PDA

View Full Version : Is Spiritual Alchemy A Valid Path?



Pages : [1] 2

Dwellings
08-09-2016, 06:42 PM
Alchemy at its base level provides with a means of producing truckloads of gold by using a little amount of red powder known as the Philosopher's stone. This is the basic definition of alchemy.

I want to ask:
How can by merely meditating chakra kundalini Inner Alchemy or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?

Let's proceed with a quote by Ab Roek


Internal / External fallacy

Many are lead astray by the recent inventive fallacy of "internal vs. external" Alchemy. Untrained noses are thrown off the Scent of the real Trail, and distracted by the piss markings of those who have not seen the Trail through to its more important Landmarks. The true way is distinguished by the scent of Roses.

Keep in mind that the Ancients did not advocate the distinction of "internal vs. external" Alchemy. It is not because they weren't as smart as you or me, and hence didn't know enough about the varieties toward which their Subject could be applied. Although many of them did use blinds to confuse the unserious seeker, they never stooped to telling a lie (that is, such a lie as the "internal vs. external" view of Alchemy). Occult blinds are not the same as lies, learn well the difference and understand.

It is a belief that is without foundation. Moreover, this belief only serves to limit one's perspective and approach, and, once accepted as "true," does much to actively generate misunderstanding among those who are seeking the reality behind Alchemy. This is why I called it a "lie." (As well to help distinguish it from the use of occult blinds)

Do not take my previous post as being personally directed at you, or any one single person on this forum. I've seen traces of this belief in dozens of other posts here, as well in a good number of the modern written works on Alchemy. It is a recent error, perpetuated by authors who were trying to fit Alchemy into their own belief systems and their own knowledge of other traditions.

I am saying, there are some some beliefs that seekers hold onto which will only prohibit their understanding. If one wants to find the truth behind the tradition of Alchemy, one must decide to see things as they are, rather than how one would like them to be.

Try letting go of the belief for three months, and during that time actively try to understand Alchemy without it.

"Whoso loveth unquietness, let him be reformed."

When you claim that you do not have a belief about this issue, meanwhile go on to defend, justify, and in other ways cling (indeed) to the belief which underlies the internal / external error, your actions and words become a fundamental contradiction. If you believe you are being straightforward, look deeper and see whether you're being honest with yourself on this issue- begin with the statement "I do not have a belief about this..." Your actions and predilections of study will tell you what your beliefs are-- whether you are consciously aware of them or not does not change the fact that they guide your course.

Furthermore, to say that the "internal / external" error is "useful" to hang onto both betrays a preference which you do not wish to let go of (presuming you meant what you said), and promulgates a roadblock to progress in Art. For, this internal / external error is the very opposite of useful, in that it only serves to obfuscate the seeker's understanding of Alchemy, in both its theory and practice. To thus claim that something is "useful" for the ends of Alchemy, when in fact it only prohibits and stunts the maturation of that Art, is more than merely flawed logic.

Let's be clear here, that when you have grasped the Prima Materia, and reflected upon the consequences of your realization, you will also realize precisely why I say that the "external / internal" view of Alchemy is a Lie. Until that time, you are only theorizing and offering your opinion, which cannot be grounded upon anything other than speculation. I say cannot, because I know from personal experience that Alchemy only becomes possible after the revelation of the Prima Materia. The fact that you think this is some sort of disagreement over syntax is further evidence that you fundamentally do not understand the core of the issue, and from your mistaken point of view, you feel the next best course of action is to come up with thought-strings which serve to defend your own ego and beliefs on the matter.

This is not about you or any more than it is about me, or any other single individual. There are many who post here who have become infected by this error, which the interested and diligent reader can trace through numerous threads on this forum. Saying "there is no inside or outside, therefore anything goes" is disingenuous, and dissembling. When anyone truly realizes (abolishes) the Vanishing Point which seems to separate "in here" from "out there," they will not continue advocating for that distinction in their discussions on theory and practice.

Let everyone continue to experiment, and find out the truth for themselves. I have offered more than enough for the sincere seeker on this particular subject.



He sums up my viewpoints quite eloquently and I doubt that I could have put up a better arguement.

Come out or you will end up only fooling yourselves.

Awani
08-09-2016, 07:21 PM
I want to ask:
How can by merely meditating chakra kundalini Inner Alchemy or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?

You cannot. Because why the hell would one waste time doing that... those that hunt for physical gold are the fooled. Even if they get truckloads. Also your defenition of alchemy is your own, and you cannot claim authority over its meaning.

:cool:

Dwellings
08-09-2016, 07:33 PM
You cannot. Because why the hell would one waste time doing that... those that hunt for physical gold are the fooled. Even if they get truckloads. Also your defenition of alchemy is your own, and you cannot claim authority over its meaning.

:cool:

1. What is wrong with hunting for huge amounts of Gold even if it takes time?

2.Regarding the definition of alchemy
Certainly not, ask among the public, you will get the same (many would have read Harry Potter) so there is that.

3. When did I ever claimed I know the meaning or its authority? Can you point it out in my post?

Well my aim is to use their data, their words and show that they are wrong. This is why I wrote the above definition.

Loki Morningstar
08-09-2016, 08:19 PM
As Harry Potter was brought up. It's worth talking about the fact that we could say that J.K.Rowling managed to, through Spiritual Alchemy, turn masses of paper into gold.

Awani
08-09-2016, 08:45 PM
1. What is wrong with hunting for huge amounts of Gold even if it takes time?

2.Regarding the definition of alchemy
Certainly not, ask among the public, you will get the same (many would have read Harry Potter) so there is that.

3. When did I ever claimed I know the meaning or its authority? Can you point it out in my post?

1. If gold fulfills your life go for it.

2. "The ancient study of alchemy is concerned with making the Sorcerer's Stone, a legendary substance with astonishing powers. The stone will transform any metal into pure gold. It also produces the Elixir of Life, which will make the drinker immortal." - from Harry Potter

Basically Harry Potters view of alchemy is closer to your view of it than it is mine own... how ironic. ;)

3. I was simply saying that no one can own the definition, so just because you see it one way doesn't mean it makes it so for everyone else. You and I are not the authority... only the author of our on view on the matter.

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-09-2016, 08:59 PM
My belief is that the prima materia is the mind of the alchemist. The alchemists goal is to turn his mind into the stone by gathering as much information, about as many topics, as possible. The alchemist then has the ability to turn any material into gold (or money). The elixir of life is the useful knowledge he has distilled, which makes one immortal by sharing this knowledge, in the same way that great scientists are immortal.

At the same time, we could say if an alchemist finds the 'true' stone, he may find ways of making himself actually immortal; either spiritually, or bodily. As he would have knowledge of the whole universe and its workings.

Dwellings
08-10-2016, 02:20 AM
My belief is that the prima materia is the mind of the alchemist. The alchemists goal is to turn his mind into the stone by gathering as much information, about as many topics, as possible. The alchemist then has the ability to turn any material into gold (or money). The elixir of life is the useful knowledge he has distilled, which makes one immortal by sharing this knowledge, in the same way that great scientists are immortal.

At the same time, we could say if an alchemist finds the 'true' stone, he may find ways of making himself actually immortal; either spiritually, or bodily. As he would have knowledge of the whole universe and its workings.

No, you are way off the true path.

In the alchemical process

1. Why is there a violent fight at the begining?

2. Why sometimes you need to prepare "Doves of Diana".

How can you explain these in terms of what you have written.
The fact is you cant.

It also seems like you did not read the first post.

Dwellings
08-10-2016, 02:27 AM
1. If gold fulfills your life go for it.

2. "The ancient study of alchemy is concerned with making the Sorcerer's Stone, a legendary substance with astonishing powers. The stone will transform any metal into pure gold. It also produces the Elixir of Life, which will make the drinker immortal." - from Harry Potter

Basically Harry Potters view of alchemy is closer to your view of it than it is mine own... how ironic. ;)

3. I was simply saying that no one can own the definition, so just because you see it one way doesn't mean it makes it so for everyone else. You and I are not the authority... only the author of our on view on the matter.

:cool:

The correct definition assuming somebody knows it will never be described in plain terms to anyone.

I find it surprising that you will nitpick on the definition. That is more common in physicsforums when you come out with data proving that Einstein ws a fraud.

Have you ever conducted a survey among local people, I have as a part of college project (Market Research on famous authors and their overall strategy for sales and marketing) and this was one of the questions and this is from where I came up with the above definiton

Awani
08-10-2016, 08:52 AM
You will get different views if you do local market research about alchemy in, for example gold obsessed USA, compared to a place like India. Regardless the reason I focus on your definition is because it is how you define alchemy that cause you to denounce spiritual alchemy.

Everything has an outer aspect (practical) and an inner aspect (spiritual). If focus is only on the practical all you have is form. Form without spirit is empty. Sure you can make gold either way, but I rather reach a state of peace than have all the gold in the world.

When you reach a certain state of consciousness gold becomes no different than wood.

I have also done a personal observation (not related to you in any way as I do not know who you are), but the most gold obsessed alchemists have two traits in common: they are Americans and they are "poor". I don't have any judgement on this. I just think it is interesting, because having lived in USA for a time I know that this society is obsessed with greed. And the "white trash" of the United States all think that money will solve all their problems. It won't.

My own view of alchemy is the transmutation/transformation of the self into a higher state of being.

Your view of alchemy is not wrong, I just disagree personally that Spiritual Alchemy is a hoax. I think a certain kind of practical alchemy is important, but the gold chasing alchemist... well I think "that" is the true joke.

But it is true there is a lot of New Age-styled empty mumbo-jumbo spiritual alchemist gurus and those folks are indeed a hoax. So yes I agree in part with what you say. But there are child molesters who recycle, so there is good and bad in everyone/everything.

:cool:

JDP
08-10-2016, 03:10 PM
My belief is that the prima materia is the mind of the alchemist. The alchemists goal is to turn his mind into the stone by gathering as much information, about as many topics, as possible. The alchemist then has the ability to turn any material into gold (or money). The elixir of life is the useful knowledge he has distilled, which makes one immortal by sharing this knowledge, in the same way that great scientists are immortal.

At the same time, we could say if an alchemist finds the 'true' stone, he may find ways of making himself actually immortal; either spiritually, or bodily. As he would have knowledge of the whole universe and its workings.

What you are proposing here is "magic", not "alchemy". Alchemy does not try to rely on any mysterious Jedi-like mind powers. Alchemy was a part of natural science, it relied on reactions between substances, which are not affected by ones wishes or ideas about them. They simply "are". They do not care one bit what one thinks or wishes, just like gravity doesn't care one bit what one thinks or wishes of it, it will just do "its thing" regardless of what one wants. The job of the alchemist was to find the correct substances, the correct proportions, and the correct reactions to manufacture the Stone.

Awani
08-10-2016, 03:22 PM
Yeah and politicians and presidents were meant to serve the public and not rape and steal and murder and lie at every turn. Shit happens.

And what is the point of making the Stone with only physical methods? What is the point of doing that other than just having a geeky adventure (which is fine, we all need hobbies)?

:cool:

Dwellings
08-10-2016, 04:15 PM
And what is the point of making the Stone with only physical methods? What is the point of doing that other than just having a geeky adventure (which is fine, we all need hobbies)?
:cool:

To me, it is not an adventure but it is as important as my life & I take Alchemy very seriously.



Alchemy at its base level provides with a means of producing truckloads of gold by using a little amount of red powder known as the Philosopher's stone. This is the basic definition of alchemy.

I want to ask:
How can by merely meditating chakra kundalini Inner Alchemy or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?


@dev:
I do not think you need to be told what an adjective/adverb does to a statement. Read this with your previous responses to my original post, you will get why I wrote so.

Alchemy at its core is the study of nature. Hence it is a physical science not spiritual as many will argue. Also, this Inner Crap seems to be argued by those who do not get generally what Prima Materia is.

JDP
08-10-2016, 04:32 PM
Yeah and politicians and presidents were meant to serve the public and not rape and steal and murder and lie at every turn. Shit happens.

And what is the point of making the Stone with only physical methods? What is the point of doing that other than just having a geeky adventure (which is fine, we all need hobbies)?
:cool:

That's what alchemy is and always was, why question its goals and methods? If it is not to one's liking, then seek another pursuit. But do not try to "hijack" alchemy and claim it was really about mysterious mind powers that no one has ever proved they exist in the first place. Now that would be an excellent situation to ask your question: And what is the point of making the Stone with "mental" methods for which there is no proof whatsoever that they even exist in the first place?

Besides, if such mental powers did really exist, I can't imagine anyone wasting his time making the Stone. A person possessed of such mental powers would have pretty much anything he wanted already, would have a blast everyday of his life and have most his time already occupied doing other things, like going around looking for hot chicks and mentally convincing them that you are the man of their dreams:

**SAID A LA OBI-WAN KENOBI** "The clown you are with is not the man you are looking for, dump him. I am the studliest stud of your wildest dreams, the one you have been fantasizing with all your life, you will invite me to your apartment tonight..." ;)

Alchemy: Jedi Knights Need Not Apply (because they are already plenty busy doing a million other amusing things with their amazing mind powers)

Andro
08-10-2016, 05:32 PM
Alchemy at its core is the study of nature. Hence it is a physical science not spiritual as many will argue. Also, this Inner Crap seems to be argued by those who do not get generally what Prima Materia is.

Does "Nature" not have a "spiritual" cause? (Hermetic Law of Causality)

I see Alchemy as involving Spiritual Principles practically applied (inside the "Alchemical Crucible" and laboratory) in & to the realm of physical matter, thus taking it beyond mere chemistry.

What, in you view, are the attributes of the "Prima Materia" (generally)?

You quoted Ab Roek earlier. If I'm not mistaken, both of you have openly admitted not to have performed practical laboratory work yet. It could be interesting to hear your perspectives after commencing the practical Work.

For me, it's fascinating to observe how physical matter can have its properties radically altered when treated alchemically. Or even matter "mysteriously" appearing where there was none before.

The Work in itself doesn't seem to require any "spiritual mind powers". However, a deep, primordial (dare I even say Gnostic) inner-standing of Spirit (and its manifestations, attributes and affinities in the physical realm) seems to be necessary in order to uncover the mysteries of the actual Practical Work.

JinRaTensei
08-10-2016, 05:34 PM
Would you consider things like "hallucinogenic visions" or astral travel or generally everything "Mumbo Jumbo Jedi Mind trick" what shamans worldwide are doing daily?
What about healing/regeneration(self remission/spontaneous self healing), precognition or knowledge one should not have according to physics?

What about dreams if they tell us things about "reality" also fake?
What about mushrooms and DMT ?
What about remote viewing?

Where exactly is your line between "reality" and everything else?

Andro
08-10-2016, 05:42 PM
Would you consider things like "hallucinogenic visions" or astral travel or generally everything "Mumbo Jumbo Jedi Mind trick" what shamans worldwide are doing daily?
What about healing/regeneration(self remission/spontaneous self healing), precognition or knowledge one should not have according to physics?

What about dreams if they tell us things about "reality" also fake?
What about mushrooms and DMT ?
What about remote viewing?

Where exactly is your line between "reality" and everything else?

All those are valid in my own experience (except that I'm not familiar with psychedelic substances, which I don't use for shamanic work or for anything else).

But these are not "Alchemy" in the classical/canonical sense of the term, although the same rules generally apply to every area of research and inquiry.

JinRaTensei
08-10-2016, 05:51 PM
But these are not "Alchemy" in the classical/canonical sense of the term, although the same rules generally apply to every area of research and inquiry.

I guess that can be the case but to me it does not matter. I view it all as "cultivation" and only rely on the laws which rule everything else. So like you mention if the same rules apply than there can be no practical achemy without inner alchemy or even if it would not be called inner alchemy it would still work and be "real"

Awani
08-10-2016, 06:02 PM
That's what alchemy is and always was, why question its goals and methods? If it is not to one's liking, then seek another pursuit. But do not try to "hijack" alchemy and claim it was really about mysterious mind powers that no one has ever proved they exist in the first place. Now that would be an excellent situation to ask your question: And what is the point of making the Stone with "mental" methods for which there is no proof whatsoever that they even exist in the first place?

Besides, if such mental powers did really exist, I can't imagine anyone wasting his time making the Stone. A person possessed of such mental powers would have pretty much anything he wanted already, would have a blast everyday of his life and have most his time already occupied doing other things, like going around looking for hot chicks and mentally convincing them that you are the man of their dreams:

**SAID A LA OBI-WAN KENOBI** "The clown you are with is not the man you are looking for, dump him. I am the studliest stud of your wildest dreams, the one you have been fantasizing with all your life, you will invite me to your apartment tonight..." ;)

Alchemy: Jedi Knights Need Not Apply (because they are already plenty busy doing a million other amusing things with their amazing mind powers)

Ah. I see. Ok. Well I don't waste time with teenager arguments, nor with those that repeat a question as an answer. Enjoy matter. Since that is all you see, that is all you will ever get. I am going to use the ignore function. With a simple button I can manipulate my forum reality. Wonderful is it not. :)

:cool:

Awani
08-10-2016, 06:09 PM
Alchemy at its core is the study of nature. Hence it is a physical science not spiritual as many will argue. Also, this Inner Crap seems to be argued by those who do not get generally what Prima Materia is.

If you looked a bit into this inner crap maybe you would be less inclined to waste energy about trying to convince the converted that it is a hoax. LOL.

:cool:

Andro
08-10-2016, 06:40 PM
So like you mention if the same rules apply than there can be no practical alchemy without inner alchemy or even if it would not be called inner alchemy it would still work and be "real".

Alchemical Elixirs can be powerful supports/additions/enhancements to the Inner Work one is performing. Many ancient traditions (such as various Martial Arts, etc...) have Alchemical 'Back Rooms', usually accessible only to the highest initiates. Even one account (http://himalayanbon.org/shardza-tashi-gyaltsen-rinpoche/) of a Dzogchen master who was witnessed to achieve the 'Rainbow Body' reveals that he partook of the 'Blessed Medicine' prior to disappearing from the physical realm.

JinRaTensei
08-10-2016, 06:53 PM
Thx for the link Andro it is very interesting to me personally!

JDP
08-10-2016, 07:36 PM
Would you consider things like "hallucinogenic visions" or astral travel or generally everything "Mumbo Jumbo Jedi Mind trick" what shamans worldwide are doing daily?
What about healing/regeneration(self remission/spontaneous self healing), precognition or knowledge one should not have according to physics?

What about dreams if they tell us things about "reality" also fake?
What about mushrooms and DMT ?
What about remote viewing?

Where exactly is your line between "reality" and everything else?

Can anyone prove that what Shamans claim they do is real? It goes on inside their heads, no one can prove anything regarding such claims. Who knows what goes on in there under the influence of hallucinogens.

There is a difference between the claims of alchemy, which are of a more concrete and substantial nature, and thus subject to investigation and proving/disproving, and all the claims you just mentioned, which there is no way of proving them.

JinRaTensei
08-10-2016, 09:09 PM
Sure there is a way to proof it, personal experience. Just because most of us have not had such experiences does not mean the experiences of others are lies or delusions. And there is "proof" for many things considered fringe and not possible.
Like I say where do you draw your line of what is real?
Is the Astralbody real?
Is the "soul" real?
Are Telekinesis and Psychokinesis real?
Are remote viewing, precognition and prophecies real?
Are lucid dreaming, astral travel and dreamwalking real?

Because their is scientific "proof" for all of it out there.

Just tell me..or rather yourself where do you draw the line of what is real and spend a day with google and a open mind trying to proof yourself "right" or "wrong" :)

Loki Morningstar
08-10-2016, 10:20 PM
I wasn’t going to post a reply. Way too much negativity on this thread for me. Although I feel that there is a chance that my words may help so I shall just reply as simply as I can.

1. The body, and mind, are material objects last time I checked, not mumbo jumbo. (Non-materialists, completely see your view too; on the fence myself too. Just talking in terms a materialist may understand.)

2. From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy. Most of these philosophies coming from the east, from Ancient Greece, China, Tibet, Egypt, etc. And as they came closer to the west got more and more right brained.

3. As for the whole idea of alchemy being a practical art. That only seems to be the case in the West. The East was more about internal alchemy and creation of tinctures for health from herb. As far as I am aware, from what I have read. For example Neidan and Waidan. (http://www.goldenelixir.com/jindan.html)

As it got more western and right brained it seem it changed, two reasons I can think of:

i. To convince people (kings, lords, people with money) that it was worth paying them to do research.

ii. Western greed causing the chase for gold. Perhaps after seeing all the gold in the east they were astounded, and perhaps doubted the amount of work the eastern people may have put in to get it. Perhaps thinking that they could just magic it up. Superstitious lot the westerners lol. (I am one myself)

4. Looking at the reasons someone may wish to create gold. Generally this will come down to them feeling that they need something that they currently don’t have in their life. And we can distill this to feelings of wanting to be happy.

Why not jump straight into the finding ways to be happy part?

5. Personally I am not sure how practical alchemy is any more likely to bring gold into our personal reality than spiritual alchemy. As a realist, I find it more likely that I could bring gold into my reality by trading and being good at it, by purifying my will and motivation for hard work. I feel it is much less likely that I will turn a base metal into gold. Especially as, as far as we are aware, all the gold on earth was created in the furnace of a star.

It is proven that we can produce gold, although it takes massive amounts of energy, more energy than most chemical reactions will ever create. The energy costing much more value than the gold will give in return. It seems to me like exchanging a chicken for some eggs.

Whereas, using the ancient art of metal work, we may turn iron into steel, and steel into a sword, then sell the sword for much more gold than the cost of the steel, or the amount of time it took us to make it. Or we may take common chemicals and turn them into gunpowder. Another great way to make some money. Although both being weapons, not my cup of tea. Although a much easier route to gold in my eyes.

Western alchemy, for me, was just the beginning of chemistry and physics. Which I do totally like to learn about. Although that is common knowledge in the west. The part that seems more hidden, or esoteric, to me is inner alchemy, and psychology. I personally prefer to see alchemy as a label for my love of esoteric wisdom, and my goal as an alchemist is to educate myself. To me knowledge is an alchemists true gold. And I am not saying that my way is the only way. All road lead to rome eventually.

My personal goals are to learn about how sacred geometry is linked to physics, how linguistics can become more advanced, how linguistics effect the mind, getting to know myself and how my mind works, how reality is encoded in the brain, etc. I feel I will get much more value from this, than I could from any gold. I would have to agree with dev, alchemists chasing gold will only end up ending up with fools gold in the end. Even if it is pure Au, it can’t truly make you happy.

Personally, to me, the philosophers stone is a tablet of information. Hence the name. It is all the alchemists knowledge and wisdom distilled and concentrated into the smallest form he can, then ‘etched on a tablet’ for prosperity. The philosophers stone to me is metatrons cube, knowledge of harmonics, mathematics, chemistry, physics, knowledge in its simplest form, etc.

And through this knowledge one can get as much gold as one wants if the knowledge is used for that means.

Finally, I would like to say, these are just my views, and I do not profess that they are correct, right, 'the way' or 'the true path'. Please, can we just get on. As alchemists we are already outsiders to 'popular' society, lets not have infighting eh?

Much love to you all. Wishes of peace and happiness.

Loki

Awani
08-10-2016, 11:42 PM
From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy.

Actually in my humble opinion alchemy is a direct result and offspring of shamanism, and the shaman is the true alchemist.


Way too much negativity on this thread for me.

Yes, well it is a very negative affair to be knee deep in materialism. ;)

Also finally I would like to say that to denounce an entire section of the forum to be a hoax is a bit insulting to all the people that spend time there. I can only imagine if I create a thread saying Practical Alchemy is a hoax and a sham... which I don't think it is.

I think the world needs more bisexuality. Straight people and homosexual people are on equal ground: they only have one option (although gays usually have at least tried the other option before they go rogue)!!! ;)

:cool:

JDP
08-11-2016, 12:11 AM
Sure there is a way to proof it, personal experience. Just because most of us have not had such experiences does not mean the experiences of others are lies or delusions. And there is "proof" for many things considered fringe and not possible.
Like I say where do you draw your line of what is real?
Is the Astralbody real?
Is the "soul" real?
Are Telekinesis and Psychokinesis real?
Are remote viewing, precognition and prophecies real?
Are lucid dreaming, astral travel and dreamwalking real?

Because their is scientific "proof" for all of it out there.

Just tell me..or rather yourself where do you draw the line of what is real and spend a day with google and a open mind trying to proof yourself "right" or "wrong" :)

Personal experience is merely anecdotal evidence, it is not actual proof. For something to constitute "proof" it needs to be able to be replicated and confirmed by others. The claims of Shamanism, Telekinesis, Psychokinesis, "astral travel", etc. have not been confirmed anywhere. When put to the test UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS, failure to replicate any such claims has been the only result. That professional magician, James Randi, through his educational foundation has in fact for a long time been offering a million dollars for anyone who, UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS (meaning: NO CHEATING POSSIBLE), can demonstrate the reality of any such claims, and so far all the tons of applicants they have had through the years have totally failed to prove any of such claims. The results of Randi's challenge are an excellent example of the staggering amount of self-delusion among people who harbor such credulous ideas. Most of the failed challengers were really totally convinced they could perform the weird things they claimed, yet when put to the test they all miserably failed. Of course, they always have a never-ending parade of "explanations" and excuses rather than finally accept that they have no proof whatsoever of their claims, but those among them who once again were given more chances to prove their claims failed again, and again, and again, and again...

JDP
08-11-2016, 12:27 AM
I wasn’t going to post a reply. Way too much negativity on this thread for me. Although I feel that there is a chance that my words may help so I shall just reply as simply as I can.

1. The body, and mind, are material objects last time I checked, not mumbo jumbo. (Non-materialists, completely see your view too; on the fence myself too. Just talking in terms a materialist may understand.)

2. From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy. Most of these philosophies coming from the east, from Ancient Greece, China, Tibet, Egypt, etc. And as they came closer to the west got more and more right brained.

3. As for the whole idea of alchemy being a practical art. That only seems to be the case in the West. The East was more about internal alchemy and creation of tinctures for health from herb. As far as I am aware, from what I have read. For example Neidan and Waidan. (http://www.goldenelixir.com/jindan.html)

As it got more western and right brained it seem it changed, two reasons I can think of:

i. To convince people (kings, lords, people with money) that it was worth paying them to do research.

ii. Western greed causing the chase for gold. Perhaps after seeing all the gold in the east they were astounded, and perhaps doubted the amount of work the eastern people may have put in to get it. Perhaps thinking that they could just magic it up. Superstitious lot the westerners lol. (I am one myself)

4. Looking at the reasons someone may wish to create gold. Generally this will come down to them feeling that they need something that they currently don’t have in their life. And we can distill this to feelings of wanting to be happy.

Why not jump straight into the finding ways to be happy part?

5. Personally I am not sure how practical alchemy is any more likely to bring gold into our personal reality than spiritual alchemy. As a realist, I find it more likely that I could bring gold into my reality by trading and being good at it, by purifying my will and motivation for hard work. I feel it is much less likely that I will turn a base metal into gold. Especially as, as far as we are aware, all the gold on earth was created in the furnace of a star.

It is proven that we can produce gold, although it takes massive amounts of energy, more energy than most chemical reactions will ever create. The energy costing much more value than the gold will give in return. It seems to me like exchanging a chicken for some eggs.

Whereas, using the ancient art of metal work, we may turn iron into steel, and steel into a sword, then sell the sword for much more gold than the cost of the steel, or the amount of time it took us to make it. Or we may take common chemicals and turn them into gunpowder. Another great way to make some money. Although both being weapons, not my cup of tea. Although a much easier route to gold in my eyes.

Western alchemy, for me, was just the beginning of chemistry and physics. Which I do totally like to learn about. Although that is common knowledge in the west. The part that seems more hidden, or esoteric, to me is inner alchemy, and psychology. I personally prefer to see alchemy as a label for my love of esoteric wisdom, and my goal as an alchemist is to educate myself. To me knowledge is an alchemists true gold. And I am not saying that my way is the only way. All road lead to rome eventually.

My personal goals are to learn about how sacred geometry is linked to physics, how linguistics can become more advanced, how linguistics effect the mind, getting to know myself and how my mind works, how reality is encoded in the brain, etc. I feel I will get much more value from this, than I could from any gold. I would have to agree with dev, alchemists chasing gold will only end up ending up with fools gold in the end. Even if it is pure Au, it can’t truly make you happy.

Personally, to me, the philosophers stone is a tablet of information. Hence the name. It is all the alchemists knowledge and wisdom distilled and concentrated into the smallest form he can, then ‘etched on a tablet’ for prosperity. The philosophers stone to me is metatrons cube, knowledge of harmonics, mathematics, chemistry, physics, knowledge in its simplest form, etc.

And through this knowledge one can get as much gold as one wants if the knowledge is used for that means.

Finally, I would like to say, these are just my views, and I do not profess that they are correct, right, 'the way' or 'the true path'. Please, can we just get on. As alchemists we are already outsiders to 'popular' society, lets not have infighting eh?

Much love to you all. Wishes of peace and happiness.

Loki

Then why bother with alchemy if you are not interested in transmutation of base metals into noble ones and the Philosophers' Stone? Seek another pursuit that matches your goals. I don't get the obsession some people have with trying to hijack alchemy for their own occult beliefs. This would be as absurd as me trying to hijack, say, astrology, and claim that the real goal of astrologers was really just astronomy, not make bizarre predictions based on arbitrary interpretations of planetary motions. No: that is what astrology was always about. Trying to claim otherwise is simply wrong, so I don't attempt to hijack it for any other discipline. Well, alchemy was always about transmutation and the Stone, that simple.

Regarding alchemy among the Chinese: they too were interested in transmutation, but not as much as the medicinal/longevity aspects of the subject (the chief obsession of the Chinese alchemists was to eventually become one of the "immortals".) The whole "internal alchemy" thing (meaning, no operations with actual substances) among the Chinese is obviously a gross misunderstanding by some excessively mystically-minded later writers who either totally failed to achieve the goals of alchemy and tried to give the subject some other meaning in the face of such failure to achieve an actual "Elixir", or never in fact understood alchemy's goals to begin with and gave it a fanciful interpretation.

Loki Morningstar
08-11-2016, 05:36 AM
Personal experience is merely anecdotal evidence, it is not actual proof. For something to constitute "proof" it needs to be able to be replicated and confirmed by others. The claims of Shamanism, Telekinesis, Psychokinesis, "astral travel", etc. have not been confirmed anywhere. When put to the test UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS, failure to replicate any such claims has been the only result. That professional magician, James Randi, through his educational foundation has in fact for a long time been offering a million dollars for anyone who, UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS (meaning: NO CHEATING POSSIBLE), can demonstrate the reality of any such claims, and so far all the tons of applicants they have had through the years have totally failed to prove any of such claims. The results of Randi's challenge are an excellent example of the staggering amount of self-delusion among people who harbor such credulous ideas. Most of the failed challengers were really totally convinced they could perform the weird things they claimed, yet when put to the test they all miserably failed. Of course, they always have a never-ending parade of "explanations" and excuses rather than finally accept that they have no proof whatsoever of their claims, but those among them who once again were given more chances to prove their claims failed again, and again, and again, and again...

I will personally give you a thousand pound if you can prove you are not part of an elaborate experiment, a brain in a jar being stimulated with electrodes to perceive the existence you are living in. Shaman, Philosophers, Religious, and truly critical Scientists, have been thinking about this idea for thousands of years, and they still haven't figured it out. You sound like an fundamentalist atheist alchemist; any good scientist, alchemist, or philosopher should always be agnostic, or on the fence in my eyes.

I think you are judging something before you have even really looked deep enough in my eyes. How many people have proved they could change base metals into gold through chemistry under scientific conditions? I am pretty sure Randi's experiment would work just as well for this claim.

I would have to agree with dev here. Alchemy most likely was started by herbal shaman. There is much historical proof of this. Shamans also being the first philosophers, the first thinkers we could say. Plus a lot of the ideas of ancient alchemy were based on the ideas of Plato's geometry principles, and other philosophers ideas. So alchemy certainly seems to have it's roots in philosophy of some variety. So if anyone is 'hijacking' alchemy as you put it, even though I do not judge either way, it is the western gold hunters.

Personally, I do not believe either is possible. Many of the spiritualist claims, or the claim of being able to turn metals to gold. I try not to believe anything as much as possible, just to get an understanding. At the same time, I would like to see someone argue against geometry, or philosophy, and I would not personally judge anyone, ever. If that is their personal path, that is their personal path.

As I said, all roads lead to Rome. All I personally do it to look for is greater understanding of the things we do 'know'. "I know one thing, and that is I know nothing", although I do know that "I am a thinking thing, that is, a being who doubts, affirms, denies, knows a few objects, and is ignorant of many …", but at the end of the day "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool".

I personally do not judge people for their views. Nor do I judge people for lacking people skills. At the end of the day, both shall effect them much more than they will me.

I wish you all the best, I hope you find what you are 'actually' looking for, and if you wish for friendship, or companionship, on your journey toward truth, I am more than willing to support you in any way I can to get there.

Love and Light.

Loki.

P.s. I feel my post on what my definition of alchemy (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4812-What-Is-Alchemy-To-Me) may actually help in this situation. I am not saying it is the definition, or the way, but at a minimum it explains my ideas of what alchemy is, and why I 'bother with' Alchemy.

JinRaTensei
08-11-2016, 08:12 AM
JDP

Just for good form, I have mentioned twice now that there is scientific proof for the fringe I mentioned out there. With scientific I mean reproduceable facts like society in the west accepts it as scientific method.
If you have not come across such information than maybe you have not looked deep enough or at the wrong places...but this would just lead to the next circular reasoning between us, what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?
Irony being since personal experience is the only thing true we can ever do/experience and you view it as anectdotal means that you disregard the only part of your existence with any meaning, imo.
What if I show a video with the president of the USA saying it is real? Just a liar?
What if I show you a video with an experiment and scientists who demonstrate how the fringe is real? Just a fake?
What if I show you reports of evidence an testimony?Just missinterpretation and delusion?

I assume that your position and own view is honest and that you are a integer person like most of us. So do not avoid these questions but please just drop a short line what evidence would be credibe for you, if any at all. That way we will know if this conversation is an approach to seek truth or an approach to seek conflict.

JDP
08-11-2016, 09:38 AM
JDP

Just for good form, I have mentioned twice now that there is scientific proof for the fringe I mentioned out there. With scientific I mean reproduceable facts like society in the west accepts it as scientific method.
If you have not come across such information than maybe you have not looked deep enough or at the wrong places...but this would just lead to the next circular reasoning between us, what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?
Irony being since personal experience is the only thing true we can ever do/experience and you view it as anectdotal means that you disregard the only part of your existence with any meaning, imo.
What if I show a video with the president of the USA saying it is real? Just a liar?
What if I show you a video with an experiment and scientists who demonstrate how the fringe is real? Just a fake?
What if I show you reports of evidence an testimony?Just missinterpretation and delusion?

I assume that your position and own view is honest and that you are a integer person like most of us. So do not avoid these questions but please just drop a short line what evidence would be credibe for you, if any at all. That way we will know if this conversation is an approach to seek truth or an approach to seek conflict.

Once again you are showing that you do not have a proper understanding of what "proof" is. You keep bringing up gratuitous personal claims that have not been proven by anyone. They are just claims and boasts. Anyone can make them. I could tell you, for example, that by flapping my arms real hard I can actually fly. Would you believe such nonsense without actual proof, though? No? Well, good, neither would I. So don't you think that if the proof that you so much think has already been given really existed the world would be a much different place than it is? Yet the official stance of the scientific world on such claims continues to be the exact same one: no one has proven any such claims. As two popular sayings go, "talk is cheap" and "the proof is in the pudding". And so far nobody has "eaten" this "pudding" when it comes to the the gratuitous claims you keep bringing up as if they were "proof" of something.

JinRaTensei
08-11-2016, 10:11 AM
Me:

but this would just lead to the next circular reasoning between us, what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?

You:

I could tell you, for example, that by flapping my arms real hard I can actually fly. Would you believe such nonsense without actual proof, though? No? Well, good, neither would I

Me:
In order to believe that you can really fly by flapping your arms I would either have to see you in person doing it or I would accept a experimental setup where I could arrange the observation modalities like choose how,where and with whom you should reproduce and how you should film it/monitor it.
This would be an easy and doable solution in this particular case. And this would be the proof I need in this particular case

You see how it is done? Now we could have a discussion because I have layed the groundwork, a fair and clear defined parameter for me believing something, and now everybody else can choose if they want to "debate" "against/for" that position but I have shown honesty and "vulnerability" in accepting the consequences of my believes being altered if these parameters are met and I will not avoid questioning.

Me:

what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?


What if I show a video with the president of the USA saying it is real? Just a liar?
What if I show you a video with an experiment and scientists who demonstrate how the fringe is real? Just a fake?
What if I show you reports of evidence an testimony?Just missinterpretation and delusion?

A very simple question because who better to know what it is you would need to "believe" in something than yourself. If you do not to state such parameters
in a strict and clear way I will have to assume that you do not want to for your own reasons and thereby can judge the worth of future discussion on this particular topic.

Andro
08-11-2016, 10:18 AM
Regarding alchemy among the Chinese: they too were interested in transmutation, but not as much as the medicinal/longevity aspects of the subject (the chief obsession of the Chinese alchemists was to eventually become one of the "immortals".) The whole "internal alchemy" thing (meaning, no operations with actual substances) among the Chinese is obviously a gross misunderstanding by some excessively mystically-minded later writers who either totally failed to achieve the goals of alchemy and tried to give the subject some other meaning in the face of such failure to achieve an actual "Elixir", or never in fact understood alchemy's goals to begin with and gave it a fanciful interpretation.

Yes.

Also see THIS POST (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?2123-Alchemists-sure-are-pale!&p=14234#post14234).

JDP
08-11-2016, 10:25 AM
I will personally give you a thousand pound if you can prove you are not part of an elaborate experiment, a brain in a jar being stimulated with electrodes to perceive the existence you are living in. Shaman, Philosophers, Religious, and truly critical Scientists, have been thinking about this idea for thousands of years, and they still haven't figured it out. You sound like an fundamentalist atheist alchemist; any good scientist, alchemist, or philosopher should always be agnostic, or on the fence in my eyes.

I am in fact an agnostic and an empiricist. You should already have guessed that much from my posts.


I think you are judging something before you have even really looked deep enough in my eyes. How many people have proved they could change base metals into gold through chemistry under scientific conditions? I am pretty sure Randi's experiment would work just as well for this claim.

So far none, but there are some good reasons why this has not happened yet, the chief being simply self-interest. Most people who discovered the empirical reality of transmutation did not want to "kill the goose that lays the golden eggs" for them by making it known to all. This situation might change, though. So far I have gathered enough demonstrable repeatable evidence to convince me of the reality of the subject. And fortunately for our subject matter, most of the processes discovered by the old "chymists" (not alchemists) only give small amounts of gold and silver, not enough to derive a profit from them (unlike the Philosophers' Stone of alchemy, which can turn many times its own weight of base metals into precious ones), but only valuable to demonstrate the reality of transmutation, and in fact several of them in their writings specifically offered such processes as proof of the reality of transmutation without fear that gold and silver would lose their value (i.e. without "killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.") If or when I decide that I have enough evidence to prove it to the whole world is another matter. So far I too must remain on the fringe and simply limit myself to my personal convictions on this subject, which unlike many of the weird claims that others keep bringing up, do not rely on mind-altering substances or some sort of mysterious special Jedi-like powers, and can be repeated by anyone. In other words, REAL EMPIRICAL FACTS.


I would have to agree with dev here. Alchemy most likely was started by herbal shaman. There is much historical proof of this. Shamans also being the first philosophers, the first thinkers we could say. Plus a lot of the ideas of ancient alchemy were based on the ideas of Plato's geometry principles, and other philosophers ideas. So alchemy certainly seems to have it's roots in philosophy of some variety. So if anyone is 'hijacking' alchemy as you put it, even though I do not judge either way, it is the western gold hunters.

Personally, I do not believe either is possible. Many of the spiritualist claims, or the claim of being able to turn metals to gold. I try not to believe anything as much as possible, just to get an understanding. At the same time, I would like to see someone argue against geometry, or philosophy, and I would not personally judge anyone, ever. If that is their personal path, that is their personal path.

As I said, all roads lead to Rome. All I personally do it to look for is greater understanding of the things we do 'know'. "I know one thing, and that is I know nothing", although I do know that "I am a thinking thing, that is, a being who doubts, affirms, denies, knows a few objects, and is ignorant of many …", but at the end of the day "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool".

I personally do not judge people for their views. Nor do I judge people for lacking people skills. At the end of the day, both shall effect them much more than they will me.

I wish you all the best, I hope you find what you are 'actually' looking for, and if you wish for friendship, or companionship, on your journey toward truth, I am more than willing to support you in any way I can to get there.

Love and Light.

Loki.

P.s. I feel my post on what my definition of alchemy (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4812-What-Is-Alchemy-To-Me) may actually help in this situation. I am not saying it is the definition, or the way, but at a minimum it explains my ideas of what alchemy is, and why I 'bother with' Alchemy.

It is good and healthy that you remain skeptical, even of transmutation. I am not criticizing you for it. I am a skeptic myself, so I understand your point of view. I merely limit myself here to let you know of my personal conviction, based on repeatable facts that anyone can carry out (no mysterious special "powers" of any kind required), that unlike all those strange "spiritualist", "occultist", "mentalist", or whatever else claims, transmutation is quite real and demonstrable. So far I have managed to make small amounts of silver and gold from some metals that I am quite sure through assaying did not contain the slightest visible amount of any of these two "noble" metals, so these are not the result of any supposed "impurities" in the materials used. May God (if he really exists) bless some of those old "chymists" who sometimes actually wrote the plain naked truth and defended it with tooth & nail by actually offering proof of the matter. It is thanks to them that I have been able to also become aware of the empirical reality of the subject.

JDP
08-11-2016, 10:36 AM
Me:


You:


Me:
In order to believe that you can really fly by flapping your arms I would either have to see you in person doing it or I would accept a experimental setup where I could arrange the observation modalities like choose how,where and with whom you should reproduce and how you should film it/monitor it.
This would be an easy and doable solution in this particular case. And this would be the proof I need in this particular case

You see how it is done? Now we could have a discussion because I have layed the groundwork, a fair and clear defined parameter for me believing something, and now everybody else can choose if they want to "debate" "against/for" that position but I have shown honesty and "vulnerability" in accepting the consequences of my believes being altered if these parameters are met and I will not avoid questioning.

Me:




A very simple question because who better to know what it is you would need to "believe" in something than yourself. If you do not to state such parameters
in a strict and clear way I will have to assume that you do not want to for your own reasons and thereby can judge the worth of future discussion on this particular topic.

Your post is very strange. You now demand actual proof of the bizarre claim I made as an example, yet you do not apply the same strict parameter for the other bizarre claims you bring up as "proof". Apply it to them as well, and you will see that no one has proven them either. They are about as "proven" as my purposefully ridiculous example claim that I can fly by flapping my arms real hard. They are just empty claims with no actual proof to back them up.

JinRaTensei
08-11-2016, 10:49 AM
Thank you for your time and patience with me, there is no reason to ask again or put it more simple since your position seems apparent to me.

Awani
08-11-2016, 12:04 PM
A wall is a wall. A door is a door. If you put a door in a wall you can go through it. If you put a wall in a door you get a wall.

:cool:

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 12:11 PM
Does "Nature" not have a "spiritual" cause? (Hermetic Law of Causality)

I see Alchemy as involving Spiritual Principles practically applied (inside the "Alchemical Crucible" and laboratory) in & to the realm of physical matter, thus taking it beyond mere chemistry.

What, in you view, are the attributes of the "Prima Materia" (generally)?

You quoted Ab Roek earlier. If I'm not mistaken, both of you have openly admitted not to have performed practical laboratory work yet. It could be interesting to hear your perspectives after commencing the practical Work.

For me, it's fascinating to observe how physical matter can have its properties radically altered when treated alchemically. Or even matter "mysteriously" appearing where there was none before.

The Work in itself doesn't seem to require any "spiritual mind powers". However, a deep, primordial (dare I even say Gnostic) inner-standing of Spirit (and its manifestations, attributes and affinities in the physical realm) seems to be necessary in order to uncover the mysteries of the actual Practical Work.

To your causality question, remember that in my statement I associatied spiritual with inner crap not that spiritual which you are pointing out.

When did you ever hear any adept saying so applying spiritual (i guess you meant inner) principles to lab, when they talk of figures they want you to think deeply. Not work on your inner lab which does not exist. Remember I used the term inner lab.

As for the attributes can't be explained here will send you a PM.

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 12:14 PM
If you looked a bit into this inner crap maybe you would be less inclined to waste energy about trying to convince the converted that it is a hoax. LOL.

:cool:

LOL, its now a cult.

To Loki,

You talk about negativity. What sort of negativity, nobody called you out. In fact the discussion is not about you or me but the Truth vs Hoax.

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 12:20 PM
You people praise God sky high, sometimes even say he is generous and you people want to transmute your being.

Why would God put you through such useless acrobatics before granting your desire.

God is simple, his works may be replicated without much efforts.

Andro
08-11-2016, 12:21 PM
Thank you, it's much clearer now.

I didn't mean applying "Inner Work" to the Lab Work, but Spirit ("Universal Spirit" made manifest) is nevertheless the Key to the Practical Work. I.M.S.E.


To your causality question, remember that in my statement I associated spiritual with inner crap not that spiritual which you are pointing out.

When did you ever hear any adept saying so applying spiritual (I guess you meant inner) principles to lab, when they talk of figures they want you to think deeply. Not work on your inner lab which does not exist. Remember I used the term inner lab.

As for the attributes can't be explained here will send you a PM.

Awani
08-11-2016, 12:22 PM
LOL, its now a cult... Truth vs Hoax.

The only cult mentality I have experienced in alchemy are from the American lab-focused alchemists and nowhere else.

The only hoax is that there is a Truth!

:cool:

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 12:27 PM
The only cult mentality I have experienced in alchemy are from the American lab-focused alchemists and nowhere else.

The only hoax is that there is a Truth!

:cool:Editing the original post to suit your convenience, Hmm.......

Awani
08-11-2016, 12:29 PM
Editing the original post to suit your convenience, Hmm.......

Huh?

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-11-2016, 12:51 PM
I am in fact an agnostic and an empiricist. You should already have guessed that much from my posts.

We have common ground then. :)


So far none, but there are some good reasons why this has not happened yet, the chief being simply self-interest. Most people who discovered the empirical reality of transmutation did not want to "kill the goose that lays the golden eggs" for them by making it known to all.

This is the problem of modern society up to the current date. People who you can tell think things like "It took me years to learn this stuff, like I am going to give it to you in 30 minutes.” really anger me. Think of where we could be now if they had just shared. And the bafflement of layman by academics using terms that the academic can barely understand themselves, etc. I like the quote of Einstein when he said, “If you cannot explain it simply, then you don’t know it well enough.”


This situation might change, though. So far I have gathered enough demonstrable repeatable evidence to convince me of the reality of the subject. And fortunately for our subject matter, most of the processes discovered by the old "chymists" (not alchemists) only give small amounts of gold and silver, not enough to derive a profit from them (unlike the Philosophers' Stone of alchemy, which can turn many times its own weight of base metals into precious ones), but only valuable to demonstrate the reality of transmutation, and in fact several of them in their writings specifically offered such processes as proof of the reality of transmutation without fear that gold and silver would lose their value (i.e. without "killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.") If or when I decide that I have enough evidence to prove it to the whole world is another matter. So far I too must remain on the fringe and simply limit myself to my personal convictions on this subject.

Seems we are on the same wavelength here. Information for the masses. Real education, not training for the working class for their dead end jobs.What happened to geometry, chemistry, real history, etc. being part of the syllabus? And of course I believe that demonstrable evidence is important too. Although we have only just gained the ability to prove anything that may happen in the mind, and to be honest it is still a little lacking, but I guarantee we will see jumps ahead very soon.


Which unlike many of the weird claims that others keep bringing up, do not rely on mind-altering substances or some sort of mysterious special Jedi-like powers, and can be repeated by anyone. In other words, REAL EMPIRICAL FACTS.

Sometimes less is more. You aren't going to make any friends talking like this. Especially being so unspecific.

I do not personally think mind-altering substances are part of the path either. Although I think they can be a tool. Personally, I seem to be able to get similar effects from meditation, and feel that meditation is less likely to unbalance my brain chemistry. Any drug we can ingest is only a trigger for something already within the body.

I would like to know what you think is quackery and what is not. My goal is practically to train to become a Jedi. ;0)P


For my ally is the Prima Materia. And a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Prima Materia around you. Here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere! Yes, even between the land and the ship."

I try to keep an open mind to all things. We are children in the progression of conciseness. We only truly became conscious in a blink of an eye compared to the age of the universe, and perhaps a slightly longer blink compare to the age of humanity. There is still much we do not understand.


It is good and healthy that you remain skeptical, even of transmutation. I am not criticizing you for it. I am a skeptic myself, so I understand your point of view. I merely limit myself here to let you know of my personal conviction, based on repeatable facts that anyone can carry out (no mysterious special "powers" of any kind required), that unlike all those strange "spiritualist", "occultist", "mentalist", or whatever else claims, transmutation is quite real and demonstrable.

I agree, healthy amounts of scepticism are good. Although I like to say it is important to believe everything, and nothing. If we ignore parts of the reality we live in we may not get the bigger picture. There is a chance that we will find inspiration in the most unlikely places.

Constancy is an important part of deciding what is reality and what is not. And there is consistency to many things that you may, or may not, consider 'mumbo jumbo'.

I am about to go and study psychology at university. The field is moving in leaps and bounds recently, with the advent of newer technology, more and more things are becoming clear. Especially with regard to such things as the benefits of meditation, the effectiveness of hypnosis, how the mind truly works, etc. And there is still plenty of mystery to be found.

I see benefits in doing what some of the shamans do. I found some surprising results during meditation. I recently began talking with myself. Sounds strange I know, but then when we think about the idea of congruence of the left and right hemispheres, and how many great minds had a thick corpus coliseum, and frontal lobe, which are two parts of the brain that still grow throughout our adulthood. The validity of studying these areas, and attempting to work on bettering the brain, or we could say transmuting the brain from one of lesser density to one of higher density, is clear.

I agree that talking of some of the strange things that can have no proof for may seem relatively pointless. But then I find most text relatively pointless due to the unstructured way our language works, and the lack of strong definition of words. At the same time, don't we all enjoy a bit of unprovable philosophy even now and again, a bit of stoner/philosopher talk?

Isn't it more important that we all get on? Rather than arguing with each other over things which neither will change their mind about, and neither can prove as of yet. Better to gradually attempt to help someone through subtle and gentle suggestion. To guide someone to the path, rather than shove them onto it. As we know, you can guide a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

On top of this, as I said before, there is a large chance that you may gain inspiration from unlikely places.


So far I have managed to make small amounts of silver and gold from some metals that I am quite sure through assaying did not contain the slightest visible amount of any of these two "noble" metals, so these are not the result of any supposed "impurities" in the materials used. May God (if he really exists) bless some of those old "chymists" who sometimes actually wrote the plain naked truth and defended it with tooth & nail by actually offering proof of the matter. It is thanks to them that I have been able to also become aware of the empirical reality of the subject.

I do not doubt that this may be the case. If you say it, I will believe you for the sake of discussion. That way we can have a beneficial discussion for both of us.

I truly wish you the best, and hope that you do find what you are looking for. I honour your wish to be able to eventually share your information with the masses. And I see that your goal seems to be being able to prove transmutation, rather than actually get some gold. Which is a noble cause. Your appreciation for peoples honesty and of sharing their knowledge is something I also share.

I look forward to seeing some of your sharing of your proof and hope that you will perhaps in future open you mind a little to other peoples understandings.

Love and light.

Loki.

Loki Morningstar
08-11-2016, 01:04 PM
As for the negativity dwellings, can you not feel the tension? and not from one particular person.

I could pull up all the bits that seemed a bit negative, although that would only do to attract more.

Don't get me wrong, I see the benefits of these kinds of discussions.

But they can be done in a way with less tension.

Perhaps in an inquisitive way?

As other people I am sure have said in the past. If any one of us knew all the secrets that alchemy has to share, I doubt that we would be here on this forum searching for the truth like everyone else. We are all at different levels, and the path is not straight.

Sometimes it takes believing all kinds of things to be motivated enough to find truth. Everyone's path is different. I have believed all kinds of strange things in the past, explored them, and then been lead to a new understanding.

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 05:14 PM
As for the negativity dwellings, can you not feel the tension? and not from one particular person.

I did not find any tension here, everyone is expressing their views thats it.

Loki Morningstar
08-11-2016, 06:21 PM
Fair play, for the sake of peace, maybe I am being over sensitive. It was just a observation on how I felt, and how I figured others may be feeling. I think attacking others beliefs is pointless. Instead I usually come at things I don't understand with curiosity.

It is not so much what is being said for me, but how it is being said.

I think it is important to, as much as possible, raise the good qualities, rather than attempting to hold down the bad. If you try to hold down the bad, it fights against its chains getting stronger and stronger until it breaks free again. If you just hold up the good, and let its light shine on all, the bad through lack of attention withers and disappears.

Creation not destruction.

Dwellings
08-11-2016, 07:13 PM
Fair play, for the sake of peace, maybe I am being over sensitive. It was just a observation on how I felt, and how I figured others may be feeling. I think attacking others beliefs is pointless. Instead I usually come at things I don't understand with curiosity.

It is not so much what is being said for me, but how it is being said.

I think it is important to, as much as possible, raise the good qualities, rather than attempting to hold down the bad. If you try to hold down the bad, it fights against its chains getting stronger and stronger until it breaks free again. If you just hold up the good, and let its light shine on all, the bad through lack of attention withers and disappears.

Creation not destruction.

We try to go back into our cocoon when our believes are questioned, I think your response above indicates the same.

My intention is not to change anyone's beliefs but bring out the truth and call the Hoax a Hoax. And, I do not think anyone has used any sort of abusive or arrogant language in this thread.

Loki Morningstar
08-11-2016, 08:28 PM
I have no problem with my beliefs being questioned personally. Although there may be others more sensitive than I.

I personally feel if you read back over your statements, it clearly show you attempt to change others beliefs. Not that this bothers me really. It is not so much what you are saying that has bothered me but how you say it. And I only tell you this for your own good. Not for mine. I could just leave this thread and forget about it. No worries.

I wasn't going to do this. But as I feel it may be of some benefit. Please remember, I am doing this but to show you a mirror. It takes me more effort to do it than to ignore it.


or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it.

Come out or you will end up only fooling yourselves.

Mumbo Jumbo, not sure it was necessary to call inner alchemy that. And beings you don't seem to have any understanding of it, I would personally come at it from an angle of interest. Words like mumbo jumbo are bound to p*** people off.

As for the second statement. Come out or you will end up fooling yourself. This is not an attempt to influence others?


No, you are way off the true path.

You know the true path? It seems arrogant to state that someone else is way off the true path. Again, likely to rub people up the wrong way.


Also, this Inner Crap seems to be argued by those who do not get generally what Prima Materia is.

Inner Crap? Yet again, could have used better wording. Don't get what Prima Materia is? Hey guys, we can all give up the search Dwellings knows what the Prima Materia is! You can see how this comes across right?

There are plenty of other times when I personally feel you have done the same. Although I will not go further. And please remember I do this out of love, I have no other intentions.

Insight into yourself and how you effect others is, in my opinion, a big part of Inner Alchemy. It is about transmuting yourself to attract the relationships you want.

Love and Light.

Loki.

Awani
08-11-2016, 08:40 PM
We try to go back into our cocoon when our believes are questioned, I think your response above indicates the same.
Same goes for you I think.


...but bring out the truth and call the Hoax a Hoax.

I say it again: the Truth is the Hoax.

Why don't you join a forum about that deals only with Flat Earth Theory and try and get the owners of that forum to close it down and create threads calling Flat Earth theory a hoax... do it and report back your response/success.

Alchemy Forums deal with all forms of alchemy, not only "lab" alchemy... there are forums out there on the Internet that focus only on lab stuff. We have a section in this forum that deals only with Ormus. Personally I think Ormus is bullshit... yet I created that section for those that want to talk about Ormus. There is nothing wrong with questioning something, but here is an example...

In the Shamanism section of the forums there is a thread called: Is psychedelics a valid path? (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3125-Is-psychedelics-a-valid-path)

Now that is the right way to go about it.

Creating a thread called: The Psychedelic Hoax... well that won't go down well with all those that spend time in that part of the forum.

Really what you need to do is study warfare tactics. LOL.

:cool:

JDP
08-12-2016, 12:47 AM
I would like to know what you think is quackery and what is not. My goal is practically to train to become a Jedi. ;0)P

Quackery are empty boasts and claims. They have nothing to back them up.

By the way, the literature of alchemy and "chymistry" themselves are also very often quite packed with lies and empty claims. This was often done on purpose to make the subject all the more difficult to discover.


This is the problem of modern society up to the current date. People who you can tell think things like "It took me years to learn this stuff, like I am going to give it to you in 30 minutes.” really anger me. Think of where we could be now if they had just shared.

But you should not be angry at them. I fully understand their apparent "selfishness" since I have been there myself. Too many people have the brazenness of wanting everything given to them for free. They want to spend no money, time and/or effort on anything. So why should the person who actually invested large amounts of his own money, time and/or effort then give everything he has achieved to others for free? This is like that classic fable of the hard-working ant and the lazy grasshopper.

When I said that maybe one day I will prove to the world the empirical reality of transmutation, I do not mean by it that I will not make a profit out of it first. You better believe it I will. I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I have had to work very hard to know what I know so far. Years of large sums of money invested in all kinds of alchemical and chymical texts, often having to have them translated because they are in languages I can't understand (which costs extra money and time, as you need to locate a good translator, not all of them will know how to deal with this subject, in fact some will just flat out refuse to have anything to do with it! It has happened to me several times while searching for translators), all kinds of glassware, crucibles, cupels, scorifiers, furnaces/kilns, fuels, all sorts of chemicals, etc. Investigating this subject is anything but cheap and easy! A Rockefeller might afford being sanctimonious and preaching about giving away stuff for free because he has no needs, but to most average people things are very different. Life is tough, and often cruel. Nobody really gives anything for free. Self-preservation and security come first and foremost. Then you can afford to be charitable.



I truly wish you the best, and hope that you do find what you are looking for. I honour your wish to be able to eventually share your information with the masses. And I see that your goal seems to be being able to prove transmutation, rather than actually get some gold. Which is a noble cause. Your appreciation for peoples honesty and of sharing their knowledge is something I also share.

Well, yes and no. I am interested in proofs of transmutation, even if they only produce a small amount of another metal that was not there before the reactions took place, but like everyone else I am also very interested in processes that leave a profit for the operator. I don't see why some people think it is dishonorable to want to earn a living through alchemy/chymistry. It is just as honest -if not actually more so- than any other job. It certainly takes a heck of a lot of effort, time and money to investigate it, so you might as well take full advantage of any discoveries you make. So far I have not had any luck with finding a profitable process, though. Processes that can leave a profit for the operator appear to be pretty scarce. The amount of gold or silver produced in the ones I have re-discovered so far is just too small to even cover the cost of carrying out the operations, let alone give a net profit for the operator. This type of processes only serve one purpose: to prove that transmutation is indeed real. Once you have realized the reality of the subject, believe me that you are "bitten" by the "gold/silver-making bug" and you won't stop investigating the subject, always hoping to discover more, and hopefully finally the ultimate prize: a process that actually may leave you a profit. But I am not going to sugar-coat it: this can be a dangerous pursuit, specially if you don't have the means to support this kind of research, it will send you to the poor-house rather fast, even if you are on the right track and manage to discover the empirical reality of the mater. There are so many lies and false claims in the literature having to do with transmutation that getting through this mess gets expensive quick. You have to sift through a ton of nonsense just to get to a small kernel of truth.

And the Philosophers' Stone is the most intricate and difficult of all processes to unravel, as this substance is the one that is apparently endowed with the most powerful transmuting qualities, thus the alchemists have made a veritable mess for anyone trying to figure out its preparation.

Ghislain
08-12-2016, 06:57 AM
It has to be taken as an empirical fact that the transmutation of elements does occur naturally for anyone who believes in the Big Bang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang) theory; that everything in existence came from a Singularity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Singularity).

It is said that stars were formed from the first element Hydrogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen) and from this Helium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium) is then formed. As the processes in the star continue other light elements are formed and if the star is large enough and goes Supernova (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova) then the heavy elements are produced by Nuclear Fusion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion).

Does this answer questions or just create more?

After all the big bang is only a theory, a "leap of faith" one might say.

Ghislain

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 08:09 AM
JDP:
What specifically is quackery and empty claims? What is it you think you know about inner alchemy?

Ghislain:
I completely agree Ghislain. And I have talked about this earlier in the thread. Supposedly all gold on earth, other than the very small amounts created by using nuclear reactors, was supposedly created in the heart of a star.

This does not make me feel the need to say, because it is so hard to break the strong force, that it is a hoax. As I understand that others are on this path, they most likely take it very seriously, and I haven't looked into it deeply enough to make such a claim. This is what has annoyed me slightly about people having the arrogance to call inner alchemy a hoax, without even having deeper knowledge of it. I would never do it, it is just rude. I don't really like TV, but I quickly learned if you go up to someone who loves TV and slag off the 'weapon of mass distraction' they quickly become annoyed. Some people seem to know so little of inner alchemy, insight, or empathy, that they don't even have basic people skills.

Personally I find it hard to believe that anyone will ever make gold via chemistry, I feel if it ever became possible it would be more likely done by physicists. But at the same time I find all new information intruiging and of value, and so I find joy in learning about what people are up to, their passions, and how they spend their time. Plus, as we know, there were very many accidental inventions of alchemists as they searched for gold, and perhaps there could be a few more, they might even prove me completely wrong. And it is much nicer to all get along, to have some common courtesy, than to argue over points for the sake of arguing.

If Dwelling or JDP really wanted to learn a little more about inner alchemy, then I would understand the point of this thread. As it is, I really don't see what the point of this thread is, it seems to me currently to have no value. I completely agree with Dev, the correct way to go about this would have been to create a thread like the psychedelics thread, 'Is psychedelics a valid path?', from a place of exploration of ideas and curiosity. There has not even been any explanation by the OP, or naysayers, about which area of inner alchemy that they feel is a hoax.

And beings that philosophy is a much older discipline, as we talked about on another thread; going back around 33,000 years, I feel it deserves a little more respect. There is a reason it is called the philosophers stone.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 01:59 PM
Same goes for you I think.



I say it again: the Truth is the Hoax.

Why don't you join a forum about that deals only with Flat Earth Theory and try and get the owners of that forum to close it down and create threads calling Flat Earth theory a hoax... do it and report back your response/success.

Alchemy Forums deal with all forms of alchemy, not only "lab" alchemy... there are forums out there on the Internet that focus only on lab stuff. We have a section in this forum that deals only with Ormus. Personally I think Ormus is bullshit... yet I created that section for those that want to talk about Ormus. There is nothing wrong with questioning something, but here is an example...

In the Shamanism section of the forums there is a thread called: Is psychedelics a valid path? (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3125-Is-psychedelics-a-valid-path)

Now that is the right way to go about it.

Creating a thread called: The Psychedelic Hoax... well that won't go down well with all those that spend time in that part of the forum.

Really what you need to do is study warfare tactics. LOL.

:cool:

See, you people want to transmute yourselves to a higher being.

I am showing you the TRUTH yet you are not listening.

My goals are FIRMLY aligned with yours. Hence, my words however terrible they seem must be taken in and contemplated.

We are not dealing with Children's toys like Shamanism but with something which is as important as life, hence the title of this thread is justified IMO.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 02:00 PM
It has to be taken as an empirical fact that the transmutation of elements does occur naturally for anyone who believes in the Big Bang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang) theory; that everything in existence came from a Singularity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Singularity).

It is said that stars were formed from the first element Hydrogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen) and from this Helium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium) is then formed. As the processes in the star continue other light elements are formed and if the star is large enough and goes Supernova (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova) then the heavy elements are produced by Nuclear Fusion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion).

Does this answer questions or just create more?

After all the big bang is only a theory, a "leap of faith" one might say.

Ghislain

Big Bang is a Hoax. Read Bible.

Stars work on electrical principles not nuclear as we are lead to believe.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 02:03 PM
JDP:
What specifically is quackery and empty claims? What is it you think you know about inner alchemy?

Ghislain:
I completely agree Ghislain. And I have talked about this earlier in the thread. Supposedly all gold on earth, other than the very small amounts created by using nuclear reactors, was supposedly created in the heart of a star.

This does not make me feel the need to say, because it is so hard to break the strong force, that it is a hoax. As I understand that others are on this path, they most likely take it very seriously, and I haven't looked into it deeply enough to make such a claim. This is what has annoyed me slightly about people having the arrogance to call inner alchemy a hoax, without even having deeper knowledge of it. I would never do it, it is just rude. I don't really like TV, but I quickly learned if you go up to someone who loves TV and slag off the 'weapon of mass distraction' they quickly become annoyed. Some people seem to know so little of inner alchemy, insight, or empathy, that they don't even have basic people skills.

Personally I find it hard to believe that anyone will ever make gold via chemistry, I feel if it ever became possible it would be more likely done by physicists. But at the same time I find all new information intruiging and of value, and so I find joy in learning about what people are up to, their passions, and how they spend their time. Plus, as we know, there were very many accidental inventions of alchemists as they searched for gold, and perhaps there could be a few more, they might even prove me completely wrong. And it is much nicer to all get along, to have some common courtesy, than to argue over points for the sake of arguing.

If Dwelling or JDP really wanted to learn a little more about inner alchemy, then I would understand the point of this thread. As it is, I really don't see what the point of this thread is, it seems to me currently to have no value. I completely agree with Dev, the correct way to go about this would have been to create a thread like the psychedelics thread, 'Is psychedelics a valid path?', from a place of exploration of ideas and curiosity. There has not even been any explanation by the OP, or naysayers, about which area of inner alchemy that they feel is a hoax.

And beings that philosophy is a much older discipline, as we talked about on another thread; going back around 33,000 years, I feel it deserves a little more respect. There is a reason it is called the philosophers stone.

Arrogant? I am speaking the TRUTH, calling the hoax a Hoax.

LOL, you are turning the Messengers into Patients.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 02:07 PM
I am quoting Green Lion here (Andro had already done this earlier but I think it is important).




Personally, I think that the concept of internal alchemy is a diverted way which arises from the loss of understanding of the real sense of the alchemy.
We can observe how the Chinese alchemy became the Taoism. The Taoism appeared from the moment the alchemists did not know how to have a practice any more in the laboratory. It was the first emperor of China who made forbid the alchemy because of the more and more important number of deaths.
Also for the western "internal" currents of alchemy. When we read texts on the subject (as those of the Great Osirian Order), we notice that the members of these groups understood nothing in the alchemy and made in the end that to use the alchemical symbols to illustrate their personal practices.
From my point of view, the "internal" alchemies are also valid as the interpretation of Jung: interesting, but it is not alchemy.



He is trying to put the truth in a mild way.

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 02:25 PM
Big Bang is a Hoax. Read Bible.

Stars work on electrical principles not nuclear as we are lead to believe.

This made me snigger. Fair play Dwellings there is obviously no fooling you.

Have you learnt a new word recently and really wanted to use it?


Arrogant? I am speaking the TRUTH, calling the hoax a Hoax.

LOL, you are turning the Messengers into Patients.

Come one then Dwellings, I am all ears. What is this TRUTH you speak of?

Sorry, I was being nice before, but you want to play? Come on lets play! :cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 03:01 PM
Let's use your own quote. I'll quote Green Lion too. He may not of realised it, but if anything he gave evidence for our side of the picture.


Personally, I think that the concept of internal alchemy is a diverted way which arises from the loss of understanding of the real sense of the alchemy.

What is it that makes so many people think that the older the information the better?

Until around 400 years ago 80% off the population were illiterate. It is only within the last 100 or so years that we came to nearer 80% of the population being literate. This belief that there were people with great knowledge in the past, is something you often hear the spiritualists saying, they very people you are denouncing. I think you are in the closet.


We can observe how the Chinese alchemy became the Taoism. The Taoism appeared from the moment the alchemists did not know how to have a practice any more in the laboratory. It was the first emperor of China who made forbid the alchemy because of the more and more important number of deaths.

Oh yeah, so there were people that could do it, then they just forgot. That's often how things work. Who knows, tomorrow the whole human race might just forget how to do heart surgery?

Number of deaths... yeah that sounds like people living forever and creating masses of gold.

Also, the Chinese then went on to create the Tao, and Inner Alchemy. Created amazing meditation techniques, which are now scientifically proven through research using Mri scanners to change the structure and density of the brain, and assist mental wellness. They also created philosophies and psychological ideas, well ahead of their time. Things that the west have only started realising in the past 100 or so years, and are now being proven correct.

I think you need to check you facts before you start calling things a HOAX.


Also for the western "internal" currents of alchemy. When we read texts on the subject (as those of the Great Osirian Order), we notice that the members of these groups understood nothing in the alchemy and made in the end that to use the alchemical symbols to illustrate their personal practices.

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.


From my point of view, the "internal" alchemies are also valid as the interpretation of Jung: interesting, but it is not alchemy.

Who is to say what is and is not alchemy. Is there some kind of alchemy thought police now? Some kind of alchemical judicial system that I don't know of? Did you even read my personal definition of alchemy (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4812-What-Is-Alchemy-To-Me)? Which is obviously only my own personal view, no one holds a copyright over the definition of alchemy.

Additionally, where is the point in being able to make masses of gold. It is scientifically proven that more money does not make you happy, once you have more than $75,000. There are many examples of people winning the lottery and becoming depressed. True gold is the things that you wish you could have if you had lots of gold, and often, by following the passions for the things you truly want, deep down, friendship, self actualisation, love, etc. You will get real Au/money by following them.

For example, a millionaire comes to psychologists and says, "I am depressed". The psychologist will do some quick work to find out why they are depressed. Maybe they are working too much in something that they have no passion for, perhaps often wanting to commit more time to their hobby but not having time. Let's say their hobby is golf. So they get their company to a point where it can run itself and begin playing golf more often, all of a sudden they realise they could own a golf club, or start a golfing school, all of a sudden they are happy again, and they make money in the process.

Also, as for living forever, "who want's to live forever?" (https://youtu.be/_Jtpf8N5IDE) as the late great Freddie Mercury would say. Watching all your friends die. It is the ups and downs of life that keep it interesting. If there is life after death, which I make no assumptions about, I would much prefer to go there than stay in a body eternally. If there isn't, I would rather do my thing, live my life, and be at peace. Living forever in a material world sounds like torture to me. And then what do you do with all the people? Everyone is immortal, do we just bunch together on this already overpopulated rock?

And to be honest, most of the people that I have met chasing immortality waste the time they do have in this earthly plain, only to realise too late that forgot to live in the present. Memento Mori.

I do not judge them. If that is their passion. They should follow it. I just pity them if they wake up with regrets.

At which point, there is much more value, in my opinion, in internal alchemy. Furthering our knowledge of our own consciousness, being more focused, with stronger will, more peaceful, more happy, learning to use our senses and imagination more effectively, being more in control of our lives, would surely only speed up ones attainment of the goal of what you seem to believe is TRUE alchemy. I don't see how could any of my goals stated could be seen as negative, or a hoax? As far as I am aware there isn't a golden pill to take to gain any of those things. It takes hard work. And much observation of self.

How about you clear off and go back to your gold chasing crew and leave the real thinking to the philosophical lot eh? If you are not going to come at this from a position of curiosity there is nothing you can learn from being here. And so far you haven't shared any information of any value so far. So it seems we really don't need to learn anything from you.

How do you expect to collect more tea if your cup is full?

You use the word truth far too much in my opinion.

So come on Dwellings, give me some TRUTH!

*Disclaimer:

Please do not think that this post is the real me. I am playing a game of trickster goodness for the sake of fun (after my namesake), and hopefully some learning on both sides. I hope you will take what I say with a pinch of salt, as these are not my real views, as stated before I believe everything and nothing. I am actually a lot more open to a lot of the ideas that I talk about than it shows in this post. I am doing it mainly to prove a point, seems that Dwellings was looking for someone to play with. And I am happy to fulfil his wishes like the evil genie archetype that I like to embody. :p

To be honest, hopefully I might get to know him better, and I am sure he is a decent chap really.*

Love and Light.

Loki.

Awani
08-12-2016, 03:29 PM
We are not dealing with Children's toys like Shamanism but with something which is as important as life, hence the title of this thread is justified IMO.

Ha ha ha ha. I personally have nothing more to say. Good luck exposing the hoax.

The Spirtual Alchemy section will never be closed down. :)

:cool:

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 03:55 PM
Let's use your own quote. I'll quote Green Lion too. He may not of realised it, but if anything he gave evidence for our side of the picture.



What is it that makes so many people think that the older the information the better?

Until around 400 years ago 80% off the population were illiterate. It is only within the last 100 or so years that we came to nearer 80% of the population being literate. This belief that there were people with great knowledge in the past, is something you often hear the spiritualists saying, they very people you are denouncing. I think you are in the closet.



Oh yeah, so there were people that could do it, then they just forgot. That's often how things work. Who knows, tomorrow the whole human race might just forget how to do heart surgery?

Number of deaths... yeah that sounds like people living forever and creating masses of gold.

Also, the Chinese then went on to create the Tao, and Inner Alchemy. Created amazing meditation techniques, which are now scientifically proven through research using Mri scanners, proven to change the structure and density of the brain, and cause mental wellness. They also created philosophies and psychological ideas, well ahead of their time. Things that the west have only started realising in the past 100 or so years, and are now being proven correct.

I think you need to check you facts before you start calling things a HOAX.



I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.



Who is to say what is and is not alchemy. Is there some kind of alchemy thought police now? Some kind of alchemical judicial system that I don't know of? Did you even read my personal definition of alchemy (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4812-What-Is-Alchemy-To-Me)? Which is obviously only my own personal view, no one holds a copyright over the definition of alchemy.

Additionally, where is the point in being able to make masses of gold. It is scientifically proven that more money does not make you happy, once you have more than $75,000. There are many examples of people winning the lottery and becoming depressed. True gold is the things that you wish you could have if you had lots of gold, and often, by following the passions for the things you truly want, deep down, friendship, self actualisation, love, etc. You will get real Au/money by following them.

For example, a millionaire comes to psychologists and says, "I am depressed". The psychologist will do some quick work to find out why they are depressed. Maybe they are working too much in something that they have no passion for, perhaps often wanting to commit more time to their hobby but not having time. Let's say their hobby is golf. So they get their company to a point where it can run itself and begin playing golf more often, all of a sudden they realise they could own a golf club, or start a golfing school, all of a sudden they are happy again, and they make money in the process.

Also, as for living forever, "who want's to live forever?" (https://youtu.be/_Jtpf8N5IDE) as the late great Freddie Mercury would say. Watching all your friends die. It is the ups and downs of life that keep it interesting. If there is life after death, which I make no assumptions about, I would much prefer to go there than stay in a body eternally. If there isn't, I would rather do my thing, live my life, and be at peace. Living forever in a material world sounds like torture to me. And then what do you do with all the people? Everyone is immortal, do we just bunch together on this already overpopulated rock?

And to be honest, most of the people that I have met chasing immortality waste the time they do have in this earthly plain, only to realise to late that forgot to live in the present.

I do not judge them. If that is their passion. They should follow it. I just pity them if they wake up with regrets.

At which point, there is much more value, in my opinion, in internal alchemy. Furthering our knowledge of our own consciousness, being ore focused, with stronger will, more peaceful, more happy, learning to use our sense more effectively, being more in control of you life, would only speed up ones attainment of the goal of what believe is TRUE alchemy, as you put it. I don't see how could any of my goals stated could be seen as negative? As far as I am aware there isn't a golden pill to take to gain any of those things. It takes hard work. And much observation of self.

How about you clear off and go back to your gold chasing crew and leave the real thinking to the philosophical lot eh? If you are not going to come at this from a position of curiosity there is nothing you can learn from being here. And so far you haven't shared any information of any value so far. So it seems we really don't need to learn anything from you.

How do you expect to collect more tea if your cup is full?

You use the word truth far too much in my opinion.

So come on Dwellings, give me some TRUTH!

*Disclaimer:

Please do not think that this post is the real me. I am playing a game of trickster goodness for the sake of fun (after my namesake), and hopefully some learning on both sides. I hope you will take what I say with a pinch of salt, as these are not my real views, as stated before I believe everything and nothing. I am actually a lot more open to a lot of the ideas that I talk about than it shows in this post. I am doing it mainly to prove a point, seems that Dwellings was looking for someone to play with. And I am happy to fulfil his wishes like the evil genie archetype that I like to embody. :p

To be honest, hopefully I might get to know him better, and I am sure he is a decent chap really.*

Love and Light.

Loki.

Just Full of BS.

I do not have time to play useless GAMES with you.

Correct or Defraud yourselves, choice is yours.

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 04:03 PM
I am not really sure as to why you posted the whole of my post? It doesn't do much good posting stuff if you are not going to refer to it. Did you like it that much that you wanted to share the whole of it again?

I am not looking for an argument, or GAMES. I presumed that is what you wanted?

I am happy to have friendly conversations with you about your understanding, or my understanding.

You do not appear to be interested in mine, or anyone else regarding inner alchemy. Although honestly, and respectfuly, I am interested in your understanding of things, so come on, share your TRUTH!

I am listening.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 04:26 PM
I am not really sure as to why you posted the whole of my post? It doesn't do much good posting stuff if you are not going to refer to it. Did you like it that much that you wanted to share the whole of it again?

I am not looking for an argument, or GAMES. I presumed that is what you wanted?

I am happy to have friendly conversations with you about your understanding, or my understanding.

You do not appear to be interested in mine, or anyone else regarding inner alchemy. Although honestly, and respectfuly, I am interested in your understanding of things, so come on, share your TRUTH!

I am listening.

Typing on the mobile is painful, went for conveinient option.

The only Truth I want to say is Inner Alchemy is a cruel hoax that a man can do on himself while Practical Alchemy is the correct one since Alchemy is a physical science.

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 04:29 PM
Although I really feel you could do with changing the way you say things. E.g. truth, cruel hoax, correct one, etc. It all sounds like language a religious fundamentalist may use. But I shall carry on and take it that you don't even realise you are doing it.

So what specifically makes you think that?

What is your understanding of inner alchemy?

JinRaTensei
08-12-2016, 05:03 PM
Dwellings

A question out of curiosity, do you consider other inner practices to be true?

Like for instance psychology, meditation, zen, yoga, qigong?

Is it that you generally do not believe that inner practices have effects on the outside/ material world or do you just believe they have effects but are not part of alchemy?

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 05:14 PM
Although I really feel you could do with changing the way you say things. E.g. truth, cruel hoax, correct one, etc. It all sounds like language a religious fundamentalist may use. But I shall carry on and take it that you don't even realise you are doing it.

So what specifically makes you think that?

What is your understanding of inner alchemy?

There is no such thing as inner alchemy, that is my understanding.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 05:14 PM
Dwellings

A question out of curiosity, do you consider other inner practices to be true?

Like for instance psychology, meditation, zen, yoga, qigong?

Is it that you generally do not believe that inner practices have effects on the outside/ material world or do you just believe they have effects but are not part of alchemy?

They may or may not have effect but are not part of Alchemy.

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 05:17 PM
There is no such thing as inner alchemy, that is my understanding.

Then what is the purpose of your post?

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 05:34 PM
Then what is the purpose of your post?

I have given you the reply to your question.

I have nothing more to say.

JinRaTensei
08-12-2016, 05:41 PM
Dwellings

Not that I want to change anyones opinion or think my own opinion is more valid but what you replied is "some" common ground.

Than I have another question for you. Do you believe that your emotions and thoughts control how much energy your body can release or store?
Do you have more energy when you are excited about something?

Are you able to give 100% at anything when you are sad?

Do you have more energy with a deep breath compared to an shallow one?

Feelings are also energy just like anything else is so do you agree that the way you feel/ the amount of energy you have influences how you act?

Would you agree that if you had more energy stored inside the way you experienced reality would be different, just like a radio tuner with high energy will get more radio stations,less interference and no static noise compared to a radio tuner with low energy. Allthough they are technically identical,the amount of energy is different. And by that the abilities/ experiences of both radio tuners will be as different as heaven and earth.

So would you agree that humans have something like energy?

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 05:46 PM
Bit of a waste of everyones time then eh? Shame, I was hoping I could get to know you.

This is what I love about alchemy. In my opinion, if anything is a hoax, it is practical alchemy.

If I was a chemist of the old days, and wanted to make some money. I would sell the snake oil idea of transmuting metals into gold, and immortality. The two biggest dreams of the masses. I could easily get funding from greedy kings, take on apprentices and not pay them anything, but promise to teach them the secrets. Show them how to make gunpowder (keeping the king happy), telling them they must pay dues by getting skilled at the practice. Making the alchemist lots of money in the process.

Similar to the way they still do in the big pharma. Take on new graduates as unpaid interns with the promise of a big paying job, get them to find derivatives of drugs, after having them sign a contract stating that any findings belong to the company. So that when they do they can just be sacked and they can get the next graduate in.

Whats the fastest way to make £20? ... Tell you what ... give me £20 and I will tell you.

While all the time, the true secrets of alchemy were the above process, social manipulation, psychology, etc. Which as the alchemists said, would never be learned by the greedy and impure of heart; too obsessed with making gold or immortality. It's one of the principles we lived by when me and a few mates were teaching blokes how to pick up women. We would never teach the good secrets to the ones we thought would misuse it, we would teach them the basics and take their money though. ;)

Oh well, it would have been nice to know you. And there would be a lot that I could have shared regarding inner alchemy if you were interested. But as you would rather chase gold and immortality. Have fun.

Plus, I mean, if there is no such thing as inner alchemy, then this section of the forum obviously doesn't exist. We must all be figments of your imagination, as must be any texts you have ever read regarding inner alchemy, you must be fighting against your own conflicting delusions. Perhaps even the reality around you doesn't exist? Perhaps you are in a coma dream? Perhaps everything you thought you knew is an illusion.

Wake up Dwellings.

Wake up!

... Follow the white rabbit.

Dwellings
08-12-2016, 05:59 PM
I do not need to be told when to wake up or sleep Loki. The fact is you just don't get it.

I have sufficient enough proof that Inner crap gets you nowhere. Look at India, everyone single one was fooled by the rishis whose words were intrepreted literally forced them to do various acrobatics and rituals which they followed to the letter. In the end they died away.

That is the benefit of Inner Alchemy, you will grow old and die away.

@Jin
We were talking about Alchemy, not energy per se.

JinRaTensei
08-12-2016, 06:13 PM
Dwellings

Can you please answer my question regardless if it has anything to do with alchemy.
Personally I do not care if it is alchemy or not. I am talking about logic.

For instance chicken soup, cars and popsongs are also no alchemy but they abide the same rules as alchemy does, as does everything in this reality.
Sepparating laws and claiming they belong only to a certain school of thought is, imo, fundamentally stupid. Like most modern science is.

The same rules/laws of chemistry must apply to physics. Even if physics decides to look at totally different aspects of reality compared to chemistry the underlying principle is the same.

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 06:30 PM
Dwellings. It was a quote from the matrix. I was just making a joke out of the fact that you seem to think inner alchemy doesn't exist. It clearly exists, the validity of it is what I think you are questioning. Although without knowing anything about it you cannot make a rational argument. This was the point that I was attempting to highlight, but you seem to be attempting to avoid.

I get it pretty clearly. I personally believe that anyone touting eternal life or magically creating gold to be a charlatan. But that is just my view. But, in my opinion, alchemy is not about that, it was a ruse started to keep greedy people from finding the true knowledge. Clearly didn't work based on the society we have today though. It is about something very different. Did you actually read my post about my definition of alchemy?

Yes it can make you rich, yes it can make you immortal; as in you will be remembered for ever. And there is the small chance that the things you may learn may help in an afterlife, if there is one, although that is just a bonus for me. But most importantly it can make you at peace. It can give you a feeling of calmness and conscious congruency, self control. These are the only things you can truly own. You cannot own gold, a house, a car, money, job, etc. They are material things, and I am not saying there is no point to pursuing them, I love the material world, it is just important to remember they are on loan. They can always be taken from you. Although you can truly possess knowledge, which unless you are killed can never be taken. Knowledge is the true gold.

What you seem to be arguing with us about here is over the definition of alchemy. Do you agree?

Andro
08-12-2016, 09:14 PM
The Truth is the Hoax.

No it isn't... it's just very deeply hidden behind the mirage of projection/perception, space, time and data flow in general...

Most programs are too complex (or too "thick") to penetrate this veil and gain the necessary access/clearance :)
______
I.M.S.I.

Awani
08-12-2016, 10:47 PM
No it isn't...

Yes it is, because I am talking about "The Truth" that humans always talk about (not a Truth... or the final Truth unknowable to any "The Truth" seeker), because this "The Truth" (or even "Truth) which they [we] know nothing about, cannot understand or even perceive... even if it fucked us in the face. ;)

To claim you have "The Truth" = Hoax
To quest for "The Truth" = Hoax
To experience "truth" = Wisdom
To confuse "truth" with "The Truth" = Delusion

There is an ocean between those that hunt for Truth or claim to know Truth or teach Truth... and those that "hold" wisdom.

The idea that the true goal of the alchemist is to create gold is a hoax to protect them from the real truth (which was a dangerous thing a thousand years ago)... and this hoax has become a truth that now many "practical alchemist" think is the truth. Pretty funny if you ask me...

:cool:

Awani
08-12-2016, 10:56 PM
I am quoting Green Lion here (Andro had already done this earlier but I think it is important).

LOL. This is the same as quoting an atheist to prove atheism. So what? Is everything Green Lion says Truth? Is everything Andro says Truth? No.

Is what I say true? In a way yes it is... but only to me.


Alchemy at its base level provides with a means of producing truckloads of gold by using a little amount of red powder known as the Philosopher's stone

If this is TRUE then I would close these forums down instantly (thankfully there is more to alchemy than this).

:cool:

JDP
08-12-2016, 11:16 PM
It has to be taken as an empirical fact that the transmutation of elements does occur naturally for anyone who believes in the Big Bang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang) theory; that everything in existence came from a Singularity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Singularity).

It is said that stars were formed from the first element Hydrogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen) and from this Helium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium) is then formed. As the processes in the star continue other light elements are formed and if the star is large enough and goes Supernova (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova) then the heavy elements are produced by Nuclear Fusion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion).

Does this answer questions or just create more?

After all the big bang is only a theory, a "leap of faith" one might say.

Ghislain

Modern science accepts transmutation, just not by "chemical" reactions, though.

JDP
08-12-2016, 11:34 PM
JDP:
What specifically is quackery and empty claims? What is it you think you know about inner alchemy?.

Just like the example I gave before, about me supposedly being able to flap my arms real hard and take off to the skies like a bird. Notice how empty and purely gratuitous such a boast is. The claims of spiritualism, shamanism, mentalism, astrology, magic, etc. are of this nature. They never offer the slightest shred of verifiable, repeatable evidence. You just have to take the word of its acolytes at face value. As the psychologist in the first Terminator movie says after he hears Kyle's explanation for the apparent contradiction of how the assassin robot was able to go through a time-machine that only can work with living matter: "This is great stuff. I could make a career out of this guy! You see how clever this part is? How it doesn't require a shred of proof? Most paranoid delusions are intricate, but this is brilliant!" In fact, that skeptical magician, Randi, has been making his second "career" out of the delusions of such credulous, self-deceived people who think they can perform such things as "reading minds", predict future events, "remote viewing", live by breathing air and ingesting water only (no food supposedly needed), telekinesis, healing with the hands (no medicine required), etc.

JDP
08-12-2016, 11:47 PM
Bit of a waste of everyones time then eh? Shame, I was hoping I could get to know you.

This is what I love about alchemy. In my opinion, if anything is a hoax, it is practical alchemy.

If I was a chemist of the old days, and wanted to make some money. I would sell the snake oil idea of transmuting metals into gold, and immortality. The two biggest dreams of the masses. I could easily get funding from greedy kings, take on apprentices and not pay them anything, but promise to teach them the secrets. Show them how to make gunpowder (keeping the king happy), telling them they must pay dues by getting skilled at the practice. Making the alchemist lots of money in the process.

You could also end up dead or locked up in a dungeon, like many did who failed to deliver what they claimed they could do.


Similar to the way they still do in the big pharma. Take on new graduates as unpaid interns with the promise of a big paying job, get them to find derivatives of drugs, after having them sign a contract stating that any findings belong to the company. So that when they do they can just be sacked and they can get the next graduate in.

Whats the fastest way to make £20? ... Tell you what ... give me £20 and I will tell you.

While all the time, the true secrets of alchemy were the above process, social manipulation, psychology, etc. Which as the alchemists said, would never be learned by the greedy and impure of heart; too obsessed with making gold or immortality. It's one of the principles we lived by when me and a few mates were teaching blokes how to pick up women. We would never teach the good secrets to the ones we thought would misuse it, we would teach them the basics and take their money though. ;)

Oh well, it would have been nice to know you. And there would be a lot that I could have shared regarding inner alchemy if you were interested. But as you would rather chase gold and immortality. Have fun.

Plus, I mean, if there is no such thing as inner alchemy, then this section of the forum obviously doesn't exist. We must all be figments of your imagination, as must be any texts you have ever read regarding inner alchemy, you must be fighting against your own conflicting delusions. Perhaps even the reality around you doesn't exist? Perhaps you are in a coma dream? Perhaps everything you thought you knew is an illusion.

Wake up Dwellings.

Wake up!

... Follow the white rabbit.

As has been pointed out earlier, "inner alchemy" is a gross misunderstanding of the subject by some later writers. And at least "practical alchemy" (the one and only alchemy) can actually be empirically explored and either proved or disproved. The purely gratuitous claims of the imaginary "inner alchemy" simply can't. As the psychologist in the first Terminator movie very well puts it: "You see how clever this part is? How it doesn't require a shred of proof? Most paranoid delusions are intricate, but this is brilliant!" All of such claims take place inside the person's mind, where there is no friggin' way of testing any such thing. How convenient!

Loki Morningstar
08-12-2016, 11:51 PM
As the psychologist in the first Terminator movie says after he hears Kyle's explanation for the apparent contradiction of how the assassin robot was able to go through a time-machine that only can work with living matter: "This is great stuff. I could make a career out of this guy! You see how clever this part is? How it doesn't require a shred of proof? Most paranoid delusions are intricate, but this is brilliant!"

And if I remember rightly, shortly after, the T-800 turns up and shoots him in the face...

I wouldn't end up in a dungeon. I wouldn't make promises I couldn't keep. I would promise gunpowder and strong metals for weapons, and any other techniques I knew. And hint at the idea that one day I might be able to do other things. The gold and immortality is more for the apprentice/cheap labour. I might even try some of my tinctures on them, to see if they worked, and if it killed them, that would be a result, because then I can just get a new one in and not have to worry about the apprentice running off with my knowledge. :cool::p

I feel perhaps you are missing the point. I have an open mind, but I don't personally believe in any of the stuff you mentioned either. But there are plenty of other great inner alchemy diceplines that speak for their self. That don't really need verification. Such as: psychological individuation, practices to strengthen the will, practices of increasing the accuity of the senses, etc.

Or we could talk about the ones that have been verifed such as: Meditation and it's many benefits, hypnosis and its power to persuade, memory techniques, philosophy, logic, etc.

Yeah, maybe in the past they couldn't be emperically (where would empiricism be without philosophy?) explored, proved or disproved, it was something you had to trial and error with your self. But that is quickly becoming less and less the case. With new techniques in psychology such as Mri scanners, brainwave readers, new scientific discoveries made by behaviourists, etc. These disciplines are moving forward leaps and bounds.

A really interesting example of this is the relatively recent discoveries of split brain research.

Ghislain
08-13-2016, 02:21 AM
The point of the big bang post was about how people take a leap of faith, the big bang is a “weird”
theory that fits the bill for now, no one knows if it is true or not, they can only theorise.

If we look at a computer game when the user is playing an opponent generated by the game, then the
enemy has far more information of the game than the novice user; however this changes with experience.

The game may contain self-learning algorithms, so as you try certain things in the game the game
itself becomes aware of your tactics and works out ways to overcome them; it is still bound by rules.

The one thing the opponent in the game cannot do is contact the games creator for help if it is
struggling, whereas a user can, and a lot of the time does in the form of cheats.

Now if you look at your life as a character in a game you have to abide by the rules the creator of the
game has supplied you with. Now look at who is playing your character...they are outside of the
game and do not have to abide by the rules. They can be very helpful; they have more influence on
the game rules than the character will ever have. The character will only exist as long as the game
does, but the user lives on.

Inner alchemy is realising (you and the user) that it is you who is the user playing the part of the character,
this is not easy to achieve as you are still the character also and the rules seem so unbendable to you; you
could look at your user as your higher self.

If you want to see just what the character sees, then live your life by the rules and enjoy the game you
have; you will realise who your user is when the game is over.

Or you can be one with the user and he can supply the cheats.

Note: Before you ask for proof, you can only prove this to yourself and it takes discipline and
understanding. The only advice, not for any religious reason, is read Matthew 7:7 as it is the best
place to start and it worked for me. Let’s call it an inner alchemical text.

Carry on gaming ;)

Ghislain

P.S. This costs you nothing but your time and effort. Realise Gold and money are just the score
keeper in the game, like the rings in sonic...fun but meaningless in reality.

Dwellings
08-13-2016, 06:52 AM
Ghislain, Loki, Jin

I have already voiced my opinion and I have nothing more to say.

@dev

Laugh at me for all you want since I possess very little knowledge regarding Alchemy.

But guys like Green Lion, Ab Roek or Andro can skin anyone alive in Alchemical discussions due to their extensive knowledge. You won't be able hold your ground for long. I would recommend you think twice before including them with me.

I used the term base level to signify I am taking up only a certain aspect of it yet you cling to it.

Andro
08-13-2016, 08:17 AM
But guys like Green Lion, Ab Roek or Andro can skin anyone alive in Alchemical discussions due to their extensive knowledge. You won't be able hold your ground for long. I would recommend you think twice before including them with me.

I'm not into skinning anyone alive (unless they betray me) :) ... I prefer to be on friendly, harmonious terms with most people, even if we disagree.

I'm inclined to think that this debate is, for the most part, psycho-semantic.

Many people are performing various spiritual practices. Some of them refer to these practices as "alchemy". Others don't. As far as I'm concerned, anyone can call anything whatever they want to call it - unless they'll calling me (or my friends) derogatory names, in which case it will be regarded as betrayal and may lead to a 'skinning alive' situation :)

Traditionally speaking, the term Alchemy refers to the production/rendering of physical substances with certain highly unusual properties, such as "potable gold", the "philosopher's stone", the "universal medicine" (for all Kingdoms, including people and metals), the "perpetual lamp", etc... Those Alchemical substances do not conform to the 'normal' laws of chemistry and neither do their effects.

Non-traditionally, in time, terms like alchemy (and others) tend to gather a wider interpretation, the more "pop" they become. The same happens to other traditional arts, in different variations. Nowadays for example, even someone who can barely tune their instrument or carry a tune can make recordings on their home computer or even phone and upload them to the Internet. For them, it is "music". I have no problem with that. Others write in a way that is barely intelligible, disregarding basic grammar, spelling & syntax - yet they refer to it as 'English' - and for them, it is.

People (men especially) often need alcohol to express their emotions, or even psychedelic substances to help them cry. Nuance-less texting takes priority over actually talking to each other, and we cling to the idea that social media is a form of 'communication', and that IKEA is a form of 'furniture'.

Except for a few places, gone are the days of long-term apprenticeship and initiation, the days of impeccable craftsmanship and genuine mastery.

These are the days of entitlement and instant gratification.

This is the Zeitgeist and I take no issue with it, especially as I am far from immune to it myself...

Let us eat breadcrumbs and call it cake :)
___________________________

PS: It is not my intention to come across as 'reactionary', because I'm not. Every age has its advantages and opportunities, even the cold winter of Kali Yuga.

We can have access to long distance travel, information and tools/resources that were not available in previous ages. This is great for free thinkers and independent artists & researchers.

Quoth 'The Way of the Samurai', as seen in the movie 'Ghost Dog':


It is said that what is called "the spirit of an age" is something to which one cannot return.
That this spirit gradually dissipates is due to the world's coming to an end.
For this reason, although one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done.
Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation.

Dwellings
08-13-2016, 09:21 AM
@Andro

You do know that skinning alive has hyperbolic connotations. Besides my statement when read in context and factoring in the hyperbolic stuff will ensure that you get the drift of what I want to convey if you already haven't.

Andro
08-13-2016, 09:41 AM
You do know that skinning alive has hyperbolic connotations. Besides my statement when read in context and factoring in the hyperbolic stuff will ensure that you get the drift of what I want to convey if you already haven't.

Similar to that thread/post about not using the shell of the egg (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4821-Fermentative-distillation&p=43047#post43047)... But in this case, I chose to deliberately focus on the plain meaning of the word :)

Awani
08-13-2016, 09:44 AM
Laugh at me for all you want since I possess very little knowledge regarding Alchemy.

I am not laughing at you, but what you said. But if you claim to possess very little knowledge regarding alchemy I don't see how you feel you can claim something to be a hoax? Now that is funny.:)


But guys like Green Lion, Ab Roek or Andro can skin anyone alive in Alchemical discussions due to their extensive knowledge.

According to you, yes. Taste and preference is always relative.

:cool:

Awani
08-13-2016, 09:58 AM
Let us eat breadcrumbs and call it cake

Personally I rather eat cake and leave behind only crumbs... ;)


People (men especially) often need alcohol to express their emotions, or even psychedelic substances to help them cry. Nuance-less texting takes priority over actually talking to each other, and we cling to the idea that social media is a form of 'communication', and that IKEA is a form of 'furniture'.

I think this is an oversimplification (which I am guilty of myself many times). IKEA is furniture, not an idea we cling to that it is... but if one likes this type of furniture is another matter. What you call impeccable craftsmanship and genuine mastery is relative, meaning one mans master is another mans slave.


These are the days of entitlement and instant gratification.

A perfect example of the master preaching (or master loving) practical alchemy community.


It is a good viewpoint to see the world as a dream. When you have something like a nightmare, you will wake up and tell yourself that it was only a dream. It is said that the world we live in is not a bit different from this. - also from Ghost Dog

:cool:

Awani
08-13-2016, 10:05 AM
I'm inclined to think that this debate is, for the most part, psycho-semantic.

Is Spiritual Alchemy a valid path to go down? Is not Practical Alchemy the thing that provide the greatest benefit?

These are valid "threads"/"questions" that I would seriously think about. But as this thread so far has been titled/presented is, IMO, like a fucking troll joke and I am inclined to close and archive it so it can be re-started with a more productive line of thinking that doesn't piss everyone in the face. Either that or create a thread in every section of the forums called "The [insert forum name] is a Hoax", and stick them at the top.

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 10:18 AM
Ghislain:


The big bang is a “weird” theory that fits the bill for now, no one knows if it is true or not, they can only theorise.

Although the mathematics for it looks pretty good supposedly.


Inner alchemy is realising (you and the user) that it is you who is the user playing the part of the character.

I like this concept, there is slowly becoming empirical data which could add validity to these kinds of theories. Although unsure it is will help our case here, I do look forward to talking with you about it some more.


You can only prove this to yourself and it takes discipline and understanding. The only advice, not for any religious reason, is read Matthew 7:7 as it is the best place to start and it worked for me. Let’s call it an inner alchemical text.

This is a really important concept in my eyes. In fact, it is one of my favourite quotes from the bible. And I am starting to think that perhaps I should heed the longer passages advice with regards to this thread. Matthew 7:6.

Dwellings:


I have already voiced my opinion and I have nothing more to say.

Yes, and that opinion lacked any rational explanation, or deeper knowledge of the discipline you are condemning.


Green Lion, Ab Roek or Andro can skin anyone alive in Alchemical discussions due to their extensive knowledge. You won't be able hold your ground for long. I would recommend you think twice before including them with me.

Its likely best that you do not drag others into your discussions. I would bet that the people you summon by name will not like it. And even if they do share your view, would be more diplomatic about it, and willing to converse rationally about it. As would I be respectful of their knowledge of practical alchemy, as I know little about it currently.

You did not answer my question from before:

You seem to want to discuss the definition of 'Alchemy'. Do you agree?

Andro:

As always an eloquent, concise, and diplomatic reply.


I'm inclined to think that this debate is, for the most part, psycho-semantic.

I’m inclined to agree. Thanks for the subtle sharing of information for those who can see. Haven’t heard of Oscar Bruce before and I shall definitely be buying some of his books now.


Unless they'll calling me (or my friends) derogatory names

You can call me what you want, just don’t call me late for dinner. :cool:


Traditionally speaking, the term Alchemy refers to the production/rendering of physical substances.

Non-traditionally, in time, terms like alchemy (and others) tend to gather a wider interpretation.

I do completely agree with you here. And at the same time think it is important that things evolve. In my opinion, conventional science is too stuck in its ways, and magic and spiritualism is too away with the fairies. I like to think that Alchemy is this nice place right in the middle. With people with open logical minds and open loving hearts, and the will and courage to seek the truth.

Kali Yuga is my bread and butter baby. Loki Rulez! ;)

Love your final quote. I may have to save it in my quote bank.

Dwellings
08-13-2016, 10:26 AM
@dev

Since knowledge is unquantifiable, one can use variable grading curves and benchmarks. The benchmark that I have set for myself is huge, so my wording.
But whatever little I know, I feel that's the right stuff.

If my intentions need to formulated like your questions in previous post for productive discussion, by all means close this thread and start a new "valid path"thread.

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 10:39 AM
Create a thread in every section of the forums called "The [insert forum name] is a Hoax", and stick them at the top.

I genuinely think this is an interesting idea. As much as I was totally against this thread to start off with. I think it has opened some interesting dialogue.


I feel that's the right stuff.

is the real HOAX. It is very important to be able to see beyond your own beliefs.

Andro
08-13-2016, 10:42 AM
What you call impeccable craftsmanship and genuine mastery is relative, meaning one mans master is another mans slave.


A perfect example of the master preaching (or master loving) practical alchemy community.

'Mastery' -> in the sense of mastery over oneself and one's own craft, not over others in a preaching/devotion context.

JinRaTensei
08-13-2016, 10:50 AM
The practical alchemist on whatever quest he/she seeks will encounter hardship and failure.
The alchemist will learn and improve, will understand and comprehend.
The alchemist will advance,stagnate or decline at his/her own pace.

The alchemist must improve willpower and discipline, he must refine the way he/she interprets data.

Other than reality defying luck the alchemist will not reach any goal of greater magnitude if he himself does not become a greater being.

The alchemist may disregard all inner aspects but he still has cultivated them to have the abilities and endurance because such is the law and the law is absolute.
The alchemist may disregard all outer aspects but he still has experienced them to have the data and conditions for his inner work because such is the law and the law is absolute. ( until it is not ^^)

Inner&Outer alchemy a strange romance with a lot of fire but although sparks fly sometimes and hearts start to boil one can not exist without the other, two sides the same coin.

Andro
08-13-2016, 10:56 AM
Haven’t heard of Oscar Bruce before and I shall definitely be buying some of his books now.

I had never heard of Oscar Bruce before now, either. Just looked him up.

I was under the self-deluded impression that I had coined the term 'Psychosemantics' myself :o ... Been using it here on the forum for years :)

Nothing new under the sun...

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 11:03 AM
Jin! That is an amazing way to put it! Sums it up really nicely. I think that should be the Alchemy Forums new motto! :D

Andro: Seems it was divine inspiration from the fates then. :)

JinRaTensei
08-13-2016, 11:28 AM
Loki
Thank you for the kind words/jest! But I think the only motto for this forum should be "Hillary for president"...just imagine the onslaught XD

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 11:31 AM
Hahahaha! The lizard queen! Rockerfellas puppet. Our Lord and master! ;)

I hope you don't mind. I messed about with it a bit to shorten it, make it sound a bit like a biblical quote.

As one seeks we encounter hardship and failure.
We will understanding, will comprehension,
will learning, and will improvement;
advancing, stagnating, or declining at our own pace.

One must improve willpower and discipline,
one must refine the way one interprets data;
one becomes greater by becoming a greater being.

One may disregard all inner alchemy,
still one will cultivate,
ones will, ones memories, ones endurance;
such is the law and the law is absolute.

One may disregard all outer alchemy,
still one will experience,
ones actions, ones perceptions, ones tests;
such is the law and the law is absolute.

A strange romance between mental and physical,
with a lot of fire, sparks fly, hearts boil,
but one can not exist without the other,
two sides the same coin; one is all.

Bit off topic, but have you seen this?
Hillary 'The truth is out there' Clinton (http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/09/24/why-is-hillary-clinton-talking-to-laurence-rockefeller-holding-a-book-about-extraterrestrials/)

Andro
08-13-2016, 11:44 AM
While I don't personally see any deliberate trolling here, this thread is gradually taking the art of 'Off-Topic' to whole new levels...

Let's 'stay the course', all of us, please...

I'm also OK with renaming the thread, in a manner that appears to be less 'provocative', as the OP has already suggested.

JinRaTensei
08-13-2016, 11:50 AM
Loki

No I don´t mind at all, it wasn´t any "property" of me just some thoughts and besides it sounds much better the way you interpret and arrange it. I view it as improvement so thank you :).


one becomes greater by becoming a greater being.

Again I am not the souvereign of definition here and you can and should interpret the way you like but if it is rephrasing you seek I maybe would change this line into "one achieves greater (your words fit better than mine) by becomig a greater being"or "by achieving greater one becomes a greater being" because otherwise the statement would be meaningless and circular since a greater being by definition is already greater, imo.

But I like your words and thoughts quite much :)

Andro

Sry saw your reminder to late. Hence forth I will be homogenous in my posts regarding the topic of the thread.

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 12:24 PM
Respectfully Andro. There hasn’t been any trolling here?



PRACTICAL ALCHEMY IS A HOAX!

How can by merely [sic] chemistry or practical alchemy [sic] whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?

Come out or you will end up only fooling yourselves.

You are way off the true path.

Also, this [sic] Physical Alchemy [sic] Crap seems to be argued by those who do not get generally what Prima Materia is.

My intention is not to change anyone's beliefs but bring out the truth and call the Hoax a Hoax.

I am showing you the TRUTH yet you are not listening.

We are not dealing with Children's toys like [sic] practical alchemy [sic] but with something which is as important as life, hence the title of this thread is justified IMO.

Big Bang is a Hoax. Read Bible.

Arrogant? I am speaking the TRUTH, calling the hoax a Hoax.

[sic] You are [sic] Just Full of BS.

I do not have time to play useless GAMES with you.

Correct or Defraud yourselves, choice is yours.

The only Truth I want to say is [sic] Practical Alchemy [sic] is a cruel hoax that a man can do on himself while [sic] Inner Alchemy [sic] is the correct one since Alchemy is a [sic] philosophical [sic] science.

There is no such thing as [sic] practical [sic] alchemy, that is my understanding.

I have given you the reply to your question.

I have nothing more to say.

I have sufficient enough proof that [sic] practical alchemy [sic] crap gets you nowhere. Look at India, everyone single one was fooled by the [sic] practical alchemists [sic] whose words were intrepreted literally forced them to do various acrobatics and rituals which they followed to the letter. In the end they died away.

I have already voiced my opinion and I have nothing more to say.

[sic] Trolololol [sic]



Respectfully, I understand that you said intentional, and perhaps it is not intentional, and I do understand that the OP may have some personal issues with Inner Alchemy due to bad experiences or something of the sort. But I still think he could have had a bit more tact. He was repeatedly asked to be more specific, and treated with respect, despite his wild comments. But would just shut down when asked genuine questions.

JDP
08-13-2016, 01:02 PM
And if I remember rightly, shortly after, the T-800 turns up and shoots him in the face...

No, he doesn't, but he does show up at the police station and kills the entire police force guarding Sarah and Kyle. But then again that is the FICTIONAL world of the movie, where such things as a "Terminator" cyborg and time-travelling machines are already a well-known reality, though only for people in THE FUTURE THAT KYLE COMES FROM. The point of citing the criminal psychologist character is that he represents the logic and voice of reason for people IN OUR PRESENT TIMES (i.e. the real world we live in), where such a story as Kyle's sounds too difficult to believe, specially since Kyle does NOT show any proof of his claims (the criminal psychologist makes it a point to request actual proof from Kyle during his interrogation, and naturally Kyle can't provide any and gives an explanation of why he could not do so, but the psychologist is not buying any excuses that sound too fanciful, thus his logical conclusions that Kyle's strange story is very likely a delusion.)


I wouldn't end up in a dungeon. I wouldn't make promises I couldn't keep. I would promise gunpowder and strong metals for weapons, and any other techniques I knew. And hint at the idea that one day I might be able to do other things. The gold and immortality is more for the apprentice/cheap labour. I might even try some of my tinctures on them, to see if they worked, and if it killed them, that would be a result, because then I can just get a new one in and not have to worry about the apprentice running off with my knowledge. :cool::p

You should read the many historical cases of gold/silver-makers who ended up either in court having to defend themselves, in jail or even executed for not being able to fulfill their contracts. Some cases are truly fascinating because the "criminals" in fact were SUCCESSFUL (i.e. transmutation was achieved) yet they were still pursued by the law for failing to fulfill their contracts. The case of Georg Honauer comes to mind here. He ended up hanging from the gallows, yet his pursuing noble patron was 100% convinced (through actual tests) that he was a real alchemist in possession of the Stone. The reason why he got the death sentence despite his success was because he broke his contract with the Duke of Württemberg and fled with the Stone, which infuriated his noble patron to no end. The Duke pursued him until he finally was able to negotiate his extradition back to Württemberg, tried him as a "betrüger" (defrauder; but not for failing to make gold and silver, but for not honoring his contract with the Duke) and had him hanged.

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 01:16 PM
Such things as a "Terminator" cyborg and time-travelling machines are already a well-known reality, though only for people in THE FUTURE THAT KYLE COMES FROM. The point of citing the criminal psychologist character is that he represents the logic and voice of reason for people IN OUR PRESENT TIMES (i.e. the real world we live in), where such a story as Kyle's sounds too difficult to believe, specially since Kyle does NOT show any proof of his claims (the criminal psychologist makes it a point to request actual proof from Kyle during his interrogation, and naturally Kyle can't provide any and gives an explanation of why he could not do so, but the psychologist is not buying any excuses that sound too fanciful, thus his logical conclusions that Kyle's strange story is very likely a delusion.)

I think this makes my own point. That there are things out there we don't understand, and writing off as delusion because you have no physical proof yourself as of yet, leaves one in unprepared when they do eventually get proved. We cannot actually prove we are not brains in a jar, and I am sure people saying the earth revolves around the sun were seems as delusional at first.


You should read the many historical cases of gold/silver-makers who ended up either in court having to defend themselves, in jail or even executed for not being able to fulfill their contracts. Some cases are truly fascinating because the "criminals" in fact were SUCCESSFUL (i.e. transmutation was achieved) yet they were still pursued by the law for failing to fulfill their contracts. The case of Georg Honauer comes to mind here. He ended up hanging from the gallows, yet his pursuing noble patron was 100% convinced (through actual tests) that he was a real alchemist in possession of the Stone. The reason why he got the death sentence despite his success was because he broke his contract with the Duke of Württemberg and fled with the Stone, which infuriated his noble patron to no end. The Duke pursued him until he finally was able to negotiate his extradition back to Württemberg, tried him as a "betrüger" (defrauder; but not for failing to make gold and silver, but for not honoring his contract with the Duke) and had him hanged.

Thank you for sharing this information JDP, I genuinely appreciate it, and look forward to learning more about it. I also appreciate your diplomatic and logical way at coming at this topic. I have enjoyed your posts.

Just to make all aware of my position, I am not overly sceptical of physical alchemy, I fully respect the dicepline and others knowledge of it, the things I have said have been for effect, and the sake of discussion. As stated before, I am willing to believe everything and nothing. I feel this is the best way to come at life.

Awani
08-13-2016, 02:00 PM
'Mastery' -> in the sense of mastery over oneself and one's own craft, not over others in a preaching/devotion context.

Ah ok. Well that kind of mastery is the name of the game and what alchemy is all about IMO. :)


I'm also OK with renaming the thread, in a manner that appears to be less 'provocative', as the OP has already suggested.

I think the bed has been made. I'm quite happy to see this thread derail into all kinds of swamps and cesspools. Maybe not an "official law", but certainly "a" law of alchemy is: you get what you give. :)

People also have this option (and it works wonders I think): How to ignore (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4831-How-to-ignore)

Shape your reality. ;)

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 02:48 PM
I'm personally not a big fan of ignoring people. Unless it is completely necessary. I quite enjoy a bit of banter from time to time. Definitely a big believer in the "you get what you give" mentality. We are all consenting adults at the end of the day. At the same time, I am more than willing to get to know anyone, or give second chances. I don't hold grudges.

I am sure we are all relatively the same in this respect right?

Awani
08-13-2016, 02:51 PM
I don't hold grudges.

Yeah I just let go... but also my priorities have changed a lot in the last few years. Why watch Action if you only enjoy Comedies is an allegory of this.

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 03:00 PM
Yeah that makes sense. I suppose it is all about preference. I do see your point. I am moving more and more that way as I get older, and learn more about myself.

Dwellings
08-13-2016, 03:21 PM
I think the bed has been made. I'm quite happy to see this thread derail into all kinds of swamps and cesspools. Maybe not an "official law", but certainly "a" law of alchemy is: you get what you give. :)


LOL, thats what you get when a bunch of guys swoon over their inner abilities and believ that they are on the path of truth.

JinRaTensei
08-13-2016, 03:29 PM
We are all just seekers brother live and let live :)

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 03:39 PM
Amen Jin. :)

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 03:43 PM
Dwellings the only person talking about truth is you.

All the inner alchemy enthusiasts that I have talked to on here, have been more than willing to admit that there is no true path, and that we all follow our own. How many times do we have to explain, all roads lead to Rome.

It is your obsession with the "truth" that is getting you in trouble here.

Please define what 'truth' is?

Awani
08-13-2016, 03:53 PM
LOL, thats what you get when a bunch of guys swoon over their inner abilities and believ that they are on the path of truth.

It is all belief. Even what you think. I am not on a path of truth. That is ridicilous.

:cool:

Ghislain
08-13-2016, 05:33 PM
LOL, thats what you get when a bunch of guys swoon over their inner abilities and believ that they are on the path of truth.

Dwellings, what "guys" are you referring to that "swoon over their inner abilities"?

And what do you know of these "guys" experiences?

You sound like a spoilt child who has been excluded from the party, but then I know nothing of your experiences either and thus I should not be judgemental. That is how one should conduct oneself when in conversation with others in a forum such as this, it is called mutual respect.

My mother used to tell me that if I had nothing nice to say, then say nothing.

I try to hold mutual respect for the people here on this forum, but have to draw the line if they attack another's path.

Each here is walking there own path, if it is not the same path as yours and you have no interest in it then ignore it, but don't drop your rubbish on their path.

Ghislain

Dwellings
08-13-2016, 06:00 PM
Dwellings, what "guys" are you referring to that "swoon over their inner abilities"?

And what do you know of these "guys" experiences?

You sound like a spoilt child who has been excluded from the party, but then I know nothing of your experiences either and thus I should not be judgemental. That is how one should conduct oneself when in conversation with others in a forum such as this, it is called mutual respect.

My mother used to tell me that if I had nothing nice to say, then say nothing.

I try to hold mutual respect for the people here on this forum, but have to draw the line if they attack another's path.

Each here is walking there own path, if it is not the same path as yours and you have no interest in it then ignore it, but don't drop your rubbish on their path.

Ghislain

The guys I'm refering to will know themselves without being told.

Since you are asking this, you can safely assume you are not in it.

I never felt that "Swoon" is bad word, its generally used in dating lingo.

I have respect for everyone, you are quite wrong in calling me a spoilt child.

How can prove without a doubt that what I'm writing in this thread is rubbish.

Awani
08-13-2016, 07:04 PM
You sound like a spoilt child...

Gold chasers are never spoiled. More the opposite.

:cool:

Ghislain
08-13-2016, 08:01 PM
The guys I'm refering to will know themselves without being told.

I don't think anyone would associate themselves with your description as they would not be on their path if they believed it was leading them nowhere...now here.


Since you are asking this, you can safely assume you are not in it.

It would matter little to me one way or the other.


I never felt that "Swoon" is bad word, its generally used in dating lingo.

It seems an odd choice of words to use in the context you have used it.


I have respect for everyone, you are quite wrong in calling me a spoilt child.

In your opening post you said, "How can by merely meditating chakra kundalini Inner Alchemy or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?"

You came into a section of the forum called, "Spiritual Alchemy", and referred to the studies some take very seriously as "mumbo jumbo"; is that the way to show respect?

I would see that as the actions of a spoilt child, but as I said before I know nothing of your experiences and should not be judgemental.


How can prove without a doubt that what I'm writing in this thread is rubbish.

I cannot and do not wish to, I have my experiences and know where my studies have lead me so far, I could easily ask you the same questions of your belief, but your answer would mean very little to me unless I experience it for myself.

If you are waiting for others to give you the answers you so desire, I think you are in for a long wait, for the answers can only come from within you; try some meditation and see, you may be pleasantly surprised.

A weed is just a flower that is not wanted, rubbish is just an object that is not wanted...one man's rubbish is another man's fortune; one man's weeds makes another man's garden.

Ghislain

http://thealchemyforum.com/Images/What Now

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 09:56 PM
Ghislain, I love your meme. Literally made me lol. The unfortunate truth is always funnier than fiction.

Awani
08-13-2016, 10:00 PM
http://thealchemyforum.com/Images/What%20Now

That's so funny... LOL.

:cool:

Loki Morningstar
08-13-2016, 11:14 PM
It is so common that people chase the material things.

"In want a car.", "I want a house.", "I want more money than I could ever spend." Etc.

Yet what they really want deep down, is to have friends that understand them, to feel a sense of belonging, to feel self worth, etc. And they think the material things will bring all of these ethereal things to them.

Often they don't even realise that they hold the ethers right in their hand. Or at least have them within grasp. And yet they let them slip through their fingers. While chasing things that aren't really going to bring them any joy. You can't eat gold. Well, you can. But you catch the drift.

JDP
08-14-2016, 03:43 PM
http://thealchemyforum.com/Images/What Now

Much better than ending up like this:

http://meleboophotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/begging-for-alms.jpg

Depending on the charity and pity of others. Sure, very "rich" in spiritual/religious beliefs (none of which can be proven to be correct and rely on faith alone, mind you), but a pauper in real life, who relies on the money of others for his very survival.

Those who trivialize gold/silver-making live in a fantasy world where people do not have material needs and life is a breeze. They actually think transmutation is something "easy" to achieve or some other sort of delusional view of reality, so to them it seems like investigating the subject is a "trifle" or a superficial vanity. There are a couple of reasons why chemistry and physics deny transmutation through "chemical" reactions, one of them is due to the fact that all the reactions they know about simply do not make any real alteration of the metals involved and leave them just as they were before the reactions took place. So if in the roughly 250 years that chemistry has been around (before that there was alchemy & "chymistry", both of which did not deny transmutation) they have still not stumbled upon any reaction that does what they think is "impossible" that should pretty much tell you how difficult it is to discover the subject. There is nothing "trivial", "superficial", "vain" or "easy" about it. Far from being a "contemptible" pursuit, it is one of the most fascinating ones you could ever get involved in. But as I cautioned beginners before: be careful, because investigating the subject will require a very considerable investment of your time, efforts and money. If you are not prepared for it, you will end up like the fellow above: in the poor-house.

Ghislain
08-14-2016, 06:11 PM
Do birds search for gold or fish or lions, tigers, monkeys...I would presume not. It is only man that puts such value on a metal.

People thought that the Aztecs found a great seam of gold and called it El Dorado (The Golden), but it has been proved since that they didn't. What they did was trade with people for gold and then they made artifacts from it for ritual purposes, which they then threw into a lake; some of these have been recovered and they are great pieces of work. The value they put on the gold was spiritual.

El Dorado Legend Snared Sir Walter Raleigh (http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/el-dorado/)

If a persons pursuit of gold is their Magnum Opus then I wish them well on their journey, but do not deride others for whom this is not.

Ask yourself, if this were your last day, have you spent it fruitfully?

Ghislain

Edit: JDP I think we might find that the person in your pic is more at peace with himself than you or I.

Loki Morningstar
08-14-2016, 06:14 PM
Also JDP, repectfully, this is a false dichotomy.

JDP
08-14-2016, 06:26 PM
Do birds search for gold or fish or lions, tigers, monkeys...I would presume not. It is only man that puts such value on a metal.

People thought that the Aztecs found a great seam of gold and called it El Dorado (The Golden), but it has been proved since that they didn't. What they did was trade with people for gold and then they made artifacts from it for ritual purposes, which they then threw into a lake; some of these have been recovered and they are great pieces of work. The value they put on the gold was spiritual.

El Dorado Legend Snared Sir Walter Raleigh (http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/el-dorado/)

If a persons pursuit of gold is their Magnum Opus then I wish them well on their journey, but do not deride others for whom this is not.

Ask yourself, if this were your last day, have you spent it fruitfully?

Ghislain

Edit: JDP I think we might find that the person in your pic is more at peace with himself than you or I.

That might also be true of the person in your picture, whom I doubt would really have much trouble coming up with ways to put to work what is right below him. He could start simply by buying himself new, clean clothes, for example. It's not really any "dilemma" what to do with a fortune. It can do a lot to improve your life.

Ghislain
08-14-2016, 06:30 PM
For those that were not sure about JDP's pic, that was a Buddhist Monk in Taipei (Taiwan) begging for Alms. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alms)

Ghislain

Awani
08-14-2016, 06:55 PM
Personal story. In my life on this Earth I have experienced most levels of existence (at least in the Western World). True I have not been a pauper in the ghettos of India, but I have met them and of all the "poor" people I have encountered in life those in the New Dehli ghetto were the worst in terms of utter misery. And this is not something I projected, their lives were misery.

But getting side-tracked, for me the so-called most low position as far as wealth was when I lived on the streets hussling tourists for tips... although I did have a tiny tent that I used for sleeping in the larger natural parks of the city I was in. I was at the bottom of the ladder. I had gone 100 % off grid. Compared to those guys I met in New Dehli (if I had at that moment teleported to them), I would have been living the high life. My God, I had weed, I had a tent, I had an environment around me that was clean, beautiful, safe, I was not slave to any addiction, certainly not in the tax system, and no matter how economically low I NEVER went to bed hungry. I celebrated my 25th birthday alone in this tent one sunny summer. There were a few cows where I had camped. Being 25 is a big thing culturally where I am from... yet I thought at the time watching the cows, smoking a joint, that I had never felt MORE free and more at HOME up until then in my life. It was wonderful for me. It is all relative.

One day I was at a festival collecting cans (you got money for them), and it was muddy and I was picking them up from the ground. Two guys watched me and thought that I was some foregin bum... like Bulgaria or Romania (I was listening to them speak about me). They pitied me, and they thought I was dirt poor. But I was living the great life. Relative.

I have also lived the complete opposite. I have been in a position where I could buy a 1 000 dollar shirt, wear it one hour and then throw it away... and it would not affect the rest of my day economically one fucking bit. And honestly when I was in this "kim kardashian/shoppaholic/binge" phase, which lasted 4-6 months roughly, something felt wrong. I was certainly not happy.

And the cause was not that I was wasting money, because as much as I spent I saved. There was something else. Something about the "wealth" that did not sit right with me. I even longed back to that day only a few years earlier when I had it all: nothing

Because sometimes in life NOTHING is way more than EVERYTHING.

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h18/deviadah/forum/133364-Rumi-Quote-If-you-want-money-more-than-anything-you-ll-be-bought_zps258gctyq.jpg

:cool:

JinRaTensei
08-14-2016, 07:47 PM
Beautiful story dev!



Because sometimes in life NOTHING is way more than EVERYTHING.

Maybe having nothing you had also nothing distracting you from the one thing you always have but never cheerish until one understands, yourself.

Now even if your life is going in a way you desire you never truly have yourself just for yourself even when you are ust by yourself.

The less the outside has to give the more the inside will offer freely.

PS: Obv. in todays world one is only truely homeless if one has no internet connection ^^. I mean dev what did you do all day like living and breathing and shit XD
PS2: Was that time the start for your path as alchemist? Did you already walk the shamanistic path in those days?


I guess this post counts as topic derailing cesspool, enjoy ^^

Awani
08-14-2016, 08:02 PM
In a way the alchemical/shamanic path created all events described. I know because I was using alchemy/shamanism to move through different realms of existing looking for the "home" we all need in this state of being. Home for body. Home for mind. And if lucky that place is the same.

I think all this is very relevant regarding the Hoax.

:cool:

JinRaTensei
08-14-2016, 08:05 PM
Interesting thank you for the reply. How kind of the universe forcing you to colide with society/material needs so early or I would not be able to participate here in your experiences :)

JDP
08-15-2016, 12:28 AM
In a way the alchemical/shamanic path created all events described. I know because I was using alchemy/shamanism to move through different realms of existing looking for the "home" we all need in this state of being. Home for body. Home for mind. And if lucky that place is the same.

I think all this is very relevant regarding the Hoax.

:cool:

So you were using "alchemy" to do something that the alchemists themselves knew nothing about, and that on top of that there is no evidence anywhere that such a thing as "different realms of existing" actually exist? Amazing. Maybe I will use theurgy or haruspicy to calculate the orbits of planets. :)

Loki Morningstar
08-15-2016, 09:20 AM
JDP, it is quite clear what is being said here. You do not have a chokehold over the definition of alchemy. Get over yourself. You can believe what you want. But is it really necessary you wind everyone up in the process?

It is very clear to me what dev meant by different realms of existence. You would have to be pretty slow to not get it. He meant in the sense of, being homeless is one realm of existence, having lots of money is another, being happy with no money is one realm of existence, being unhappy with no money is another.

I doubt you will have ever noticed the subtle nature of your surrounding appearing to change around you when you change your self. Perception is projection, sow what you reap, and other such ideas.


Maybe I will use theurgy or haruspicy to calculate the orbits of planets.

I wouldn't usually say things like this, but seeing as you have not repeat for our discipline...

Or maybe you will use Alchemy to do Chemistry and Physics?

JDP
08-15-2016, 04:03 PM
JDP, it is quite clear what is being said here. You do not have a chokehold over the definition of alchemy. Get over yourself. You can believe what you want. But is it really necessary you wind everyone up in the process?

Unlike what some people think, alchemy does have a specific definition, and it certainly is not some of these strange claims floating around in our modern times by people who want alchemy to be anything but what it actually always was.


It is very clear to me what dev meant by different realms of existence. You would have to be pretty slow to not get it. He meant in the sense of, being homeless is one realm of existence, having lots of money is another, being happy with no money is one realm of existence, being unhappy with no money is another.

Why would he need "shamanism & alchemy" for such mundane everyday things, then? Those are just common facts of life that will happen without the aid of anything "strange" or unusual. It all depends on certain factors (luck, each individuals' resourcefulness, mental/emotional stability, etc.) No need to conjure up weird things.


I wouldn't usually say things like this, but seeing as you have not repeat for our discipline...

Or maybe you will use Alchemy to do Chemistry and Physics?

No, I would use alchemy to do alchemy, what it is really about: making the Elixir/Philosophers' Stone. I would not attempt to hijack alchemy for other things that have quite little or nothing to do with it. Yet many people nowadays feel strangely compelled to do just that.

Loki Morningstar
08-15-2016, 04:24 PM
Unlike what some people think, alchemy does have a specific definition, and it certainly is not some of these strange claims floating around in our modern times by people who want alchemy to be anything but what it actually always was.

JDP, you are starting to sound like some kind of Alchemy fascist. Alchemies earliest days would have been philosophy, herbology, spiritualism, etc. All this purist speak is repulsive. All alchemy is about as far as I am aware is transmutation. Change of one thing to another. I completely agree that chemistry is an integral part. But to be a good alchemist you must have perseverance, strength of will, patience, well tuned senses. These are all part of alchemy too. And to work on them only makes your great work better. I feel you have not been reading anybody else's opinion on this thread, and you seem to be beginning to repeat yourself.


Why would he need "shamanism & alchemy" for such mundane everyday things, then? Those are just common facts of life that will happen without the aid of anything "strange" or unusual. It all depends on certain factors (luck, each individuals' resourcefulness, mental/emotional stability, etc.) No need to conjure up weird things.

Shamanism and alchemy are like father and son in my eyes. Shamans were the wisest of the tribesmen, they knew how to make medicines, they knew about psychology, they were the scientists of their day.

When you get he calling towards being a shaman, everything becomes a message, something to draw you down your path of fact finding, truth searching, data collecting, whatever you want to call it.

It is just a different way to look at things. We all have different paths. And some feel a connection to the universe more than others. Personally I see many signs and teaching in my life that I feel was sent to me by a greater intelligence. Even if that greater intelligence is nothing more than my subconcious communicating with me.


No, I would use alchemy to do alchemy, what it is really about: making the Elixir/Philosophers' Stone. I would not attempt to hijack alchemy for other things that have quite little or nothing to do with it. Yet many people nowadays feel strangely compelled to do just that.

I agree that physical alchemy is a great dicepline, I am not questioning that in the slightest. All I am saying is inner alchemy, transmutation of self, can only help in the art. At the end of the day it is called the philosophers stone, not the alchemists stone. I think if anyone is doing high-jacking here it is the people on an inner alchemy thread, denouncing inner alchemy without having any real knowledge of it, or its benefits to physical alchemy.

I think you may benefit from learning a bit more about it before judging it so strongly. And if you do not want to do that, I do not see why you are on an inner alchemy thread. What is your intention?

Axismundi000
08-15-2016, 05:22 PM
@ Loki Morningstar you are wasting your time with this guy.

http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3946-Aspects-of-Alchemy/page23

From page 23 onwards I provide various sources, well....see for yourself how it turns out.

JDP
08-15-2016, 06:19 PM
@ Loki Morningstar you are wasting your time with this guy.

http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3946-Aspects-of-Alchemy/page23

From page 23 onwards I provide various sources, well....see for yourself how it turns out.

That you quoted the personal beliefs/speculations of some writers, also dictionaries, and then again selectively the more modern (and erroneous in a historical context) alternative usages of the word "alchemy". I, on the other hand, provided a definition of alchemy straight from a medieval author. So who is "wasting time" with whom?

JDP
08-15-2016, 06:43 PM
JDP, you are starting to sound like some kind of Alchemy fascist.

Or maybe you are starting to sound like some kind of anti-alchemy anarchist?


Alchemies earliest days would have been philosophy, herbology, spiritualism, etc.

None of which are "alchemy". Those topics stand on their own. Nobody seems to want to hijack them to mean something else. So once again one has to wonder why this obsession some people have with trying to make alchemy be something else than it was by hook or crook.




All this purist speak is repulsive. All alchemy is about as far as I am aware is transmutation. Change of one thing to another.

More specifically "base" metals into "noble" ones.


I completely agree that chemistry is an integral part.

Alchemists have always made a distinction here too. They never saw their operations as being part of "vulgar" or "ordinary chemistry" either. Their writings are full invectives against "sophists", "puffers", "multipliers", "vulgar chymists", etc., whom they considered did not know the correct way of operating. We are talking, therefore, about a set of effective operations with the appropriate substances, which "chemistry" obviously must completely ignore or has never bothered to investigate better, otherwise its professors would know the reality of the subject and would stop treating alchemy as a some sort of "dream" or "error" (at best) or a deliberate fraud (at worst.) So instead of "chemistry" being an integral part, I would say "manual/physical operations with substances" is the MANDATORY part of alchemy, regardless of what some alchemists might have believed or thought when it came to theoretical interpretations of what they were doing.



But to be a good alchemist you must have perseverance, strength of will, patience, well tuned senses. These are all part of alchemy too. And to work on them only makes your great work better.

Yes, but none of what you are aptly bringing forth as important for the alchemist to possess has anything to do with any bizarre "inner alchemy" claims. Those are just natural character traits that all people have in different degrees. Thus why some people are more apt for alchemy than others, why some succeed while others never do. But, once again, this is all PERFECTLY NATURAL, there is no "strange" or "supernatural" thing going on here, just plain life/nature at work, as usual.


Shamanism and alchemy are like father and son in my eyes. Shamans were the wisest of the tribesmen, they knew how to make medicines, they knew about psychology, they were the scientists of their day.

Prehistoric shamans knew precious little about alchemy. We do not get any notices of alchemy until much later, closer to the last centuries BC, when civilization was already advanced enough for something like alchemy to be discovered/developed.


When you get he calling towards being a shaman, everything becomes a message, something to draw you down your path of fact finding, truth searching, data collecting, whatever you want to call it.

It is just a different way to look at things. We all have different paths. And some feel a connection to the universe more than others. Personally I see many signs and teaching in my life that I feel was sent to me by a greater intelligence. Even if that greater intelligence is nothing more than my subconcious communicating with me.

I agree that physical alchemy is a great dicepline, I am not questioning that in the slightest. All I am saying is inner alchemy, transmutation of self, can only help in the art. At the end of the day it is called the philosophers stone, not the alchemists stone. I think if anyone is doing high-jacking here it is the people on an inner alchemy thread, denouncing inner alchemy without having any real knowledge of it, or its benefits to physical alchemy.

I think you may benefit from learning a bit more about it before judging it so strongly. And if you do not want to do that, I do not see why you are on an inner alchemy thread. What is your intention?

There is no evidence that any such thing as an "inner alchemy" exists. For all we know it is just the delusion of a few people. Who can prove otherwise? We are talking about things that are alleged to be happening INSIDE THE HEAD/MIND of some people, where nothing can be proved and you have to take people's claims at face value with no proof whatsoever. Like the already cited criminal psychologist character from the first Terminator film said: "You see how clever this part is? How it doesn't require a shred of proof?"

Loki Morningstar
08-15-2016, 09:07 PM
JDP, you are acting like a luddite, if anyone is doing high-jacking here it is the people posting on an inner alchemy thread, denouncing inner alchemy without having any real knowledge of it, or its benefits.

I think you may benefit from learning a bit more about it before judging it so strongly. And if you do not want to do that, I do not see why you are on an inner alchemy thread.

What is your intention?

zoas23
08-15-2016, 10:23 PM
@ Loki Morningstar you are wasting your time with this guy.

http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3946-Aspects-of-Alchemy/page23

From page 23 onwards I provide various sources, well....see for yourself how it turns out.

It's never a waste of time to talk to JDP!!!! Never undervalue the others, they may be wiser than you think.

JDP certainly has a vast knowledge of alchemy... that's impossible to deny.

I am also often surprised by his disregard for the spiritual side of alchemy... though I get his view and where he's coming from: a lot of things received the name of "alchemy" in the last 150 years... and some of them are maybe valuable, but they are not really "alchemy" if you have a classical perspective (i.e, I won't discuss if the psychology of Jung has any value or not -in my opinion, it does not have much value... his Gnostic sermons have some worth though-... but, in my opinion, Jung is not "alchemy").

Same thing goes for some weird practices, at least very popular among the South American followers of Kardek... who are obsessed with "channeling" Saint Germain in spiritist sessions that they call "alchemy"... that's not "alchemy" either.

Maybe the KEY word of the Royal Art is "Art".

So some discussions become absurd if you think about ART... Is the Mona Lisa worth because of its technique? Or is it worth because of its impossible to define spiritual value? Or is it a mix of both? Is art a technical practice or a spiritual practice? Which one is the final aim of art? Is there even an answer to these questions?

Axismundi000
08-16-2016, 07:20 AM
Zoas23 I appreciate the thought you have put into your comment. Perhaps it is usefull to simply point out that the virtue of Malkuth is discrimination and leave it at that.

JDP
08-16-2016, 01:54 PM
JDP, you are acting like a luddite, if anyone is doing high-jacking here it is the people posting on an inner alchemy thread, denouncing inner alchemy without having any real knowledge of it, or its benefits.

The very fact that there is such a claim floating around as "inner alchemy" is more than enough evidence of who started the hijacking. The old alchemists themselves never made such a claim, it's a relatively modern invention (and no, claiming that alchemy is a "Divine Gift" does not qualify as "inner alchemy"; the alchemists who believed in this "Divine Gift" claim still talk about operations with substances, so the "Divine Gift" status did not prevent from having to actually work with substances.)


I think you may benefit from learning a bit more about it before judging it so strongly. And if you do not want to do that, I do not see why you are on an inner alchemy thread.

What is your intention?

To defend alchemy from hijackers.

Axismundi000
08-16-2016, 03:41 PM
So JDP you seek to defend Alchemy from hijackers!!!:D

I did not realise you had taken on such a mantle of responsibility. The Internet is a vast place I think you are going to be very busy rooting out all those with spiritual ideas related to Alchemy. We seem to pop up everywhere I wish you luck.

Alternatively instead of policing everyone you could work to produce this empirical, experimental success with Alchemy. This is after all what you see Alchemy to be, purely scientific and empirical. if you achieved that you would save millions of lives with the scientific method of the stone that you published. Perhaps you would become more famous then sir Isaak Newton.

Loki Morningstar
08-16-2016, 05:14 PM
Hahaha! That is spot on Axismundi. Couldn't have said it better myself. That was pretty much where I was taking this.

As for what you said earlier.


It's never a waste of time to talk to JDP!!!! Never undervalue the others, they may be wiser than you think.

JDP certainly has a vast knowledge of alchemy... that's impossible to deny.

I am sure he does. And I would love to talk to him about that, as I am fully respectful of his passion. Although it's also about cost benefit analysis. And at the moment, with his amount of disrespect for something that he doesn't seem to know very much about, and that I have a passion for, it would be difficult to have a conversation with him. Although at the same time. I am more than willing to change my mind.

Ghislain
08-16-2016, 05:21 PM
Alchemy would not make an appearance in Europe until the 8th century when Muslims finally brought alchemical knowledge with them to Spain. The first European text to mention alchemy appeared in roughly 1050 CE. And, while Egyptian, Muslim, and European practitioners were certainly interested in the elixir of life, there was a more noticeable focus on creating gold from other substances than was found elsewhere. Gold was perceived to be the perfect metal, with all others being less than perfect. The pursuit of the transmutation of lesser metals into gold was thus also the pursuit of the perfection and transmutation of the human spirit.

So alchemy has always been spiritual, thus those who deny this spiritual aspects are not true alchemists, but just puffers in pursuit of gold.



Alchemy in China was the brainchild of Taoist monks, and as such is wrapped up in Taoist beliefs and practice. The founder of Chinese alchemy is considered to be Wei Po-Yang. In its earliest practice the Chinese aim was always to discover the elixir of life, not to transmute base metals into gold. Therefore, there was always a closer connection to medicine in China.

Some believe that China was the birthplace of Alchemy.


Once alchemy became more scientific and focused on the transmutation into gold, there was more support for it. This was a period of economic hardship and even many monarchs were hopeful that the claims of alchemy were true.

Note the word "hopeful"

Source: The Magic and Myth of Alchemy (http://www.lloydlibrary.org/exhibits/alchemy/history.html)

Alchemy has been many things to many different people, even the etymology of the word Alchemy is rather vague...


alchemy (n.)

mid-14c., from Old French alchimie (14c.), alquemie (13c.), from Medieval Latin alkimia, from Arabic al-kimiya, from Greek khemeioa (found c.300 C.E. in a decree of Diocletian against "the old writings of the Egyptians"), all meaning "alchemy." Perhaps from an old name for Egypt (Khemia, literally "land of black earth," found in Plutarch), or from Greek khymatos "that which is poured out," from khein "to pour," related to khymos "juice, sap" [Klein, citing W. Muss-Arnolt, calls this folk etymology]. The word seems to have elements of both origins.

Mahn ... concludes, after an elaborate investigation, that Gr. khymeia was probably the original, being first applied to pharmaceutical chemistry, which was chiefly concerned with juices or infusions of plants; that the pursuits of the Alexandrian alchemists were a subsequent development of chemical study, and that the notoriety of these may have caused the name of the art to be popularly associated with the ancient name of Egypt.

The al- is the Arabic definite article, "the." The art and the name were adopted by the Arabs from Alexandrians and thence returned to Europe via Spain. Alchemy was the "chemistry" of the Middle Ages and early modern times; since c. 1600 the word has been applied distinctively to the pursuit of the transmutation of baser metals into gold, which, along with the search for the universal solvent and the panacea, were the chief occupations of early chemistry.

Source:Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=alchemy)

You see, no one even knows what is the true meaning of the word Alchemy. It is only since the 1600's that the word has been applied distinctively to the pursuit of the transmutation of baser metals into gold and thus this may be a corruption of the true meaning.

Is there any proof at all of an Alchemical transmutation of base metal into gold?

Why did all Alchemical labs have an altar and a space for prayer and possible meditation...it is important to realise there is much we don't know and thus exploration of every path is necessary.

JDP inner Alchemy may be the ingredient you are missing.

The search continues...

Ghislain

JDP
08-16-2016, 06:24 PM
So JDP you seek to defend Alchemy from hijackers!!!:D

I did not realise you had taken on such a mantle of responsibility. The Internet is a vast place I think you are going to be very busy rooting out all those with spiritual ideas related to Alchemy. We seem to pop up everywhere I wish you luck.

Alternatively instead of policing everyone you could work to produce this empirical, experimental success with Alchemy. This is after all what you see Alchemy to be, purely scientific and empirical. if you achieved that you would save millions of lives with the scientific method of the stone that you published. Perhaps you would become more famous then sir Isaak Newton.

Obviously it is impossible to fight all the widespread ignorance and mistaken ideas on the subject. Academic historians themselves have been fighting a similar fight (though for their own point of view of the subject, which is basically alchemy as a "proto-chemistry") for decades, and they still have to cope with these misinterpretations of alchemy, despite all their efforts so far. But that doesn't mean one should give up. Even if just one person becomes better aware of the subject and realizes the inadequacy of such spiritualist/mentalist/Jungian claims regarding alchemy, that already is worth the effort. It means one person less who has been misled.

At least I have achieved other methods of effecting transmutation via reactions between some substances and seen the empirical reality of the subject, which if or whenever I wish to, I can also teach to others so they can in their turn repeat it for themselves and become aware of how real the whole thing is. No Jedi Knight-like powers or blind faith in unseen "beings" required. Anyone skilled in laboratory operations can do it (including you yourself, despite your mistaken views.) Can you say the same of your fanciful "spiritual/mental" speculations about alchemy? Have they actually allowed you to prepare the Stone or achieve any other metallic transmutation whatsoever? Somehow I strongly suspect they haven't. And they wouldn't work even if you lived to be 1000 years old and every single day try to achieve it by such unproven means. I have plenty of reasons to doubt that alchemy relies on such weird fancy things that no one has even proven they exist in the first place. If one can't even prove that such things exist, how can one possibly be so sure that alchemy supposedly needs such unproven things to work? As the old saying goes: "This is ignotum per ignotius!" (i.e. explaining the unknown by the even more unknown!) What people who believe this weird stuff need to do first and foremost is to actually prove that such spiritual/mental influences/powers even exist in the first place. Once they have done that, then we can talk about whether such things have anything to do with alchemy or not.

JDP
08-16-2016, 06:44 PM
So alchemy has always been spiritual, thus those who deny this spiritual aspects are not true alchemists, but just puffers in pursuit of gold.




Some believe that China was the birthplace of Alchemy.



Note the word "hopeful"

Source: The Magic and Myth of Alchemy (http://www.lloydlibrary.org/exhibits/alchemy/history.html)

Alchemy has been many things to many different people, even the etymology of the word Alchemy is rather vague...



Source:Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=alchemy)

You see, no one even knows what is the true meaning of the word Alchemy. It is only since the 1600's that the word has been applied distinctively to the pursuit of the transmutation of baser metals into gold and thus this may be a corruption of the true meaning.

Is there any proof at all of an Alchemical transmutation of base metal into gold?

Why did all Alchemical labs have an altar and a space for prayer and possible meditation...it is important to realise there is much we don't know and thus exploration of every path is necessary.

JDP inner Alchemy may be the ingredient you are missing.

The search continues...

Ghislain

You are quoting non-specialized sources which still follow some rather incorrect ideas on the subject that became popular in the 19th century. One only has to see the example of a MEDIEVAL definition of alchemy I quoted in that other thread that was linked earlier to plainly see that alchemy was always the pursuit of the Philosophers' Stone and metallic transmutation, a looooooooooong time before 1600 (the "Mirror of Alchemy" attributed to Roger Bacon is definitely a medieval work, no question about it.) It is rather the other way around, as was already shown even by a very eminent occultist in the 1920s: Arthur Edward Waite. Read his "The Secret Tradition in Alchemy" book, which is a survey of all the literature on the subject that he had read (Waite was fluent in Latin, French and English, so he was able to examine a very large portion of the surviving literature on the subject) and you will see that it is actually the claims about "spiritual alchemy" which are the rather recent ones, not those about the Stone and transmutation, which are ancient. Waite could not find any clear evidence for any such "spiritual alchemy" before the 16th century, and even the few early examples he found are dubious, as substances and laboratory operations are still quite prominent in the works of such apparently mystically-minded writers as Khunrath. In fact, I would go beyond Waite and say that "spiritual alchemy" claims (meaning wholly discarding operations with substances) do not seem to exist before the late 17th century.

Ghislain
08-16-2016, 07:56 PM
JDP

You have your beliefs, but you failed to mention the transmutational proof, the reason for the presence of an altar in the lab or the fact that even the origin of the word Alchemy is suspect.

If you close your mind to all possibilities other than those you have already planted in your mind as the truth, all you will ever find is what you already believe, whether that is right or wrong.

I have nothing more to say on this subject and I wish you well in your endeavors.

Ghislain

zoas23
08-16-2016, 08:00 PM
The thread can get REALLY interesting if you all go on the opposite direction: finding the "common ground" where you AGREE.

I used to deeply dislike the point of view of JDP... but after some time and some comments by a third person (in private), I realized that JDP is not "wrong" (even if I think that he's too radical in some of his views).

The debate about sources is somehow exhausted... Since you are not enemies, why don't you take a truly spiritual alchemical path and find the way in which you (Axis, Loki, Ghislain, etc) can AGREE with JDP?
Same thing goes to JDP in relation to the others.

The "Symposium" of Plato is a great example: 7 persons who do not agree explain their views and somehow arrive to an agreement.

Loki Morningstar
08-16-2016, 08:00 PM
Ghislain, that was a very well thought out and information rich post. I really enjoyed the information you shared.

As for this thread, I am getting a bit tired of it. We share a variety of knowledge and information. JDP ignores it, repeats himself and implies we are all idiots. I am just going to explain my beliefs, they are my beliefs, and to be honest no one can change them, they are logical and currently see no reason why I should change them.

I personally believe in a thing I call the Logos. The Logos, to me, is a conceptual idea of all the information that can be known of everything in existence. Whether it exists physically, or as a concept, I do no really care, and do not see how this can be argued not to exist. If someone did, then there is no such thing as truth, in which case, my truth is as valid as anyone else's.

Secondly, the brain appears to be a collector of information. It does this by creating patterns of neural pathways. This pattern to me is a child like version of the Logos, which I personally also see as a neural pattern, the most perfect neural pattern. The human mind has the potential to contain the Logos, perhaps not in its current state of evolution. Although I believe with a certain amount of neurones it would be capable.

My personal belief is that the goal of alchemy is to take the brain from a raw state, and move it towards becoming more and more like the Logos. This is not to say that I do not think of physical alchemy as an important practice. I think it is very important, as a information gathering tool to move towards the Logos.

These are my beliefs, think of them what you will. But I do not see how you can argue against this as a belief, or noble pursuit.

As stated before, we cannot know that the external world even exists, we cannot know that the rules that we think are constant will always be consistent, but we can know with some surety that we think, and retain information.

Even in physical alchemy, without transmuting the brain into a pattern more and more close to the Logos; if we do not carefully observe, remember, and understand the information we attain through it; then it would be a pretty worthless pursuit.

To me the prima materia is information. Even if we talked about it as a material objective thing, whatever that thing is, to us, as humans, only capable of perceiving information through our senses, it is just information or data.

I believe there are two branches to alchemy. I just explained mine. And I assume that you all understand quite well the other. And so, to me, that is the end of it. There is no arguing my logic as far as I can tell.

Axismundi000
08-16-2016, 08:02 PM
JDP my lab Alchemy is still at the Spagyrics level which you can easily see on this forum, I have never made any claim about results that I cannot back up with some kind of description, photographic and text.

As i have mentioned if you succeed in showing the stone in a purely empirical way without any spiritual stuff you will have made the world a better place. Despite my disagreement with you over what constitutes Alchemy I would be delighted if you were to achieve this.

When it comes to 'saving' people from what you see as deluded ideas about Alchemy I'm afraid I am beyond rescue, good luck with that in general.

@zoas23 you come across as exhibiting that particular new age fascism where you try to sound reasonable but are actually seeking to control. JDP is aggressive almost 'evangelical' in his empiricism but we must all find a way..... I am reminded of that film with Sasha Baron Cohen: Bruno. Hey zoas23 lets all 'hug it out' here shall we?

JDP
08-17-2016, 04:21 AM
JDP my lab Alchemy is still at the Spagyrics level which you can easily see on this forum, I have never made any claim about results that I cannot back up with some kind of description, photographic and text.

As i have mentioned if you succeed in showing the stone in a purely empirical way without any spiritual stuff you will have made the world a better place. Despite my disagreement with you over what constitutes Alchemy I would be delighted if you were to achieve this.

When it comes to 'saving' people from what you see as deluded ideas about Alchemy I'm afraid I am beyond rescue, good luck with that in general.

@zoas23 you come across as exhibiting that particular new age fascism where you try to sound reasonable but are actually seeking to control. JDP is aggressive almost 'evangelical' in his empiricism but we must all find a way..... I am reminded of that film with Sasha Baron Cohen: Bruno. Hey zoas23 lets all 'hug it out' here shall we?

Let me put it to you this way: if you could train a chimp or program a robot to perform the operations of alchemy, it would succeed all the same as if you or I performed them. So much for this "inner alchemy" thingy. Even a "soulless" machine could perform it, if it had the right information programmed into it.

Also, from a historical point of view: the fact that the alchemists always feared that their knowledge would fall into the "wrong" or "unworthy" hands also immediately should tell you that they did not believe that any such "special powers", or "Divine permissions", or whatever other uncorroborated boasts, were really necessary to prepare the Stone, no matter what some of them claimed to try to impress the public and confer some sort of "divine" status to their science/art. One only has to see how careful they were never to write too clearly about the matters used to make the Stone to plainly perceive that. Such a measure would have been totally unnecessary if something "special" that only some people can achieve or possess was required to succeed in the operations of alchemy. You could in fact very safely divulge the entire process in very clear language and still the "unworthy" would not succeed, while the "worthy" would, even though both groups would be following the exact same instructions! Can you imagine the impact that this simple fact would have on the world? It would change mankind forever (and for the better, I may add.) It would in fact transcend the fact of the Stone being real. It would indeed prove to the whole world that something "supernatural" is plainly at work, and therefore it does exist, it would not be a matter of "faith" but of empirical certitude. Only a complete idiot or a totally self-destructive person would try to go against such "Divine Will" after such amazing evidence. But no such luck. That is not how reality works. Sorry. It is pure wishful thinking and idealism. The reason for the heavy secrecy in alchemy was precisely an attempt to ward off those people that the alchemists arbitrarily considered "unworthy" of possessing the Stone. The funny and ironic thing, though, is that since alchemy was practiced by a great variety of peoples with diverse backgrounds (Chinese, Indians, Egyptians, Persians, Jews, Byzantines, Arabs, Berbers, Turks, Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, French, Germans, English, etc.) and cultures/religions (Taoists, Buddhists, Pagans, Gnostics, Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Protestants) with very different views and ideas, many of them were "unworthy" according to the point of view of many of their very own "peers". So if we have to take at face value such absurd claims and totally subjective views, like who is "worthy" and "unworthy", we would have to come to the inevitable conclusion that a bunch of the alchemists themselves must have been liars who never achieved what they claimed. They can't all possibly have been "worthy" to achieve the Stone. Obviously someone must have been wrong here, since the alchemists themselves were a very diverse group of people who more often than not did not share the same set of ideals on what or who was "worthy". Such subjective views vary from one group of people to another. Can anyone in his right mind, then, seriously think that alchemy can possibly rely on such things? Call me crazy, but to me makes infinitely more sense that alchemy is simply an empirical fact, and as such it can be achieved by anyone, regardless of arbitrary personal points of view and beliefs, provided that the person manages to discover the right matters and the right operations.

JDP
08-17-2016, 04:41 AM
JDP

You have your beliefs, but you failed to mention the transmutational proof, the reason for the presence of an altar in the lab or the fact that even the origin of the word Alchemy is suspect.

If you close your mind to all possibilities other than those you have already planted in your mind as the truth, all you will ever find is what you already believe, whether that is right or wrong.

I have nothing more to say on this subject and I wish you well in your endeavors.

Ghislain

Old drawings showing altars in alchemical labs are few and far between. Look at many old drawings/paintings of alchemical labs and you will plainly see that in most of them the altar shines precisely by its absence.

The etymology of the word "alchemy" has little to do with the subject. There's several theories about its origin. None of which have anything to do with the claims of "inner alchemy" enthusiasts, by the way. As your very own sources show, they have to do with such things as "black earth", or "melting/pouring", or "juices/saps", etc. Funny, isn't it? All of them connected to substances or operations carried out with substances.

zoas23
08-17-2016, 06:03 AM
@zoas23 you come across as exhibiting that particular new age fascism where you try to sound reasonable but are actually seeking to control. JDP is aggressive almost 'evangelical' in his empiricism but we must all find a way..... I am reminded of that film with Sasha Baron Cohen: Bruno. Hey zoas23 lets all 'hug it out' here shall we?

When you manage to find a common ground with someone, then you can learn from him. Of course, it takes two to tango.

Other than that... If you are having a bad day, that's your fucking problem, not mine... I'm not your punching bag... so whenever you feel in the mood to insult me: eat your own shit yourself, 'cause I certainly do not need it. Thank you.

Loki Morningstar
08-17-2016, 06:14 AM
Surprise suprise, JDP you are ignoring us and repeating yourself again. You are beginning to sound like a broken record. Yawn!

Do you know everything there is to know about alchemy and life?

I am always willing to admit that I know very little, that there is so much more to learn. I am willing to admit I might be wrong about anything that I say. It seems to me that you need inner alchemy more than you know.

You may have great skills and knowledge in practical alchemy (Which you seem to think is chemistry, so it seems if anyone is hijacking alchemy, it is you, if this is what you are looking for why not join a chemistry forum?). And I respect you for your knowledge of this area.

But what use is having the stone if you struggle to make, or have, good relations with people, if you have no quality of life?

Do you care about making friends on Alchemy Forums?

I would really like to be able to get on with you JDP. I would really like us to be able to share knowledge with each other. Although, that would take mutual respect, I am not interested in a one sided conversation.

Axismundi000
08-17-2016, 07:39 AM
When you manage to find a common ground with someone, then you can learn from him. Of course, it takes two to tango.

Other than that... If you are having a bad day, that's your fucking problem, not mine... I'm not your punching bag... so whenever you feel in the mood to insult me: eat your own shit yourself, 'cause I certainly do not need it. Thank you.

Judging by your abusive comments I am not the one having a bad day. Clearly you are not used to being called out on new age fascism. I suppose I should complain to moderators about you language but frankly you are not worth the effort.

Andro
08-17-2016, 08:26 AM
Address the topic, not the person.

All personal attacks, direct or implied, stop NOW.

Do not reply to this post, as it is not up for debate.
_______________________

Edit: Also see this thread: Argue The Point, Not The Person (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?2854-Argue-the-point-not-the-person).

zoas23
08-17-2016, 10:27 AM
Judging by your abusive comments I am not the one having a bad day. Clearly you are not used to being called out on new age fascism. I suppose I should complain to moderators about you language but frankly you are not worth the effort.

Yes, I am not used to being called "fascist" or "new ager", for I am far from being either of those things.
If you think that I am not worth the effort, that's your problem, not my problem.
So I am expecting an apology from you.

As for getting along with other persons who have a radically different point of view than the one you have: that's maybe the #1 practice of inner alchemy...

I do not agree with many views that JDP has... and yet we helped each other a few times with different things, without caring if our ideology is very different. I simply do not need him to agree with me.
JDP has a privileged knowledge of classical alchemical literature... So maybe you can take from him what is useful for you and disregard the ideas which are not useful for you.

I do not give a damn on winning an internet debate, but undeserved insults are off limits to me.

If you want to hear my unworthy opinion on inner alchemy, it's as simple as: "That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing".

If you are unable to be kind, respectful, helpful and mutable... then don't waste your time with alchemy.

Wise words from the departing:
By working the soil
We cultivate the sky
And enter the vegetable kingdom
Of our own heaven.
Wear sensible shoes
And always say "thank you"
By working the soil
By working the soil
We cultivate good manners.
It is to say "please", and "thank you"
Especially for the things
We never had

Axismundi000
08-17-2016, 11:54 AM
I note zoas23 that you disagree with the new age fascism idea.

You then suggest I seek to win a debate and finally identify behaviours and atitudes without which you feel it is unlikely that I will be succesfull in my pursuit of Alchemy. You clearly do not think any of this telling me what I am wanting to achieve. How I should think and act, what my attitudes need to be is in any way new age spiritual fascism. After a little thought I realise that you genuinely do not consider any of this innapropriate hence your annoyance, I have encountered this several times before.

I wish you every success on your journey zoas23 and I understand the opinions you express are genuinely felt.

Just as i perceive JDP to be an obdurate empiricist who it is pointless to debate with, I now understand that you also are firmly entrenched in your paradigm and I shall take all you say with a large pinch of salt from now on.

Thank you both.

Loki Morningstar
08-17-2016, 04:34 PM
I wish everyone would just get on and accept that people have varying views about things. :(

zoas23
08-17-2016, 05:02 PM
I note zoas23 that you disagree with the new age fascism idea.

You then suggest I seek to win a debate and finally identify behaviours and atitudes without which you feel it is unlikely that I will be succesfull in my pursuit of Alchemy. You clearly do not think any of this telling me what I am wanting to achieve. How I should think and act, what my attitudes need to be is in any way new age spiritual fascism. After a little thought I realise that you genuinely do not consider any of this innapropriate hence your annoyance, I have encountered this several times before.

I wish you every success on your journey zoas23 and I understand the opinions you express are genuinely felt.

Just as i perceive JDP to be an obdurate empiricist who it is pointless to debate with, I now understand that you also are firmly entrenched in your paradigm and I shall take all you say with a large pinch of salt from now on.

Thank you both.

Yes, I do NOT consider inappropriate to ask you not to insult me.
Am I firmly entrenched in MY paradigm? Could you please describe which one is my paradigm or which ones are its main ideas and practices?

You don't fucking know me... cut the crap.

Axismundi000
08-17-2016, 05:40 PM
Yes, I do NOT consider inappropriate to ask you not to insult me.
Am I firmly entrenched in MY paradigm? Could you please describe which one is my paradigm or which ones are its main ideas and practices?

You don't fucking know me... cut the crap.

zoas23 I will not accept further abusive language from you. My letting it go the first time may have been a mistake, it seems to have encouraged you in the idea that it is OK to be abusive and that infantile temper tantrums are something I will tolerate, I will not tolerate foul mouthed oafish language and attitudes.

zoas23 i do not expect an apology from you for this serial abuse because I do not think you have the maturity to genuinely give one.

I simply request that you never use abusive and obscene language towards me ever again on this forum.

JDP
08-17-2016, 10:00 PM
Surprise suprise, JDP you are ignoring us and repeating yourself again. You are beginning to sound like a broken record. Yawn!

Do you know everything there is to know about alchemy and life?

I am always willing to admit that I know very little, that there is so much more to learn. I am willing to admit I might be wrong about anything that I say. It seems to me that you need inner alchemy more than you know.

You may have great skills and knowledge in practical alchemy (Which you seem to think is chemistry, so it seems if anyone is hijacking alchemy, it is you, if this is what you are looking for why not join a chemistry forum?). And I respect you for your knowledge of this area.

But what use is having the stone if you struggle to make, or have, good relations with people, if you have no quality of life?

Do you care about making friends on Alchemy Forums?

I would really like to be able to get on with you JDP. I would really like us to be able to share knowledge with each other. Although, that would take mutual respect, I am not interested in a one sided conversation.

Talking about "broken records" and ignoring what one writes: I never said that alchemy is "chemistry", in fact, quite the contrary, I have always pointed out that the alchemists distinguished their operations and methods from those of "vulgar chymistry". Just because both alchemy and chemistry operate upon substances does NOT mean they are the same thing. In fact, I go even further and say that chemistry is not even the same with its real immediate predecessor: chymistry (unlike chemists, the chymists of the 17th-18th century did not deny transmutation and in fact a good number of them achieved it by their own methods, different from those of the alchemists.) But the difference between the two (or three) disciplines has nothing to do with any unproven "supernatural" intervention or special Jedi-like mental forces. Transmutation does not need "miracles" to work. It is perfectly natural and thus anyone can achieve it, provided he is a good researcher and figures out the correct substances and operations. Nature does not give a damn about what one thinks or believes, it just "is", and it will continue to do its thing independent of anyone's arbitrary theories and speculations.

I need "inner alchemy"? Really? Why would anyone need something for which there is no proof whatsoever it actually exists? I have an idea, Loki: I have decided that you need a "ghost generator". Yes, that is the solution to all your problems, my friend. Now go and find one and start generating ghosts. Then let me know how this purely imaginary thing that I have just made up a couple of minutes ago and for which there also is no proof whatsoever that it actually exists anywhere has improved your life.

zoas23
08-17-2016, 10:23 PM
zoas23 I will not accept further abusive language from you. My letting it go the first time may have been a mistake, it seems to have encouraged you in the idea that it is OK to be abusive and that infantile temper tantrums are something I will tolerate, I will not tolerate foul mouthed oafish language and attitudes.

zoas23 i do not expect an apology from you for this serial abuse because I do not think you have the maturity to genuinely give one.

I simply request that you never use abusive and obscene language towards me ever again on this forum.

Sir Center of the World.... An apology from me????

I told you that after more than 15 pages of a discussion that was going nowhere, you should try a different approach and find the common ground where JDP and you (and others) can get along and have a productive conversation/exchange... I do not agree with many points of view that JDP has, but I respect him and I've had a few very productive exchanges with him. We do not need to agree.

Abusive language is calling me a "new age fascist" for suggesting you to do such thing... I should have replied "FUCK YOU" to that idiotic post of yours, I didn't, maybe I should have done it... and then you kept on insulting me.

Other than that, I work quite often in the context of a Lodge dedicated exclusively to inner alchemy (no lab). Our #1 rule is explained by the metaphor of feeding the Dove (a symbol of the Logos / Word). The Dove flies from person to person and everyone has to "feed it"... If you insult another person, you are doing the opposite, which is taking away the seeds that the Dove received. The Lodge has some 30 men and women of both sexes with very different ideas... and yet we never had a discussion.

I enjoy a lot exchanging ideas with persons of different ideologies... as long as there's kindness, respect, an understanding that we all have different ideas and trust.

I do not deserve your insults... and if you do not see that you are insulting me, then you are completely out of your mind, so I somehow hope that you actually understand that you are doing it.

I see Alchemy as an ART... thus I understand that some persons can be very focused on the technique, others can be focused on its spiritual value, others can be focused on its theory, others can be focused on its literature... the possibilities are endless. It is possible to appreciate Basquiat and Mantegna... and it's somehow good that both of them existed.

A person who seeks to destroy those who do not think like him... will end up having a very limited point of view.

“And remember, you shall suffer all things and again suffer: until you have sufficient sufferance to accept all things.” ― Austin Osman Spare

Axismundi000
08-17-2016, 11:37 PM
Once again you use obscene language towards me zoas23. This really is too much.

zoas23
08-18-2016, 12:21 AM
Once again you use obscene language towards me zoas23. This really is too much.

I actually sent you a private message saying literally:



I do not get which one is your problem with me, but STOP IT.

I seriously dislike confrontations.

So... truce and let's make a "tabula rasa" and begin again, this is fucking stupid and makes no sense.

... but you decided to ignore it. So I'll say it here: STOP IT. Let's begin again in a different and civilized way... I do not enjoy this type of exchanges. They do not make any sense.

Awani
08-18-2016, 01:15 AM
Temporary lock.

:cool:

Andro
10-23-2016, 06:31 PM
Time to re-open this thread...

Zero tolerance for flaming, trolling, personal attacks, etc... Should go without saying...

Coleridgean
10-23-2016, 08:35 PM
I'd actually prefer the term 'philosophical alchemy' to 'spiritual alchemy' since the spirit represents only one of three aspects of the ternary - those being salt or sal (Earth / body), mercury (Water&Air / spirit), and sulfur (Air&Fire / soul). The point I would make is that spiritual or philosophical alchemy has very strong validity in literature and is the root of modern philosophy, since pioneers like Jacob Boehme came along before and inspired Kant, Schelling, and the rest of the Germans

Schmuldvich
10-23-2016, 09:39 PM
I'd actually prefer the term 'philosophical alchemy' to 'spiritual alchemy' since the spirit represents only one of three aspects of the ternary - those being salt or sal (Earth / body), mercury (Water&Air / spirit), and sulfur (Air&Fire / soul).

The point I would make is that spiritual or philosophical alchemy has very strong validity in literature and is the root of modern philosophy, since pioneers like Jacob Boehme came along before and inspired Kant, Schelling, and the rest of the Germans

Alchemy is a tangible, physical science whose principles, when understood, can be applied to daily life and our understanding of the Universe.

Because these principles can be applied to our daily lives (as well as because people falsely suppose our Art is not true), in time Alchemy has been bastardized into "spiritual alchemy". Call it what you want; "inner alchemy", "philosophical alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy.


The OP of this thread, Dwellings, asked if by merely meditating we can end up with insane amounts of gold...


I want to ask: How can by merely meditating chakra kundalini Inner Alchemy or whatever mumbo jumbo you want to call it can you end up with insane amounts of Gold?

Most texts written deal with creating the Philosopher's Stone, though never directly giving a recipe and always with veiled speech. Many Alchemists liked to skirt around the issue and write in allegory. Others liked to veil what they wrote in a kind of spiritual blanket, making it applicable to life.

This is a clever way for the Wise to instill unwavering wisdom within your subconscious.

Coleridgean
10-23-2016, 10:15 PM
Perhaps no one individual has meditated on philosophical alchemy to achieve gold via the ever-regenerative Philosopher's Stone, however consider that the secret college was born out of the Rosicrucians, and that the Royal Society was born out of the secret college. And then all science has flowed from this arcane discipline. Even Francis Bacon wrote Sylva Sylvarum, and he was considered the father of modern science and the scientific method. So in a roundabout way, yes, meditating on philosophical alchemy has ultimately brought about hoards of gold.

Awani
10-23-2016, 10:16 PM
Call it what you want; "inner alchemy", "philosophical alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy.

Honestly the same can be said of Practical Alchemy: Call it what you want; "practical alchemy", "laboratory alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy.

:cool:

Schmuldvich
10-23-2016, 10:26 PM
Perhaps no one individual has meditated on philosophical alchemy to achieve gold via the ever-regenerative Philosopher's Stone, however... ...So in a roundabout way, yes, meditating on philosophical alchemy has ultimately brought about hoards of gold.

Ha! Good point. Indeed, utilizing that line of deduction you certainly could say that meditating on philosophical alchemy has ultimately brought forth tons of gold.



Honestly the same can be said of Practical Alchemy: Call it what you want; "practical alchemy", "laboratory alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy.

:cool:

I like how you think! :cool:

While intentionally you could say that the same can be said of physical Alchemy, can you really though...?

If you say that physical Alchemy is not real Alchemy, then what in the world would you go on to define as 'real Alchemy'?

Awani
10-23-2016, 11:08 PM
If you say that physical Alchemy is not real Alchemy, then what in the world would you go on to define as 'real Alchemy'?

Well the main problem with this discussion is the word itself. It's like saying: what is the real Christianity? Is is the Pope and his gang? Is it the Gnostics? The Russian Orthodox? Etc.

Alchemy is a word that defines a category I guess. Etymologically according to Wiki:
The word alchemy was borrowed from Old French... and which is in turn borrowed from Arabic... the Arabic word is borrowed from Late Greek chēmeía... ‘black magic’... this ancient Greek word was derived from the early Greek name for Egypt, based on the Egyptian name for Egypt... ‘black earth’... - source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy#Name)



SHAMANISM

My position is that the original source of any form of transmutation or transformation stems from the ancient art of Shamanism. A shaman uses methods to achieve various forms of results through either potions (laboratory alchemy) or other means (spiritual alchemy). Most "modern" humans that encountered shamanism viewed it - and still to this day it is viewed by some assholes - as "black magic".

So if alchemy is just an old word for "black magic", then alchemy is nothing more than the Art of Shamanism.


EGYPT

But even if all I have written now is wrong then let's look at Egypt.

Egypt is not the beginning of civilisation. The human race did not one day stop being Stone Age man and suddenly erect a few pyramids and elect a Pharaoh. Egypt is the END of an older civilisation... and it is from this "older" civilisation the alchemical art comes from. Egypt is a culture that is extremely spiritual. There is no doubt about this. Their whole culture was about "gods", "afterlife" and such things. Yes, they were also very interested in the physical matter of our world and thus created some amazing structures... but the reason for these is clearly in the realm of the "spiritual" of some sort.

So even if the word "alchemy" only comes from Egypt it is clearly not only about some "physical act".

---------------------------------------------

So what is REAL alchemy?

If it is about the transmutation/transformation of the self into a higher state then it is REAL alchemy.

This was the goal of the old Egyptians, as well as the goal of those involved with Shamanism. To create real gold is certainly not the purpose, and those that think it is are not alchemists in my book, but if they are in their own books that is none of my business.

In my humble opinion.

:cool:

zoas23
10-24-2016, 04:12 AM
Ha! Good point. Indeed, utilizing that line of deduction you certainly could say that meditating on philosophical alchemy has ultimately brought forth tons of gold.

I get the point of Dev, probably the least lab oriented person here.

Maybe the discussion is if alchemy IS about getting a lot of gold. I know some people think that way... and I wish them the best and I hope that they will get all the gold they want.

My own vision is that occidental alchemy (I can't talk about, say, Chinese alchemy, because it's not a subject that I understand) was born out of Gnosticism... and whilst I don't call the Gnostic texts "Alchemy", the resemblance is too obvious.

Donald Trump has more money than any alchemist ever had... I would not be his apprentice though. If we reduce alchemy to producing richness, then I'd say that Trump is by far more worth than anyone's favorite alchemy classic. So get his bio and maybe you'll get what you want.

But if you think that Alchemy is a philosophy... a way of understanding the universe... a way of understanding life... then probably Trump is not a character that inspires you.

Awani
10-24-2016, 10:57 AM
I get the point of Dev, probably the least lab oriented person here.

Not entirely true. My cauldron and lab is my body... and many wonderous experiments can be performed with it. But yes, as for pseudo-Alchemy [chemistry] you are correct... not that into it. Unless I'm making some DMT (but actually got a life time supply at the moment, so I don't ever need to make that ever again).

:cool:

JDP
10-24-2016, 11:36 AM
Honestly the same can be said of Practical Alchemy: Call it what you want; "practical alchemy", "laboratory alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy.

:cool:

No, you can't. Even if for argument's sake we assumed that the Philosophers' Stone does not exist and artificial transmutation is "impossible" short of having the atom-smashers devised by modern physics, you still cannot reverse the roles. So-called spiritual alchemy is a mistaken interpretation of the subject which is only about 2 or 3 (at most) centuries old, while alchemy (i.e. the issue of making the Philosophers' Stone and turning base metals into noble ones) is at least more than 2000 years old. Historical seniority alone shows that the fake and usurper here is the purely imaginary "spiritual alchemy" that came much later, the product of a mistaken understanding of the subject.

elixirmixer
10-24-2016, 12:50 PM
Dev would be expressing more alchemical values than most, by treating his body as his laboritaory...

I do not plan on reading 18 pages of this thread, but would like to respond to the title of this thread.

Even with my beginner like attitude, my love for laboritory work, and my distaste for inactive principles and a lack of expression for the human evolution, I too must share, express, represent (for lack of better words) the deep inner truth that dev has touched on in this his last post. The body is indeed the true laboritory. You can learn all the secrets of alchemy, and still cheat yourself of all its blessings, if you do not learn and understand the the true Magnus Opus, occurs within the self... not as some fairytale, halucinagenic, dreamtime (although it does manafest itself as such in some stages of growth) but as a living, breathing, energy in the body, that is being spiritually cultivated in the same way that we think of the manafestation of SM, in order that you may become 'holy' or 'whole', having filled up the 'light vessels' within the body...

Modern Christianity is fucked, because while their 'religion' does indeed encapsulate the entire truth, much like alchemy itself, Christianity is only know in its fullness, by a very select few.


Jesus: "I have chosen you, one in a thousand, and two in ten thousand"


Jesus:"It is given to you, to know the dominions of the heavens, but to these, it is not given.

Coleridgean
10-24-2016, 02:24 PM
...So-called spiritual alchemy is a mistaken interpretation of the subject which is only about 2 or 3 (at most) centuries old...

I'd say 4+ centuries old, beginning with the publication of the Alchymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, or even as far back as John Dee's Monad (Monas Hieroglyphica). And in the King James Bible (ye are the salt of the Earth) ... so it is a legitimate complement to English literature and deserves a moniker of its own, but we could equally call it Renaissance Hermeticism.

However, even Zosimus in about the 5th century A.D. was interpreting dreams by his alchemical experiment.

Schmuldvich
10-24-2016, 02:44 PM
As for pseudo-Alchemy [chemistry] you are correct... not that into it. Unless I'm making some DMT (but actually got a life time supply at the moment, so I don't ever need to make that ever again).

Extracting your own DMT is no doubt a rewarding experience. In the past I have used mimosa hostilis root bark with great success. What is your go-to source of DMT when extracting it yourself, dev?



No, you can't say "Honestly the same can be said of Practical Alchemy: Call it what you want; "practical alchemy", "laboratory alchemy", etc. While useful and applicable in many ways...this is not real Alchemy." Even if for argument's sake we assumed that the Philosophers' Stone does not exist and artificial transmutation is "impossible" short of having the atom-smashers devised by modern physics, you still cannot reverse the roles.

So-called spiritual alchemy is a mistaken interpretation of the subject which is only about 2 or 3 (at most) centuries old, while alchemy (i.e. the issue of making the Philosophers' Stone and turning base metals into noble ones) is at least more than 2000 years old.

Historical seniority alone shows that the fake and usurper here is the purely imaginary "spiritual alchemy" that came much later, the product of a mistaken understanding of the subject.

Yes! What JDP is saying here is fact: "spiritual alchemy" is a new phenomenon only a couple hundred years old, whereas the real art of Alchemy is way more than 2,000 years old. So-called "spiritual alchemy" is a completely modern invention.

Don't believe us? Go ahead and search for the words "spiritual alchemy", or even "inner alchemy" or "philosophical alchemy", in any old Alchemy treatise. You will not find one single instance where any of these terms are ever used.



Dev would be expressing more alchemical values than most, by treating his body as his laboritaory...

In what way is dev expressing more Alchemical values here than most by "treating his body as his laboratory"?


You can learn all the secrets of alchemy, and still cheat yourself of all its blessings, if you do not learn and understand the the true Magnus Opus, occurs within the self...

How can someone possibly "learn all the secrets of alchemy and still cheat himself of all its blessings"? This statement makes little sense, elixirmixer. If a person learns all the secrets of Alchemy would they not be in complete control of themselves and the world around them?

The term you were attempting to use above is not "Magnus" Opus. The correct term is Magnum Opus. Do you know what this is?

A magnum opus is 'a large and important work of art, music, or literature, especially one regarded as the most important work of an artist or writer'. Notice that last part of the definition. Our Magnum Opus as Alchemists is what we call the Great Work. The goal of the Great Work is the production of the Philosopher's Stone.

Why do you say that the true Magnum Opus occurs within the self when it is clear that our Magnum Opus is the successful accomplishment of the physical, tangible Philosopher's Stone here on Earth?

Awani
10-24-2016, 03:58 PM
Extracting your own DMT is no doubt a rewarding experience. In the past I have used mimosa hostilis root bark with great success. What is your go-to source of DMT when extracting it yourself, dev?

For further discussion on this topic: http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?1933-DMT-Extraction-Guide
Or: http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4690-DMT-Report

Short answer same as you, but have Acacia also. If you want to continue this topic see above threads or create new one in "Shamanism" section.

------------------------------------------------------


...whereas the real art of Alchemy is way more than 2,000 years old. So-called "spiritual alchemy" is a completely modern invention.

Don't believe us? Go ahead and search for the words "spiritual alchemy", or even "inner alchemy" or "philosophical alchemy", in any old Alchemy treatise. You will not find one single instance where any of these terms are ever used.

The answer to this is simple. They did not seperate the two aspects in those days, as we do today. To them it was simply "alchemy"... in fact the original alchemy might not even have been called alchemy at all...

And as I have stated earlier I think alchemy is an offspring of shamanism (and shamanism is also a modern word). But we need words to discuss so let's ignore the actual words.

Shamanism is both practical and spiritual. As is alchemy. If an alchemist is ONLY approaching alchemy from a practical perspective it is - in my opinion - pseudo-Chemistry.

"Thoughts create a new heaven, a new firmament, a new source of energy, from which new arts flow." - Paracelsus

“Imagination is a great power, and if the world knew what strange things can be produced by the power of imagination, the public authorities would cause idle people to go to work.” - Paracelsus

But is Spiritual Alchemy a valid path? Only those on it can say if it is or not. ;)

:cool:

Andro
10-27-2016, 06:31 PM
Note: Continued from HERE (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4862-hermetically-sealed&p=44949#post44949)
______________________


Hermetically sealed means to retain the energy within and not spill it, not actually retaining chemicals in a laboratory vial. It also refers to the secrecy surrounding the esoteric knowledge, which all secret societies and mystery schools have practiced. You must be hermetically sealed and not spill your energy nor the secrets of the work to anyone who isn't ready to hear it.

That's probably in the context of sexual/tantric practices?

In lab alchemy, it can mean that the 'cooked' mattes are fully unified and inseparable (i.e. 'hermetically sealed' together).

Anyway, there's more than one meaning/interpretation for this term.

Google, for example, translates 'hermetic' as 'airtight' - so when you see a post ending with 'airtight greetings', you can pretty much assume they're using Google Translate :)

JDP
10-27-2016, 06:56 PM
That's probably in the context of sexual/tantric practices?

Which are in fact not "alchemy" at all. Once again an example of hijacking of the word "alchemy" and its specialized terms by people with strange beliefs who refuse to accept what alchemy was and has always been, viz. making the Philosophers' Stone (which is an actual substance, physical and tangible, not some intangible mystical concept, and it is made by a series of appropriate laboratory operations on the right combination of substances, not by mental/spiritual ruminations, or withholding ejaculation, or what have you.)

ArcherSage
10-27-2016, 08:46 PM
I personally find it hard to believe that something so sacred has been written literally all this time for everyone to read, the language of metaphor, allegory and symbolism has always been used to describe spiritual and mental aspects over physical aspects. This is a fact of esoteric philosophy. Something as sacred as the philosophers stone is not so easily understood as just reading about what chemicals to combine in a lab with step by step instructions for anybody to read, sorry but its not that simple of a concept. The material thinkers of the world who managed to get a hold of these sacred writings took them literally, just as the philosophers knew they would. It is done intentionally so that the true meanings are deeper than material interpretations. I do not doubt however that transmutation from actual lead to gold could be done in a scientific sense, but originally that was not the intent. Alchemy is much older than the medieval chemists who tried in vain to make gold so they could be rich. It has not always been called alchemy, but it has existed for thousands of years. There is a reason all the mystery schools used physical symbols to represent spiritual and mental teachings, the great work predates the term "alchemy". Thank goodness it has been veiled in symbolism, not to be taken literally by materialists.

Kiorionis
10-28-2016, 01:09 AM
Anyway, there's more than one meaning/interpretation for this term.

Seth-Ra had one that I like. His was that the hermetic seal was to "seal out stagnation" during one of his particular works.

Kiorionis
10-28-2016, 01:10 AM
I personally find it hard to believe that something so sacred has been written literally all this time for everyone to read

Haha, we'll there are quite a few authors who have said they wrote it as plainly and clearly as possible (during their time).

Awani
10-28-2016, 01:35 AM
From the Bible: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Pretty literal and correct in my view. This is the Big Bang that is being described IMO.

:cool:

theFool
10-28-2016, 08:27 AM
In my opinion, internal alchemy is the result of ingesting the elixir produced by external alchemy. The elixir will "force" the body to follow a new way of being, more evolved. The "hermetic seal" of the sexual fluids or the replacement of eating food by prana (or qi) for example, are some attributes that are caused by the elixir.
"Internal alchemists" are trying to replicate-mimic those effects through exercises, but without having the elixir. Wether this is enough to take someone all the way towards the evolved state by itself, I don't know. But for sure, it has some good effects as we see on people practicing yoga for example.

A good link here: http://www.goldenelixir.com/jindan.html

It seems that either we like it or not, Waidan (external alchemy) has developed earlier than Neidan (internal alchemy) at the East too. This hints to the idea that the latter is an offsping of the former.

JDP
10-28-2016, 10:55 AM
I personally find it hard to believe that something so sacred has been written literally all this time for everyone to read, the language of metaphor, allegory and symbolism has always been used to describe spiritual and mental aspects over physical aspects. This is a fact of esoteric philosophy. Something as sacred as the philosophers stone is not so easily understood as just reading about what chemicals to combine in a lab with step by step instructions for anybody to read, sorry but its not that simple of a concept. The material thinkers of the world who managed to get a hold of these sacred writings took them literally, just as the philosophers knew they would. It is done intentionally so that the true meanings are deeper than material interpretations. I do not doubt however that transmutation from actual lead to gold could be done in a scientific sense, but originally that was not the intent. Alchemy is much older than the medieval chemists who tried in vain to make gold so they could be rich. It has not always been called alchemy, but it has existed for thousands of years. There is a reason all the mystery schools used physical symbols to represent spiritual and mental teachings, the great work predates the term "alchemy". Thank goodness it has been veiled in symbolism, not to be taken literally by materialists.

Since alchemical texts are not written as 100% clear instructions regarding what substances to use to make the Stone, your "objections" are hardly valid. They are not written in the manner of "recipes" that can be followed by just about anyone, and in fact are often chock-full of code-words, symbols, allegories, allusions, riddles, etc. What you are thinking of are the "particular" processes of the ancient and medieval puffers/multipliers and the Early Modern "chymists", which are indeed usually written in a much clearer manner, pretty much as "recipes", the majority of which processes are indeed totally false and sophistical and do not perform what they claim, but a small minority of such processes in fact work, contrary to your mistaken assumption that "medieval chemists... tried in vain to make gold" (your opinion is, ironically, in fact the very opinion of modern ordinary chemists, who obviously have not bothered to make a truly systematic empirical investigation of the subject and simply assume that because the vulgar chemical reactions and procedures they know about do not seem to alter any metals into other ones it must be so with all reactions and procedures.) The "spiritual and mental teachings" that you say are older than the term "alchemy" are in fact NOT "alchemy", since that word did not even exist yet. You have just debunked your very own hijacking of the term, congratulations! Ever since words like "chymia" and "alchemy" started popping up in recorded history, we see them linked to the topic of the Philosophers' Stone, the "Elixir" and the transmutation of metals. Therefore this is what "alchemy" deals with, not some older or more recent "spiritual and mental teachings".

ArcherSage
10-28-2016, 01:40 PM
It was known as the living stone, or the wet stone/water stone before it was called the philosophers stone. The elixir was referred to as the fountain, the living water, the waters of heaven etc.. All of this is referring to something that not only extends the human life if consumed, it forces the being to be completely reborn as the phoenix parable states.

Awani
10-28-2016, 02:30 PM
Alchemy is just "black magic" as I said before. Alchemy is only neo-Shamanism. A Shaman is an alchemist. And a shaman always work with spirit AND matter.

The ONLY literal physical matter alchemist-mentality is, in my opinion, silly. But sometimes I play with Lego. You got to have fun also. ;)

:cool:

ArcherSage
10-28-2016, 02:58 PM
I respect anyone who is a believer in the physical creation of a stone, but I personally believe that the arcane arts have always been related to more than physical matter. In my opinion, the 2nd birth or being "born again" of fire not water as Yeshua states, is the key to the spirit actually passing on to the next realm. Just as you were inside a womb before you were born, the spirit is inside your body now waiting to be born into the spirit world, you are the womb of the spirit. You have had the 1st birth in the physical plane, but the 2nd birth is only possible from within. Without certain spiritual trials and tribulations the spirit will remain in a fetus like state and not be able to be born into the spirit world. Just as the human must develop in the womb before it is born, the spirit must be at a certain growth before it is ready for the spirit realm. In my opinion, this is what the goal of alchemy is. Not the extended of human life, but the creation of the spirit itself. Just my opinion.

Schmuldvich
10-28-2016, 03:12 PM
Alchemy is just "black magic" as I said before. Alchemy is only neo-Shamanism. A Shaman is an alchemist. And a shaman always work with spirit AND matter.

The ONLY literal physical matter alchemist-mentality is, in my opinion, silly.

No, dev.

Your opinion is not only silly, but also wrong.

If you hold the the opinion that the Earth is flat, more power to ya. You have every right to have your silly opinion that a shaman is an Alchemist. Just because you are entitled to your opinion does not make your opinion right. You can think the Earth is flat all you want, just like you can say a shaman is an Alchemist all you want, but this is just wishful thinking on your part, and in my opinion a completely false statement you have been trying to push.

Alchemy is not black magic. Alchemy is not neo-shamanism either. No matter how badly you want it to be, a shaman is not an Alchemist.

I really like what JDP said earlier in the thread


Unlike what some people think, alchemy does have a specific definition, and it certainly is not some of these strange claims floating around in our modern times by people who want alchemy to be anything but what it actually always was.

Alchemists have always made a distinction here too. They never saw their operations as being part of "vulgar" or "ordinary chemistry" either. Their writings are full invectives against "sophists", "puffers", "multipliers", "vulgar chymists", etc., whom they considered did not know the correct way of operating. We are talking, therefore, about a set of effective operations with the appropriate substances, which "chemistry" obviously must completely ignore or has never bothered to investigate better, otherwise its professors would know the reality of the subject and would stop treating alchemy as a some sort of "dream" or "error" (at best) or a deliberate fraud (at worst.) So instead of "chemistry" being an integral part, I would say "manual/physical operations with substances" is the MANDATORY part of alchemy, regardless of what some alchemists might have believed or thought when it came to theoretical interpretations of what they were doing.

I would use alchemy to do alchemy, what it is really about: making the Elixir/Philosophers' Stone.

Andro
10-28-2016, 03:20 PM
a shaman always works with spirit AND matter.

Alchemists work with corporified 'spirit matter', in a different way than shamans and with different goals.

Awani
10-28-2016, 03:37 PM
If you hold the the opinion that the Earth is flat, more power to ya. You have every right to have your silly opinion that a shaman is an Alchemist.

I certainly don't think the Earth is flat. As for the rest I agree to disagree. See this (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4824-Is-Spiritual-Alchemy-A-Valid-Path&p=44794#post44794).


...with different goals.

Not really. But yes if it is about making gold then sure, very different.

And if spiritual alchemy is a valid path or not cannot be decreed by anyone else than the person on the path.

:cool:

Andro
10-28-2016, 03:46 PM
if it is about making gold then sure, very different.

Alchemy is not 'for making gold'. According to the classical authors, you can make lots of other 'stuff' with Alchemy (or at least with the Alkahest): Malleable glass, various stones ('precious' or not), not to mention medicines that go way beyond the potency and ingress of plant/herbal coctions of indigenous medicine men/women ('shamans' and 'medicine men' are not necessarily interchangeable terms), culminating with the Universal Medicine for all three Kingdoms.


And if spiritual alchemy is a valid path or not cannot be decreed by anyone else than the person on the path.

I am into various 'inner' or 'spiritual' practices, I just don't refer to them as 'Alchemy' in the canonical sense. But these paths/practices are all mutually supportive.

theFool
10-28-2016, 03:53 PM
Without certain spiritual trials and tribulations the spirit will remain in a fetus like state and not be able to be born into the spirit world. I find your ideas interesting. Do you think that when the time comes for the spirit to be "born into the spirit world" the body follows it? For example Christ is known to have "died" without leaving a body behind. Also, there are reported numerous similar "transmutations" at the time of death in eastern and western history, not to mention the myths about gods.

ArcherSage
10-28-2016, 04:04 PM
There were many versions of the Resurrection. The so called Gnostic Christians did not believe his physical body ascended, which would have been a very literal phoenix like transformation. But there are those who believe that because his body was not completely of earthly origin, that it very well could have returned to the realm of Barbelo.

Andro
10-28-2016, 04:04 PM
the creation of the spirit itself.

Do you believe that Spirit is something that can be 'created'?

Dwellings
10-28-2016, 04:36 PM
Alchemy is not 'for making gold'. According to the classical authors, you can make lots of other 'stuff' with Alchemy (or at least with the Alkahest): Malleable glass, various stones ('precious' or not), not to mention medicines that go way beyond the potency and ingress of plant/herbal coctions of indigenous medicine men/women ('shamans' and 'medicine men' are not necessarily interchangeable terms), culminating with the Universal Medicine for all three Kingdoms.


The most important one that you forgot to mention, spiritual regeneration of man.

theFool
10-28-2016, 04:37 PM
The so called Gnostic Christians did not believe his physical body ascended, which would have been a very literal phoenix like transformation. Isn't the goal of every alchemist this final transformation ..

Andro
10-28-2016, 05:38 PM
The most important one that you forgot to mention, spiritual regeneration of man.

Yes, and there's that too :)

But as I currently understand, one must also be 'ready' for this internally, besides the mere ingestion of it (which acts as the final 'booster' and 'support' for the transmutation/transfiguation into Spirit).

I have no idea how someone would react who is still hooked on playing all the games 'here', incarnating, etc...

Dwellings
10-29-2016, 03:31 AM
Yes, and there's that too :)

But as I currently understand, one must also be 'ready' for this internally, besides the mere ingestion of it (which acts as the final 'booster' and 'support' for the transmutation/transfiguation into Spirit).

I have no idea how someone would react who is still hooked on playing all the games 'here', incarnating, etc...

I do not think one must ready internally before consuming the elixir since you are only awakening what is latent in you not trying to do/bring anything new. The issue of internally ready arises when one is trying to/has understood what the prima materia is during his studies.

Those moments can turn anyone upside down. Elixir can be given to anyone IMO and he will become an adept.

Ofcourse, these are my personal opinions.

Awani
10-29-2016, 04:59 AM
I do not think one must ready internally before consuming the elixir since you are only awakening what is latent in you not trying to do/bring anything new. The issue of internally ready arises when one is trying to/has understood what the prima materia is during his studies.

Those moments can turn anyone upside down. Elixir can be given to anyone IMO and he will become an adept.

I strongly agree with this, although it still requires a lot of "internal" work. I mean you can't be a lazy cunt, sit on the couch watching America's Got Talent and expect to have some sort of Ascension into a higher state of being. But yes we are already awake, we just need a kick in the ass. Sometimes, also, the awakening is only an awakening into a state of being that makes one realise one still has a lot of awakening to do, but you can't milk the cow before you have a cow to milk.

:cool:

Ghislain
10-29-2016, 05:19 PM
Below are the arguments for and against numerous subjects. These examples have not been selected for their accuracy or validity, but rather for their brevity ;)

They are to show that all beliefs can be and are regularly debated.

People are very selective when arguing their points and generally disregard or avoid any information that would make their belief incorrect.

Hollow Earth (for) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14BtWERAUNU)
Hollow Earth (against) starts at 1:20 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0WtXOyOSRs)

Flat Earth (for) (https://youtu.be/GDKc6X8TXNE)
Flat Earth (against) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9ksbh88OJs)

Global Warming (for) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk5_CF15BHU)
Global Warming (against) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq4Bc2WCsdE)

Evolution (for) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fGkFuHIu0)
Evolution (against) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLYFJHBBwGw)

I don’t believe in any religion, I believe religion was and still is a form of control. religious leaders where supposed to be guides, but forgot this and became "teachers".

I do believe, at this point in time, in spirituality, but that it should be explored personally so as not to contaminate it with other peoples hidden agenda's.

If one has to learn from someone else then always question what hidden agendas those people may have had, as you would, or should, if you found some information on the Internet; you don’t take the first bit of information you find on the net as positively true, you cross reference and look for further proof.

What a lot of people fail to do a lot of the time is search for disproof, and sometimes this can give you better answers than your search for proof. I think a reason for this may be they are afraid they may find it.

In Alchemy we rely on “other people” to get the knowledge required to achieve our goals, many of whom were the same as us here, but without the technical or information resources that we have at our disposal today. The language of these people has probably changed considerably from what we use now.

How many people here are gay?

I was asking how many people here are happy.

The “Adepts” and “Masters” of old wrote in the language of their time, often in foreign languages of their time...how much is lost in translation?

Laws change and the art of Alchemy was at many times illegal and punishable by death and thus these Alchemists wrote in code and riddles to disguise their works, many having their own personal codes and riddles.

And yet considering all of this there are those that profess to know who is right and who is wrong; how?

Who among us has seen or have first-hand knowledge of The Stone?

Who among us have experienced what The Stone may have to offer as described in the ancient texts; whether that is by illusion, delusion, or real experience is only for them to decide.

Many depictions of the “Adepts” or “Masters” lab’s have included, along with their lab equipment, an altar, but this is the point I was making above, some ignore this fact as it does not fit within their frame of belief; that is cherry picking.


Every given element and every given existing thing is composed of three components:

• energy
• matter
• Consciousness

The five basic elements that make up all manifested things.

• Akash
• Air
• Fire
• Water
• Earth

The five elements are sometimes simplified to just four: air, fire, water, and earth. Those four elements in spirituality do not refer merely to physical elements. They refer to spiritual and psychological elements as well. The elements also are composed of those three primary factors: matter, energy, and Consciousness.
Source: The Laboratory of the Alchemist (http://gnosticteachings.org/courses/alchemy/3112-the-laboratory-of-the-alchemist.html)

Those that think Alchemy is entirely material or that it is entirely spiritual are both wrong, but that is just my opinion as...

Alchemy is only Opinion ;)

Ghislain

ArcherSage
10-29-2016, 08:13 PM
I believe one of the biggest challenges for the practitioner is learning how to transmute the negative situations in their life into positive outcomes. The true alchemist must be able to transmute any situation they find themselves in, into gold. Turning the cheek to your enemy is in fact transmuting something negative, into something positive. My study of hermetic philosophy has led me to believe that no matter what hand you are given, you can always improve or transmute it. I believe there is a physical, mental, and a spiritual alchemy. I believe all of them are rooted in morality and eliminating the ego.

ArcherSage
11-04-2016, 02:46 PM
My stance on alchemy has changed somewhat since reading what everyone says here in this forum. I am of the belief that alchemy could have been a spiritual endeavor from the beginning, but I also believe that the true alchemist can transmute anything..from the mental, to the spiritual, to the physical properties in his/her life. I believe there is an inner great work, and an outer great work.

Awani
11-04-2016, 04:46 PM
In my view the outer can't do much. The inner can do it all. The inner creates the outer. Sure the outer can empower (or weaken) the inner, but at its core the inner is the All.

:cool:

Schmuldvich
11-04-2016, 04:48 PM
In my view the outer can't do much.

Do you not believe what the Ancients say about the Philosopher's Stone?



The inner can do it all.

How can "the inner" create some powder that transmutes physical metal to gold?

How can "the inner" make a tangible medicine that can be dosed and ingested accordingly?

Awani
11-04-2016, 04:54 PM
Do you not believe what the Ancients say about the Philosopher's Stone?

They say what?


How can "the inner" create some powder that transmutes physical metal to gold?

It can't, and to be frank that aspect has no interest for me whatsoever. To me that is no better than any other "get rich quick" scheme. They are all scams.


How can "the inner" make a tangible medicine that can be dosed and ingested accordingly?

Who said a medicine needs to be dosed and ingested? ;)

:cool:

Schmuldvich
11-04-2016, 05:07 PM
They say what?


For Hermes said of this Science: Alchemy is a Corporal Science simply composed of one and by one, naturally conjoining things more precious, by knowledge and effect, and converting them by a natural commixtion into a better kind.

A certain other said: Alchemy is a Science, teaching how to transform any kind of metal into another: and that by a proper medicine, as it appeared by many Philosophers' Books.

Alchemy therefore is a science teaching how to make and compound a certain medicine, which is called Elixir, the which when it is cast upon metals or imperfect bodies, does fully perfect them in the very projection.

"The Mirror Of Alchemy", by Roger Bacon 1250




How can "the inner" create some powder that transmutes physical metal to gold? It can't, and to be frank that aspect has no interest for me whatsoever. To me that is no better than any other "get rich quick" scheme. They are all scams.

So, dev, you do not believe that there is a physical substance out there (generally referred to as the "Philosopher's Stone") that can transmute physical metal to gold?




How can "the inner" make a tangible medicine that can be dosed and ingested accordingly? Who said a medicine needs to be dosed and ingested? ;)

I phrased it like that because, knowing you, you would flip to the other side of the coin and say that we are inwardly creating this "medicine", which is why I specified an actual physically tangible medicine that one can touch, dose out, and ingest or give to a patient. You and I are both in agreement that we can already create a medicine inwardly that is beneficial to our health and state-of-being on this plane.

Awani
11-04-2016, 05:13 PM
I don't deem Roger Bacon to be worth his weight in the gold he never made... not ancient either. Frankly I've got a hard time "looking up" to someone called Roger. ;)


So, dev, you do not believe that there is a physical substance out there (generally referred to as the "Philosopher's Stone") that can transmute physical metal to gold?

Not really. And even if it did exist it would eventually devalue gold. It's pointless.


...an actual physically tangible medicine that one can touch, dose out, and ingest or give to a patient.

Yes I agree there is such "outward" medicine, but it's not "the Stone".

:cool:

Schmuldvich
11-04-2016, 05:26 PM
Frankly I've got a hard time "looking up" to someone called Roger.

Well with this superficial attitude you certainly will not get very far (unless you are joking; hard to tell over the internet). What authors, books, or treatises regarding Alchemy do you hold in high regard, dev?




So, dev, you do not believe that there is a physical substance out there (generally referred to as the "Philosopher's Stone") that can transmute physical metal to gold? Not really. And even if it did exist it would eventually devalue gold. It's pointless.

So you are not aware of what you believe? "Not really"

The "value" of gold is completely arbitrary. It is not the gold that is valuable, but rather what it gets you that is valuable. A bottle of water to some guy dying of thirst in the desert is worth $847,246,925,721+ to that guy, whereas if you were to offer him a 1 oz hunk of gold he would offer you no more than a penny for this worthless (to him) item. The value of gold is irrelevant.




Yes I agree there is such "outward" medicine, but it's not "the Stone".

What do you believe this outward medicine that is not the Stone is?

Awani
11-04-2016, 06:23 PM
What authors, books, or treatises regarding Alchemy do you hold in high regard, dev?

None anymore.


What do you believe this outward medicine that is not the Stone is?

Depends on the issue.

:cool:

Schmuldvich
11-04-2016, 06:41 PM
Depends on the issue.

Specifically the post (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4824-Is-Spiritual-Alchemy-A-Valid-Path&p=45300#post45300)when you said, "Yes I agree there is such "outward" medicine, but it's not "the Stone".

Awani
11-05-2016, 02:18 PM
It depends on the medical issue.

:cool:

ArcherSage
11-05-2016, 02:29 PM
It's not what the stone is, its what it represents. Yes spiritual alchemy is a valid path, for it is how you reach a higher state of consciousness. I would say that mental and spiritual alchemy would enable one to find the physical stone from their heightened sense of creativity and energy. Many alchemists who tried to find the physical stone were also into the mental aspect, such as Issac Newton. It is said he may have never had sex his entire life, and by retaining this energy allowed him to have more brain power to discover things. When you retain sexual energy you will have so much creative energy that its hard to go to sleep sometimes, you will stay up and write books and music etc..

Schmuldvich
11-05-2016, 04:34 PM
It depends on the medical issue.

Specifically the issue you were referring to 23 hours ago, post #209 in this thread, post #45300 of all time. You know what I am asking.

What do you believe this physically tangible outward medicine that one can touch, dose out, and ingest but is not the Stone is, dev?

Awani
11-05-2016, 06:22 PM
What do you believe this physically tangible outward medicine that one can touch, dose out, and ingest but is not the Stone is, dev?

Third and last time I say it: it depends on what needs to be cured.

:cool:

ArcherSage
11-08-2016, 01:40 PM
As I have stated before, I believe there is a physical stone that can be created, but it wont do you any good. All the greatest alchemists and philosophers have written that real gold is not the goal of alchemy, the material thinker has taken everything written as literal. Then later, alchemist were writing about the laboratory processes to create this gold, and all knowledge of the original alchemy was lost, and replaced by greed. This is the case with all great spiritual teachings, just look at the church and what it did to the teachings of Christ. It seems odd that the elimination of the ego is a requirement of alchemy as written by almost all the alchemical texts, yet they want to create gold for themselves.

JDP
11-08-2016, 01:46 PM
As I have stated before, I believe there is a physical stone that can be created, but it wont do you any good. All the greatest alchemists and philosophers have written that real gold is not the goal of alchemy, the material thinker has taken everything written as literal. Then later, alchemist were writing about the laboratory processes to create this gold, and all knowledge of the original alchemy was lost, and replaced by greed. This is the case with all great spiritual teachings, just look at the church and what it did to the teachings of Christ. It seems odd that the elimination of the ego is a requirement of alchemy as written by almost all the alchemical texts, yet they want to create gold for themselves.

Huh? Where exactly did they write that? What you are claiming is modern "spiritualist" or Jungian misinterpretations of alchemy.

ArcherSage
11-08-2016, 03:01 PM
I will quote Hermes the "father" of alchemy, from various books from the divine pymander.




"That which is immortal, partakes not of that which is mortal.

That which is mortal cometh not into a Body immortal; but that which is immortal cometh into that which is mortal.

Operation or Workings are not carried upwards, but descend downwards.

Things upon Earth, do nothing advantage those in Heaven; but all things in Heaven do profit and advantage all things upon Earth.

Heaven is capable, and a fit receptacle of everlasting Bodies; the Earth of corruptible Bodies.

The Earth is brutish; the Heaven is reasonable or rational.

Fortune is the carriage or effect of that which is without order; the Idol of operation, a lying Fantasie or opinion.

What is God? The immutable or unalterable good.

What is man? An unchangeable evil.

If thou perfectly remember these Heads, thou canst not forget those things which in more words I have largely expounded unto thee; for these are the contents or Abridgment of them.

Avoid all conversation with the multitude or common people; for I would not have thee subject to Envy, much less to be ridiculous unto the many.

For the like always takes to itself that which is like, but the unlike never agrees with the unlike. Such discourses as these have very few Auditors, and peradventure very few will have, but they have something peculiar unto themselves.

They do rather sharpen and whet evil men to their maliciousness; therefore, it behoveth to avoid the multitude, and take heed of them as not understanding the virtue and power of the things that are said.

How does thou mean, O Father?

This O Son: the whole nature and Composition of those living things called Men, is very prone to Maliciousness, and is very familiar, and as it were nourished with it, and therefore is delighted with it; now this wight, if it shall come to learn or know that the world was once made, and all things are done according to Providence or Necessity, Destiny or Fate, bearing rule over all, will he not be much worse than himself, despising the whole, because it was made? And if he may lay the cause of Evil upon Fate or Destiny, he will never abstain from any evil work.

Wherefore we must look warily to such kind of people, that being in ignorance they may be less evil for fear of that which is hidden and kept secret."




"Why, O Men of the Offspring of Earth, why have you delivered yourselves over unto Death, having power to partake of Immortality? Repent and change your minds, you that have together walked in Error, and have been darkened in ignorance."




"But the Soul entering into the body of a Man, if it continue evil, shall neither taste of immortality, nor is partaker of the Good."

"The disposition of these clothings or Covers is done in an Earthly Body; for it is impossible that the Mind should establish or rest itself, naked, and of itself in an Earthly Body; neither is the Earthly Body able to bear such immortality: and therefore, that it might suffer so great virtue, the Mind compacted, as it were, and took to itself the passable Body of the Soul, as a covering or clothing. And the Soul being also in some sort Divine, useth the Spirit as her Minister or Servant; and the Spirit governeth the living things.

When therefore the Mind is separated, and departeth from the Earthly Body, presently it puts on its Fiery Coat, which it could not do, having to dwell in an Earthly Body.

For the Earth cannot suffer fire, for it is all burned of a small spark; therefore is the water poured round about the Earth, as a wall or defence, to withstand the flame of fire.

But the Mind being the most sharp or swift of all the Divine Cogitations, and more swift than all the Elements, hath the fire for its Body."

"Yet is it so as I say, O Son, He that looketh only upon that which is carried upward as Fire, that which is carried downward as Earth, that which is moist as Water, and that which bloweth, or is subject to blast, as Air; how can he sensibly understand that which is neither hard nor moist, nor tangible, nor perspicuous, seeing it is only understood in power and operation? But I beseech and pray to the Mind, which alone can understand the Generation which is in God.

Tat. Then am I, O Father, utterly unable to do it.

God forbid, Son, rather draw or pull him unto thee (or study to know him) and he will come, be but willing and it shall be done; quite (or make idle) the senses of the Body, purging thyself from the unreasonable brutish torments of matter.

Tat. Have I any (revengers or) tormentors in myself, Father?

Herm. Yea, and those not a few, but many, and fearful ones.

Tat. I do not know them, Father.

One Torment, Son, is Ignorance: a second, Sorrow; a third, Intemperance; a fourth, Concupiscence; a fifth, Injustice; a sixth, Covetousness; a seventh, Deceit; an eighth, Envy; a ninth, Fraud or Guile; a tenth, Wrath; an eleventh, Rashness; a twelfth, Maliciousness.

They are in number twelve, and under these many more; some which through the prison of the Body do force the inwardly placed man to suffer sensibly.

And they do not suddenly or easily depart from him that hath obtained mercy of God; and herein consists both the manner and the reason of Regeneration."

"Tell me, O Father, This body that consists of Powers, shall it ever admit of Dissolution?

Good words, Son, and speak not things impossible; for so thou shalt sin, and the eye of thy mind grow wicked.

The sensible body of Nature is far from the Essential Generation, for that is subject to dissolution, but this is not; and that is mortal, but this immortal. Dost thou not know that thou art born a God, and the Son of the One, as I am?"




" But the Operation of God, is Mind and Soul, Of Eternity, Permanence, or Long-lasting, and Immortality, Of the World, Restitution, and Decay, or Destruction."



"As a good Physician grieveth the Body, prepossessed of a disease, by burning or lancing it for health's sake; After the same manner also the Mind grieveth the Soul, by drawing it out of Pleasure, from whence every disease of the Soul proceedeth."




"For the things that are, being two Bodies, and things incorporeal, wherein is the Mortal and the Divine, the Election or Choice of either is left to him that will choose: For no man can choose both"







There are many more as well, it seems Hermes himself was into "new age alchemy" as you guys call it. Yes physical alchemy may be a thing, however to state that alchemy originated in a purely material way is ignorant. It evolved into such a thing as Hermes predicted it would. I found the part about the fiery coat interesting, as this is the baptism by fire that the spirit must go through for its transformation, the same as the parable of the phoenix. Yeshua (christ) having been raised in Egypt surely was knowledgeable about hermetics.

JDP
11-08-2016, 04:08 PM
That's all fine and dandy but the "Pymander" is NOT an alchemical text.

ArcherSage
11-08-2016, 05:52 PM
Hermes has spoken. Its a shame that you don't recognize true alchemical texts when you see it.

This was a warning to the materialists who misinterpret his writings. Immortality on earth from producing the stone was the goal of physical alchemy, yet Hermes tells us this "Why, O Men of the Offspring of Earth, why have you delivered yourselves over unto Death, having power to partake of Immortality? Repent and change your minds, you that have together walked in Error, and have been darkened in ignorance"

Sadly many of you still take all the writings literally, and study the material alchemists work which will lead you nowhere. There are many clues to the great work hidden through many texts that you may not consider an "alchemy text", nonetheless they are there for you to find. Hopefully you don't rely on a book to be called "alchemy 101 or alchemy etc" to consider it alchemy. Not everything is black and white.

JDP
11-08-2016, 09:38 PM
Methinks that it is you who can't recognize actual alchemical texts. No scholar that I know of considers the Pymander to be an alchemical text.

Kiorionis
11-08-2016, 11:29 PM
Out of curiosity, how would you define an "alchemical text" JDP?

ArcherSage
11-09-2016, 01:48 AM
The true arcane arts and esoteric studies are always veiled in symbolism..even physical materials such as mercury and salt are not literal, at least not in its meaning. It was used literally to create the physical stone, however it is the qualities that these things have in relation to the spirit or mind.

Andro
11-09-2016, 07:06 AM
The thread 'Alchemy is Spiritual' has been merged with this one, as they both largely deal with the same topic.

Promoting/spreading the same topic over many threads can have a 'flooding' effect, so, whenever possible, please continue a topic on a thread where it is already discussed, instead of starting a new thread every time. It also makes searching the forums much easier.

Also, for reference: Another thread that deals heavily with somewhat similar issues is Aspects of Alchemy (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3946-Aspects-of-Alchemy).

Thanks!

Aaron
11-09-2016, 11:22 AM
Claiming alchemys purpose was to actually transmute lead into gold, is the same as saying they were literally trying to make humuncoli (human-like beings).

JDP
11-09-2016, 12:26 PM
Out of curiosity, how would you define an "alchemical text" JDP?

Texts that have to do with the making of the Philosophers' Stone. They are not difficult at all to differentiate from texts on other topics, really. Would you confuse, for example, Thomas Norton's "Ordinal of Alchemy" (even if you ignore the very obvious title) with any other type of literature? I don't think so. You easily know alchemical texts when you read them.

JDP
11-09-2016, 12:45 PM
Claiming alchemys purpose was to actually transmute lead into gold, is the same as saying they were literally trying to make humuncoli (human-like beings).

Hardly valid comparison. Most alchemists were either ignorant about or quite unconcerned with the claims about the "homunculus" (which has its origin in ancient ideas about "spontaneous generation" which predate alchemical literature itself), while the bulk of alchemical literature is heavily concerned with the Philosophers' Stone and transmutation. Plus some writers do indeed claim to have made "homunculi".

Kiorionis
11-09-2016, 12:58 PM
Texts that have to do with the making of the Philosophers' Stone. They are not difficult at all to differentiate from texts on other topics, really. Would you confuse, for example, Thomas Norton's "Ordinal of Alchemy" (even if you ignore the very obvious title) with any other type of literature? I don't think so. You easily know alchemical texts when you read them.

I agree. I also see a trend for two things in alchemical texts. First is the author's theory, which is followed by a section on the practice. Or it's a mixture of theory and practice throughout.

Loki Morningstar
11-24-2016, 02:26 AM
Well this thread was hard to read, especially as I subscribe to an inner alchemy perspective. At the same time, I really appreciated the information it drew out from both parties. Lots of great information and ideas. And it taught me a lot about myself and my own communicating style. So many blessings, I suppose at least I can be grateful for that fact. And that this thread has, at least in some way, sorted the wheat from the chaff. It was interesting to see who crossed the threshold.

Awani
04-28-2017, 11:44 PM
Off-topic debate moved here from this (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?5243-The-general-process-of-the-magnum-opus) thread.


...and no little "angel" is going to come down from "Heaven" to conveniently hand you the process for the Stone either...

Isn't it funny that Descartes got his ideas that would lay the foundation of modern logical thinking from an angel in a dream? Isn't it also funny that the theory of evolution (natural selection) was given to Alfred Russel Wallace in a feverish vision? Wallace was before Darwin, and it was at first called the Darwin-Wallace theory... then Darwin managed to take all the credit. DNA and the discovery of the double helix is pretty significant. Seems like one of the scientists working on that took LSD on a regular basis whilst working on it. Einstein is famous for using his imagination to discover the Theory of Relativity. And there are plenty more than this... and some even keep it secret due to fear of not being taken seriously.

If the paranormal is good enough for science, it is good enough for alchemy (which science don't take seriously at all). Must be lonely to have the rational scientific mind and working with such mumbo-jumbo as alchemy... LOL.

:p

JDP
04-29-2017, 01:52 AM
Isn't it funny that Descartes got his ideas that would lay the foundation of modern logical thinking from an angel in a dream? Isn't it also funny that the theory of evolution (natural selection) was given to Alfred Russel Wallace in a feverish vision? Wallace was before Darwin, and it was at first called the Darwin-Wallace theory... then Darwin managed to take all the credit. DNA and the discovery of the double helix is pretty significant. Seems like one of the scientists working on that took LSD on a regular basis whilst working on it. Einstein is famous for using his imagination to discover the Theory of Relativity. And there are plenty more than this... and some even keep it secret due to fear of not being taken seriously.

If the paranormal is good enough for science, it is good enough for alchemy (which science don't take seriously at all). Must be lonely to have the rational scientific mind and working with such mumbo-jumbo as alchemy... LOL.

:p

But "official" science itself also has its own share of "mumbo-jumbo". It doesn't make its empirical facts any less real, though. Same with alchemy.

Awani
04-29-2017, 12:45 PM
It doesn't make its empirical facts any less real...

So then why do you discredit other peoples empirical facts?

Empirical evidence, also known as sense experience, is the knowledge or source of knowledge acquired by means of the senses, particularly by observation and experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience. - source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence)

Clearly when it concerns "paranormal" matters you have zero experience... thus you have no empirical facts.


I read enough to know what he thinks.

LOL.

:p

JDP
04-29-2017, 07:00 PM
So then why do you discredit other peoples empirical facts?

Empirical evidence, also known as sense experience, is the knowledge or source of knowledge acquired by means of the senses, particularly by observation and experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience. - source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence)

Clearly when it concerns "paranormal" matters you have zero experience... thus you have no empirical facts.

That's because no such "paranormal" claims have been observed and confirmed by any serious source under controlled conditions.

Awani
04-29-2017, 07:08 PM
That's because no such "paranormal" claims have been observed and confirmed by any serious source under controlled conditions.

There is no such thing as control.

And there is certainly nothing that is "serious". Recently heard this sage from India say something along the lines of: people study for years to get their Phd in being an idiot.

:p

Kiorionis
04-29-2017, 07:15 PM
That's because no such "paranormal" claims have been observed and confirmed by any serious source under controlled conditions.

Then the real magicians and wizards don't present a serious source under controlled conditions?

JDP
04-29-2017, 08:55 PM
There is no such thing as control.

And there is certainly nothing that is "serious". Recently heard this sage from India say something along the lines of: people study for years to get their Phd in being an idiot.

:p

Yes, there is, on both counts. When "paranormal" claimants are challenged to prove their assertions under controlled conditions (so they can't resort to tricks and cheating) they invariably fail to do so.

JDP
04-29-2017, 08:59 PM
Then the real magicians and wizards don't present a serious source under controlled conditions?

When people making these strange claims accept to be put to the test under controlled conditions they always fail to prove anything of what they assert. Funny, isn't it? The only "magicians" that actually can do things that seem "amazing" are the David Copperfields, David Blaines, etc., but, of course, they resort to tricks, and they gladly admit it.

Awani
04-29-2017, 10:00 PM
When "paranormal" claimants are challenged to prove their assertions...

You fail to understand that it is not the claimants job to prove anything. It's like I said before: prove to me that you are not a homosexual

Firstly you don't need to prove it. Secondly you cannot. However you know.

How can an NDE(near-death experience) be proven, unless you create an NDE again? Not sure anyone willingly would do so. I feel pretty confident... no need to discuss this further in this life on my part... however I look forward to talking with you about all these paranormal things in "heaven". ;)

:p

JDP
04-29-2017, 11:39 PM
You fail to understand that it is not the claimants job to prove anything. It's like I said before: prove to me that you are not a homosexual

Firstly you don't need to prove it. Secondly you cannot. However you know.

How can an NDE(near-death experience) be proven, unless you create an NDE again? Not sure anyone willingly would do so. I feel pretty confident... no need to discuss this further in this life on my part... however I look forward to talking with you about all these paranormal things in "heaven". ;)

:p

No, you keep getting it backwards. The burden of proof is ON THE CLAIMANT, no one else:

http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/PHIL_of_RELIGION_TEXT/CHAPTER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm

"The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of argumentum ad ignorantium, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion being made. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise."

Kiorionis
04-30-2017, 03:51 AM
When people making these strange claims accept to be put to the test under controlled conditions they always fail to prove anything of what they assert. Funny, isn't it?

Yes, it is funny that science holds magic and similar "occult sciences" (like alchemy) to the same standards as chemistry, physics, etc.

JDP
04-30-2017, 04:28 AM
Yes, it is funny that science holds magic and similar "occult sciences" (like alchemy) to the same standards as chemistry, physics, etc.

Alchemy does not belong in that category, though. It does not rely on any supposed special "powers" of the operator himself, unlike the claims of magic/necromancy/sorcery. Modern historians of science do not classify it as such but alongside the history of other natural sciences.

Kiorionis
04-30-2017, 04:31 AM
It does not rely on any supposed special "powers" of the operator himself, unlike the claims of magic/necromancy/sorcery.

Curious. Didn't know that's how magic/necromancy/sorcery worked haha

JDP
04-30-2017, 05:27 AM
Curious. Didn't know that's how magic/necromancy/sorcery worked haha

How else do you think they were supposed to work? If it is not by the "power" of the will of the "magician" it certainly would not happen on its own. Otherwise there would be no point to the claims of magicians/necromancers/sorcerers. The mysterious effects they lay claim to would not be under their control and would only be considered strange/unusual natural phenomena (if they actually were real, that is), not something the magician/necromancer/sorcerer can control at his will. We would be talking about "miracles" or "paranormal occurrences", but not "magic". Magic/necromancy/sorcery requires human intervention.

Awani
04-30-2017, 07:09 AM
No, you keep getting it backwards. The burden of proof is ON THE CLAIMANT, no one else.

Nope I don't need to prove anything. I know. I don't care if anyone else believes me. Prove you are not gay, since you claim to be straight! If you don't feel the need to do so, even if you have claimed to be straight, then you might understand my own position.


Magic/necromancy/sorcery requires human intervention.


I read enough to know what he thinks.

For someone who knows everything about a person after reading a few sentences, and for someone who says anything paranormal is bullshit... well now you seem to know how "what does not work" work. LOL.

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h18/deviadah/forum/those-of-you-who-think-you-know-everything-are-annoying-those-of-us-who-do-quote-1_zpsktjntux5.jpg

Especially true when I look in a mirror. ;)

:p

JDP
04-30-2017, 09:31 AM
Nope I don't need to prove anything. I know. I don't care if anyone else believes me. Prove you are not gay, since you claim to be straight! If you don't feel the need to do so, even if you have claimed to be straight, then you might understand my own position.

If you want critical and logical people to believe you, then you do need to do so. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. No "ifs" or "buts" about it.

Plus it is you who keeps claiming things about me being or not being a "homosexual", I never made any claims on the subject until you started bringing this up. Since you are the one making the claim here too, it is up to you to either prove or disprove that I am "not a homosexual", which I will find very amusing to see indeed :)


For someone who knows everything about a person after reading a few sentences, and for someone who says anything paranormal is bullshit... well now you seem to know how "what does not work" work. LOL.

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h18/deviadah/forum/those-of-you-who-think-you-know-everything-are-annoying-those-of-us-who-do-quote-1_zpsktjntux5.jpg

Especially true when I look in a mirror. ;)

:p

But he wrote enough on the subject of alchemy and laboratory apparatuses to be able to get a good idea of what he thinks on this topic. I don't see what amuses you so much about this. It is called DEDUCTION. Have you ever watched Columbo episodes or read Sherlock Holmes stories? It is not "magic", just logic, deductive reasoning.

Awani
04-30-2017, 10:19 AM
For someone who knows everything about a person after reading a few sentences, it is funny to me that you cannot read. LOL.


If you want critical and logical people to believe you...

I don't care if anyone else believes me.

Also the homosexual query comes from me trying to make you understand knowing and experience, and how difficult it is to prove and convince anyone else + how unnecessary it is to do so. I am amazed you keep avoiding this perception. It doesn't matter to me what you understand or not...

I think it is interesting that a person of your beliefs/logic is even interested in alchemy, because as far as I can tell it is nothing but mumbo-jumbo - even if you remove all spiritual aspects. A logical reasoning scientist with empirical evidence would laugh in your face if you even mentioned the word, so be careful. And until you have transmuted gold everything you claim is up to you to prove (according to your outlook).

In theory then, according to the scientific community, you would be viewed as a quack in denial. That is hilarious to me. You must see the irony? :)

:p

JDP
04-30-2017, 11:10 AM
For someone who knows everything about a person after reading a few sentences, it is funny to me that you cannot read. LOL.




Also the homosexual query comes from me trying to make you understand knowing and experience, and how difficult it is to prove and convince anyone else + how unnecessary it is to do so. I am amazed you keep avoiding this perception. It doesn't matter to me what you understand or not...

I think it is interesting that a person of your beliefs/logic is even interested in alchemy, because as far as I can tell it is nothing but mumbo-jumbo - even if you remove all spiritual aspects. A logical reasoning scientist with empirical evidence would laugh in your face if you even mentioned the word, so be careful. And until you have transmuted gold everything you claim is up to you to prove (according to your outlook).

In theory then, according to the scientific community, you would be viewed as a quack in denial. That is hilarious to me. You must see the irony? :)

:p

Oh I can read very well, thank you very much, that's why I am not convinced at all by your claims that you do not care. You devote unusual amounts of time to such unproven/unprovable topics. Usually the people who say "I do not care about..." are in fact among the ones who care the most about the very things they are trying to convince others they supposedly do not care about :)

But the difference is that transmutation CAN be proven, unlike that bunch of real "mumbo-jumbo" you strangely believe so much in but that you also (painfully) know deep inside that you could never prove, no matter how much you tried, and therefore no logical, rational, critical person will ever believe in those claims you hold so dear as if they were actual facts. But my darling little subject (i.e. transmutation) CAN be proven. Yes, even YOU, dev/Awani, even YOU could carry it out with your own hands and see it with your own eyes and prove its reality to yourself and those you would want to reveal it to. It must really suck that the very subject that you are trying to disparage and deny actually (and ironically) CAN be proven, but the subjects that you hold so dear and believe so much in have no shred of evidence in their favor. Tee-hee!

Awani
04-30-2017, 11:28 AM
LOL. Nope it is not like that at all. That is why I keep using the sexual preference allegory, because you know you are straight and you feel no need to convince anyone else. Same goes for me regarding the paranormal.

:p

Axismundi000
04-30-2017, 11:58 AM
Your empirical assertions about Alchemy are not currently so, they are 'a priori' JDP due to the lack of empirical methodology and evidence, the evidence you have not yet provided. So you are simply falling back on the scientific method and relying on the rigorous research outside of the practise of Alchemy and a lot of reading to which you apply personal opinion. Simply repeating the scientific and empirical view is at best boorish. You assert various things but do not show your own Alchemical work so that it is open to refutation. Science is theory underpinned by evidence that is; open to being tested/refuted, you offer opinions and theories about historical Alchemical documents but offer no actual testable or refutable evidence you merely assert such and such an author is trying to trick the reader. They may be, and some of these Alchemical procedures have since become a part of chemistry, but it remains a priori to say that all the mystical and occult stuff not addressed by chemistry is fallacious. You need to show a new empirical finding which shows that a specific mystical and occult assertion is a deliberate trick, demonstrate a new empirical method that is verifiable and repeatable. Until you do this you are merely providing a source of light entertainment, interesting and stimulating though I find this.