Grigori Yefimovitch Rasputin is one of the most mysterious, notorious and disputed figures in modern history. Who was this man who seemingly had strange powers and a mysterious influence over others; with eyes that many claimed changed colors when they spoke to the monk. Did Rasputin have some sort of supernatural link, as he claimed? Or was he a charlatan who had a mastery of hypnosis and one of the most immense libidos ever to walk the Earth? It is hard to find reputable sources of information on Rasputin; most stories about him come from his daughter, the entourage of the tsar or  peasants, all of which suffer from lack of credibility.


”They gathered in crypts, indulging in flagellation, mad dancing and orgiastic sex. Only after sinning could they repent and come closer to God. This mix of religious piety and sexual hedonism, ‘driving out sin with sin’, was a notion that never left Rasputin. During his participation in “sacred orgies” instead of being exhausted, he seemed to save more energy, and this is the reason that explains his sexual strength. Many people believe, that through his sins (sex) he obtained his holiness, and that he proceeded in initiations that transformed his miraculous “ego”.”

”Peoples View of Rasputin Though the Czarina wrote flowery love letters to him, he apparently felt it best not to take her to bed.”

Likely a great deal of exaggeration, though he did subscribe to the school of ” purity through transgression”, that seemed somewhat indebted to the messianic overtures and religious mysticism that was pervasive in the eastern reaches of the Russian domain. ” Thus, the truly righteous man descends into the realm of sin, just as Abraham, according to the Zohar, “descended into Egypt,” not to “enjoy” the sin but to break its hold over the Glory of God and thereby liberate from the evil husk of sin the Holy Sparks of God entrapped therein. … Such teachings are also to be found among the early “Libertine” Christians who believed it was necessary to sin in order to be forgiven, and furthermore claimed they had learned this teaching directly from “Jesus” himself. (See Morton Smith’s Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark, Harvard University Press, 1973, e.g. p. 258) Much later, the “mad monk” of Imperial Russia, Rasputin …. , taught a similar doctrine (possibly influenced by Frankist Sabbatianism) that “a great sin was necessary to be granted a great redemption.”

That Rasputin was attractive to women; there can be no doubt about that. He was nothing if not masculine, and the mesmeric quality of his eyes evidently was an effective complement or, when necessary, an effective palliative, to the blunt probing of his peasant hands and the wet kisses that he distributed among his female acquaintances like invitations. As for the charge so assidiously pushed by his male detractors; namely, that he was physically ”filthy” and had a strong body odor, it does not seem to comport well with the acknowledged fact that a favorite place for his ”orgies” was the public baths.


Once the idea that he was sexually grotesque has been set aside, it is quite possible, as a matter of fact, to see Rasputin in a favorable light; he was really, in modern terms, a good guy. He was undeniably crude, but there is little evidence that he was cruel. On the contrary, as Sir Bernard Pares was willing to admit, Rasputin was strongly bent toward a kind of Robin Hood generosity. After his death, a treasure hunt for his wealth produced little. Often he took large sums of money from the wealthy, bribes for favors, and handed them out to poor people without even troubling to count. He was not personally avaricious. He drank, but seldom anything stronger than wine and always, if possible, in company. He loved singing and dancing, and was perpetually ready for a party. Russian folk songs and gypsy music were two of his passions.

”Grigory Efimovich Rasputin was born in a dank bog in rural Siberia – a lush, magical, unicorn-breeding ground of an inhabitable wasteland (I mentioned it briefly when talking about Vasily Zaitsev), where the temperature never gets above freezing and the people are made out of a combination of battle-hardened asbestos and malfunctioning robot parts…”

On more important questions, Rasputin comes off surprisingly well. He foresaw what World War I would mean for Russia and tried desperately to make Nicholas see it, too, sending him telegrams and notes conveying his vision of the impending calamity. It was a very lonely and unpopular view to take at the start of the war, for Russia was caught up in the frenzied, romantic patriotism of 1914 as much as any of the participants. Pares dutifully records a fact that he was sure would strike his readership as anomalous; Rasputin was a close friend of the shrewd Russian statesman , Count Witte, who was also firmly opposed to Russia’s involvement in World War I. ”…but there is nothing surprising in all this,” Pares concludes, giving the devil his due; ”Rasputin’s views were very long-sighted and they coincided with Witte’s”.

”Why would the British want to whack him? Cuz Rasputin was insisting that the Tsar withdraw his troops from WWI – if that would’ve happened the British woulda been f*cked.”

There was another subject on which Rasputin took an unpopular stand, particularly for a Russian peasant. He was sure that all races and religions were equal in the sight of God, and he spoke out boldly against anti-Semitism whenever he thought it might do some good. Over a long period of time this had some effect on Nicholas and Alexandra, in whom the prejudice was deeply ingrained.

No, the image of Rasputin as ”the evil monk” simply does not hold up on the basis of the record. Yet now comes the pradox. It can reasonably be argued that without the influence of this ”bon-vivant” who so ardently preferred Eros to Death, the Russian Revolution of 1917, with all its agonies, might never have occurred. To make such an argument, it is necessary, of course, to entertain the idea that individual personalities do matter in history. It is a non-Marxist idea, although Trotsky, confronted with the fascinating triumvirate here considered; Nicholas, Rasputin and Alexandra , concedes that ” the great, moving forces of history, which are super-personal in character” do after all, ”operate through people,” and he proceeds to a penetrating character character sketch of the czar and czarina.

”Rasputin and Yussupov”

It was Nicholas who set the stage for a denouement in which Rasputin’s influence would be the catalytic force. In the summer of 1915, with Russia reeling under the blows of the Kaiser’s armies and the responsibility of wartime government painfully stretching his limited attention span, he decided to leave the helm to Alexandra while he went off to the front to personally lead his soldiers in defense of Mother Russia. It was an empty gesture, a kind of  farce that fooled almost nobody, but Nicholas himself; he had no practical experience as a military commander and only the haziest concepts of military strategy and tactics. His interest seemed limited to parades and pageantry.  It was his quaint notion that nothing could boost the morale of Russian army units more than the living sight of their emperor , and when he was not playing dominoes, walking in the woods, or reading, he spent much of his time visiting troops; always, of course, at a safe distance to the rear of the actual fighting.rasputin32

”Many women were falling for Rasputin’s hypnotic charms. One, Olga Lokhtina, invited him to stay in her home. She became a lifelong devotee, changing from a witty, intelligent socialite into a crazed eccentric. On one occasion Rasputin was observed violently beating her while she held on to his penis, shouting: ‘I am your ewe, and you are Christ.’ Other women claimed he’d raped them. Rasputin also reputed to have cut locks of hair from the virgins he had sex with. When his house was pulled down in 1977, the authorities unearthed several boxes containing hair buried in the garden.”

Other have painted Rasputin as the ”evil messenger” , a witting or unwitting tool who knew his role and destiny. ”Don’t stop short and point at some world banker. Find out who his shaman is. Find out who does his astrology chart. Look at who taught him Gnosticism, theosophy and syncretism, and you will find yourself looking squarely at the Illuminati itself. For instance, Gregory Rasputin was one. He was the occult shaman sent in by the Gnostic secret society, the Klysty, to spy on, undermine, and subvert the House of the Romanovs. He was the Illuminati’s man in the Czar’s Palace. He, more than anyone else, brought down Czarist Russia and opened the gates to the Bolsheviks. But investigators are always looking for the big powerful politicians with the most press coverage, or the most heavily armed, when hunting for the conspirators. Meanwhile, the sham

the priest who did it, is sneaking out the back door of the palace, unsuspected, just some “kook” that doesn’t matter. This is why Adam Weishaupt’s little BRANCH of it, which he set up in 1776, was a mere blip on the screen. Although his Bavarian Illuminati wing got the most publicity, it never was the main arm of the pagan movement.”

William Blake. ''...about the psychological symbols used in Blake's mythos and its ties to Gnosticism and the Book of Enoch.''

William Blake. ''...about the psychological symbols used in Blake's mythos and its ties to Gnosticism and the Book of Enoch.''

” You can take the advice of Jesus of Nazareth and “be born again of water and spirit” – to be born of the spirit, not of the flesh. You can harness the power of Tantra, the continuum of energy of Chaiah that flows through all of nature but condenses in its most potent, powerful, dangerous force in our physical body as sexual energy.

That energy is the foundation of life, whether that life is physical or spiritual. But one must know how to use it. If one misuses it, one creates a devil. This is what happened to Rasputin. Rasputin knew the knowledge but misused it and created a great devil. This has happened to many people who have misunderstood the doctrine, who have used the sexual energy but not eliminated their desire. The result is they become split personalities, abortions of nature, causes of suffering.”

Related Posts

This entry was posted in Cinema/Visual/Audio, Feature Article, Ideas/Opinion, Miscellaneous and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>