PDA

View Full Version : RAW on Sexual Alchemy



Awani
03-17-2012, 06:36 AM
http://www.rawilsonfans.com/articles/alchemy.htm


RED LION - the male Alchemist, or his penis.
WHITE EAGLE - the Alchemist's mate, or her vagina.
RETORT - the vagina and/or womb.
TRANSMUTATION - (or transubstantiation) an altered state of consciousness.
ELIXIR - the semen.

I'm not sure I agree on the vagina/penis thing. Comments?

:cool:

III
03-17-2012, 07:29 AM
http://www.rawilsonfans.com/articles/alchemy.htm

RED LION - the male Alchemist, or his penis.
WHITE EAGLE - the Alchemist's mate, or her vagina.
RETORT - the vagina and/or womb.
TRANSMUTATION - (or transubstantiation) an altered state of consciousness.
ELIXIR - the semen.

I'm not sure I agree on the vagina/penis thing. Comments?

:cool:

Hi Dev,

"Red Lion nor white eagle I have never heard of in these terms, but there is a lot I'm not familiar with. Retort - vagina-chalice. Tansmutation - zaltered state of consciousness, sure, close enough.
Elixer (of life) - semen. NO. Not in anything I am familiar with. Semen might be "living water" or "water of life". "Elixer (of life)" is the combination of the 3 female orgasmic fluids with the semen reacted in the retort/chalice being stirred by the wand/sword while being heated (radiated) by the Shakti. Again though, I have read only a tiny fraction of literature and so may be unfamilar with some terminology sets.

Andro
03-27-2012, 09:29 PM
Retort - vagina-chalice.
[--------------------------------------------------------------]
"Elixir (of life)" is the combination of the 3 female orgasmic fluids with the semen reacted in the retort/chalice being stirred by the wand/sword while being heated (radiated) by the Shakti.


I'm not sure I agree on the vagina/penis thing.

Hey III,

From your perspective:

Do you believe it is impossible to perform partnered sexual alchemy to its fullest possible extent (with ALL spiritual AND physical aspects included), if there are no vaginas and no female orgasmic fluids involved?

Or, alternatively, if there is no semen & wand involved, but ONLY vaginas and female orgasmic fluids?

III
03-29-2012, 04:58 AM
Hey III,


From your perspective:

Do you believe it is impossible to perform partnered sexual alchemy to its fullest possible extent (with ALL spiritual AND physical aspects included), if there are no vaginas and no female orgasmic fluids involved?

Or, alternatively, if there is no semen & wand involved, but ONLY vaginas and female orgasmic fluids?

Hi Androgynus,

I make no claims of being familiar with every varient of tantric alchemy. It isn't a unified thing. There may be other definition sets. I have done a lot of alchemical sequences and tantric alchemical sequences, most of them alone. And quite a few with other guys.

As far as generating the Elixir it is a whole lot more than the fluids, it's the energy generated, it's the imprinting energy that is generated with the fluids and Union occurring. At least that is the formula and process as I was taught. Everybody present would partake of the Elixir in wine or brandy, part of the ceremony, but also everyone present who is linked in will recieve a heavy dose of Shaktipat, and maybe that is what it is really about as it is sufficient "catelyze" a person's transformation. So in answer to your question, I don't know. I don't see why it shouldn't be possible but I don't know, either way. Shaktpat doesn't require more than one to transmit. There is something additional, or maybe "complex" about what occurs with two doing Union.

Andro
03-29-2012, 05:06 AM
Thank you very much for the honest answer!

Much appreciated!

It is my personal perspective that, like you said (more or less), it is really about the energies being generated rather than the actual physical 'genders' and 'body parts' involved.

III
03-29-2012, 05:22 AM
Thank you very much for the honest answer!

Much appreciated!

It is my personal perspective that, like you said (more or less), it is really about the energies being generated rather than the actual physical 'genders' and 'body parts' involved.

Hi Androgynus,

I can be whatever energy "polarity" that I need to be for Shaktipat to occur. That is not a matter of gender, but rather a matter of the other persons ability to accept it.

III
04-04-2012, 09:53 PM
Hi Androgynus,

I would like to clarify some of the things that might be derived from what I said. "ALCHEMICAL UNION", in the sense that I am using it in all this is so extremely rare that most particiapating in the ritual are not going to experience ALCHMICAL UNION. It is much rarer than the Alchemical Marriage. I do not want to give the expectation of experiencing it by following a recipe or formula. Both partners must be fully ready for it, fully purified. It's one of those things that may be practiced over and over until one gets it right. These practices tend to advance one or two steps at a time, until everything comes out at all the right moments and everything links up the way it should. It's like being struck by lightning, and not as easy to cause. Around here I can watch all those volunteer lightning rods out on the golf course. In Life in the Labrynth EJ Gold has a chapter entitled "Lightning Handlers Always Crackle". There are other ways to play metaphysical lightning rod.

Since UNION is quite rare and is needed for the elixir of life to be genenerated that gets us down to the Wild Duck Dinner while lost in the woods recipe; first bring me the wild duck. None of the rest of the ingrediants are needed until both partners can perform UNION. Most who try never do achieve that. It may be achieved more frequently than the "stone" or maybe not.

vega33
04-04-2012, 11:32 PM
http://www.rawilsonfans.com/articles/alchemy.htm



I'm not sure I agree on the vagina/penis thing. Comments?

:cool:

Much as I enjoy RAW's "maybe logic", and really enjoyed his Cosmic Trigger series (I had the entire series of his books at one stage collected), his experience was limited through the people he interacted with. Leary; McMurty, the former OHO of the OTO (sadly missed now Beta is in his place); Hynek; a bunch of intellectuals... but no real alchemists. Not his fault, and he did write for Playboy so he was perhaps predisposed to the whole sex angle.

I'm not saying trascendent or magickal experience can't be had through sexual magick - in fact, I once went on a magickal road trip with a Soror I knew at the time through the SW that involved sex magick and my then perspective on alchemy... this before I met my current partner who is a joy to work with. Much transcendent wisdom was gained here, and there is something to be said for the association of different sexual positions with the different planets.

What is missing from RAW's perspective/articles, in my opinion, is the understanding of alchemical terminology. When RAW says:


There is only one bath from which all creatures are generated and 'that is the bath of vaginal fluids, which is "not of any kind of water."

he totally missed the point: chickens are generated from a fertilized egg, as are humans generated from the same, with careful incubation in the womb. And what about metals? What about plants? Insects? And why does he transform the words "nothing in this world" into "all creatures"? thats a BIG difference.

Wilson would have done better to think long and hard about Vaughan's statement that "The true furnace is a little simple shell" - a point that evokes Fulcanelli's so called merelles de Compostelle, the scallop shells of St James of Compostella. Nature has no need for pyrex glassware, nor a need for ascribing rather dumb names to everyday objects of desire.

If you want to study sexual magic, first learn about your own body and you'll find there are many ways to manipulate energy into various pathways, once the mind stops thinking in words. Then you take that knowledge and work with it with a partner if you want. And forget all the dumb Captain Hammer like statements, such as "the red lion is my penis" :P.

Awani
04-05-2012, 09:36 PM
What is missing from RAW's perspective/articles, in my opinion, is the understanding of alchemical terminology.

I have never really got into RAW's body of work... But I had this feeling and your quote above verify it. I mean if I haven't read any how can I know for sure... but it seems you know his work quite well. Save me the time;) Thanks.

:cool: