Arcadia Discussion Zone

TCP I meant the books from the Rabbinical college library of Machir or of his son depending on whose history you subscribe to... later taken over by Benedictines.. so perhaps accessible to Sauniere and his brother. You added to my options of retained in the library or sent to the Vatican with the possibility of burnt by victors or chucked in the knapsack by expelled Jews.



Because we know who the original Templars were, who their early patron was, who gave them their rule, and where the council was held at which they approved was held.

So are you maintaining exclusive and multi generational northern origins of all founders? On what evidence?



Why do you think Graham Simmans was an earnest serious researcher? Look at who he's written with.
TCP[/quote]

People don't get to decide what co-authors they are married up with, that was editorial manipulation. Of course he was a serious researcher, proven in time (80+ years researching), travel, expenditure and the commitment to consult with many multidisciplinary experts ranging from the Dalai Llama to Professor Van Elden and even with his own wife who is also an academic with a useful specialty.
He had little time for fringe ideas that the archaeological records contradict and was a great reader and long term member of the Egyptology Society as he wished like any serious researcher to stay abreast. I challenge you to put forward another person who has dedicated as much time to trying to sort wheat from chaff.

Browsing threads here there are a lot of seeming digressions albeit intriguing ones that the residents seem to grasp and address, though I'm sure they somehow relate to thread topics it is often not apparent howso to newbies. It would be good if people could make clear any connection to topic and not assume fore knowledge, or if there is none to highlight that they are just babbling about a hobby horse, and maybe explain what is their area of 'specialty' or general POV within all this. Those who know each other know others premise, without that insight it is hard to follow the meanderings on many threads here. Just saying (:

Of course we now know that this was Church propaganda (a word that comes from the Church's own word "propagate" and its need to propagate the faith), easily spun because of the Cathar belief that all flesh was evil. The purpose of this propaganda was used to justify the atrocities of the Albigensian Crusade.

btw, Gnosticism was alive and well in Southern Gaul long before Catharism or Bogomilism, as the authors of HBHG said of the Cathars, "They seemed to represent the flowering of something already rooted in French soil for centuries".

Any time we discuss the first Templars digging within the Temple mount, we should mention "Rashi" of Troyes, and his connection to the Count of Troyes.

Well Sonar, the threads on this forum are conversations. You are bound to miss something coming to the conversation late. I'm glad to know that we "seem to grasp and address" the issues.....are you an expert in the field? I'm just wondering, seeing as you seem to have put yourself in a position of power already.

Now, it would be nice to know what everyone's expertise is on this forum.....however, vita's are not a requirement for posting here. You learn who to follow or ignore with time. If you don't have the time, welll....you know what to do.

And therefore we should assume it's false? Because the statements consist of harsh criticisms? Because a Catholic priest recorded his own observations we should assume the opposite is true? Or is it only people like yourself who get to determine which parts are true and which are false depending on how useful they are to creating a fantasy narrative you prefer? BTW Bill, the only source for the knowledge that Cathars believed in some sort of "adult" relationship between Jesus and Magdalene are those same commentaries written by Catholic priests. You seem all to willing to take them at their word on that point, what bothers you is the fact that the Dualist Cathars considered them to belong to the terrestrial - the evil, negative, soul-enslaving side of that coin. How deftly you separate the kernels from the stalks!



Really? Can you source that with anything other than the creative meanderings of the authors of HBHG?



And why is that, Bill? Care to elaborate? Provide specifics, please.

TCP

Well, there is Hilary of Poitiers, known as one of the greatest theologians of his time b. 315 d. 368. who wrote in 354 "The Manichaean faith was a significant force in southern Gaul". Manichaeism itself, possessing both Christian and Gnostic elements.
Ptolemy, born in the late first century, was a disciple of the Gnostic Valentinius. He became the principle writer for the "western" form of Valentinian Gnosticism which was active in southern Gaul in the early 2nd century.
Prisciliano of Avila, born in the roman province of Gallaecia around the year 340 A.D., is known to have traveled to Bordeaux in 370, preaching a Gnostic doctrine. His ideas were very well recieved, particulary by women and the lower classes. Eventually accused of Gnosticism and Manichaeism he was executed in 385 A.D.

Wow Wayward
is it this fello
The great Jewish scholar, Rashi de Troyes, (1040-1105), made the astonishingly frank statement that the Genesis narrative, going back to the creation of the world, was written to justify what we might now call genocide. The God of Israel, who gave his people the Promised Land, had to be unequivocally supreme so that neither the dispossessed Canaanites nor anyone else could ever appeal against his decrees. Rashi's precise words were that God told us the creation story and included it in the Torah "to tell his people that they can answer those who claim that the Jews stole the land from its original inhabitants. The reply should be; God made it and gave it to them but then took it and gave it to us. As he made it and it's his, he can give it to whoever he chooses ".

Hugues de Payns was actually born at the Chateau of Payns around 1070 (commune of around 900 inhabitants near Troyes). At this time the Turks were about to invade Jerusalem. In 1095 Pope Urbain II called a council where he exhorted the believers to deliver the tomb of Christ from the hands of the Turks.

Deus vult
God Wills it!

Not exactly the opposite. The point I am making is that the terrestrial Jesus is (was) not considered any more evil then the Cathars considered their own terrestrial bodies, or more importantly their own Bishops terestrial bodies.
The statement in question was an exaggeration, common in all wars, and designed to weaken the enemies position with anybody on the fence politically, in this case more than likely the Catholic neighbors of the heretics.

Yes Lov,
The Rashi who walked in the Court of Champagne, who knew more about the relics of his faith, and where they might be located than any other Jew.

Lets just think hypothetically here
You could see how an alliance could be made
Both parties interested in finding Solomon's treasure and the other trying to get to Our Lord's Tomb

Rashi was said to be a descendant of David ....so he may have known
Great insight Bill!

It was really a cover story ....to hide the real agenda

By an edict of Louis X in 1315 all books (excepting the Talmud) confiscated from the Jews during the 1306 expulsion were to be returned to them.



On the fact that they came from, or were allied by marriage to, landowning families in the north at a time when marriages were contracted locally and multiple generations were born and died on the same soil. On what evidence do you support your contention, or Simmans' contention, that they were actually southerners?



That's absurd.



The man died at 86, would you like to re-evaluate your timeline to at least get him past his grade school years?



He was an arch-fi author who took an interest in RLC late in life and was never known (or published) for anything else. If you're referring to Ingrid as his wife, she wasn't; nor was she an academic. Her "useful speciality" is knowing how the New Age market works.



His work is nothing but fringe ideas that archaeological and historical records contradict. He was a lay Egyptologist, like millions of other aficionados and like several who write New Age-themed books on "secrets" and "hidden knowledge" that surprisingly only they have ever seen or know how to interpret.

You are, of course, entitled to your own opinions about the value of Simmans' "legacy", but bear in mind one's character is often judged by the company they keep.



You expect a lot for a newcomer. Perhaps you should just observe for awhile until you get the lay of the land.

TCP

Nothing that didn't die off six or seven centuries before the Cathars? You referred to "something already rooted in French soil for centuries" - nothing a little more up-to-date, more contemporary to connect to?

TCP

And your source for this information is...? HBHG perhaps?

Rashi was a learned Jewish scholar and author of commentaries on the Talmud and Tanakh at a time when Troyes was a center of Jewish learning in the north. There is nothing from which to ascertain that he "walked in the Court of Champagne" or "knew more about the relics of his faith, and where they might be located than any other Jew" other than the desperate need of Baigent, Lincoln and Leigh to come up with a speculative source for "hidden knowledge" handed down to the Templars. All unsubstantiated by actual source material.

TCP

Yes, a cover story concocted in the late 1970s/early 1980s to sell a sensational pseudo-historical book called Holy Blood, Holy Grail. It's that sort of "start from your desired conclusion and work backwards to make a convincing argument" that defines the genre.

TCP

No my source was not HBHG. Actually I thought HBHG was greatly lacking in this respect. IMO, Rashi was one of the more important links to this whole story, and B.L.and L. only mentioned him in passing. It is interesting to me that the Count of Champagne and his vassel, Hughes de payens traveled to Jerusalem in 1104, the year before Rashi died.

The Cathars considered their own physical bodies to be vessels of entrapment, and "Rex Mundi" and his son the false Jesus to be their tormentors. You might want to do a little reading on the subject.



And your proof of that is...? Stop with the knee-jerk rationalizations and hair-splitting, Bill, I have no interest in your opinions. Go ahead and try to prove that the Cathars weren't Dualists, didn't follow the Bogomil episcopal lineage, were so enamored of the "sacred marriage of Jesus and Magdalene" that they didn't require the marriages of their own perfecti to be dissolved. Try getting rid of every inconvenient fact that impedes your progress, just know that you can only do this if you have something tangible to prove them wrong.

TCP

Yes, as the head of a Kabbalist school in Troyes, which Rashi was not. So who is your source, then? David Icke perhaps?

TCP

I'll get into the knee jerk stuff tomorrow (golf league today), but don't you think it important that a Bogomil Bishop installed Cathar Bishops? Shouldn't we be discussing Bogomil doctrine instead of Cathar? The only references to any Cathar doctrine are from their mortal enemies the Roman Catholic Church, as you have already mentioned.

and about Rashi, don't you find it interesting that the Count of Champagne undertook a trip to Jerusalem, along with his vassel Hughes de payens, the year before Rashi died?

Wear a hat and don't forget sunscreen!



Absolutely.



Absolutely.



The references aren't from the "Church" itself, but by priests and monks describing events they actually witnessed in most cases. Given that each had already pronounced the other's approach to the Christian religion to be heretical on doctrinal points, did either side really need to embellish?

And why do those today arguing against the validity of those charges still cling to whatever information those charges might provide that serves their purpose?



Given what was going on there at the time and the fact that so many of his peers were taking part in it, why would you think Rashi had anything to do with Hugues de Champagne's decision to go on a pilgrimage? Shouldn't you be focusing on finding something - anything - to demonstrate that Rashi had ever met either Hugues de Champagne or Hugues de Payens? You seem to be getting ahead of your skis; but others have set that precedent for you, I'm afraid.

TCP

He existed we have a wood cut of him
A woodcut of Rashi that appeared in a printing of Postillae maiores totius anni cum glossis & quaestionibus by Guillaume de Parisiensis (William of Paris), published in Lyon in 1539.

February 22, 1040 – July 13, 1105), was a medieval French rabbi famed as the author of a comprehensive commentary on the Talmud, as well as a comprehensive commentary on the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible). He is considered the "father" of all commentaries that followed on the Talmud (i.e., the Baalei Tosafot) and the Tanakh (i.e., Ramban, Ibn Ezra, Ohr HaChaim, et al.).[1][2]

Acclaimed for his ability to present the basic meaning of the text in a concise, lucid fashion, Rashi appeals to both learned scholars and beginning students, and his works remain a centerpiece of contemporary Jewish study. His commentary on the Talmud, which covers nearly all of the Babylonian Talmud (a total of 30 tractates), has been included in every edition of the Talmud since its first printing by Daniel Bomberg in the 1520s. His commentary on Tanakh — especially his commentary on the Chumash ("Five Books of Moses") — is an indispensable aid to students of all levels. The latter commentary alone serves as the basis for more than 300 "supercommentaries" which analyze Rashi's choice of language and citations, penned by some of the greatest names in rabbinic literature.[2]

Rashi was an only child born at Troyes, Champagne, in northern France. His mother's brother was Simon the Elder, Rabbi of Mainz.[4] Simon was a disciple of Rabbeinu Gershom Meor HaGolah,[5] who died that same year. On his father's side, Rashi has been claimed to be a 33rd-generation descendant of Yochanan Hasandlar, who was a fourth-generation descendant of Gamaliel the Elder, who was reputedly descended from the royal line of King David. In his voluminous writings, Rashi himself made no such claim at all. The main early rabbinical source about his ancestry, Responsum No. 29 by Solomon Luria, makes no such claim either


He returned to Troyes at the age of 25, after which time his mother died, and he was asked to join the Troyes Beth din (rabbinical court). He also began answering halakhic questions. Upon the death of the head of the Bet din, Rabbi Zerach ben Abraham, Rashi assumed the court's leadership and answered hundreds of halakhic queries.

His daughters were very well educated

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashi

I do appreciate the informative responses, obviously there are drawbacks to arriving late in the convo. Some of you have encyclopaedic knowledge and have surprised me with the ability to answer some questions. I'm not sure of Simmans source for Southern connections, will have a hunt round.

As far as I know they were married though Ingrid retained her maiden name or name of former husband, does this not become the legal status after a time living together as in my country? Perhaps you don't consider the possession of a PhD in I believe psychology and theology to be an academics hallmark? It got Ingrid long service as a lecturer and work in archives so the institutions she was attached to seem to have been satisfied with Ingrids quals.

http://jungfairytale.or.kr/Swiss_Jung_S ... _2008e.pdf

That I don't know.



I wouldn't consider an honorary professor from a German university (where these titles are often granted to lecturers) to be the equivalent of an academic diplomate in the faculty of Psychology from a German or any other accredited western university.

Here's what your source says:

Ingrid Riedel, Dr. phil et theol., Training analyst of the C.G. Jung Institute Zürich,
Hon. Prof. for Psychology of Religion, University of Frankfurt/Main

I wouldn't read this as a "Doctorate of Philosophy" (Ph.D.) in Theology but rather a "Doctorate in Philosophy" (DPhil.) and Theology. I note that the institution that awarded this degree isn't noted here. The Jung Institute doesn't award doctorates, and it would be rather odd for the University of Frankfurt-am-Main to make one of its own doctoral graduates an "honorary professor." Many seminaries award vocational doctorates but these aren't academic titles.


TCP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_do ... by_country

And I thought a Doc in Phil was a Doc of Phil (must pay more attention) yet it is way more convoluted. I didn't realise the system varied so much by country either per link.

Here it is very simple and I suppose based on the UK route - bachelors +/- hons, followed by masters followed by PhD.
I have what I guess you'd determine a vocational bachelors (more clinical than uni base study - about 70/30). I can only go to masters through University papers done on the job (2 or 3 more years part time), or credit it towards a masters in very few related fields eg social policy (wholly university based study 2 years). Wouldn't that be a part vocational (earlier) and part academic (latter part of studies) track to a masters?
Or I can use my bachelors for credit in but one unrelated field (it seems they are desperate for takers here), the masters in museumology.

One is a doctorate specifically in the field of Philosophy while the other is a doctorate of philosophy in the field of (fill in the blank).



Same as in the U.S., except we don't have 3-year baccalaureate degrees with an additional honours year in some fields, all of ours are four-year degrees.



For the purpose of admission to a graduate degree program at a UK university I couldn't tell you, as I don't know how they would weigh that balance between lecture hours and lab work. I spent ten years as a graduate admissions specialist for the University of California (for MBA programs) and I specialized in international degree equivalencies for conformity to our admission standards, but Britain's standards for graduate studies may be different than ours. I do know that our minimum requirement for British applicants was the 4-year honours baccalaureate or the 3-year baccalaureate + the 2-year masters, + X number of years professional experience depending on the program applied to.



Don't know, but here no part of a prior degree program counted towards the satisfaction of our degree requirements in an advanced program. We might waive a core economics course for a Bachelor of Economics but they still had to earn units by taking additional electives.

TCP

Nothing that didn't die off six or seven centuries before the Cathars? You referred to "something already rooted in French soil for centuries" - nothing a little more up-to-date, more contemporary to connect to?
TCP[/quote]



We have shown gnosticism was alive and well into the 4th century, what information is there that it died off? It didn't die off anywhere else.
But in the 5th century the Visigoths became the dominant authority in the region, and while centered at Toulouse, controlled much of the Iberian as well as southern Gaul. Alaric II as King of the Visigoths was an Arian, but tolerant of both Catholics and Gnostics. after 508 most of the Gallic holdings were lost to the Franks (Merovingians), and although Clovis did convert to Catholicism, the Merovingians did allow Gnosticism and Arianism to flourish. Even under the later Carolingians the Gnostic and Arian sects continued. As far as I can tell, there is no record of an attempt to wipe out Gnosticism in the area until 1022. There can be little doubt that several forms of Gnosticism existed in the area well into the Catholic era. All of these having similarities with each other, and they all seemed to evolve from either Manichaeism or Valentinian Gnosticism. As a matter of fact, the word Katharoi in a similar form was the name of a sect that the father of Mani had belonged to.
So when HBHG mentioned that the Gnostic Cathars "seemed to represent the flowering of something already rooted in French soil for centuries", they could well have been correct.

Homework done. ^ speculative, absence of evidence regarding all 9 original Templars. I tracked 5 to Northern or central France (2 days horse ride from Carcassonne at a good pace) but the origins of Geoffrey Bison are unclear, and of two original Templars 'recorded only by the names of Rossal and Gondamer' per Wiki. The ninth knight also remains unknown. So the probability of all founders hearking from far away is not looking that great, and would not attract long odds imo.

TCP

If the mystery Knights were kin then why has their proper identities been lost to history, especially given they were figures history should have celebrated or at least remembered given their church brownie points... unless there is a reason for half the 9 founders to have been erased. Southerners might say it all?

There again, more than a couple of websites have two of them down as Italians from Seborga with a secret - http://freemasonandknighttemplars.blogs ... mplar.html