View Full Version : Hurt to clear up

Green Lion
02-01-2012, 08:43 AM
Hello to all.

I write this message to clarify certain points which seem problematic concerning my interventions on this forum.

When a few months ago I decided to share with you certain alchemical conceptions about Spiritus Mundi and about its securement, my purpose was to open new perspectives in the reading of the authors as well as in the application of the various known protocols.

My purpose absolutely was not to create a difference so clear between those who swear only by Spiritus Mundi and those who swear only by "said" classic protocols.

As I specified it from the beginning, the concepts of securement of Spiritus Mundi and work on this only subject were never written by the ancients in the works of alchemy.

It is thus useless to try to make texts stick, especially in their practical descriptions, with the concepts which I proposed in reflection. It is that in the alchemical theory that you can find some allusive references. Keep it in mind not to fall into the trap of the excessive justification by the texts of a thing which is not there.
Then, I specified well that the comments which I held concerning the securement of "pure" Spiritus Mundi aim only at allowing a different vision from the alchemy to appear and thus to open new perspectives of analysis of texts and alchemical practices in the laboratory. This work not were the one of ancient alchemists (set apart Stone of God's Fire about whom speaks certain Rosy-Cross alchemist), it is not to be considered as the valid only one to the detriment of the other protocols. For what I just tried to make understand, it is that this concept of Spiritus Mundi is to be studied to allow to understand how to make alchemical known "recipes" capable of giving the results which describe the Ancients.

The metallic ways, the salt ways and even the solar way are absolutely valid, doubtless. But it misses that certain things in the descriptions which made the ancients. It is for it that several alchemists who have at their disposal extremely precise protocols did not manage to operate them up to the end. It is there that the secret texts, the ancient manuscripts etc. show their limits: certain concepts are missing. It is these concepts which I tried to shine by speaking about Spiritus Mundi.

All the alchemical ways of the ancients aim at opening a subject, at cleansing it, at making it capable of getting and of containing the Divine Light (Spiritus Mundi). It is the preparation of the magnet of the Wise. But any subject contains this Divine Light otherwise it would not exist. Thus any subject is useful to work in the Great Work. On the other hand, certain subjects are more easily useful than the others. Working protocols are then specific in the subject chosen to begin. For example, the solar way does not need darkness to give a result because the subject which is worked is the solar light. The salt ways need absolutely to be worked in the black to avoid chemical changes produced by the solar light. The metallic ways need darkness at first …

All this to say that I regret sincerely the form which it takes. I ask Rogerc and Androgynus not to play proselytes as they make it. Continue to work as you wish it, but do not try to convince whoever it is as long that you will not have finalized the work which you began. Respect the choice of each, the knowledge of each, the experience of each. If you are really convinced by your studies, your understanding and your practice, you do not need to try to convince the others.

Finally, to try to reassure some: I am not a guru, I am not a master, I am not a messiah, I look for no follower, I do not try to convince. I am only an alchemist as the others who share time at time and who wanted naively to give a different vision to look to provoke a reflection to some.

02-01-2012, 10:54 AM

Each in their own way, anyway.

And all I can share here, is what I have discovered by myself so far.

And I have also been clear about what I have reached, what I have NOT reached, and what stage my research is in, more or less - to keep a degree of ethical transparency.

Personally, I don't think I tried to convince anyone... But maybe I've slipped once or twice :)

I ask Rogerc and Androgynus not to play proselytes as they make it.

I don't get the "play proselytes" bit as pertaining to me in any way.

I am not a 'convert' trying to convert others (and I deeply regret it if things I've said came across this way), but rather had certain personal realizations and deep revelations that led me further on my path.

I would also like to think that there are some who found my contributions beneficial, in principle AND application.

Besides - It's not where you take it FROM, it's where you're taking it TO.

And I took in in my own individual direction, which is different from any other directions I know, and shared my (satisfying) findings SO FAR.

I can't speak for Rogerc, but he also took it in his own direction(s) of research, and I have personally learned a lot from what he shared, even if it's not my current focus.

I am not a master

True, you're not a master. But I'm confident that you are 100% genuine in your laboratory alchemy experience, as well as a source of inspiration for many of us here.

And the sharing of your vision has helped me towards a 'larger' way of seeing things, which is also showing in the laboratory, in matter.

For this, I am very grateful and always will be.

Hurt to clear up Some hurts/wounds are not meant to clear/heal. Like Chiron / the 'Wounded Healer' Archetype.
__________________________________________________ ____________________________


All and all, maybe this is my EXIT cue in this regard. We shall see to what end.

But I will continue to share and exchange about my personal work in more private communications.

And it's NOT because I am asked to, but because it resonates with what is already happening in my life right now. Just waited for the right 'trigger', I suppose...

There are other fascinating topics to discuss besides lab alchemy...

Like different conceptions/perspectives about INTERNAL alchemy, for example... and the Mysteries of Creation and the Universe... And 'where' this is all going...

My most sincere wishes of practical success to EVERYONE here.



ghetto alchemist
02-01-2012, 11:04 AM
My purpose absolutely was not to create a difference so clear between those who swear only by Spiritus Mundi and those who swear only by "said" classic protocols.

Thank you for saying this Green Lion, as a newcomer, I was perplexed these separate camps.
Even though I am firmly entrenched in the classical one.

Yours is the highly regarded voice of reason.

Thank You
Ghetto Alchemist

True Initiate
02-01-2012, 03:24 PM
Thank you for the clarification Green Lion. I hope that other will learn a lesson from this and not to clinge on other peoples work without any concrete proof and their own experience.

Sir, you shoved the greatness of your character by posting this.

02-01-2012, 07:49 PM
Well said Green Lion. :)


Illen A. Cluf
02-01-2012, 11:46 PM
Green Lion,

Thank you very much for your well articulated clarification. It helps explain your position quite well.

I can see why you regretted how your initial discovery and revelation of that discovery was subsequently misinterpreted. From a positive perspective, I think it still led to a very worthwhile discussion, even though your prime point appears to have been mostly disregarded. That point being: "certain concepts are missing. It is these concepts which I tried to shine by speaking about Spiritus Mundi". You have repeatedly mentioned that it is the concepts and principles that need consideration, not so much the subject or technique. The ancient texts often mention the absolute importance of the influence of the light of the Sun in the cycle of birth, growth, putrefaction and rebirth. And thus the importance of understanding the concept of Spiritus Mundi.

Thank you again for stressing the importance of this concept.