PDA

View Full Version : Salazius "Alchemy" Work



Schmuldvich
08-14-2017, 07:40 PM
Here are examples of my transmutations :

http://i.imgur.com/acBLJ1o.jpg

During a process of High Spagery (archemical) using mercury HG, I had the surprise to witness the vegetation of gold in a proper matrix, all the process happened at room temperature, it was a wonder to witness because I could see all the changes of colours of the metal, at first it was silvery mat, then taking a peacok colour, and pinkish hue, then this shiny golden colour.
One can really meditate on the formation of the metals, and transmutations after that.


http://i.imgur.com/uA3zC8y.jpg

This is an atomic destruction, releasing the Priciples of the Gold. Without using acids or aquae regia, this is "un-transmutating" atoms so to speak.

At Room temperature.


So...uh....what exactly did you transmute with your "transmutation"?

You put gold leaf into a mixture, and this mixture that you made dissolved the gold leaf. Congratulations you are $3.99 poorer!



What happened after this?


Well, read again, it's all plainly explained => Hg into gold.

And for the second experiment, gold made non metallic.

I'm not poorer.

I'm richer of wisdom and of a great gold tincture.
I'm richer of the metallic knowledge of the principles of transmutations.
I'm richer of the experiments and capacity to proove that my ideas were right at first, and it worked out well.
I'm richer of the inner experiences provided by the Gold Tincture on my bodies. (And I can use it also for a lot of purposes)
I'm richer of the fact that now my spirit was "worked out" with these two types of transmutations : one for evolution, and one for retrogradation.

Only you, sees poverty here.


Thank you :)

I know photos prove nothing. You can all just rely on my words.

I don't care if people don't believe in transmutations possibilities.

But, the Magnum Opus is entirely based on the effect of several transmutations. From the begining to the end.

A transmutation to dissolve, and a transmutation to recompose. And then a transmutation to share the power.

The Magnus Opus (The Great Work) is the successful production of the Philosopher's Stone.

What you show here is not the Philosopher's Stone and contains many "vulgar" ingredients. Our Stone, the Philosopher's Stone, has one root.




I've asked everyone openly on this forum before, and I will ask this openly again to anyone willing to answer...



Do you know ANYONE who has accomplished anything worthwhile with Alchemy?

Why do you think in the first experiment that you "transmuted Hg into gold"?

In the second experiment, "gold made non metallic"...you disintegrated gold leaf. Anyone can do this in so many different ways. And, yes, I get it; you did it at room temperature with a concoction you made yourself, that's awesome! I am sure you learned a whole lot as you point out above, I value those things as well and have no doubt this furthered your knowledge, but did you actually accomplish anything worthwhile?




I've posted two photos today in the transmutation thread. Do you consider my two types of transmutations as worthwile ? I know photos prove nothing. I know that.

And by the way, if ever someone who did something truly worthwile (as a rejuvenation for example), would they claim it openly here ? I doubt it.

Your photos prove a whole lot. Don't belittle your photos. I appreciate photos greatly; very few people are brave enough to share publicly. You did and I commend that. Thank you for sharing your work!

What happened after these photos?

Do you know anyone who has done anything (other than selling "books", "processes", or "classes") that has profited them monetarily?

That said, does anyone on this site know a single person, or even heard of anyone alive today, that possesses the Philosopher's Stone (ya know, the one that does all the marvelous things the Ancients claimed...)??

Salazius
08-15-2017, 06:43 AM
The Magnus Opus (The Great Work) is the successful production of the Philosopher's Stone.

What you show here is not the Philosopher's Stone and contains many "vulgar" ingredients. Our Stone, the Philosopher's Stone, has one root.

Why do you think in the first experiment that you "transmuted Hg into gold"?

In the second experiment, "gold made non metallic"...you disintegrated gold leaf. Anyone can do this in so many different ways. (...), but did you actually accomplish anything worthwhile?

Do you know anyone who has done anything (other than selling "books", "processes", or "classes") that has profited them monetarily?

That said, does anyone on this site know a single person, or even heard of anyone alive today, that possesses the Philosopher's Stone (ya know, the one that does all the marvelous things the Ancients claimed...)??


Well, "vulgar ingredients", you are quite quick to judge a work based on photographies. You know nothing about the processes and the Mercuries involved.

No one asked for a Stone to be exposed as far as I know. And by the way I share what I want.

Hearing you comment, it seems you know pretty much about the Phi Stone.

There is a difference between dissolving a gold leaf (chemically) and opening it with a Mercury. In the first case, atom if untouched, in the second one, atoms do not exist as they were before. It makes a huge difference. But it seems common for you right ?

Yes some persons did transmutations and had some money with it. A french man in Paris did 75 kg of gold and wanted to sell them to the Banque de France. Because of an old law in France, that not allows anyone to produce gold, the 75kg were taken away from him.
If you read Bernard Husson for example you'll have a lot of proofs that transmutation was clearly common at a certain time.
And personnaly yes I know people that make money with trans gold or silver. Or simply have partial transmutations of lead into silverish/tin metal. (reacting as silver under the touchstone).


Spin-off thread here: Making gold and getting away with it (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?5352-Making-gold-and-getting-away-with-it)

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 12:33 AM
Well, "vulgar ingredients", you are quite quick to judge a work based on photographies. You know nothing about the processes and the Mercuries involved.

No one asked for a Stone to be exposed as far as I know. And by the way I share what I want.

Hearing you comment, it seems you know pretty much about the Phi Stone.

There is a difference between dissolving a gold leaf (chemically) and opening it with a Mercury. In the first case, atom if untouched, in the second one, atoms do not exist as they were before. It makes a huge difference. But it seems common for you right ?

Yes some persons did transmutations and had some money with it. A french man in Paris did 75 kg of gold and wanted to sell them to the Banque de France. Because of an old law in France, that not allows anyone to produce gold, the 75kg were taken away from him.
If you read Bernard Husson for example you'll have a lot of proofs that transmutation was clearly common at a certain time.
And personnaly yes I know people that make money with trans gold or silver. Or simply have partial transmutations of lead into silverish/tin metal. (reacting as silver under the touchstone).

You said that you used common mercury(Hg)...This is enough information to know that you are using "vulgar ingredients". If this is not the case, will you tell us what your Starting Matter for the above photos is?

There are not different types of "Stones". There is one Stone and it is the Philosopher's Stone. Anything else is a "particular" preparation (which does not interest me). ...Is what you made the Philosopher's Stone or a "particular" preparation?

Yes, I know a great deal about the Philosopher's Stone, but I do not possess the Philosopher's Stone. Do you know much about the Philosopher's Stone?

"Dissolving gold leaf chemically" is not the same as "opening gold Philosophically". This needs to be understood. One cannot open gold until they possess our Alkahest. Are you in possession of our Alkahest, Salazius?

The people that you know "that make money with trans gold or silver", what do they do with their gold and silver? Do you friends make money with their "partial transmutations of lead into silverish/tin metal"?

Have you ever seen any of their transmuted gold and silver, or can you yourself produce gold and silver from lesser metals?

elixirmixer
08-16-2017, 02:06 AM
You said that you used common mercury(Hg)...This is enough information to know that you are using "vulgar ingredients". If this is not the case, will you tell us what your Starting Matter for the above photos is?

There are not different types of "Stones". There is one Stone and it is the Philosopher's Stone. Anything else is a "particular" preparation (which does not interest me). ...Is what you made the Philosopher's Stone or a "particular" preparation?

Yes, I know a great deal about the Philosopher's Stone, but I do not possess the Philosopher's Stone. Do you know much about the Philosopher's Stone?

"Dissolving gold leaf chemically" is not the same as "opening gold Philosophically". This needs to be understood. One cannot open gold until they possess our Alkahest. Are you in possession of our Alkahest, Salazius?

The people that you know "that make money with trans gold or silver", what do they do with their gold and silver? Do you friends make money with their "partial transmutations of lead into silverish/tin metal"?

Have you ever seen any of their transmuted gold and silver, or can you yourself produce gold and silver from lesser metals?

Some of your questions can be very rude Schmuldvich, a lot of people do not like talking about their personal finances, especially when that may involve legally questionable transmutations. And seriously, should people have to explain themselves to a governmental force, if they have received gold directly FROM NATURE HERSELF?? what the fuck does rockafella have to do with that?

Also this:
There are not different types of "Stones". There is one Stone and it is the Philosopher's Stone. Anything else is a "particular" preparation (which does not interest me). ...Is what you made the Philosopher's Stone or a "particular" preparation?

Is BS. Any true quintessence that has been thoroughly manifested, elementalized, purified, re-combined and fixed, will appear and either a red or white stone, capable of, at least, transmuting the human mind and body, to varying degrees. There is not one stone.

finally:
Are you in possession of our Alkahest, Salazius?


I honestly think, that you think that you are, and yet, ill bet my saggy ballsack that you don't., which would make it "our solvent" not yours :p and i make this bet based on many months of reading your posts, you can memorize all the texts that you like, but if you havent had the appifany that produces the stone, all you blokes mucking around with minerals are completely fooling yourself. COMPLETELY. since, obviously, minerals are quite specified. (however, i do like the idea of mucking around with quartz AFTER making my stone.)

Additionally:
One cannot open gold until they possess our Alkahest. what is this crap here; there are many alkehiest which release the sulphur of gold once the gold is well prepared.

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 02:22 AM
Some of your questions can be very rude Schmuldvich, a lot of people do not like talking about their personal finances, especially when that may involve legally questionable transmutations. And seriously, should people have to explain themselves to a governmental force, if they have received gold directly FROM NATURE HERSELF?? what the fuck does rockafella have to do with that?
My questions are not rude. My questions are direct. You guys are scared shitless to answer direct questions.

Personal finances were never asked about, elixirmixer. I cannot name one person on this forum who has accomplished a "legally questionable transmutation". Have you?

Regarding governmental force, Rockefellers, Nature herself, etc. ...I have only seen members of this forum dissolve (cough*waste*cough) gold, but never transmute gold or even "produce" gold from one of their mixtures. Do you know why?



also this: "There are not different types of "Stones". There is one Stone and it is the Philosopher's Stone. Anything else is a "particular" preparation (which does not interest me). ...Is what you made the Philosopher's Stone or a "particular" preparation?"

Is BS. Any true quintessence that has been thoroughly manifested, elementalized, purified, re-combined and fixed, will appear and either a red or white stone, capable of, at least, transmuting the human mind and body, to varying degrees. There is not one stone.
There is one singular "true quintessence". It is called our Quintessence. Many impostors to this marvelous substance exist, but only one performs all the acts the Ancients described. Show me anywhere on this message board where someone has done anything in line with the Sages and I will be a happy man!



finally: "Are you in possession of our Alkahest, Salazius?"

I honestly think, that you think that you are, and yet, ill bet my saggy ballsack that you don't., which would make it "our solvent" not yours :p and i make this bet based on many months of reading your posts, you can memorize all the texts that you like, but if you havent had the appifany that produces the stone, all you blokes mucking around with minerals are completely fooling yourself. COMPLETELY. since, obviously, minerals are quite specified.
You think that I am in possession of our Alkahest? I did not understand the part about saggy ballsack.

My computer has a search function just like yours. You should use it some time... I do not have as many texts "memorized" as you assume I do.

The "appifany" is not to be taken lightly, Mr. Mixer; Truth is magnificent! Do you presume that I work with minerals?



additionally: "One cannot open gold until they possess our Alkahest."

what is this crap here; there are many alkehiest which release the sulphur of gold once the gold is well prepared.
There is one Solvent, our Alkahest, that genuinely opens common elemental gold. Various concoctions dissolve gold and release what you wrongly call "sulphur", but only one concoction, our Universal Solvent a.k.a. our Alkahest, truly actually opens gold.




Salazius, what happened after those pictures?

elixirmixer
08-16-2017, 02:43 AM
This is a more accurate statement:

There is one singular "true quintessence". It is called our Quintessence. Many impostors to this marvelous substance exist, but only one performs all the acts the Ancients described.


Do you presume that I work with minerals? Yes.


our Alkahest, truly actually opens gold Please explain the hermetic difference between dissolving and opening.

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 07:01 AM
"Do you presume that I work with minerals?"
Yes.

Well please let me clear that up for you, I do not work with minerals.



Please explain the hermetic difference between dissolving and opening.

Philalethes gives us an excellent description of our Alkahest in "A Brief Guide To The Celestial Ruby"...







"A Brief Guide To The Celestial Ruby" by Philalethes, 1668

Our water is the water Mercury, which dissolves homogeneous metallic bodies, and mingles with them in indissoluble union, abides with them, is digested with them, and together with them becomes that spiritual whole which we seek. For everything that dissolves a substance naturally (still preserving the specific properties of the thing dissolved) becomes one with it both materially and formally, coalesces with it, and is thickened by it, thus nourishing it.

We may also observe that, every natural dissolution being a quickening of that which was dead, this quickening can take place only through some vital agent which is of the same essence with the dead thing; if we wish to quicken the (dead) grain of wheat, we can do this only by means of an earthy vapour, which, like the grain itself, is a product of the earth. For this reason common Mercury can have no quickening effect on gold, because it is not of the same essence with it. A grain of wheat sown in marshy soil, so far from being quickened into life, is, on the contrary, destroyed, because the aqueous humour of the soil is not of the same nature. In like manner, gold, if mixed with common Mercury, or with anything except its own essential humour, is not dissolved, because such waters are too cold, crude, and impure; for which reason, being utterly unlike gold, they cannot amalgamate with it, or attain with it to a far nobler degree of development. Our Mercury, indeed, is cold and unmatured in comparison with gold; but it is pure, hot, and well-digested in respect of common Mercury, which resembles it only in whiteness and fluxibility. Our Mercury is, in fact, a pure water, clean, clear, bright, and resplendent, worthy of all admiration. If you wish for a more particular description of our water I am impelled by motives of charity to tell you that it is living, fluxible, clear, nitid, as white as snow, hot, humid, airy, vaporous, and digestive, and that gold melts in it like ice in warm water.

It is our vessel, our fire, the abode of our furnace, by whose continuous and gentle warmth the whole substance is digested. If you know this water, it will be seen to contain all our fires, all our proportions of weight, all our regimens. It is Bernard of Trevisa's clear pellucid Fountain, in which our King is cleansed and strengthened to overcome all his foes. All you have to do is to find this water and to put into it the purified body; out of the two Nature will then produce our Stone. This mineral water can be extracted only from those things which contain it; and that thing from which it is most easily obtained is difficult to discover, as is also the mode of its extraction. It dissolves gold without violence, is friendly to it washes away its impurities, and is white, warm, and clear Without our Mercury, Alchemy could not be a science, but only a vain and empty pretence. If you can obtain it, you have the key of the whole work, with which you can open the most secret chambers of knowledge. Its nature is the same as that of gold, but its substance is different, and the preparation of it causes a great stench.

Weigh well the possibilities of Nature; refrain from introducing any heterogeneous element into our Magistery, and do not blame me if you fail to understand my words.

elixirmixer
08-16-2017, 07:19 AM
Okay, well, I don't have any idea what your working with then, but at least your not crawling around in the dirt :cool:

Beautiful art, at the very least Salazius

Salazius
08-16-2017, 01:49 PM
Beautiful art, at the very least Salazius

Thank you Elixirmixer.

Kiorionis
08-16-2017, 02:23 PM
You said that you used common mercury(Hg)...This is enough information to know that you are using "vulgar ingredients".

Quite curious, because I read him as saying he used an archemical/high spagyric process on metallic mercury to vegetate gold in a proper matrix.

From this I gather that although his mercury may be metallic and common, the "ingredients" he's added to it are not "vulgar", but archemical.

It is quite impressive work, if you ask me.


There are not different types of "Stones". There is one Stone and it is the Philosopher's Stone.

And this One Thing has many different adaptations (if you remember your Emerald Tablet (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4759-Re-Interpretation-of-the-Emerald-Tablet)).

:)

Hellin Hermetist
08-16-2017, 05:06 PM
You said that you used common mercury(Hg)...This is enough information to know that you are using "vulgar ingredients".

If you arent an accomplished adept and doesnt possess the Stone, how do you know for sure that this or that ingredient, which you call "vulgar", is not essential for its confection?



Yes, I know a great deal about the Philosopher's Stone, but I do not possess the Philosopher's Stone. Do you know much about the Philosopher's Stone?

How is it possible to know much about a certain substance and at the same time never have this substance at your possesion? Has any close friend of yours present to you this substance and let you make tests with it to familiarize yourself with its properties and characteristics?


One cannot open gold until they possess our Alkahest. Are you in possession of our Alkahest, Salazius?

The term Alkahest, was invented by Paracelsus, to describe a certain medicine of the liver, which of course had nothing to do with transmutation and the philosophers Stone. Helmont later used that term, to describe a special solvent, which, according to him, was able to dissolve any substance put inside it and reduce it to water. Of course Helmont's alkahest too had nothing to do with alchemy (Helmont had admitted that he got a sample from the prepared Stone from a stranger and was allowed to make tests with it and didnt know how to prepare the Stone himself). So about which Alkahest are you interested in? The pharmaceutical one of Paracelsus or the Helmontian special solvent? Of course both of them have nothing to do with alchemy.


The people that you know "that make money with trans gold or silver", what do they do with their gold and silver? Do you friends make money with their "partial transmutations of lead into silverish/tin metal"?

Have you ever seen any of their transmuted gold and silver, or can you yourself produce gold and silver from lesser metals?

Why are you so interested in that? Are you a tax collector?

Hellin Hermetist
08-16-2017, 05:13 PM
My questions are not rude. My questions are direct. You guys are scared shitless to answer direct questions.


I asked you in another topic to prove a thesis of yours and you answered that you will not prove anything, that I am not able to decipher and understand the secret code of the adepts and other similar bs. Now everyone can see who is scared shitless to answer direct questions. Your ignorance has been exposed in this topic as well.

Hellin Hermetist
08-16-2017, 06:16 PM
Philalethes gives us an excellent description of our Alkahest in "A Brief Guide To The Celestial Ruby"...


Ok. Seems that its getting better with every new post. Me and others have shown you in some earlier posts that Starkey/Philalethes fooled also other ppl in the past as he has now fooled you, and in reality he never had the Stone. As it seems that you prefer to reject common logic and follow your strange conceptions, at least try to work with common metallic mercury if you want to follow Philalethes-Starkey, as this was the real substance he worked with. Its very easy for me to prove my thesis.
I shall quote from Ripley Revived:


For mine own part, I have cause to honour Bernard Trevisan, who is very ingenious, as in all his Writings, so especially in that Epistle of his to Thomas of Bononia, in which let me seriously profess, I received the main Light in this hidden Secret. I shall not name the place, but read the Epistle, and read it again and again, for in it is most excellent truth, and Naked truth.

Everyone who has studied the answer of Bernard to Thomas of Bononia (I propose you to study it as well) can see by his own eyes how highly the author praise common metallic mercury as the one and only real alchemical solvent, and how he mocks all those experimenters who destroys its pure metallic nature by dissolving it in acid substances or sublime it with salts, when the only thing it needs, is to mix it with certain substances, which will divide from its inner nature a certain phlegmatic humidity and an impure earth. Then it will be ready to dissolve metallic gold and accomplish philosophical Work. That is the opinion of Bernandus, which Philalethes define as most certain truth and naked truth.


Next to him, or rather before him in some respects, is an author whom I will not name.

Most probably thats a reference to Alexander Von Sucthen, as it was his path which Philalethes followed.



There is than but one only humidity, which is applicable unto our Work, which certainly is neither of Saturn nor Venus, nor is drawn from any thing, which nature hath formed, but from a substance compounded by the Art of the Philosopher. So then, if a Mercury drawn from the Bodies, have not only the same deficiency of heat and superfluity of faeces as Common Mercury hath, but also a distinct specificated form, it must (by reason of this its form) be so much the farther remote from our Mercury, then common Argent Vive is.

The only problem of common metallic mercury is that it has a deficiency of heat and a superfluity of feces.


Our Art therefore is to compound two Principles, (one in which the Salt, and another in which the Sulphur of nature doth abound,) which are not yet perfect, nor yet totally imperfect, and (by consequence) may therefore (by our Art) be changed or exalted, which that (which is totally perfect) cannot be; and then by Common Mercury to extract not the Pondus, but the Coelestial virtue out of the compound. Which virtue (being Fermental) begets in the common Mercury an Offspring more noble then it self, which is our true Hermaphrodite, which will congeal it self, and dissolve the Bodies

To solve the above problems (heat metallic mercury to a greater degree and seperates its superfluous feces) the author says that we have to compound a certain substance from two principles, and after that to use common metallic mercury to extract a certain vitrue from the artificial compound, which will reinforce common mercury and reduce it to Philosophic Mercury.


We conclude them, that all operations for our Mercury, but by common Mercury, and our Body according to our Art, are erroneous, and will never produce our Mysterie, although they might be otherwise, Mercuries so wonderfully made.

Now can see again that, according to Philalethes, common metallic mercury and the compound of the art gives the Philosophic Mercury and real alchemical solvent.


This Principle wants nothing but composition, and this composition must be made with our other crude white Sulphur, which is nothing but Mercury vulgar, by frequent cohobation of it upon our Hermaphroditical body, so long till it become a fiery water.

Common mercury becomes alchemical solvent and a fiery water, by repeated cohobations over the art's compound (he calls every cohobation an eagle).


Besides Gold, which is the Body or male, you must have another Sperm, which is the Spirit and Soul; or Female, and this is Mercury, in Flux and Form like to common Argent Vive, yet more clean and pure. There are many, who instead of Mercury, will have strange Waters or Liquors, which they stile by the name of Philosophical Mercury; be not deceived by them, for what a Man sows, that he must look to reap.

Philosophical mercury has the same form with common metallic mercury but its more pure and clean.


So then if thou canst (as by the Liquor Alcahest thou mayst) reduce a Body (be it what it will, whether Eggs, or Hair, or Urine, or a Spirit ardent, or any mean Mineral which is not of a Metalline imposition) to Water, and after knowest how to impregnate that Water with a specificated, seminal, influential Light, so that that Water may penetrate its dimensions at the least 16 times, and become a Mineral, Mercurial Juice; thou mayst then expect as much profit from that Mercury, as from the best Mercury that is sold in the Apothecaries shops, and no more; for thou mayst so purifie it, and separate its faeces and crudities, as that it may become fit to joyn with thy perfect Bodies: but I doubt this way will be so hard, (try it when thou wilt, I fear the first will puzzle thee all thy life long, to turn all Bodies into Water, and the next would puzzle all the Devils in Hell, to bring this Water to a Metallick seminal viscosity) that thou hadst better leave musing on these Impossibilities, and take my counsel, that is, seek it there where Nature hath put it.

And now it seems that I am going to kill two birds with one Stone. Philalethes at first affirms, to your great disappointment, that the only thing the liquor Alkahest can do, is to reduce a body in a watery form. So its wholly inadequate for our work. In second place he affirms that common metallic mercury sold by apothecaries can be purified to such a degree, and all the feces and crudities be seperated from its inner nature, that it shall be transformed to Philosphic Mercury and be fit to be joyned with the perfect bodies.

I could stay here and quoted all day if I wanted, but I believe that the above are enough. Now I have revealed to you all the Opus of Philalethes, with the expection of the real nature of the compound body he uses to purify mercury, which you have to find for yourself. You can be grateful to me now.

Axismundi000
08-16-2017, 06:35 PM
The above description is greatly appreciated: to purify and prepare common mercury (Hg) such that it becomes 'our Mercury' is something I will test for myself once I solve the problem of obtaining mercury metal. In the UK there are restrictions on obtaining Hg and also I need to prepare a small outdoors shed in my garden equipped with Mercury spillage kit etc. Common Mercury (Hg) acting as a menstruum to obtain our Mercury is an established well documented approach the advantage being lower volumes to work with, the disadvantage is the toxicity of mercury metal (Hg).

The idea that has been put forward on this forum by some that there is only one method seems unlikely to me and no real arguement as to why has been presented. It has been simply stated as a bald fact, a sure sign of ignorance perhaps.

As long as I'm carefull when I do this work it will be fun to do and I will be able to investigate this Alchemical approach fully alongside star regulus investigations. Again I spell out here even though in other posts I have been fairly clear; I know that mercury metal (Hg) is not 'our Mercury'. Also I'm wondering if the 'accumulator' used in evocation that I can personally generate is related to all this, I'm not just talking about smoke here but I digress. In the mean time I continue with other works.

JDP
08-16-2017, 06:51 PM
The above description is greatly appreciated: to purify and prepare common mercury (Hg) such that it becomes 'our Mercury' is something I will test for myself once I solve the problem of obtaining mercury metal. In the UK there are restrictions on obtaining Hg and also I need to prepare a small outdoors shed in my garden equipped with Mercury spillage kit etc. Common Mercury (Hg) acting as a menstruum to obtain our Mercury is an established well documented approach the advantage being lower volumes to work with, the disadvantage is the toxicity of mercury metal (Hg).

The idea that has been put forward on this forum by some that there is only one method seems unlikely to me and no real arguement as to why has been presented. It has been simply stated as a bald fact, a sure sign of ignorance perhaps.

There are several possible methods, but they all revolve around the secret "water" or "mercury". The reason why it is impossible to make the Stone without it is simply because this peculiar solvent makes up part of its composition. To use a previous analogy, trying to make the Stone without it is like trying to make an omelette without eggs. It's just not going to happen. You can make omelettes in several ways, but they ALL need the eggs. Similarly, you can make the Stone several ways, but they ALL need the secret solvent.


As long as I'm carefull when I do this work it will be fun to do and I will be able to investigate this Alchemical approach fully alongside star regulus investigations. Again I spell out here even though in other posts I have been fairly clear; I know that mercury metal (Hg) is not 'our Mercury'. Also I'm wondering if the 'accumulator' used in evocation that I can personally generate is related dto all this, I'm not just talking about smoke here but I digress. In the mean time I continue with other works.

Or you can save yourself a lot of trouble and expenditure and read Starkey's lab notebooks (which have been edited and translated by William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe) and see for yourself that he got nowhere with antimonial amalgams.

JDP
08-16-2017, 07:31 PM
Most probably thats a reference to Alexander Von Sucthen, as it was his path which Philalethes followed.

In all fairness to Suchten, he never claimed that you could make the Stone with such manipulations of mercury and antimony regulus. It was Starkey who for some bizarre reason just interpreted Suchten's work on "antimony vulgar" that way. Suchten only claimed that you could make artificial metals "directly" (i.e. without any "tincture" being prepared first) from regulus of antimony. But even Suchten himself in the end of his treatise on antimony admits that most of the "artificial metals" he made did not withstand his very own tests, with the only exception of one process where he claims that real gold was made, but in such a small quantity that it did not even pay for the expenditure of producing it (I put this experiment to the test many years ago, and I can say that it is 100% BALONEY; no gold whatsoever was produced by following Suchten's procedures.) Why exactly did Starkey believe that Suchten was somehow talking about making the Stone with such procedures remains one of the biggest mysteries in the literature. They defy logic and common sense. Maybe the answer is that Starkey's brain was starting to be affected from all the mercury vapors he must have inhaled in the course of his endless experiments with this substance.

Axismundi000
08-16-2017, 08:24 PM
There are several possible methods, but they all revolve around the secret "water" or "mercury". The reason why it is impossible to make the Stone without it is simply because this peculiar solvent makes up part of its composition. To use a previous analogy, trying to make the Stone without it is like trying to make an omelette without eggs. It's just not going to happen. You can make omelettes in several ways, but they ALL need the eggs. Similarly, you can make the Stone several ways, but they ALL need the secret solvent.



Or you can save yourself a lot of trouble and expenditure and read Starkey's lab notebooks (which have been edited and translated by William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe) and see for yourself that he got nowhere with antimonial amalgams.

Sometimes it's better to test things empirically for myself, especially as it would be an enjoyable learning exercise for me. Whilst I'm sure I haven't read as much as you it would be reductionist if you were to assume I have read little or none. i appreciate your comments JDP however I have to admit I was half expecting them though not the specific references and I admit I haven't bothered much with Starkey. Thanks anyway.

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 09:25 PM
Quite curious, because I read him as saying he used an archemical/high spagyric process on metallic mercury to vegetate gold in a proper matrix. From this I gather that although his mercury may be metallic and common, the "ingredients" he's added to it are not "vulgar", but archemical.
By definition archemy is vulgar. Is it not?

I like how Salazius (who refuses to answer any direct questions now or engage in direct discussion) put it almost 10 years ago...


"Archimia deals more with salts, metals, mineral things in order to make gold or specific particulars" (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?1315-Alchemy-archemy-spagyrics-where-do-you-think-the-difference-lies&p=7230#post7230).

...Is this not "vulgar" to you?

Salazius, what ingredients were used in your concoction?

What happened after the photos were taken?




And this One Thing has many different adaptations (if you remember your Emerald Tablet (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4759-Re-Interpretation-of-the-Emerald-Tablet)).
According to the "Emerald Tablet" (and this thread is so much better "The Emerald Tablet - What Does It Mean?" (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4902-The-Emerald-Tablet-What-Does-It-Mean) :p) this One Thing was created BY adaptation...


Verba secretorum Hermetis ---
Verum, sine mendacio, certum et verissimum :
Quod est inferius est sicut quod est superius; et quod est superius est sicut quod est inferius, ad perpetranda miracula rei unius.
Et sicut omnes res fuerunt ab uno, mediatione unius, sic omnes res natae fuerunt ab hac una re, adaptatione.
Pater ejus est Sol, mater ejus Luna; portavit illud Ventus in ventre suo; nutrix ejus Terra est.
Pater omnis telesmi totius mundi est hic.
Vis ejus integra est si versa fuerit in terram.
Separabis terram ab igne, subtile a spisso, suaviter, cum magno ingenio.
Ascendit a terra in coelum, iterumque descendit in terram, et recipit vim superiorum et inferiorum.
Sic habebis gloriam totius mundi.
Ideo fugiet a te omnis obscuritas.
Hic est totius fortitudine fortitudo fortis; quia vincet omnem rem subtilem, omnemque solidam penetrabit. Sic mundus creatus est.
Hinc erunt adaptationes mirabiles, quarum modus est hic.
Itaque vocatus sum Hermes Trismegistus, habens tres partes philosophić totius mundi.
Completum est quod dixi de operatione Solis.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I speak not of fictitious things, but that which is certain and true.
What is below is like that which is above, and what is above is like that which is below, to accomplish the miricles of one thing.
And as all things were produced by the one word of one Being, so all things were produced from this one thing by adaptation.
Its father is the sun, its mother the moon; the wind carries it in its belly, its nurse is the earth.
It is the father of perfection throughout the world.
The power is vigorous if it be changed into earth.
Seperate the earth from the fire, the subtle from the gross, acting prudently and with judgement.
Ascend with the greatest sagacity from the earth to heaven, and then again descend to earth, and unite together the powers of things superior and inferior. Thus you will obtain the glory of the whole world, and obscurity will fly away from you.
This has more fortitude than fortitude itself, because it conquers every subtle thing and can penetrate every solid.
Thus was the world formed.
Hence proceed wonders, which are here established.
Therefore I am called Hermes Trismegistus, having three parts of the philosophy of the whole world.
That which I had to say concerning the operation of the sun is completed.


...Yet I do agree that it has many adaptations within our flask. "From One comes Two comes a Third thing."

elixirmixer
08-16-2017, 10:39 PM
You've miss-read this i think Schmuldvich:


all things were produced from this one thing by adaptation.

Add: And I disagree, alchimi is not 'by definition' vulgar, because who's to say whether or not Salazius USED philosophical substances IN his archemy processes??

These bold, ridgid definitions, may have suited the sages in the medieval period, however, in this day and age, are not the boundaries a little more blurred, and will continue to blurr until all things conjoin back into the ONE THING!!!!!!! fuck im good.

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 10:43 PM
You've miss-read this i think Schmuldvich: all things were produced from this one thing by adaptation.
You are correct!

What you just posted is what I was attempting to imply. Thank you!

Kibric
08-16-2017, 11:27 PM
Siddha Rasavatham has a long history using mercury


In about 1661, as Aurangzeb set about to expand his kingdom throughout the subcontinent and free the land of heretics, he was at the same time extending his protection to an obscure Hindu monastery in the Punjab. At the time in question Aanand Nath, the abbot of the monastery and a Natha Siddha alchemist, was providing history's great persecutor of Hinduism a regular supply of treated mercury which promised to confer longevity. At the same time in the deep south, the Tamil Siddha alchemist Bhogar, who had supposedly migrated from China along with his guru Kalangi Nathar, was establishing a shrine to the God Murugan on the top of Palani Hill. It was there that he composed his 7000 verses on Kundalini Yoga, alchemy, and Siddha medicine. By medieval times Indian alchemy had come into vogue much like tantra had done almost a millennium earlier. And though the Indian alchemists also sought to develop the chemical processes of transforming base metals into gold as in Europe & the Middle East, they often emphasized the pursuit of bodily perfection and the preparation of the elixir of immortality as the Chinese alchemists had sought.

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/tamil_si.html

should note that the Siddhas Rasalingam is not the European " Philosophers stone "
but Bhogar is described as making a " Philosophers stone and Elixir " using Siddha alchemy that conferred Immortality.
Yogiraj has a Rasalingam I think you can visit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasalingam

Schmuldvich
08-16-2017, 11:38 PM
Siddha Rasavatham has a long history using mercury



http://www.levity.com/alchemy/tamil_si.html

should note that the Siddhas Rasalingam is not the European " Philosophers stone "
but Bhogar is described as making a " Philosophers stone and Elixir " using Siddha alchemy that conferred Immortality.
Yogiraj has a Rasalingam I think you can visit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasalingam

I have an online buddy from India, GG, who totally gets off on this stuff!


http://i.imgur.com/Ispvb52.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ct5y0eT.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/eR8PW4g.jpg http://i.imgur.com/N4ngYv7.jpg

Kiorionis
08-17-2017, 02:11 AM
By definition archemy is vulgar. Is it not?

Personally I'd make the distinction between working with salts, metals, mineral things in order to make gold or specific particulars and working on salts, metals, mineral things.

A similar distinction I'd make for working with vulgar substances and working on them.

But, Salazius is the only one (as far as I know) who knows what he uses. He might even disagree with my analysis.

Kiorionis
08-17-2017, 02:17 AM
And this One Thing has many different adaptations


You've miss-read this i think Schmuldvich: all things were produced from this one thing by adaptation.

Hmmm...:confused:

Kibric
08-17-2017, 03:12 AM
The Sages say all over the place that our Matter is available to everyone, both rich and poor, so this statement alone confirms (to me) that these "plants that only grow in South India" clearly is not our Matter.

correct they are talking about the " European Philosophers stone "
where as the Siddhas using Mercury and plants only from South India is a different concoction
but provides nearly all the same effects

This one matter if you knew it so well
then you should recognize that the Siddhar Mercury and Plant concoction
share a common ingredient (available to everyone, both rich and poor,) with the " European Philosophers stone "
and if you were really clued up you would see
How all fabled longevity given plants have the same common ingredient

your one matter is present in all of them


A "European Philosopher's Stone" does not exist just as much as "a philosophers stone" does not exist. There is One Philosopher's Stone and its properties are what the Authors have described time and time again and again...

again to be clear
there are different stones Indian and Western
but they are only really different paths
that share a common root (ingredient)

I apologise if I come across as harsh

Schmuldvich
08-17-2017, 03:14 AM
correct they are talking about the " European Philosophers stone "
where as the Siddhas using Mercury and plants only from South India is a different concoction
but provides nearly all the same effects

...Nearly the same effects ≠ Exactly the same effects

...Sorta kinda the philosopher's stone ≠ the Philosopher's Stone

JDP
08-17-2017, 03:23 AM
correct they are talking about the " European Philosophers stone "
where as the Siddhas using Mercury and plants only from South India is a different concoction
but provides nearly all the same effects

This one matter stone if you knew it so well
then you should recognize that the Siddhar Mercury and Plant concoction
share a common ingredient with the " European Philosophers stone "
and if you were really clued up you would see
How all fabled longevity given plants have the same common ingredient

your one matter is present in all of them

Technically, there is no "European Philosophers' Stone", considering that the European literature (both Latin and vernacular) on the subject is derived from the Arabic one, which in its turn is derived from the Byzantine (modern day Turkey) and Alexandrian (northern Egypt) ones.

Salazius
08-17-2017, 09:10 AM
Schmuldvich,

You seems obsessed with "vulgar" matters here.

Relax a bit, you look so tensed and stressed... For me nothing in Nature is Vulgar. Not even you, even if you show quite a lack of respect and also of passive agressive actions, tincted to my opinion with disdain, contempt, for some reasons I don't get.

But you are in right to deserve the way, for yourself, that you apply to others. Brace youself.

You can have doubts, and share them, but the tone you use is effectively rude, brutal, and no, not "direct", but incisive. It seems you have a "problem", to act like that. It is borderline for me. I don't like that.

You are asking a lot and giving, showing nothing but certitudes - it's all air. All your questions looks like a trial, and you are the judge. But you have no authority and no weight for me, at all.

"Ho why Salazius is not wanting to my "direct" answer", please, stop this immature thing now. Sometime people have a life and they don't care about the "so important" Schmuldvich's questions. I owe you nothing, and I'm fed up of your irrespectful manners, and disdainful certitudes. You have certitudes but you ask so many questions ... what a paradox if you have all the answers. If you don't believe in Alchemy then, what are you doing here... It's not even curiosity, it's inquisition.

Even speaking images are not able to penetrate your mind because of your stubborness and lack of imagination, due to a lack of practice. You made a wall of certitudes and it is effective. It will lead you nowhere but to disappointement.

What' I've shown in these photos are archemical processes/high spageric preparation, leading, after a process to alchemical things. What happens after is my business. Mind yours. The way you ask, will never call an answer.

You said :

Various concoctions dissolve gold and release what you wrongly call "sulphur", but only one concoction, our Universal Solvent a.k.a. our Alkahest, truly actually opens gold.

This tells us everything : You know shit. You don't even know what is an extraction of Sulfur after opening a metal. Come back after a little more of lab experience. It's truly a lack of time to discuss with you. My feeling. The feeling of a lot of people here also.

You maybe read a lot, but, by reading your opinions, absolute certitudes, it is clear that you lack of the precious confrontation with matters and the practical aspect, because otherwise you discourse would be completely different. There is a whole world between the discourse of the Alchemists in books and the pragmatic aspect. Yes it is a real disappointement when you see it. But that's it.

That's the gap that makes the discussion completely useless. Welcome to the real alchemists' world dear Schmuld. Things are not delimited as you could *imagine* in the real life of the Lab practice. It's wider, wilder and wiser than we could all see !

You asked for it, now you have it.

Andro
08-17-2017, 09:17 AM
Salazius, mon cher, that's what I call A Direct Answer :)

Kiorionis
08-17-2017, 12:54 PM
Hi everyone.

Remember to stay on the topic of Salazius' alchemical works presented in the OP of this thread: archemy, transmutation, mercury, gold, reverse-transmutation, and "alchahest"

You can find the discussion on alchemical signs and Schmuldvich's work at:

Alchemical Signs in the Great Work (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?5353-Alchemical-Signs-in-the-Great-Work)

Hellin Hermetist
08-17-2017, 01:41 PM
Hi Salazius,

I see that you have done much work with metallic mercury. Is it easy to acquire mercury in France? Here and in many other countries it is very difficult.

Schmuldvich
08-17-2017, 04:18 PM
Schmuldvich, You seems obsessed with "vulgar" matters here. Relax a bit, you look so tensed and stressed... For me nothing in Nature is Vulgar. Not even you, even if you show quite a lack of respect and also of passive agressive actions, tincted to my opinion with disdain, contempt, for some reasons I don't get. But you are in right to deserve the way, for yourself, that you apply to others. Brace youself.

You can have doubts, and share them, but the tone you use is effectively rude, brutal, and no, not "direct", but incisive. It seems you have a "problem", to act like that. It is borderline for me. I don't like that. You are asking a lot and giving, showing nothing but certitudes - it's all air. All your questions looks like a trial, and you are the judge. But you have no authority and no weight for me, at all. "Ho why Salazius is not wanting to my "direct" answer", please, stop this immature thing now. Sometime people have a life and they don't care about the "so important" Schmuldvich's questions. I owe you nothing, and I'm fed up of your irrespectful manners, and disdainful certitudes. You have certitudes but you ask so many questions ... what a paradox if you have all the answers.

If you don't believe in Alchemy then, what are you doing here... It's not even curiosity, it's inquisition.

Even speaking images are not able to penetrate your mind because of your stubborness and lack of imagination, due to a lack of practice. You made a wall of certitudes and it is effective. It will lead you nowhere but to disappointement. What' I've shown in these photos are archemical processes/high spageric preparation, leading, after a process to alchemical things. What happens after is my business. Mind yours. The way you ask, will never call an answer.

You know shit. You don't even know what is an extraction of Sulfur after opening a metal. Come back after a little more of lab experience. It's truly a lack of time to discuss with you. My feeling. The feeling of a lot of people here also. You maybe read a lot, but, by reading your opinions, absolute certitudes, it is clear that you lack of the precious confrontation with matters and the practical aspect, because otherwise you discourse would be completely different. There is a whole world between the discourse of the Alchemists in books and the pragmatic aspect. Yes it is a real disappointement when you see it. But that's it. That's the gap that makes the discussion completely useless. Welcome to the real alchemists' world dear Schmuld. Things are not delimited as you could *imagine* in the real life of the Lab practice. It's wider, wilder and wiser than we could all see !

You asked for it, now you have it.

http://i.imgur.com/G5HEc3p.gif http://i.imgur.com/G5HEc3p.gif




Now we are getting somewhere!! Thank you for responding!





Fantastic choice of words for my questions; I couldn't have done better myself!




Brutal - Punishingly hard or uncomfortable.

Incisive - Intelligently analytical and clear-thinking.

Direct - Bearing immediately and unambiguously upon the facts at issue.


Well put. Thanks for sharing what you like and don't like; I will be sure to keep this in mind when asking you questions from now on. You mention that my questions "looks like a trial, and you are the judge" and also mentioned later that "you (Schmuldvich) have no authority and no weight for me, at all". Did I ever claim to have authority? Check my introduction thread, I have repeatedly said since day-one that I am just like everyone else here, a Seeker. I do not claim to be an Adept nor have I ever claimed to possess the Philosopher's Stone. Do you claim to be an Adept or some kind of Authority on Alchemy?

If you don't believe in Alchemy then, what are you doing here...? I do believe in Alchemy, but I do not claim to have all the answers (and I'm not sure what makes you think that I do).

What you've shown in these photos may be archemical processes/high spageric (lol!) preparation, leading, after a process to alchemical things, and what happens after is most definitely your business, which is why I was asking if you would be so kind as to share with us what you can do with your preparations.

What have you been able to accomplish with your preparation?

Schmuldvich
08-22-2017, 04:47 PM
You know shit. You don't even know what is an extraction of Sulfur after opening a metal.
Can you explain what you mean by this?

How would you personally describe "Mercury" of a metal and "Sulphur" of a metal?

elixirmixer
08-22-2017, 10:23 PM
Merc. is easy, we all know what that is. It's moisture-spirit. I personally think that the eaisiest way to look at is by it's effects, which is the hydrogen-bonding found within minerals (that's just me) and I would say that "metals" don't have Merc. It's already been extracted and they only have Sulfur and Salt.

Sulfur is key here, it is the vital force within the atomic structure. When we research the acetate path (in depth) we see that the Sulfur characteristics are extracted from within the D-Shell orbitals, which, when using a solvent, changes these substances on a deeply molecular level, WITHOUT bonding with the atom itself. Sulfur in terms of what Salazius is talking about are these 'oils' (I'm not sure if they are actually lipids or not, they are certainly hydroscopic though) which are extracted from metals, most specifically, the energies associated with the D-she'll, which for the most part, are it's ability to create ionic bonding.

MERC IS CONSIOUSNESS
SULFUR IS ENERGY
SALT IS VESSEL

Salazius
08-28-2017, 10:14 AM
Hi Salazius,

I see that you have done much work with metallic mercury. Is it easy to acquire mercury in France? Here and in many other countries it is very difficult.

Not that hard if you are a professionnal. Otherwise it is impossible.
If pro, you need to sign papers etc.

Michael Sternbach
08-28-2017, 12:08 PM
Merc. is easy, we all know what that is. It's moisture-spirit. I personally think that the eaisiest way to look at is by it's effects, which is the hydrogen-bonding found within minerals (that's just me) and I would say that "metals" don't have Merc. It's already been extracted and they only have Sulfur and Salt.

Sulfur is key here, it is the vital force within the atomic structure. When we research the acetate path (in depth) we see that the Sulfur characteristics are extracted from within the D-Shell orbitals, which, when using a solvent, changes these substances on a deeply molecular level, WITHOUT bonding with the atom itself. Sulfur in terms of what Salazius is talking about are these 'oils' (I'm not sure if they are actually lipids or not, they are certainly hydroscopic though) which are extracted from metals, most specifically, the energies associated with the D-she'll, which for the most part, are it's ability to create ionic bonding.

MERC IS CONSIOUSNESS
SULFUR IS ENERGY
SALT IS VESSEL

Hi elixirmixer,

Would you care to elaborate on this?

For I often wonder how alchemical matter theory can be reconciled with modern insights into atomic structure etc. I know that this is not much of an issue for those alchemy aficionados who believe that all of modern science is bollocks. But in my view, it's not (well, some of it is indeed, but not all of it).

Schmuldvich
09-02-2017, 11:07 PM
Merc. is easy, we all know what that is. It's moisture-spirit. I personally think that the eaisiest way to look at is by it's effects, which is the hydrogen-bonding found within minerals (that's just me) and I would say that "metals" don't have Merc. It's already been extracted and they only have Sulfur and Salt.

Sulfur is key here, it is the vital force within the atomic structure. When we research the acetate path (in depth) we see that the Sulfur characteristics are extracted from within the D-Shell orbitals, which, when using a solvent, changes these substances on a deeply molecular level, WITHOUT bonding with the atom itself. Sulfur in terms of what Salazius is talking about are these 'oils' (I'm not sure if they are actually lipids or not, they are certainly hydroscopic though) which are extracted from metals, most specifically, the energies associated with the D-she'll, which for the most part, are it's ability to create ionic bonding.

MERC IS CONSIOUSNESS
SULFUR IS ENERGY
SALT IS VESSEL

Intriguing way of putting it. I wouldn't necessarily agree, though I am not totally against all of what you're saying. I really like how Boerhaave explains it in "A New Method Of Chemistry (1753)"...



http://i.imgur.com/do0Cwva.png