PDA

View Full Version : Sperm



memphis_mizraim
12-18-2009, 07:17 PM
I was wondering about male sperm. After all its the seed of human life so why should it not work in alchemy.

teofrast40
12-19-2009, 08:44 AM
hallo,
to my knowing, male sperm (or female menstruum) is ingested by oneself in an "alchemical" sexual internal path as tought by Giuliano Kremmerz, an italian hermetist and mage of the first part of '900. A sort of external shortcut to varjoli mudra in the yogic path, in which one uses it's own body as a living athanor to refine the matter. This path is said to come from ancient egypt. I'm not proud of having tested it in my youth. Today, besides finding it quite perverse and dangerous, I even question its right to be called alchemy.
I know many people will not like it, but I have to say that, in the western tradition, both sexual\tantric alchemy and "internal"spiritual alchemy don't find even one single evidence in the classical texts. Sex magic and tantrism (both eastern and western) are paths on their own right with a respectable and ancient tradition, that in far east is also linked to alchemy (I'm thinking about chinese Nei Dan, which is where the concept of inner alchemy come from). But they appear to a be different thing from western classical alchemy.
And also "spiritual" and "inner" alchemy in the western tradition only appeared with the work of Robert Ambelain and do not seem to have a classical justification.
Western alchemy is a mystical chemistry, where spiritual evolution is attained through lab work with a phisical matter.
And, as I stated elsewhere in this forum, to me the Great Work pertains to the mineral kingdom. The idea that alchemical path starts from work in vegetal kingdom, than moves to mineral and finally to animal, is a modern invention - as spiritual alchemy is- and don't find evidence in classical texts.
Ok, I realized that maybe I moved a little OT, sorry.

Ghislain
12-19-2009, 08:55 AM
Just a quick one (no pun intended :))

While visiting the temples in Egypt, there were many hieroglyphs
where the gods were ejaculating into a cup held by a king or queen.

It was a while ago that I went so I may have identified the participants
wrong but the glyphs were there.

Ghislain

Andro
12-19-2009, 09:36 AM
For Alchemical use, sperm is just as valid to me as any other fluid of the Microcosmos, and some may say it's many times more powerful and concentrated than all the others.

Why should anyone regard it as 'perverse' as long as you're not forcing it on others?

I myself am in the process of collecting :)

As for the Great Work, anything that is not Universal, is Particular.

It is a common mistake to include Man in the animal kingdom.

Plants, animals, metals and minerals are all Particulars.

The Waters of Man (the Microcosmos) don't belong to any of these, but are Universal, just like the Universal Waters of the Macrocosmos.

teofrast40
12-19-2009, 01:14 PM
allo,
I'm sorry, my sentence was not clear.
By no mean I consider tantrism or sex magic to be perverse from an ethical point of view. My first reference is Nature, and sex is one of her best works! Sex has been used by many serious spiritual seeker as a valid mean in their quest. I was just suggesting hthat tantrism, despite having existed in western tradition, does not pertain strictly to western alchemy.
I consider sperm ingestion to be perverse from the point of view of spiritual evolution, as this practice is said to crystalize the astral body of the practicer as a way to escape death by vampirizing someone else's body and transferring this "Rebis" to the victim's body. This is not what I'm looking after.
Also I don't see why human bodily fluids should be more universal than those of any animal, I don'think the difference between us and them lies down there.
And regarding the use of human dejections in the Work, I'll cite Limojon de Saint Didier for all:
"They (fake philosipher) have worked on certain herbs, on animals, on blood, on urine, on hairs, on sperm, and on things of this nature: those have moved away from the True Way."
cheers

memphis_mizraim
12-19-2009, 01:32 PM
allo,
I'm sorry, my sentence was not clear.
By no mean I consider tantrism or sex magic to be perverse from an ethical point of view. My first reference is Nature, and sex is one of her best works! Sex has been used by many serious spiritual seeker as a valid mean in their quest. I was just suggesting hthat tantrism, despite having existed in western tradition, does not pertain strictly to western alchemy.
I consider sperm ingestion to be perverse from the point of view of spiritual evolution, as this practice is said to crystalize the astral body of the practicer as a way to escape death by vampirizing someone else's body and transferring this "Rebis" to the victim's body. This is not what I'm looking after.
Also I don't see why human bodily fluids should be more universal than those of any animal, I don'think the difference between us and them lies down there.
And regarding the use of human dejections in the Work, I'll cite Limojon de Saint Didier for all:
"They (fake philosipher) have worked on certain herbs, on animals, on blood, on urine, on hairs, on sperm, and on things of this nature: those have moved away from the True Way."
cheers

While I welcome your comments I have to disagree with you. I am sure you can use any bodily substance if you know how to prepare it. I think just eating sperm will achieve nothing its the cycle that is followed. If you read any Taoist Alchemy documents it very clear that sperm from the man and blood from the woman is used. Its knowing how to use them is the problem. We seem to have lost these techniques. Alchemy came from the east so its not a western tradition, but has become so over the years. It is practiced in India still and their are hundreds on books published about it the same practices in China.

teofrast40
12-19-2009, 02:26 PM
as I said, I don't even think that ingesting sperm could be considered alchemy.
I'm well aware of eastern alchemy (which, if you read my above posts in this thread, shuold be quite evident), but i would not be so sure about the eastern origin of western alchemy, at least in times of which we are hitorically aware. there are some unquestionable universal traits, but the peculiar symbolic corpus of western alchemy come to us from arabic culture, that obtained it from greeks and egyptians..

Andro
12-19-2009, 02:54 PM
And regarding the use of human dejections in the Work, I'll cite Limojon de Saint Didier for all: "They (fake philosipher) have worked on certain herbs, on animals, on blood, on urine, on hairs, on sperm, and on things of this nature: those have moved away from the True Way."

You can find citations to either defend or contradict any possible statement. Alchemical works are full of self-proclaimed 'true philosophers' who claim others are 'fake philosophers', and we've had a recent example here on this forum.

Also, please remember that many philosophers have this interesting habit to mysteriously conceal their Prima Materia when they talk about it directly, but to plainly reveal it in their 'Big No-No' lists :)

I believe the following quote from 'Rosenkranz and Guildenstern Are Dead' holds true for many coded Alchemical writings:

"Half of what he said meant exactly the opposite, and the other half meant nothing at all".

:D

memphis_mizraim
12-19-2009, 02:59 PM
You can find citations to either defend or contradict any possible statement. Alchemical works are full of self-proclaimed 'true philosophers' who claim others are 'fake philosophers', and we've had a recent example here on this forum.

Also, please remember that many philosophers have this interesting habit to mysteriously conceal their Prima Materia when they talk about it directly, but to plainly reveal it in their 'Big No-No' lists :)

I believe the following quote from 'Rosenkranz and Guildenstern Are Dead' holds true for many coded Alchemical writings:

"Half of what he said meant exactly the opposite, and the other half meant nothing at all".

:D

So true a great statement , hasn't changed much over the years.

memphis_mizraim
12-19-2009, 03:05 PM
as I said, I don't even think that ingesting sperm could be considered alchemy.
I'm well aware of eastern alchemy (which, if you read my above posts in this thread, shuold be quite evident), but i would not be so sure about the eastern origin of western alchemy, at least in times of which we are hitorically aware. there are some unquestionable universal traits, but the peculiar symbolic corpus of western alchemy come to us from arabic culture, that obtained it from greeks and egyptians..

Now we are getting places for as soon as you mention Arab the name Geber comes up. The first mention of alchemical I know about is from Paracelsus and he is supposed to have traveled East and also the Middle East for instructions. CR also went to Arabia. These places are not part of what we call the western tradition. Germany seems to be the place in Europe it spread out from and made its way to France and England. For me alchemical is a Eastern Tradition and probably from India like so many other things.

memphis_mizraim
12-19-2009, 03:08 PM
hallo,
to my knowing, male sperm (or female menstruum) is ingested by oneself in an "alchemical" sexual internal path as tought by Giuliano Kremmerz, an italian hermetist and mage of the first part of '900. A sort of external shortcut to varjoli mudra in the yogic path, in which one uses it's own body as a living athanor to refine the matter. This path is said to come from ancient egypt. I'm not proud of having tested it in my youth. Today, besides finding it quite perverse and dangerous, I even question its right to be called alchemy.
I know many people will not like it, but I have to say that, in the western tradition, both sexual\tantric alchemy and "internal"spiritual alchemy don't find even one single evidence in the classical texts. Sex magic and tantrism (both eastern and western) are paths on their own right with a respectable and ancient tradition, that in far east is also linked to alchemy (I'm thinking about chinese Nei Dan, which is where the concept of inner alchemy come from). But they appear to a be different thing from western classical alchemy.
And also "spiritual" and "inner" alchemy in the western tradition only appeared with the work of Robert Ambelain and do not seem to have a classical justification.
Western alchemy is a mystical chemistry, where spiritual evolution is attained through lab work with a phisical matter.
And, as I stated elsewhere in this forum, to me the Great Work pertains to the mineral kingdom. The idea that alchemical path starts from work in vegetal kingdom, than moves to mineral and finally to animal, is a modern invention - as spiritual alchemy is- and don't find evidence in classical texts.
Ok, I realized that maybe I moved a little OT, sorry.

What is the sexual techniques of Kremmerz any document on this.

Joy
12-19-2009, 04:41 PM
Hello Teofrast40,

excuse one question inbetween!

You wrote, that in the western tradition alchemy the "inner" alchemy has no
classical justification.

So, does this mean, that "The Book of Lambspring" is an old text for the lab practise,
from your viewside?

Greetings Joy

teofrast40
12-19-2009, 05:58 PM
good evening
to memphis,
yes we could talk about geber, avicenna, artephius and many others and all of them lived some centuries before paracelsus.
I like you am convinced that eastern tradition influenced deeply some of the roots of our culture, but I was talking about historical evidence here: while we might argue that paracelsus met the siddhatamil and studied theit work, we have no textual evidence of it, while we have many that he red geber. and why do you think that it spread from germany??
regarding Kremmerz, sorry but i don't know if there's something in english, anyway those practices were described in his (apocryphous) Corpus Philosophorum Tutius Magie, but I would'nt invest much time in it, there are so many important books to be read!

to Androgynus
Yes, alchemical texts are labirinths full of traps, but if they would tell you everything and its contrary, I would see no point in reading them. almost all of them present the same symbolical apparatus, already formed in the early authors, and often they use the same identical sentences, specially on the third phase of the Work. if the vast majority of them tell me to look in the mineral kingdom, that would be my first area of investigation.

to joy

"So, does this mean, that "The Book of Lambspring" is an old text for the lab practise, from your viewside?"

yes, why not?

cheers
t

Rebus7
12-20-2009, 06:35 AM
A small but significant technicality is that I feel this little discussion should be about SEMEN, rather than SPERM.
Sperm being the actual seed that swim in the semen.
My belief is that the sulphur of this Green Man lies in the semen, the fluid which comes from the prostate. I don't believe the sperm is useful, rather the semen.
I also have a vested interest in this belief since not only have I had a vasectomy, but even without, I am a little too old to produce significant sperm. But semen... no problem. :D

Ghislain
12-20-2009, 10:04 AM
Drink Guiness ;)

Ghislain

Ghislain
12-20-2009, 10:24 AM
Putrescine (sometimes spelled putrescin) is an organic chemical compound NH2(CH2)4NH2 (1,4-diaminobutane or butanediamine). It is related to cadaverine; both are produced by the breakdown of amino acids in living and dead organisms and both are toxic in large doses.[1][2] The two compounds are largely responsible for the foul odor of putrefying flesh, but also contribute to the odor of such processes as bad breath and bacterial vaginosis. They are also found in semen and some microalgae, together with related molecules like spermine and spermidine. url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putrescine]Source:[/url]

Perhaps that is the solvent?

No smoke without fire.

Putrefaction is a commonly mentioned topic.
Here we have a substance, present in all matter
that putrefies...including semen. Although in
semen it is used to allow a sperm to penetrate
the egg.

Ghislain