — “Suitably radical instructions can be found in the Hevajra Tantra: “A wise man … should remove the filth of his mind by filth … one must rise by that through which one falls”, or, more vividly, “As flatulence is cured by eating beans so that wind may expel wind, as a thorn in the foot can be removed by another thorn, and as a poison can be neutralized by poison, so sin can purge sin” (Walker, 1982, p. 34).”
 ibid., p.76 — “The fifth and final argument attempts to persuade us that enlightenment per se arises through the radical inversion of its opposite and that there is absolutely no other possible way to break free of the chains of samsara. Here, the tantric logic of inversion has become a dogma which no longer tolerates other paths to enlightenment.”
“However, this tantric logic of inversion contains a dangerous paradox. On the one hand, Vajrayana stands not just in radical opposition to ‘social’ norms, but likewise also to the original fundamental rules of its own Buddhist system. Thus, it must constantly fear accusations and persecution from its religious brethren. On the other there is the danger mentioned by Friedrich Nietzsche, that anyone who too often looks monsters in the face can themselves become a monster.”
 J. Assante, Sex, Magic, And The Liminal Body In The Erotic Art And Texts Of The Old Babylonian Period (2002); Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East; proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, 2001, p. 34
 Wolkstein D. and Kramer S., The Courtship of Inanna and Dumuzi; Inanna, Queen of Heaven and Earth: Her Stories and Hymns from Sumer (1983), Harper & Row (New York), pp. 38-39, 48 — “These Sumerian love songs between the shepherd-king and Inanna belonged in Sumerian times to a ritual Sumerologists call the sacred marriage rite. In this ritual, the king of a Sumerian city (usually given the epithet ‘Dumuzi’) symbolically weds the goddess Inanna, who is represented by the high priestess of her city. If the goddess is pleased with her suitor and his gifts, she opens her house to him. The sacred marriage bed is prepared, and there, at the proper time (see ‘The Joy of Sumer’ hymn and commentary), the marriage between king and goddess takes place to the accompaniment of merriment and such songs as those in ‘The Courtship.'” (Kramer, p. 154)
“The ‘always’ ends. Whether by external or internal interference, unending, uninterrupted mutual bliss is not an earthly possibility. Change is the human condition. In this instance, it is the woman Inanna who by calling for the royal marriage bed brings the family and social world into her exclusive relationship with Dumuzi, thus ending ‘the honey-moon.'” (Kramer, p. 153)
 Mukīl rēš lemutti, Wikipedia, citing F.A. Wiggermann (1997) “Mischwesen, A”. in D.O. Edzard. Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie: Meek – Mythologie. Walter De Gruyter, p. 241 ; and Jo Ann Scurlock, Burton R. Andersen (2005), Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses. University of Illinois Press, p. 246
 J. Assante, Sex, Magic, And The Liminal Body In The Erotic Art And Texts Of The Old Babylonian Period (2002); Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East; proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, 2001, pp. 28-30
 Marriage of the Sea ceremony, Wikipedia, citing Kennedy, Benjamin (1962). “35b”. Revised Latin Primer. Great Britain: Longmans. p. 19; The Bucintoro, Comitato Festa della Sensa (17 Feb 2012). (21 June 2017)
 J. Assante, Sex, Magic, And The Liminal Body In The Erotic Art And Texts Of The Old Babylonian Period (2002); Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East; proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, 2001 — The traditional scholarly view is that harimtu means prostitute, and refers to a cult of “sacred prostitution”. This view has been challenged by feminist scholars such as Assante (1998, 2000: 10-73), arguing for an interpretation of the harimtu as an unmarried/unattached woman looking for sex, in a culture that had a libertine (my word) view to sexual activity.
 Michael Homan, Beer Production by Throwing Bread into Water: A New Interpretation of Qoh. XI 1-2, Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 52, Fasc. 2 (Apr., 2002), pp. 275-278 — “Beer and bread were intimately linked in the ancient Near East. Breweries from Egypt to Mesopotamia created beer by lightly baking dough composed of ground germinated cereals, and these loaves along with yeast were placed in jars of water, where the maltose sugars were converted to alcohol.”
“In favor of this interpretation are several Akkadian passages which state that beer ingredients (including bappir bread and dates) are thrown into the water to produce beer, with the verb nadu (“to throw”) used in technical language for brewing beer.”
 J. Assante, Sex, Magic, And The Liminal Body In The Erotic Art And Texts Of The Old Babylonian Period (2002); Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East; proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, 2001, pp. 33-34 —
“With the slap of the face, with the rolling of the eyes,
I have hit you on the head, I have deranged your reason,
Set your will to my will,
Set your decision to my decision,
I hold you fast as Ishtar held Dumuzi,
(As) beer binds her drinker,
I have bound you with my hairy mouth,
With my vagina (full of) wetness,
With my mouth (full of) saliva,
With my vagina (full of) wetness,
No female rival shall go near you!”
“What is important here is that the incantation employs Ishtar’s seizure of her lover and beer’s seizure of the drinker as similes for the state of being spellbound. [..] Ishtar, beer, vagina and mouth all have the power to bind. Here, as elsewhere, the vagina and mouth are interchangeable. The magical body of the divine harimtu binds at both ends. [..] The association between drinking and sex was deeply rooted in the Mesopotamian psyche of the Old Babylonian period [..] For example, beer was firmly equated to saliva and vaginal wetness [..] Mesopotamian beer was normally sweetened with date syrup, called “honey” in modern translations. In most literary erotica the mouth and vulva are honey-sweet, as they are in this Sumerian court poem from Ur:”
“My god, the tavern keeper, her beer is sweet!
And her vulva is sweet like her beer – and her beer is sweet!
And her vulva is sweet like all her mouths – and her beer is sweet!
Her kašbir-beer and her (regular) beer are sweet.”
“In this hymn, the poet adds the anus to the list of transposable body portals, although it is merely alluded to as inferior kašbir beer.”
 J. Assante, Sex, Magic, And The Liminal Body In The Erotic Art And Texts Of The Old Babylonian Period (2002); Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East; proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, 2001, p. 33
 Revue d’Assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale. Given intention to publish a book revealing a host of further evidences, this author apologises for not providing a more detailed citation at this time.
 2 Kings 17:19-24, Ezra 4:9-11, Tanakh, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1917 — 2 Kings 17:19-24
19. Also Judah kept not the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they practised.
20. And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until He had cast them out of His sight.
22. And the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them;
23 until the LORD removed Israel out of His sight, as He spoke by the hand of all His servants the prophets. So Israel was carried away out of their own land to Assyria, unto this day.
24 And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Avva, and from Hamath and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel; and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof.
9 ..then wrote Rehum the commander, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinites, and the Apharesattechites, the Tarpelites, the Apharesites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Shushanchites, the Dehites, the Elamites,
10 and the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asenappar brought over, and set in the city of Samaria, and the rest that are in the country beyond the River…
 Nili Wazana, Anzu and Ziz: Great Mythical Birds in Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Rabbinic Traditions (2008), Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 31 (2009): 111-135 –– “Were the Israelites acquainted with the Epic of Anzu? A seventh century b.c.e. cylinder seal portraying the battle of Ninurta and Anzu was discovered in Israel. While this sporadic, graphic witness cannot count as proof of knowledge of the Epic of Anzu, it does show that symbols of the combat myth had arrived along with the Assyrian army, part and parcel of a general cultural influence. Furthermore, studies have shown that the Bible employs literary motifs and linguistic expressions reflecting royal Neo-Assyrian inscriptions when ‘quoting’ Assyrian speakers, concluding that some biblical authors must have been acquainted not only with the ‘Assyrian experience,’ but also with official royal literary traditions. Considering that the Epic of Anzu played a role in the language of royal Neo-Assyrian inscriptions, underlying the criminal characterization of some of the figures in imperialistic propaganda, it is highly probable that biblical authors were familiar with this creature and its traditions—even if they did not know the epic itself, before the Babylonian exile.”
 Russell Gmirkin, Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus: Hellenistic Histories and the Date of the Pentateuch, 2006 — Gmirkin offers evidence that contradicts a widely-accepted argument concerning the earliest origins of “anti-Semitism”, which is allegedly found in the writings of an Egyptian priest of the third century BC named Manetho, in his history of Egypt (Aegyptiaca). Manetho reported that centuries earlier, a foreign population had entered Egypt from the east via the Nile delta. These foreigners rose in power, and became an increasing problem to the Egyptian natives, who were finally motivated to expel them when the foreign population developed a serious skin disease (leprosy?). According to Manetho, these ejected foreigners relocated to Jerusalem.
Gmirkin argues that the book of Exodus was written by Jewish intellectuals in Alexandria (Egypt) in reaction to Manetho, whose account came first and was more accurate. That is to say, rather than Manetho attacking the Jews, “the borrowing and polemics took place in the opposite direction; the Pentateuch polemicized against the Egyptian expulsion stories in Manetho.” (pp.2-3)
 Exodus 3:8, 33:3, Tanakh, Jerusalem Publication Society, 1917 – the common interpretation has been that “flowing with milk and honey” is a metaphor for the abundant fertility of the land itself.
 ibid., 121 — “The embracing of a ‘bleeding’ lover is therefore a great ritual privilege. In his book on Indian ecstatic cults, Philip Rawson indicates that ‘the most powerful sexual rite … requires intercourse with the female partner when she is menstruating and her “red” sexual energy is at its peak’ (Rawson, 1973, p. 24; see also Chöpel, 1992, p. 191).”
 Exodus 7:14-24, Tanakh, Jerusalem Publication Society, 1917 – “And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Say unto Aaron: Take thy rod, and stretch out thy hand over the waters of Egypt, over their rivers, over their streams, and over their pools, and over all their ponds of water, that they may become blood; and there shall be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood and in vessels of stone.’” (verse 19)
 Alchemy, Encyclopedia Judaica, Jewish Virtual Library (17 June 2017) — “The Jewish association with alchemy dates from ancient times. Zosimos, a fifth-century Greek historian, states that the Jews acquired the secrets of the “sacred craft” of the Egyptians and the knowledge of the “power of gold” which derives from it by dishonest means, and they imparted the knowledge of alchemy to the rest of the world. In ancient Greek manuscripts, which contain lists of writings on alchemy, a number of alchemic and magic writings are attributed to Moses…”
 Alchemy, Jewish Encyclopedia, (17 June 2017) — “Traces of the connection of Jews with the science of Alchemy are very scanty in Hebrew literature. Not a single distinguished adept is found who has left in a Hebrew form traces of his knowledge of the subject. There is, however, scarcely a single important ancient work upon the science which is not directly related to the Jews, with their traditions and their science. Alchemy, like others of the exact sciences, suffered from the introduction of foreign elements, and developed from a more or less secret science belonging to a particular craft, into a mysterious science dealing with changes in the organic as well as the metallic world.”
“In the evolution of Alchemy there are at least three epochs: The first, the Greek and Egyptian period; the second, the Arabic of the Middle Ages; and the last, or modern, period, extending from the sixteenth century to the present day.”
“Alchemy had already in the second or third century assumed a mystical and magical character, exemplified in such recipes as appear in the magic papyri. The whole syncretism of the East—Jewish and Egyptian gnosis, Greek mysteries, and Ophite speculations—combined to produce a current of thought which affected every mental production of the age.”
“Adam and Abraham have in their turn been described as authors of alchemistic treatises, and Moses is repeatedly met with as the author of such works. To Moses are ascribed the Greek treatise known as ‘Diplosis’ (that is, the art of doubling the weight of gold), and the treatise ‘The Chemistry of Moses’ (dealing with metallurgy), published by Berthelot in his ‘Collection des Anciens Alchimistes Grecs,’ Paris, 1887-88, ii. 300-315, iii. 287-301. In the Greek manuscript of St. Mark of the ninth century Zosimos quotes long passages from ‘The Chemistry of Moses.'”
 Vladimír Karpenko, Alchemy as donum dei, HYLE – International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, Vol. 4 (1998), No. 1, pp. 63-80; — “In the Hellenistic world particular attention should be paid to Mary the Jewess, one of the most influential personalities of this science. God appears in connection with her, but in a slightly different manner than later. To Mary, alchemy is donum dei, a gift of God; but this gift was given only to ‘chosen people’, Jews. She is reported to have said: “Do not touch the philosopher’s stone with your hands; you are not of our race, you are not of the race of Abraham.’* Thus alchemy was not for alchemists in general, but for the race of Abraham. Alchemy is presented here as the spiritual property of Jews. As pointed out by Patai, the singular form ‘God’ is used strictly in texts attributed to Mary, and this claim that alchemical secrets were revealed to her by God became a part of the medieval alchemical tradition about her.”
*Patai, R.: 1994, The Jewish Alchemists, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, p. 76.
 Autumnal, Online Etymology Dictionary (10 July 2017)
Autumn (n): late 14c., autumpne (modern form from 16c.), from Old French autumpne, automne (13c.), from Latin autumnus (also auctumnus, perhaps influenced by auctus “increase”).
Harvest (n): Old English hærfest “autumn,” as one of the four seasons, “period between August and November,” from Proto-Germanic *harbitas (source also of Old Saxon hervist, Old Frisian and Dutch herfst, German Herbst “autumn,” Old Norse haust “harvest”), from PIE *kerp- “to gather, pluck, harvest” (source also of Sanskrit krpana– “sword,” krpani “shears;” Greek karpos “fruit,” karpizomai “make harvest of;” Latin carpere “to cut, divide, pluck;” Lithuanian kerpu “cut;” Middle Irish cerbaim “cut”).
In Old English with only implied reference to the gathering of crops. The borrowing of autumn and the use of fall (n.) in a seasonal sense gradually focused the meaning of harvest to “the time of gathering crops” (mid-13c.), also to the action itself and the product of the action (after c. 1300), which became its main senses from 14c.
I’ve been deceiv’d. The Publick Safety
Requires he should be more confin’d; and none,
No not the Princess self, permitted to
Confer with him. I’ll quit you to the King.
Vile and ingrate! too late thou shalt repent
The base Injustice thou hast done my Love:
Yes, thou shalt know, spite of thy past Distress,
And all those Ills which thou so long hast mourn’d;
Heav’n has no Rage, like Love to Hatred turn’d,
Nor Hell a Fury, like a Woman scorn’d.
The Mourning Bride
False promises. Broken promises.
In marital relations, there is no greater sting, no act more likely to turn love to hatred, than the act of infidelity. The breach of trust. The breaking of a sacred bond. It is the ultimate betrayal.
Imagine for a moment the most hurtful of such betrayals. An adulterous affair, resulting in the birth of an illegitimate child.
In medieval Latin, the word infidēlitas means unfaithful, disloyal, and treacherous. It implies a willful intent.
From ancient times, men have used overt sexual symbolism to communicate and record economic actions. Even when divorced from their origins in husbandry, we still use these sexual metaphors in our economic language. In accounting and finance in particular, many words are puns – they carry a double meaning.
Growth. Cycle. Period. Maturity. Seed. Deposit. Yield. Labour. Bond. And that’s only a handful.
Just like their oriental colleagues, the occidental alchemists expressed themselves in a twilight language. All the words, signs, and symbols, which were formulated to describe the experiments in their obscure “laboratories”, possessed multiple meanings and were only comprehensible to the “initiated”.
“Make of the man and the woman a Circle,
of that a Quadrangle, of this a Triangle,
of the same a Circle, and you will have
the Stone of the Philosophers.”
So cryptic, so long disguised and so deeply embedded is it, that even men such as former governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King (The End of Alchemy) appear not to have understood the core conjugal metaphor:
[A]lchemy lies at the heart of the financial system; moreover, banking was, like alchemy, a medieval idea, but one we have not as yet discarded.
As Lord King remarks, the alchemy is “the belief that money kept in banks can be taken out whenever depositors ask for it”. This is a confidence trick in two senses: it works if, and only if, confidence is strong; and it is fraudulent. Financial institutions make promises that, in likely states of the world, they cannot keep.
Banking – and money – is all about the making of promises.
A mutual exchange of promises.
Banking, and money, is all about the alchemical marriage of two opposite principals (principles) – a lender (male, active), and a borrower (female, passive) – who agree to a mutual, binding exchange of promises.
The primal act of banking, is the forming of a “bond” – a union of opposites – between a creditor (Sola ☉, Mars ♂), and a debtor (Luna ☽, Venus ♀).
Lots of them.
The purpose of this bond – this union of opposites – is not to love each other, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part. There is a higher purpose.
The reproduction and growth of money.
The true purpose of this union of opposites, is the creation and multiplication of money … for the lender.
In banking, the production and reproduction of money is achieved not by alchemy, or magic.
It is achieved by lying, and cheating.
Cheating females is the base principle that lies, by design, at the heart of the money system.
Cheating females, is what makes our world go round. It is the driving force behind a critical factor in all monopoly-monied economies: the “circulation”, the “flow”, or the “velocity of money”.
Cheating lies at the heart of the “creative destruction” phenomenon in capitalism, and the so-called “boom and bust” economic cycle.
Cheating females is also the cause of a phenomenon seen repeatedly, through all of recorded human history: the long term relationship between lending at “interest” (usury), and rising inequality.
The art of monetary cheating – along with its base sexual metaphor of male (lender) principle cheating the female (borrower) principle – can be traced back thousands of years to ancient Babylon, through the trade and migration routes, and the boastful claims to historicity, of a unique guild of artisanal merchants.
The same secret principle – a gross perversion of the hieros gamos (“Sacred Marriage”) fertility rite – is found in the accounting records, in the scholarly, literary, and technical texts, and in the magico-religious artifacts of Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, the Roman Empire, Arabia, and the Far East.
It is found in the Babylonian Talmud and Jewish Cabala, in the code words and symbolism of Eastern and Western alchemy, and in the upaya (“method”, “trick”) of the Tantric Buddhist Kalachakra (“Time Tantra”) secret high initiation rites of medieval India.
Last of all, the same secret principle of monetary cheating is found in el modo vinegia, the medieval “Venetian method” of bookkeeping by double entry, still used as the foundation of banking and finance to this day.
“And the bookkeeper can be king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.”
Cheating females – the Royal Art of “philosophers” – is all about producing inequality, by illusions of equality.
Since ancient times, the illusion of equality has been represented by the alchemical symbol of the androgyne (Mercury-Hermes ☿). It does not, as most believe, represent the union of male and female principles – two equal opposites – in a gender-neutralising, transcendent harmony.
The androgyne actually represents a mixture of male-female reproductive forces – the mixed “seed” of the man and woman – that is “possessed by a man”.
In the alchemy of banking, the illusion of equality is represented by a bookkeepers’ symbol (“$”, “€”, “£”, “¥”) called “money of account”. It does not, as most believe, represent the union of Assets and Liabilities – two equal opposites – in a “supply-demand” harmonising equilibrium.
“Money of account” actually represents a mixture of lender (male) and borrower (female) “deposits” – Assets (left side) and Liabilities (right side) … that is possessed by a Lender:
[T]he role of money [of account] as supplementer of value is concealed behind an apparent but deceptive power to guarantee equivalence. Moreover, the power of money enables the construction of previously unprecedented levels of wealth, and the possibility of new power relations for those with money and those without it.
How does the male (lender) principle cheat the female (borrower) principle?
By faking it.
The male cheats the female, by faking his – her – “deposits”.
The lender does not give the promised “seed” to the borrower.
He does the opposite.
Using a secret method, he actually steals hers.
Following in the footsteps of Hermes “the Sage, the Babylonian” – god of merchants, orators (eloquent liars), tricksters, imposters, hegemons and thieves – the lender actually “sucks money out of purses as the magnet attracts iron”:
In the traditional Buddhist conception an embryo arises from the admixture of the male seed and the female seed. This red-white mixture is referred to by the texts as sukra. Since the fluids of man and woman produces new life [..] if the yogi succeeds in permanently uniting within himself both elixirs (the semen virile and the semen feminile), then eternal life lies in store for him. He becomes a “born of himself”, having overcome the curse of rebirth and replaced it with the esoteric vision of immortality. With the red-white mixture he attains the “medicine of long life”, a “perfected body”. Sukra is the “life juice” par excellence, the liquid essence of the entire world of appearances. It is equated with amrta, the “drink of immortality” or the “divine nectar”.
In the four highest secret initiation rituals of Tantric Buddhism, this “skillful” trick (upaya) is called the Vajroli method. It is considered “a veritable touchstone of the highest yogic skill”.
In the act of yuganaddha (fusion) with a “wisdom consort” (mudra) – lots of them – the tantric master sucks out the seed of the woman with his ‘cock’ :
“After he has streamed forth,” Mircea Eliade quotes a text as saying, “he draws in and says: through my force, through my seed I take your seed — and she is without seed”. The man thus steals the seed of the woman under the impression that he can through this become a powerful androgynous being, and leaves her without her own life energy.
Some of the “initiated” even succeed in drawing up the semen feminile without ejaculating any sperm so as to then produce the yearned-for sukra mixture in their own body. The mastery of this method requires painful and lengthy exercises, such as the introduction of small rods of lead and “short lengths of solder” into the urethra.
Now what happens if the yogi has not mastered the method of drawing back? .. [T]he adept may catch the sukra from out of the vagina in a vessel and then drink it. It is not rare for the drinking bowl to be made from a human skull. The Candamaharosana Tantra recommends sucking the mixture up with a tube (pipe) through the nose. If one sips the sukra out of his mudra’s genitals with his mouth, then the process is described as being “from mouth to mouth”. Without exaggeration one can refer to this drinking of the “white-red bodhicitta” as the great tantric Eucharist, in which semen and blood are sacredly consumed in place of bread and wine. Through this oriental “Last Supper” the power and the strength of the women are passed over to the man.
The frontispiece from Nicolas de Locques’ Les Rudiments de la Philosophie Naturelle (1665) perfectly illustrates the essence of the alchemical act. As the two “flames” (desire, lust) of Mercury-Hermes and Aphrodite-Venus “bond” – with the Sun ☼ (male) in the dominant position over the Moon ☾ (female), and her eyes blissfully wedded to the point of their “fusion” – the thieving trickster god steals her “waters” from right under her nose.
He uses her symbol (ancient Greek kteis, a pun meaning scallop shell and vagina) – held in his right hand (symbol of phallic power) – to perform the theft.
This calculating thievery is celebrated by the Tantric Babhaha (“Free Lover”) in poetic verse:
In the sacred citadel of the vulva of
a superlative, skillful partner,
do the praxis of mixing white seed
with her ocean of red seed.
Then absorb, raise, and spread the nectar—
A stream of ecstasy such as you’ve never known.
The gesture of dominance with which the tantric master seals his consort during the sexual act is called the Vajrahumkara mudra: he crosses both hands behind the back of his partner, with the vajra [phallus] held in his right hand, and the gantha [vagina] in the left. The symbolic content of this gesture can only be the following: the yogi as androgyne is lord over both sexual energies, the masculine (symbolized by the vajra) and the feminine (symbolized by the gantha). In encircling (“sealing”) his wisdom consort with the androgyne gesture, he wishes to express that she is a part of his self, or rather, that he has absorbed her as his maha mudra (“inner woman”).
In the alchemical doctrine of both East and West, the entire wealth of the cosmos is created out of the interaction of male and female genders – two equal opposites. By stealing the seed of the woman and uniting it with his seed within the temple of his own mystic and physical bodies, the tantric adept believes that he has at his disposal the secret birth-force of the female – a power that he both lacks and desires:
The tantric master uses a human woman [karma mudra], or at least an inana mudra [“spirit woman”] to create his androgynous body. He destroys her autonomous existence, steals her gynergy, integrates this in the form of an “inner woman” [maha mudra] and thus becomes a powerful double-gendered super-being.
“He absorbs the Mother of the Universe into himself”.
In the alchemical doctrine of bankers, the entire wealth of the economy is created out of the interaction of two opposite genders – Savers and Borrowers. By uniting their “deposits” within the temple of his own mystic and physical body – a monopoly banking △ system – the banking adept has at his disposal the secret birth-force of material wealth.
He now possesses legal ownership claims, on real world assets – the “collateral” he demands as “security” against failure to repay “his” “loans” – land, industrial “capital”, intellectual “property”, and the spent time and gynergy of human “labour”.
By cheating females – lots of them – the alchemist can become the “Grand Sorcerer” (Maha Siddha):
The goal of tantric androgyny is the concentration of absolute power in the tantric master, which in his view constitutes the unrestricted control over both cosmic primal forces, the god and the goddess. [..] Supernatural power gives the tantric master control over the whole universe. He can dissolve it and reestablish it. It grants him control over space and time in all of their forms of expression. As “time god” (Kalachakra) he becomes “lord of history”.
This cheating process is precisely what happens in our ‘modern’, neo-medieval banking and money system. Or, to be more precise, their neo-Babylonian banking and money system. It is built on precisely the same Old Babylonian occult (Latin occultus: hidden, secret) sex magic principles.
The Unity (or Union) of Opposites.
And the Law of Inversion (or Reversal).
In both East and West, the cheating method for sex magic – claimed to result in the spiritual and physical transformation of the (male) adept into an immortal Time Lord – at the expense of the female – is the same as the method for supposedly transforming base metals into pure gold:
[P]recisely because most extreme estrangement from enlightenment is inherent to the “daughters of Mara”, because they are considered the greatest obstacle for a man and barricade the realm of freedom, according to the tantric “law of inversion” they are for any adept the most important touchstone on the initiation path. He who understands how to gain mastery over women also understands how to control all of creation, as it is represented by him. On account of this paradox, sexual union enjoys absolute priority in Vajrayana. All other ritual acts, no matter how bizarre they may appear, are derived from this sexual magic origin.
The Tibetan lama, Dragpa Jetsen [..] distinguishes three aspects of the royal art: the “Alchemy of life: he can make his life last as long as the sun and moon[; the] Alchemy of body: he can make his body eternally be but sixteen years old[; and the] Alchemy of enjoyments: he can turn iron and copper into gold”. These three experiments, then, primarily concern two goals: firstly the attainment of immortality, and secondly the production of gold, that is, material wealth.
It should not surprise us to discover then, that the method long used by the male “time god” to steal the female’s gynergy, is precisely the same method long used by the male (lender) to cheat the female (borrower) in banking and trade.
As long ago as the dawn of the second millennium BC, the oldest written law code of human civilisation targeted this covert form of thievery:
Some evidence of the knowledge and previous existence of such practice of issuance of false receipts as against supposed valuables on deposit for safe-keeping clearly exists in the Law No. 7 of the great Hammurabi [1792 BC to 1750 BC] which same law was undoubtedly intended as a preventative to this sickness in society, which, even at that day, may very well have been the cancer that destroyed much that has been before. [..] The severity of the penalty and the placing of the law so high in the code leaves little doubt that it was directed against an evil that was by no means new…
“If a man buys silver or gold or slave, or slave girl, or ox or sheep or ass or anything else whatsoever from a [free] man’s son or a free man’s slave or has received them for safe custody without witness or contract, that man is a thief: he shall be put to death.”
The requisite of witnesses and contract attesting to the true facts of valuables on deposit, would to some extent obviate the danger of the goldsmiths, silversmiths or traders, involved in a transaction, creating receipts for valuables that did not exist, in safe custody or otherwise.
The death penalty must have motivated the cheating “time gods” to alter their method. As we will see, some six hundred years after King Hammurabi, the alchemists of Babylon were secreting a recipe to create the appearance of silver – their international trade (and thus, the accepted royal) standard, against which all other commodities were measured. The method, and especially the ingredients of this secret recipe, has far-reaching, explosive – and truly enlightening – explanatory powers.
Around two thousand years later, the cheating time lords were still practicing their secret method in and around what remained of the fallen and fragmented Roman Empire:
I summon today
All these powers between me and those evils,
Against every cruel and merciless power
that may oppose my body and soul,
Against incantations of false prophets,
Against black laws of pagandom,
Against false laws of heretics,
Against craft of idolatry,
Against spells of witches and smiths and wizards,
Against every knowledge that corrupts man’s body and soul…
Saint Patrick’s Breastplate, c. 433 AD
[This prayer also known as The Cry of the Deer (i.e., the “hart”)]
In 620 AD the Roman emperor Diocletian issued a decree ordering to destroy all alchemical manuscripts for he was afraid of devaluation of the currency by false silver and/or gold made by alchemists.
Almost a thousand years after that, at the dusk of the medieval era and the dawn of ‘modern’ commercial banking, they were still at it:
Francesco de’ Medici, a prince of the Medici, eldest son and heir to Cosimo I, should have been born with the golden apple of fortune clutched firmly in his hands. What went wrong? Why did he end his life loathed and feared by the people of Florence, amid whispers he had been poisoned by his own brother? [..] [I]n in letters and documents of the day Francesco is universally described as .. obsessed with alchemy.
Thurneisser or Thurneysser, as well as five other spellings, was born in Basel in 1530. His father was a goldsmith. Arrested for selling gilt lead as gold, Thurneisser fled Basel [..] He wrote on chemistry, alchemy, meteorology, pharmacology and medicine, making it up as he went along. History sees him now as a flamboyant charlatan.
Today, we “females” no longer use silver or gold as common money. Nor do we use cuneiform or paper I Owe You’s – written records of a Promise to Pay – receipts issued by ‘smiths for our gold and silver “deposited” with them for safe-keeping.
Instead, almost all of the “money” that we use today, is really just an electronic bookkeeping record of a male promise to pay us the government’s legal tender – cash notes and coins – “on demand”.
We pay the male rent – renamed as “account keeping fees”, “charges”, and “interest” – to have electronic “access” to his “payments system”; meaning, a system allowing us to send a request for a change in his bookkeeping records.
We believe, or unthinkingly assume, that the male – a privileged monopoly “agent” of the Sovereign – actually has a “supply” that is equal to his promises to pay out the Sovereign’s real money, stored securely in his safe.
He does not actually discharge his “promise” – a binding, legal obligation – to pay us real, physical Sovereign money, unless we “demand” it.
But he would really, really prefer that we didn’t:
In case you thought banks lend money – they take deposits and lend money – you’re wrong. Legally, they do not take deposits, they borrow from the public. The expressions in banking are designed to mislead what’s really happening…
What is a bank account? It is not a deposit. What is it? It is a record of the bank’s debt to the public; it is a record of the bank’s debt to the new borrower, and they’ll show you the record of how much money they owe you. That’s it. They don’t pay up.
So what happens when we “spend” the “money” in the “account” that we are renting access to?
The male “time god” simply changes hisstory in his books.
He now records that his debt to one female is less, and his debt to another female – or, the debt owed by his fellow cheating time lord in another temple of their cabal – is more.
He calls that a “payment” or “transfer”. Even though no one has actually been paid out any real money.
He and his fellow cheating time lords have simply shuffled their stories of their undischarged promises – their Sacred Marital obligations – to give the cat the cream.
In ‘modern’ banking, the counterfeiting of “deposits” is done using the “Venetian method” of bookkeeping by double entry. For all its fabled pretences to mathematical precision, “balance”, and objective impartiality, the art of bookkeeping – the keeping of “accounts” – is really nothing more than story-telling.
With “positive” and “negative” numbers added.
(Did you see what I did then? Loθok again.)
Most importantly, “money” by double entry is always a story of two opposite perspectives … told from only one perspective.
So his double story-telling has lots of opportunity for “skillful” tricks of word-play.
Words with double, or even multiple meanings:
Sumerian cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphs were originally based on punning systems. Punning has been credited as the fundamental concept behind alphabets, writing, and even human civilization.
In the world’s first empirical test to discover what banks really do when they “issue” a “loan” of “money”, Professor Richard Werner has proven that the trick of the ‘modern’ cheating time lord is … a pun.
The Sacred Word “deposit” … is a pun.
From the perspective of the female renter of access to “money”, it appears to be her money – the money that he promised to give her. It appears to “perform” just like the real thing.
But from the perspective of the cheating time lord, it is just a record – a reflection, a re-presentation – of his unpaid debt. His false promise. The source of his power, to “draw blood” from “easy meat” … from, in his own words, a “Babylonian whore”.
At all times, all of these “deposits” (and a few drops of real money) are stored within the temple of his mystic and physical body – the monopoly banking debt-“money of account” △ system.
The male never discharges his debt – his promise – unless she demands to have it in her “purse”.
If and when she does, he might not be able to do it:
Banks promise to return money today, when most is tied up until tomorrow or the day after. They rely on the trust of customers collectively not to call their bluff. When that trust is lost, creditors run, promises cannot be met and the banking system collapses.
There is nothing the cheating time lord fears more, than having lots of “females” – karma mudras – collectively exercising their Sacred Right and demanding to have the money – the real money – that he promised to pay:
[I]n India the flowing of the male seed into “the fiery maw of the female sexual organ” is still today regarded as a sacrificium and therefore feared as an element of death.
[E]jaculation is equated simply with death. [..] “The fear of losing body fluids leads not only to retention, but to attempts to steal the partner’s fluid (and the fear that the partner [karma mudra] will try the same trick) — yet another form of competition”.
The drawing up of sperm by a woman is viewed by a tantric yogi as a mortally dangerous theft and a fundamental crime.
For the lying cheating banker, this means that the Royal Art is a delicate balancing act. If the females ever wake up to his “confidence trick”, and collectively demand the real Sovereign money, then he is royally f****d.
He is always living on the edge, of economic life and death:
For a Buddhist Tantric the retention of the male seed is the sine qua non of the highest spiritual enlightenment. [..] As soon as a person begins to experience sexual desire, it starts to flow out, drop by drop [..] The destination of the sperm’s journey within the body is the tip of the penis. Here, through extreme meditative concentration, the adept collects the lust [..] “Through this, the act obtains a cosmological dimension. … It becomes the means of attaining enlightenment (bodhi)”. “Delight resides in the tip of the vajra [penis]”…
The Sanskrit term for alchemy is Rasa-vada. Rasa means ‘liquid’ or ‘quicksilver’. Quicksilver was considered the most important chemical substance which was made use of in the “mystic” experiments, both in Europe and in Asia. The liquid metal was employed in the transformation of materials both in the east and the west, in particular with the intention of producing gold. In the Occident it bore the name of the Roman god, Mercury. The Kalachakra Tantra also mentions quicksilver at several points. The frequency with which it is mentioned is a result of its being symbolically equated with the male seed (bodhicitta); it was, in a manner of speaking, the natural-substance form of the semen virile.
It is a characteristic of quicksilver that it can “swallow” other substances, that is, chemically bind with them. This quality allowed the liquid metal to become a powerful symbol for the tantric yogi, who as an androgyne succeeds in absorbing — i.e., “swallowing” — the gynergy of his wisdom consort.
The alchemist plays a dangerous game. In order to transform himself into the Master of the Universe – having “absolute power” and “unrestricted control over both cosmic primal forces, the god and the goddess” – he must “conquer” all the “females”.
To do this, he must continually “grow” the size of his undischarged promises to pay out real Sovereign money (cash notes and coins).
In bankers’ words, he must “expand his balance sheet” … until all the “females” are firmly, irredeemably in his debt.
This is nothing less than an alchemical, misogynist metaphor for growing an enormously “big swinging dick”.
Given that borrowers’ debts are recorded as the bankers’ Assets, to expand his balance sheet means that – from his perspective – he is growing an enormously “big black swinging dick”.
We “females” see a growing debt as our being “in the red”.
The “time god” sees that same debt, for him, as being “in the black”.
As we will see, according to the Law of Inversion the alchemist believes that he should begin with the worst substances, in order to “transform” them into the best. Indeed, the very first step in an alchemical experiment is “located within a context of sacrifice, death and the color black”, and is called nigredo – “blackening”. So the bankers’ cynical creed is not only malevolently misogynist; paradoxically, it is also rapaciously racist … against black people.
Professor Werner’s world-first empirical study has shown that every time a lying cheating “time god” makes a new false promise to pay – every time he “issues” a new “loan” of fake “money of account”, and does not discharge any real money – this is precisely what happens.
His balance sheet – his metaphorical ‘cock’ – grows bigger:
For firms without a bank licence, the disbursement of the loan is from funds elsewhere within the firm. Thus there is an equal reduction in balance of another account from which the lent funds came from. Therefore, the balance sheet shrinks again. There is no overall change in the total size of the balance sheet.
However the story is quite different for the bank. Surprisingly, we find that unlike the other firms whose balance sheets shrank back in Step 2, the bank’s accounts seem in standstill, unchanged from Step 1. The total balance sheet remains lengthened. No balance is drawn down to make a payment to the borrower.
From Vajrayana comes the striking saying that “A yogi whose member is always hard is one who always retains his semen”.
These lying cheating time lords have long told a romantic story of their past, and present. This fairy tale “account” says that theirs is only a neutral, benevolent, guiding hand – the Invisible Hand – in the reproductive affairs of others. Just like a high priest, officiating at the Sacred Wedding of two opposites. His divine intermediation and blessing on their union is necessary to ensure that the gentle rains of prosperity, security and happiness will fall on both of them … or so hisstory goes.
Over many centuries, these invisible-handed banking high priests – along with their most-favoured choir boys in the economic theory profession – have conjured up lots of abstract word-pairs to describe this “productive” union of two opposites.
Savers and Borrowers. Patient and Impatient. Investors and Entrepreneurs. Sellers and Buyers. Producers and Consumers. Exporters and Importers. External and Internal. Public and Private. And that’s just a handful.
These abstract word-pairs serve the purpose of creating a false appearance – an illusion – of equality in the union of two opposites, with the banking high priest merely “serving” the community as the trusted, Fatherly intermediary.
The reality is rather different.
As with most effective deceptions, there is some truth in this tale. One part of time lord operations once was – and still is, in a manner of speaking – acting as an intermediary between so-called “Savers” and “Borrowers”: receiving “deposits” for “safe-keeping” (legally, borrowing) from one, and “lending” to the other.
But even here, the appearance of equality between these two abstract opposites, is just an illusion. A clever trick of word-play.
The banking high priest is practicing “Time manipulation” – or more accurately, date-of-birth shuffling – with all the “accounts” of his promises to pay real money.
He is able to “create” and multiply real wealth for himself, using the “flows” between all the opposites.
The banking high priest calls this date-of-birth hustling procedure “maturity transformation” – of “term” “deposits”.
With one hand, he borrows from “depositors” for a short period of time.
With the other hand, he lends to “borrowers” – who are instantly “transformed” into “depositors” too – for a long period of time:
By doing this, banks transform [their] debts with very short maturities (deposits) into credits with very long maturities (loans), and collect the difference in the [usury] rates as profit.
There is no “magic” in any of this. The cheating time lord is simply abusing his privileged, monopoly position. Because he controls the bookkeeping records of large “stocks” of his promises, and constantly re-writes hisstory of his promises – that is, his story of the “flows” of his promises between his customers’ “accounts”, and, between those and the “accounts” written by his fellow “time gods” at other temples – he is able to gain real wealth for himself by cheating all the “depositors”.
He will only get caught if too many “account holders” (renters) start to smell a rat, and decide, at the same time, to demand the real deal – legal tender cash notes and coins – that the cheating time lord has promised to pay.
However, this is only one small part of banking “
The hidden truth is that the banking high priest is not just a lying, cheating, fake “intermediary” officiating at the Sacred Marriage of Savers and Borrowers.
He is the infamous Mercury–Hermes (☿), the “purse”-sucking androgyne himself.
Hiding behind economic babel (“confusion”) – and that owing much to the Paradox of Opposite Perspectives in double entry – the cheating time lord does not just shuffle promises to pay; he also creates new promises to pay.
False promises. Misleading promises. Deceptive promises.
“Fraudulent” promises – his promises – that he calls “credit” but is actually debt.
He actually owes all of “our” debt … to us!
As Professor Werner has proven, that is how all “money of account” appears – and disappears – in the first place.
“The dragon slays itself, weds itself, impregnates itself.”
“The serpent devouring its own tail represents alternately
.. tempter and Redeemer.”
Why do we “females” do this?
Why have we allowed these lying cheating “time gods” incarnate to keep returning to steal our gynergy, for over 5000 years?
A devil’s pact.
A promise, of Yesh for Ayin.
Something for Nothing.
In a word – usury.
The cheating time lord sucks in the female’s “interest”, using a honey-sweet promise to pay her “interest”.
But only on the condition that she walks down the aisle, ties the knot … and lets him have her “deposit”.
Preferably, for a “locked in” “period”.
The longer the “term” until “maturity”, the more “interest” he promises to pay her.
She can only “redeem” her “deposit” – and the promised “yield” – when her “deposit” in his mystic temple has gone “full term”.
Thanks to the magic “$”, “€”, “£”, “¥”, and especially the “%” signs that he flashes in our eyes, we “females” are blinded to the reality.
His fake system is an inversion – a reversal – of “Mother” nature.
His system of promises is all about cheating, stealing, manipulating, dominating, and destroying the “autonomous existence” of the fundamental feminine principle – our mother nature.
Almost 2,500 years ago, Greek philosopher Aristotle pointed out that money is sterile. It does not naturally breed more money, the way that cows breed more cows. He explained that “Money exists not by nature but by law”:
The most hated sort [of wealth getting] and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange but not to increase at interest. And this term interest (tokos), which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of all modes of getting wealth, this is the most unnatural. (1258b, POLITICS)
For over 1000 years in the “Dark” and Middle Ages – when there was no separation of two “opposites”, the Church and the State – there was an official ban on the practice of usury.
Honoured sometimes as much in the breach as in the observance. There’s a long story of willfully-blind eyes there, all in itself.
But prohibition, nonetheless.
The defenders of usury prohibition were – are – precisely right.
Far more right, than any are given credit for.
The lying cheating system of false promises and fake “deposits”, of usury by double entry – the Royal Art of “the philosophers” – is contra naturam:
[Watch to the end. The devil’s in all the little details.]
END OF PART I
I hope that you have found Part 1 of this essay to be informative. Despite its length, it is only a barely adequate quick summary of the voluminous, multi-disciplinary literature touching the subject matter. To do the themes justice may well require a multi-volume book series. Publisher inquiries welcome.
My thanks to Professor Steve Keen and Professor Richard Werner for inspiration, support and economic reading suggestions, and kind assistance with accessing academic journals; to Dr. Omar Zaid for reading suggestions and support; to Adam McLean (alchemywebsite.com) for kindly granting permission to use his coloured alchemical images; to my family for love, patience and support; and to Anna Novikova for love, inspiration, support … and more reading suggestions! Finally, I would like to borrow a leaf out of the book of one wiser than I, in giving thanks for any good to be found here to the original source of all true wisdom (Jeremiah 33:3).
The interpretations and opinions expressed here are entirely mine – ergo, the aforementioned persons are not to be held in any way responsible for them, or for any errors or omissions.
Heav’n has no Rage, like Love to Hatred turn’d,
Nor Hell a Fury, like a Woman scorn’d.
In writing this essay, I earnestly hope to provoke in womenfolk the Fury of the Woman scorn’d.
I say this to all but especially to the menfolk reading: There is no way – in my opinion – that the Babylonian “Money Power” can ever be defeated, unless the tremendous power of the “scorn’d Woman” – and her fiercely-protective Mother nature – is invoked by all of us, and turned against her violator:
“Tell the housewife at her kitchen table about this stuff. She is smart. She understands. But if you keep it a secret, naturally she’s not going to be able to act, and we can’t transform something until we understand it.”
– Ann Pettifor, Money for Nothing
In Part 2 we will consider a perfect example of the righteous anger of the Woman scorn’d, from Old Babylonian mythology.
“Now whether the yogis can actually and permanently maintain control over the women through their ‘tricks’ (upaya) is another question. This is solely dependent upon their magical abilities, over which we do not wish to pass judgement here. The texts do repeatedly warn of the great danger of their experiments. There is the ever-present possibility that the ‘daughters of Mara’ see through the tricky system and plunge the lamas into hell.”
Robert H. Bork (The Antitrust Paradox) wrote that “One of the uses of history is to free us of a falsely imagined past. The less we know of how ideas actually took root and grew, the more apt we are to accept them unquestioningly, as inevitable features of the world in which we move.”
In Part 2, we will travel back to ancient Mesopotamia, and trace forward from the earliest recorded, pre-writing origins of the two fundamental principles that lie at the heart of the Babylonian “money of account” usury system.
We will learn more – and more repulsive – details about alchemical sex magic “experiments” and rituals. We will also consider the Old Babylonian magico-religious objects and incantations (“spells”), and learn the real significance of the winged lions guarding the city of Venice, and the City of London financial district.
We will also discover the “explosive” and enlightening ingredients in the Old Babylonian secret alchemical recipe for making fake silver counterfeits of the royal standard ingots.
Thank you for reading, and sharing.
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. (…) Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. (…) It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating.”
– George Orwell, 1984
 Daniel Gross, The End of the BSD, Slate, Sept 25, 2008 — “(Relevant quote: ‘If he could make millions of dollars come out of those phones, he became that most revered of all species: a Big Swinging Dick.’)”
 Miroslav Novák, Heritage of Alchemical Cryptography (2013), Il Chimico Italiano 24: 17-24 — “Medieval European alchemists used a disorganized way of coded expressing together with a very complicated system of diverse graphical symbols... The symbols, besides their shorthand role, also serve as a specific cryptographic system, for very often the alchemists tried to conceal the results from the Christian church, avaricious noblemen and possible competitors. [..] The cryptography (or cryptology; from Greek κρυπτός, “hidden, secret”; and γράφειν, “writing”, or λογία, “study”, respectively) is the practice and study of techniques for secure communication in the presence of third parties (called adversaries) (Wikipedia). And these adversaries were the main reason, why alchemists coded their written products.”
 Samuel Scarborough, The Imagery of Alchemical Art as a Method of Communication, Journal of the Western Mystery Tradition No. 9, Vol. 1, Autumnal Equinox (2005) — “[T]he metalworkers, especially the gold and silver smiths, who in the Middle Ages and early Renaissance formed guilds to protect their secrets and craft worked with a kind of alchemy that was later to become metallurgy.”
“Alchemists, like modern day scientists, would share their findings and works with one another [..] So, how could alchemists from various countries and parts of Europe communicate in a safe manner without giving away their secrets? The answers came as allegory and allegorical imagery, which hid, from the uninitiated what was being discussed and shared amongst them.”
“This form of discussion or conveying information and ideas in allegorical images would later go on to influence several bodies of dramatic initiating orders or lodges. Among these would be the Freemasons, the Rosicrucians, particularly the fringe Masonic bodies, and even the magickal orders of the nineteenth century. This idea that images convey a message and power is powerfully illustrated in a line from the Neophyte Initiation Ceremony: ‘…for by Names and Images are all Powers awakened and re-awakened.'”
 V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny; p.77 — “In order to keep hidden from the public all the offensive things which are implicated by the required breaches of taboo, some tantra texts make use of a so-called ‘twilight language’ (samdhya-bhasa). This has the function of veiling references to taboo substances, private bodily parts, and illegal deeds in poetic words, so that they cannot be recognized by the uninitiated. For example, one says ‘lotus’ and means ‘vagina’, or employs the term ‘enlightenment consciousness’ (bodhicitta) for sperm, or the word ‘sun’ (surya) for menstrual blood. Such a list of synonyms can be extended indefinitely.”
 ibid., p. 102; — “Just as in some tantra texts, ‘secret’ practices were represented by ‘harmless’ images in the European treatises; this was especially true of the topic of erotic love and sexuality.”
“Both the tantric and the alchemic writings are [..] maps of the erotic imagination and anyone with a little speech psychology can recognize the pervasive sexual system of reference hidden in a hermetical text from the 16th century. At that time people did not have the slightest qualms about describing chemical processes as erotic events and erotic scenarios as chemical fusions. They behaved in exactly the same manner in the West as in the East.”
 Martin Wolf, Will there be another huge financial crisis?, Irish Times, June 1 2016
 Hieros gamos, Encyclopædia Britannica — (Greek: “sacred marriage”), sexual relations of fertility deities in myths and rituals, characteristic of societies based on cereal agriculture, especially in the Middle East. At least once a year, divine persons (e.g., humans representing the deities) engage in sexual intercourse, which guarantees the fertility of the land, the prosperity of the community, and the continuation of the cosmos.
Some scholars have applied the term hieros gamos to all myths of a divine pair (e.g., heaven–earth) whose sexual intercourse is creative. The term, however, should probably be restricted only to those agricultural cultures that ritually reenact the marriage and that relate the marriage to agriculture, as in Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, Canaan, Israel (the Song of Solomon has been suggested to be a hierogamitic text), Greece, and India.
 V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny; pp. 40, 585 — “..if we translate upaya (as it is clearly intended) as ‘cunning means’ or even ‘trick’ or ‘ruse’ (Wilber, 1987, p. 310).”
upaya – “‘skill in means’ – array of expedient devices employed by bodhisattvas to enlighten beings trapped in suffering existence.”
“To summarize, upaya stands for the masculine principle, the phallus, motion, activity, the god, enlightenment, and so forth; prajna represents the feminine principle, the vagina, calm, passivity, the goddess, the cosmic law. All women naturally count as prajna, all men as upaya.” (p.39)
 Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars; The Lawful Path (1996), citing William Cooper, Behold A Pale Horse (1991), Light Technology Publishing
 V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny; p. 47, 65, 93; — “Modern Western authors with views compatible to those of Buddhism [..] tend toward the opinion that the tantric androgyne harmonizes both sexual roles equally within itself, so that the androgynous pattern is valid for both men and women. But this is not the case. Even at an etymological level, androgyny (from Ancient Greek anér ‘man’ and gyné ‘woman’) cannot be applied to both sexes. The term denotes [..] the male-feminine forces possessed by a man, whilst for a woman the respective phenomenon would have to be termed ‘gynandry’ (female-masculine forces possessed by a woman).”
“The tantric yogi unites with her not just in the sexual act, but above all through consuming her holy gynergy, the magical force of maya. Sometimes, as we shall see, he therefore drinks his partner’s menstrual blood. Only when the feminine blood also pulses in his own veins will he be complete, an androgyne, a lord of both sexes.”
“In the usual yab–yum representation of the Dhyani Buddhas, the male Buddha figure always crosses both of his arms behind the back of his wisdom consort, forming what is known as the Vajrahumkara gesture. At the same time he holds a vajra (the supreme symbol of masculinity) in his right hand, and a gantha (the supreme symbol of femininity) in his left. The symbolic possession of both ritual objects identifies him as the lord of both sexes. He is the androgyne and the prajna is a part of his self.”
 Mahmoud Ezzamel and Keith Hoskin, Retheorizing Accounting, Writing and Money with Evidence from Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt, Critical Perspectives on Accounting (2002) 13, 333–367; — “The distinctive development that we see introduced by the invention of money of account is a principle of value reciprocity. Money of account constructs value by denominating it as something other than, and separate from, either the commodity or its accounting; instead value becomes something which passes reciprocally between the two, supposedly guaranteeing that each is equalised in value terms. In so doing, the role of money as supplementer of value is concealed behind an apparent but deceptive power to guarantee equivalence. Moreover, the power of money enables the construction of previously unprecedented levels of wealth, and the possibility of new power relations for those with money and those without it.”
“[M]oney plays a double game. First, it appears as the benign supplement, embodying the new possibility that value exists in a separate denominable form and simply making space for itself as numeraire to act as the measure of that value. But secondly, money is also the dangerous supplement. Beneath the apparent surface where equivalence reigns and money is just a transparent medium, the play of difference is at work: from the production of little remainders and marginal inequalities, through the generation of interest and profit, to money’s own re-writing into new and more complex instruments.”
 Vladimír Karpenko, Alchemy as donum dei, HYLE – International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, Vol. 4 (1998), No. 1, pp. 63-80; — “In the Tenth Discourse of his treatise Al-Fihrist, An-Nadim (A.D. 987) writes, after the introductory basmallah, about the origin of alchemy [§ 1]: ‘The adepts of the Art of Alchemy, … assert that the science of the Art was first discussed by Hermes, the Sage, the Babylonian …’.”
 Antoine Faivre, The Eternal Hermes: From Greek God to Alchemical Magus (1995), pp. 36-38; — “Panurge is not only connected to the tradition of Hermetic magic: he also has something of the humanist Hermes, the savant of his time. This does not prevent him from being at the same time a sort of alchemist, for he claims to possess the Philosophers’ Stone: ‘I have a philosophical stone which sucks money out of purses as the magnet attracts iron.’ And in his speech in praise of debtors, he speaks of the ‘joy of the alchemists when, after long labors, great care and expense, they see the metals transmuted in their furnaces.'”
 V. and V. Trimondi, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism (2003), transl. by Mark Penny; pp. 121-122 — “Even if many tantric texts speak only of bodhicitta, the male seed, at heart it is a matter of the absorption of both fluids, the male and the female, in short — of sukra. Admittedly the mixing of the sexual fluids does seem incompatible with the prohibition against ejaculation, but through the so-called Vajroli method the damaging consequences of the emission of semen can be reversed..”
“The bodhicitta is also called bindu, which means ‘point’, ‘nil’, ‘zero’, or ‘drop’.” (p. 135)
 ibid., p. 124 — “The initiation path of the Kalachakra Tantra [..] now leads us on to the four highest initiations, or rather to the twelfth to fifteenth initiation stages. [..] The reader will soon see that we are dealing with an extended copy of the four ‘higher initiations’ (8–11). They thus also bear the same names: (12) the vase initiation; (13) the secret initiation; (14) the wisdom initiation; and (15) the word initiation. The difference primarily consists in the fact that rather than just one mudra, ten wisdom consorts now participate in the ritual. All ten must be offered to the master by the pupil (Naropa, 1994, p. 193). There are different rules for monks and laity in this regard. It is required of a layman that the mudras be members of his own family — his mother, his sister, his daughter, his sister-in-law, and so on (Naropa, 1994, p. 192). This makes it de facto impossible for him to receive the Kalachakra solemnity. Although the same commandment applies to a monk, it is interpreted symbolically in his case. Hence, he has to deliver to his guru numerous girls from the lower castes, who then adopt the names and roles of the various female relatives during the ritual. Among other things the elements are assigned to them: the ‘mother’ is earth, the ‘sister’ water, the ‘daughter’ fire, the ‘sister’s daughter’ is the wind, and so on (Grünwedel, Kalacakra III, p. 125). After the pupil has handed the women over to his master, he is given back one of them as a symbolic ‘spouse’ for the impending rites (Naropa, 1994, p. 193).”
“Equivalent quotations from many other Western interpreters of Tantrism can be found: ‘In … Tantrism … woman is means, an alien object, without possibility of mutuality or real communication’ (quoted by Shaw, 1994, p. 7). The woman ‘is to be used as a ritual object and then cast aside’ (also quoted by Shaw, 1994, p. 7). Or, at another point: the yogis had ‘sex without sensuality … There is no relationship of intimacy with an individual — the woman … involved is an object, a representation of power … women are merely spiritual batteries‘ (quoted by Shaw, 1994, n. 128, pp. 254–255). The woman functions as a ‘salvation tool’, as an ‘aid on the path to enlightenment’. The goal of Vajrayana is even ‘to destroy the female’ (quoted by Shaw, 1994, p. 7).” (p. 47)
 ibid., p. 60, 62 — “[A]lthough her autonomous feminine existence has been dissolved, her feminine essence (gynergy) has not been lost. Via an act of sexual magic the yogi has appropriated this and with it achieved the power of an androgyne. He destroys, so to speak, the exterior feminine in order to internalize it and produce an ‘inner woman’ as a part of himself. ‘He absorbs the Mother of the Universe into himself’, as it is described in the Kalachakra Tantra (Grünwedel, Kalac[h]akra IV, p. 32).”
“In general, the maha mudra is said to reside in the region of the navel. There she dances and acts as an oracle as the Greek goddess Metis once did in the belly of Zeus. [..] The male tantric master now has the power to assume the female form of the goddess (who is of course an aspect of his own mystical body), that is, he can appear in the figure of a woman. Indeed, he even has the magical ability to divide himself into two gendered beings, a female and a male deity. He is further able to multiply himself into several maha mudras.”
 ibid., p. 48 — “In place of the human ego is the superego of a god with far-reaching powers. This superhuman subject knows no bounds when it proclaims in the Hevajra Tantra, ‘I am the revealer, I am the revealed doctrine and I am the disciple endowed with good qualities. I am the goal, I am the master of the world and I am the world as well as the worldly things” (Farrow and Menon, 1992, p. 167).'”
 ibid., pp. 77; 102-103 — “[F]or the ‘true’ adept (whether Tantric or European alchemist) it was not just a matter of the actual yellow metal, but also the so-called ‘spiritual gold’. In the West this was understood to mean the ‘Philosopher’s Stone’ or the ‘hermetical elixir’, which transformed the experimenter into a superman. Alchemy and Tantrism thus have the same spiritual goal. In order to achieve this, numerous processes of conversion were needed in the laboratory of the adept, which did not just take the form of chemical processes, but which the alchemist also experienced as successive transmutations of his personality, that is, his psyche was dissolved and then put together again a number of times in the course of the experimentation. Solve et coagula (dissolve and bind) is for this reason the first and most well-known maxim of the hermetical art.”
 David Astle, The Babylonian Woe (1975), pp. 15-16, citing G.R. Driver and John C. Miles, Ancient Codes and Laws of the Near East (Clarendon Press, Oxford); and Professor W.F. Albright, The Amarna Letters from Palestine (Cambridge University Press)
 Elizabeth Loupas, Alchemy and a ducal mistress: One prince’s deadly obsessions (2014).
 Bibliotheca Chemica, p. 453; D.S.B.; cited by Abe Books, Item Description: 1571. THURNEISSER ZUM THURN, Leonhart. PROKATALEPSIS ODER PRAEOCCUPATION, DURCH ZWOLFF VERSCHEIDENLICHER TRACTATEN; GEMACHTER HARM PROBEN. Frankfurt: Johann Eichorn, 1571. First edition. (24 June 2017)
 Richard A. Werner, To a new understanding of the function of the banking sector: the mechanism of productive credit creation and quantitative easing; presentation to the Russian Academy of Sciences, round table “Anti-crisis fiscal policy of the state in the interests of economic development of Russia” (2015). (watch video)
 John Pollack, The Pun Also Rises: How The Humble Pun Revolutionized Language, Changed History, And Made Wordplay (2011), cited in Wikipedia: Pun (21 June 2017)
 Richard A. Werner, How do banks create money, and why can other firms not do the same? An explanation for the coexistence of lending and deposit-taking (2014) — “What banks do is to simply reclassify their accounts payable items arising from the act of lending as ‘customer deposits’, and the general public, when receiving payment in the form of a transfer of bank deposits, believes that a form of money had been paid into the bank. As a result, the public readily accepts such ‘bank deposits’ and their ‘transfers’ to defray payments. They are also the main component of the official ‘money supply’ as announced by central banks (M1, M2, M3, M4), which is created almost entirely through this act of re-classifying banks’ accounts payable as fictitious ‘customer deposits’.”
 Andy Haldane, Trust and Finance, Institute for New Economic Thinking, Oct 2013
 ibid., p. 123 — “‘If the woman is too powerful or too old or too young, terrible things will happen to the innocent man who falls into her trap, a fact often depicted in terms of his losing his fluids’ (O’Flaherty, 1982/1988, p. 56).”
“Now whether the yogis can actually and permanently maintain control over the women through their ‘tricks’ (upaya) is another question. This is solely dependent upon their magical abilities, over which we do not wish to pass judgement here. The texts do repeatedly warn of the great danger of their experiments. There is the ever-present possibility that the ‘daughters of Mara’ see through the tricky system and plunge the lamas into hell.” (p. 268)
 ibid., p. 123 — “Is this purely a matter of male fantasies? Not at all — a gynocentric correspondence to the thieving seed-absorption is, namely, known from the Kali cults to be a ritual event. Here, the woman assumes the upper position [in] the sex act and in certain rites leaves the man whose life energies she has drained behind as a corpse. According to statements by the Tibet researcher, Matthias Hermanns¸ there were yoginis (female yogis) who received instruction in a technique ‘through which they were able to forcibly draw their partners’ semen from out of the penis’, and the author concludes from this that, ‘It is thus the counterpart of the procedure which the yogi employs to soak up the genital juices of several women one after another through his member’ (Hermanns, 1965, p. 19).”
 ibid., pp. 118-119 — “[T]he tantras teach that the semen is originally stored in a moonlike bowl beneath the roof of the skull. As soon as a person begins to experience sexual desire, it starts to flow out, drop by drop, passing through the five energy centers (chakras). In each of these the yogi experiences a specific ‘seminal’ ecstasy (Naropa, 1994, p. 191). The destination of the sperm’s journey within the body is the tip of the penis. Here, through extreme meditative concentration, the adept collects the lust: ‘The vajra [penis] is inserted into the lotus [vagina], but not moved. When lust of a transient art arises, the mantra hum should be spoken. … The decisive [factor] is thus the retention of the sperm. Through this, the act obtains a cosmological dimension. … It becomes the means of attaining enlightenment (bodhi)” (Grönbold, Asiatische Studien, p. 34). ‘Delight resides in the tip of the vajra [penis]’, as is said in a Kalachakra text (Grönbold, 1992a)…”
 Richard A. Werner, How do banks create money, and why can other firms not do the same? An explanation for the coexistence of lending and deposit-taking (2014) — “The act of signing the loan contract and purchasing it as a promissory note of the borrower without yet making the borrowed funds available to the borrower (Step 1) has the same accounting implications for banks, non-banks and non-financial corporations alike. In all cases, the balance sheets lengthen, as an asset (the loan contract) is acquired and a liability to make money available to the borrower is incurred (accounts payable).”
“In Step 2, the lender makes the funds available to the borrower. The fact that in Step 2 the bank is alone among firms in showing the same total impact on assets and liabilities as everyone else at Step 1, when the money had not yet been made available to the borrower, demonstrates that the bank did not actually make any money available to the borrower. This means that the bank still has an open ‘accounts payable’ liability, as it has not in fact discharged its original liability.”
 Stephen D. Simpson, The Banking System: Commercial Banking – Economic Concepts in Banking, Investopedia (1 July 2017)