The Mysteries of the Great Cross of Hendaye

by Jay Weidner

  Some discerning and less superficial authors, struck by the similarity between gothic (gothique) and goetic (goetique) have thought that* there must be a close connection between gothic art and goetic art i.e., magic.

  For me, gothic art (art gothique) is simply a corruption of the word argotique (cant), which sounds exactly the same. This is in conformity with the phonetic law, which governs the traditional cabala in every language and does not pay any attention to spelling. The cathedral is a work of art goth (gothic art) or of argot, i.e. cant or slang. Moreover, dictionaries define argot as a “language peculiar to all individuals who wish to communicate their thoughts without being understood by outsiders.” Thus it certainly is a spoken cabala. The argotiers, those who use this language, are the hermetic descendants of the argonauts, who manned the ship Argo. They spoke the langue argotique—our langue verte (“green language” or slang)—while they were sailing towards the felicitous shores of Colchos to win the famous Golden Fleece. People still say about a very intelligent, but rather sly, man: “he knows everything, he understands cant.” All the Initiates expressed themselves in cant; the vagrants of the Court of Miracles—headed by the poet Villon—as well as the Freemasons of the Middle Ages, “members of the lodge of God,” who built the argotique masterpieces, which we still admire today. Those constructional sailors (nautes) also knew the route to the Garden of the Hesperides. . . .

  In our day, cant is spoken by the humble people, the poor, the despised, the rebels, calling for liberty and independence, the outlaws, the tramps and the wanderers. Cant is the cursed dialect, banned by high society, by the nobility (who are really so little noble), the well-fed and self-satisfied middle class, luxuriating in the ermine of their ignorance and fatuity. It remains the language of a minority of individuals living outside accepted laws, conventions, customs and etiquette. The term voyous (street-arabs) that is to say voyants (seers) is applied to them and the even more expressive term sons or children of the sun. Gothic art is in fact the art got or χοτ—the art of light or of spirit.

  People think that such things are merely a play on words. I agree. The important thing is that such word-play should guide our faith towards certainty, towards positive and scientific truth, which is the key to the religious mystery, and should not leave us wandering in the capricious maze of our imagination. The fact is that there is neither chance nor coincidence nor accidental correspondence here below. All is foreseen, preordained, regulated; and it is not for us to bend to our pleasure the inscrutable will of Destiny. If the usual sense of words does not allow us any discovery capable of elevating and instructing us, of bringing us nearer to our Creator, then words become useless. The spoken word, which gives man his indisputable superiority, his dominion over every living thing, loses its nobility, its greatness, its beauty. It becomes no more than a distressing vanity. Besides, language, the instrument of the spirit, has a life of its own—even though it is only a reflection of the universal Idea. We do not invent anything, we do not create anything. All is in everything. Our microcosm is only an infinitesimal, animated, thinking and more or less imperfect particle of the macrocosm. What we believe we have ourselves discovered by an effort of our intelligence exists already elsewhere. Faith gives us a presentiment of what this is. Revelation gives us absolute proof. Often we pass by a phenomenon—or a miracle even—without noticing it, like men blind and deaf. What unsuspected marvels we should find, if we knew how to dissect words, to strip them of their bark and liberate the spirit, the divine light which is within! Jesus expressed himself only in parables; can we deny the truth which the parables teach? In present-day conversation is it not the ambiguities, the approximations, the puns or the assonances which characterize spirited people, who are glad to escape from the tyranny of the letter and thereby—unwittingly—show themselves cabalists in their own right.

  Finally I would add that argot (cant) is one of the forms derived from the Language of the Birds, parent and doyen of all other languages—the one spoken by philosophers and diplomats. It was knowledge of this language which Jesus revealed to his Apostles, by sending them his spirit, the Holy Ghost. This is the language which teaches the mystery of things and unveils the most hidden truths. The ancient Incas called it the Court Language, because it was used by diplomats. To them it was the key to the double science, sacred and profane. In the Middle Ages it was called the Gay Science and the Gay Knowledge, the Language of the Gods, the Dive-Bouteille.e Tradition assures us that men spoke it before the building of the Tower of Babel, which event caused this sacred language to be perverted and to be totally forgotten by the greater part of humanity. Today, apart from cant, we find its character in a few local dialects, such as Picard, Provençal, etc. and in the language of the gypsies.

  Mythology would have it that the famous soothsayer, Tiresiasf had perfect knowledge of the Language of the Birds, which Minerva, goddess of Wisdom, revealed to him. He shared it, they say, with Thales of Miletus, Melampus and Appolonius of Tyana,g legendary personages, whose names, in the science we are considering, ring eloquently enough to require no analysis from me.

  APPENDIX B

  THE EMERALD TABLET

  The most famous of all early alchemical texts, the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistos, became through the centuries the very credo of the alchemical adept. Tradition claimed that the tablet had been found clutched in the mummified hands of Hermes himself “in an obscure pit, where his interred body lay,” as Jabir tells us, somewhere within the great pyramid of Gizeh. The text, as Jabir gives it, is very short and obscure. It is so important, in both a historic and a symbolic sense, that the full text is required for our examination. Comparing the three earliest known Latin translations with the Arabic original and its subsequent English translations, the goal was to give as clear and simple a version as possible of such an obscure text.

  In truth, without falsehood and most real: That which is above is like that which is below, to generate the miracles of the one thing. And as all things have been derived from that one, by the thought of that one, so all things are born from that one thing by adoption. The sun is its father, the moon its mother. Wind has carried it in its belly and the earth is its nurse. Here is the origin point of every perfection in the world. Its strength and power are absolute when changed into earth; separate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the gross, gently and with great care. It ascends from the earth to the heavens, and descends again to the earth to receive the power of the superior and the inferior things. By this means, you will attain the glory of the world. And because of this, all darkness will flee from you. Within this is the power, the force of all forces. For it will overcome all subtle things and penetrate every solid thing. Thus was the universe created. From this will be, and will emerge, admirable adaptations. For this reason I am called Hermes Trismegistos, having three parts of the wisdom of the world. What I have said of the sun’s operation is accomplished.

  Whatever the origin of this text (we find a version of it in the divinatory invocation to Amon-Re given in column 29, lines 5–20 of the Leyden Papyrus, a second-century Greco-Egyptian magical text buried with its anonymous owner in the noble necropolis on the west bank of Thebes), its value as an alchemical blueprint is obvious in light of our examination of the “Isis the Prophetess” fragment. In fact, “light” is the operative point.

  In line 6 of the Amon-Re invocation we read: “Lotus-of-the Stars, heaven, in its height and breadth, is open; I am become the pure light . . . in truth, without falsehood.” In the Arabic version of Jabir, this has become: “Because of this event, obscurity [darkness] will flee from you.” The “glory of the world” is the animated glow of the living gold, the generative radiation, the “pure light” seen by the alchemists as the Great Work was completed and gold appeared in their athanors. Once they had grasped this truth, the Emerald Tablet seems to tell us, the alchemists radiated light and the darkness fled from them, figuratively and literally.

  APPENDIX C

&
nbsp; NOTES ON MOUNT ZION

  The word Zion first appears in the Bible in 2 Samuel 5:7 where David conquers the city of the Jebusites, and their fortress/temple of Zion. The word has no known meaning or origin. (A search of possible roots in Canaanite, Coptic, hieratic Egyptian, and Hebrew turns up nothing helpful.) Over time, Zion and Mount Zion became synonyms for Jerusalem itself.

  Jerusalem was first occupied in the third millennium B.C.E. and was a royal city in the time of Abraham. Melchizedek introduces Abraham to the God Most High, and Abraham does his famous sacrifice where the “blazing torch” passed through the middle, on Mount Moriah, which is identified with Mount Zion in Davidic times (2 Chron. 3:1). Mount Zion is therefore the place where covenants with God are made.

  David treated it as such, building his new capital around it. Mount Zion was also the location of the original resting place of the Ark of the Covenant when David brought it from Mount Tabor to his new capital. It was on the “threshing floor of Oruan” on Mount Zion that David danced before the Ark of God and received the assurance of divine kingship. In this kingly Davidic covenant, God tells David that his son will be the one to build a great temple.

  In Nehemiah’s description of the rebuilding after the Babylonian exile (Neh. 3:16), we find that David’s Tomb was located on Mount Zion. In Psalms, particularly number 2 which is probably by David himself and may even be the song he sang as he danced in front of the Ark/Throne, Mount Zion is God’s “holy hill” where he will judge the righteous and smite the wicked. Even more interesting is Psalm 48, which is a priestly invocation sung as a kind of circle casting before ritually opening the temple, where we find the words “in the city of our God, his holy mountain.” Also included is the only known cognate of Zion, Zaphon, which unfortunately tells us little more than that it was an older form of Zion.

  Isaiah cemented Mount Zion’s eschatological importance with verses such as 2:2–4, where the “mountain of the Lord’s temple” becomes the center of “the last days” and “all nations will stream to it.” He also tells us that “the law will go out from Zion,” which will bring about the peace of nations. Ezekiel also went in trance to the spiritual Mount Zion, where he witnessed the architecture of the Heavenly Temple in the New Jerusalem.

  Obadiah 13:17–21 repeats this eschatological meaning by declaring that “Mount Zion will be deliverance” in the last days, the place where enemies are judged and the faithful rewarded. Zechariah 6:1 also mentions apocalyptic events on Mount Zion. After this, a strange silence falls on the subject of Mount Zion.

  Jesus never refers, in the texts we have left, to Mount Zion. Given its eschatological and Davidic importance, this is truly odd. The closest he comes is a backhanded reference to Isaiah 14:12–15 in Luke that seems to imply that he has committed the impropriety of making himself like God and therefore must be punished. In Isaiah, it is the “morning star,” or Lucifer, who ascends to Mount Zaphon, or Zion, and claims God’s Throne. In Luke 10:18, Jesus identifies himself with these verses.

  Mount Zion does appear in two places in the New Testament, the Letter to the Hebrews and the Revelation of Saint John. Hebrews is a strange letter once attributed to Paul but long recognized as not by him. The best candidate is the Alexandrian Jew Apollos, known to both Paul and Luke. He uses his letter, written before the fall of the Temple, to remind the Christians of Jerusalem of the original eschatological significance of Melchizedek’s covenant with Abraham and David’s kingly covenant. The author claims that Jesus reestablished this covenant, and all believers would share in it when the Temple on Mount Zion has been made new again (Heb. 12:22).

  The Book of Revelation mentions Mount Zion as the place where the Lamb and the 144,000 faithful will gather for the judgment (Rev. 14:1). And it also marks the location of the New Jerusalem, the spot where the two Trees will stand in the remade heaven and earth.

  So, Mount Zion is (a) the place where Abraham sacrificed to the God Most High; (b) the original resting place of the Ark in Jerusalem and the place where God made David king; (c) the location of David’s Tomb; (d) the holy eschatological mountain; and (e) not mentioned by Jesus, even in John’s Gospel.

  However, the Last Supper was held on Mount Zion, in the upper room of a house in the Essene quarter, which is just south of the old tower or fortress on the top of Mount Zion known as David’s Tomb. This had to be chosen for a reason, probably to match the clues in the ritual invocation of Psalm 48:2. The Last Supper is the Melchizedekian covenant restored, and it is also the basic Osirian ritual of ancient Egypt. That it occurred on Mount Zion has apocalyptic significance.

  Even more confused is the identity of Our Lady of Mount Zion. As the orthodox Christian church evolved, it found itself having to deemphasize the role of Mary Magdalene. This led to a strange multiplicity of Marys. We have Mary, sister of Martha of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and Mary, Jesus’ mother, as well as several other, peripheral Marys. Tradition holds that Mary, Jesus’ mother, had a family home on Mount Zion, but this is somewhat odd. Mary’s family, in the Gospels, is mentioned mainly by way of genealogy. Luke assumes her to be a descendant of David, as was Joseph, her husband, and so it makes sense that the family dwelling would be near David’s Tomb on Mount Zion. However, Luke is the only evangelist to make that assumption. Matthew follows the Davidic descent through Joseph’s line, but is silent on Mary’s genealogy. Her background is not mentioned in either Mark or John. Indeed, in Mark, she appears individually only to question Jesus’ sanity (3:21), and she doesn’t show up in John until the Crucifixion. In both of these Gospels she is one of a crowd of Marys who multiply around the cross and the tomb. Jesus’ references to his mother are also oddly cold, as if they didn’t get along.

  If we assume, with good reason, that the first-person portions of John’s Gospel are the earliest of the Gospels, then Luke’s Gospel becomes the last and latest. This lateness, around 90 C.E., accounts for its pagan, mythological flavor. Since the same author also wrote the Acts of the Apostles, in which the missionary journeys of Paul are described, we can assume that Luke was one of the syncretic Christians attempting to create a new religion from Hebrew sources. His insistence on the importance of Mary suggests influences from contemporary mystery religions, such as the Cult of Isis. The confusion over the Marys arises in part from this divine mother-and-child motif. The question becomes, Which child are we talking about? Luke relates John the Baptist with the family of Mary, and the genealogical implications arising from this are fascinating.

  And, of course, there is Mary Magdalene. Her story also appears in Luke. In the other Gospels, she is mentioned only as one of the crowd of Marys at the Crucifixion and Resurrection. At first we are tempted to see her as another creation of Luke’s, since he is the only evangelist to mention her directly. However, a close reading of John’s Gospel reveals that there is another Mary, carefully edited out and obscured, who seemed to play an important role in Jesus’ ministry. Our suspicions are aroused by the marriage at Cana, at which Jesus appears to be the groom. But who was the bride? Later in John we see a moment between Jesus, a woman named Mary, and her sister Martha, in which Mary and Jesus appear as man and wife. Later, John tells us, this same Mary had the power to anoint Jesus as the Messiah. John even has Mary Magdalene meeting Jesus shortly after his resurrection, which makes her the most favored of apostles. If we assume that Mary, Martha and Lazarus’ sister, and Mary Magdalene are the same person, then an interesting pattern emerges.

  The house at Bethany, where Jesus relaxed during his visits to Jerusalem, was his sister-in-law’s house. So where did Mary live? The intriguing supposition is that she lived on Mount Zion, in the house where the Last Supper was held. Luke tells us how Mary Magdalene supported Jesus’ ministry, and if she was his wife and related as well to the Davidic royal line, then she was perhaps the most powerful force in early Christianity. Since the orthodox apostolic church is a creation of Peter and Paul, both of whom were outside the main family circle, then it is easy to see how distortions
and misdirection occurred over time. The Chroniclers of Pope Sylvester II may have discovered this Magdalenic connection to the roots of Christianity and chose their location on Mount Zion on purpose. We can say that from this source flowed a revived Marianist Christianity, which grew into the Gothic renaissance in the West.

  APPENDIX D

  TREE OF LIFE SYMBOLOGY IN LE MYSTÈRE DES CATHÉDRALES

  The Etz Chaim, the Tree of Life from the Bahir and the Sefer Yetzirah, can be seen as the prototypical kabbalistic pattern, a sort of symbolic geometry. In Le Mystère, Fulcanelli shows us this by the arrangement of chapters and sections and by the images and plates referred to within those chapters. There are four chapters in the first edition: “The Mystery of the Cathedrals,” “Paris,” “Amiens,” and “Bourges.” These represent the four worlds, or levels of abstraction, and a Tree of Life, or a part of one, is formed in each world.

  The first chapter, “The Mystery of the Cathedrals,” contains nine sections, each of which can be attributed to one of the sefirot from Kether to Yesod. This tree represents the Divine World, where the theory of creation is displayed. Interestingly enough, Fulcanelli’s thematic breaks in this chapter, while evolving the sefirot in the basic lightning-path order, divides naturally into a sword-in-the-stone pattern. The first three sections form the grip, the next five compose the stone, and the continuation of thought from section 1 straight through to section 9 creates the blade of the sword.

  The next chapter, “Paris,” creates an entire Tree of Life, with the addition of an image of the Black Madonna from the first chapter in the position of Binah. This arrangement, as we shall see, is a clue to the astronomical nature of this archetypal Tree of Life. On a projected or celestial Tree of Life, the earth’s pole is tilted toward Binah—the Dark Mother of the Cosmic Sea, in kabbalistic symbology—hence, its importance in Fulcanelli’s design. He continues the pattern with the Kether image of “Alchemy” from the main porch at Notre Dame and the Chokmah image of the alchemist from the south tower. These three images form the top three sefirot, the Supernatural Triad, and then, quite appropriately, Fulcanelli creates a break to represent the abyss of Daat, or gnosis.