PDA

View Full Version : The Dry Path of Alchemy



True Initiate
01-10-2018, 07:53 AM
Does anybody knows what happened to this book? Has it finally came out?

The Dry Path of Alchemy
https://thefirelizard.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/the-dry-path-of-alchemy/

Weidenfeld
01-10-2018, 10:15 AM
Does anybody knows what happened to this book? Has it finally came out?

The Dry Path of Alchemy
https://thefirelizard.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/the-dry-path-of-alchemy/

Best seem to be to ask José Antonio Puche Riart himself who still is on Rubellus' forum.

JDP
01-10-2018, 12:08 PM
You are not missing much. Puche Riart et al. openly admit that their supposed "Stone" does NOT transmute metals, which is nothing other than tantamount to DECLARING FAILURE, but without actually openly admitting it. They have not succeeded in making the Stone, either with the so-called "humid" or "dry" method (both of them in fact rely on the secret solvent, which they don't know how to make, so naturally all their efforts so far have come to failure.)

Andro
01-10-2018, 02:18 PM
Which authors are not a waste of time? (just "The Stone" type of authors, no chymists or particulars).

If there were/are genuine ALCHEMICAL authors out there, how do we know? How can we tell?

What (in a book) would turn the needle of the baloney meter to the left?

True Initiate
01-10-2018, 09:44 PM
The biggest value in this book it is their interpretation of the practical work of dry way so-called modus operandi. This is the most difficult piece of a puzzle to find. They are working with Stibnite which i don't think is the true matter but you can learn the modus operandi and use whatever first matter you think it is.

Andro
01-10-2018, 10:10 PM
Which authors are not a waste of time? (just "The Stone" type of authors, no chymists or particulars).

If there were/are genuine ALCHEMICAL authors out there, how do we know? How can we tell?

What (in a book) would turn the needle of the baloney meter to the left?

Never mind, I found your opinion, sort of:


For an author to qualify as an alchemist there's one requirement: his works have to be predominantly devoted to the subject of making the Philosophers' Stone/Elixir. And for an alchemist to qualify as a reputed "adept" there is one requirement as well: he has to either explicitly or implicitly state that he has been successful at the task. These requirements obviously disqualify a whole bunch of people from the above list. Even "chymists" like Kunckel or Becher, as heavily involved in the subject of transmutation as they were, cannot really be considered "alchemists", and even less "adepts" (their works are not primarily devoted to the subject of making the Stone, plus they never claimed to have actually been successful at preparing it.)

So just by claiming or implying, the author automatically qualifies? Where's the proof he's not bullshitting? Where's the empirical evidence of such claims?

We have an example HERE (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4867-SCAM-WARNING-Selling-The-Great-Work) of someone who checks ALL your above-listed boxes, and yet it's not enough :)

Andro
01-10-2018, 10:30 PM
They are working with Stibnite which I don't think is the true matter.
_______________


A quote from Fulcanelli says the Antomony is not the subject of the work. That whatever be the method by which it worked, never will be the philosophical subject.
We know that Fulcanelli worked the dry way. And he has reason! This is not the antimony such matter. Fulcanelli uses almost an entire chapter of his book to rule out such sulfur, because their material is Iron. What prevents say about antimony, it is that while it is not the philosophical matter, without it in the dry way, it is impossible to bring it to an end.

True Initiate
01-10-2018, 11:29 PM
I would say that Iron is indispensable matter in the dry way. The first matter symbolized by our planet earth must stand for some form of carbon. I can't think of more primitive and vile subject than carbon. Stibnite is too exotic and silicon too metallic.

zoas23
01-11-2018, 04:03 AM
The biggest value in this book it is their interpretation of the practical work of dry way so-called modus operandi. This is the most difficult piece of a puzzle to find. They are working with Stibnite which i don't think is the true matter but you can learn the modus operandi and use whatever first matter you think it is.

I have both versions (English and Spanish) because they were gifts from one of its authors.
I'd say that it's an excellent book... specially because it provides a Modus Operandi, but also an obsessive chemical analysis of the results of every single step.


Other than that, the book itself does not contradict the "Iron Statement" that is being discussed here.

"Fulcanelli wrote very clearly that the other basic substance of the Great Work is Iron. Of course other elements can be used, but they do not last and therefore iron is all, it is the center of the art of alchemy. Other elements are used but do not last."

The quote above is from the book... which heavily relies on Iron (and Stibine too, that's true)... but you can find the word "Iron" in probably every page of the book. So it is not a "let's not use Iron book", but quite the opposite.

I would find it odd that a person who is into the Dry Path doesn't want to read it. Other than that, as the title says, it is certainly about the Dry Path and only about the Dry Path... So it can be a curiosity, but not a very useful one for the ones who are not heavily inclined to the Dry Path (i.e, a person who is exclusively devoted to "Wet Paths" can read the book and find that nothing there is too useful for him).

I would be VERY surprised if a person who is heavily inclined to the Dry Path reads this book and decides that he has learnt "nothing". It may not be the last word on the Dry Path, but I do not know any other book that is so systematic like this one.

JDP
01-11-2018, 04:07 AM
Never mind, I found your opinion, sort of:



So just by claiming or implying, the author automatically qualifies? Where's the proof he's not bullshitting? Where's the empirical evidence of such claims?

We have an example HERE (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4867-SCAM-WARNING-Selling-The-Great-Work) of someone who checks ALL your above-listed boxes, and yet it's not enough :)

"Rhoend" is obviously a modern charlatan whose only "Philosophers' Stone" is to sell his useless books at high prices. Loads of uncorroborated "hocus pocus" in his posts/texts (including one you know all too well and which I will not explicitly mention here [...] pointing out the logical fallacies and total lack of evidence for this claim.)

Examples of actual alchemists are: Agathodaimon, Maria, Kings Marqunis & Sanfaja, Aras the Sage, Asfidus, Mihraris, Zosimos, Khalid, Jabir Ibn Hayyan, Ibn Tammam al-Iraqi, Ibn Umail, Al-Marrakushi, Abu'l-Qasim al-Iraqi, al-Tinnisi, al-Nasrani, Villanova, Llull, Dastin, Guido Montanor, Ripley, Norton, "Theodorus Mundanus", etc.

How do we know if they really succeeded in making the Stone? Well, since they are no longer around they can't actually show us (but in the case of the above mentioned "Theodorus Mundanus" we have at least two historical witnesses who independently witnessed transmutations performed with samples of the Stone provided by him: Edmund Dickinson and Robert Boyle), but that's what the point is for studying the works they left behind, to see if we can replicate their claims. But at least their claims can be taken seriously, unlike characters like "Rhoend".

JDP
01-11-2018, 04:26 AM
I have both versions (English and Spanish) because they were gifts from one of its authors.
I'd say that it's an excellent book... specially because it provides a Modus Operandi, but also an obsessive chemical analysis of the results of every single step.


Other than that, the book itself does not contradict the "Iron Statement" that is being discussed here.

"Fulcanelli wrote very clearly that the other basic substance of the Great Work is Iron. Of course other elements can be used, but they do not last and therefore iron is all, it is the center of the art of alchemy. Other elements are used but do not last."

The quote above is from the book... which heavily relies on Iron (and Stibine too, that's true)... but you can find the word "Iron" in probably every page of the book. So it is not a "let's not use Iron book", but quite the opposite.

I would find it odd that a person who is into the Dry Path doesn't want to read it. Other than that, as the title says, it is certainly about the Dry Path and only about the Dry Path... So it can be a curiosity, but not a very useful one for the ones who are not heavily inclined to the Dry Path (i.e, a person who is exclusively devoted to "Wet Paths" can read the book and find that nothing there is too useful for him).

I would be VERY surprised if a person who is heavily inclined to the Dry Path reads this book and decides that he has learnt "nothing". It may not be the last word on the Dry Path, but I do not know any other book that is so systematic like this one.

It's actually what Puche Riart & friends THINK is the "dry" way/path/method, which is a very different thing. In reality, both ways wholly rely on the secret solvent (read Franz Clinge's works, for example, one of Fulcanelli's "secret" sources that he never openly mentions to his readers), something that Puche Riart & friends DO NOT KNOW how to make. Therefore it is hardly surprising that all their efforts so far have ended up in utter failure, even though they try to disguise it with excuses, as if there was really more than one "Stone" (a relatively modern excuse invented to disguise failure in obtaining the genuine thing.) Their "Stone" is NOT the Philosophers' Stone, it does NOT transmute metals. It's just a vulgar chemical concoction. As Johnnie Cochran would put it in this context:

"If your alleged Stone does not transmute, then it sure ain't good!"


https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/62289082/if-the-glove-dont-fit-you-must-aquit.jpg

zoas23
01-11-2018, 04:29 AM
It's actually what Puche Riart & friends THINK is the "dry" way/path/method, which is a very different thing. In reality, both ways wholly rely on the secret solvent (read Franz Clinge's works, for example, one of Fulcanelli's "secret" sources that he never openly mentions to his readers), something that Puche Riart & friends DO NOT KNOW how to make. Therefore it is hardly surprising that all their efforts so far have ended up in utter failure, even though they try to disguise it with excuses, as if there was really more than one "Stone" (a relatively modern excuse invented to disguise failure in obtaining the genuine thing.) Their "Stone" is NOT the Philosophers' Stone, it does NOT transmute metals. As Johnnie Cochran would put it in this context:

"If your alleged Stone does not transmute, then it sure ain't good!"


https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/62289082/if-the-glove-dont-fit-you-must-aquit.jpg

Did you read the book? Or are you talking about what you THINK the book says?

JDP
01-11-2018, 04:33 AM
Did you read the book? Or are you talking about what you THINK the book says?

I am talking about what Puche Riart himself openly says, which he makes no secrets about.

zoas23
01-11-2018, 04:57 AM
I am talking about what Puche Riart himself openly says, which he makes no secrets about.

Hahaha... OK.

In a normal situation a "review" is written after reading a book...

JDP
01-11-2018, 05:01 AM
Hahaha... OK.

In a normal situation a "review" is written after reading a book...

What is better than the actual words directly from "the horse's mouth"....

zoas23
01-11-2018, 05:08 AM
What is better than the actual words directly from "the horse's mouth"....

Writing the review of a book after reading it? ;)

JDP
01-11-2018, 05:13 AM
Writing the review of a book after reading it? ;)

Why, when I already heard all I need to hear straight from the author himself? He has NOT made the Stone. He does not even try to hide this :)

Dragon's Tail
01-11-2018, 05:15 AM
What is better than the actual words directly from "the horse's mouth"....

A link to the actual words would be nice ;)

But I joke. I'm going to just start referring to my works in the plant kingdom as apothecary, I have no interest in "gold making." But I will be sure to test my latest magestry with lead. It isn't the stone, unless this mystical secret water is actually distilled water, and the whole thing with metals is a farce. At best I'm expecting a circulatum.

Back on topic, the dry method is by "dry distillation?" That would imply that the solvent is created in the preparation of the materia, yes? Then it would be "one material," dry distilled into a solvent, a black stinking earth, a black "salt," and maybe some other crap? Sounds like what the plant people do to me.

I'm going one kingdom at a time myself, but I've used theory from mineral work to guide my progress. There are operations in the mineral kingdom that are essential for mastery of vegetables, in my humble opinion.

Excuse my ignorance in this wet way/dry way stuff. To me the origins of any particular tincture that would plant the seed of an idea that something greater could be created, and thus beginning the first study of the stone starts with a boiling pot. Until you master that operation, there's no need to attempt anything greater. When you see the black earth rise from the ocean, then you will learn something interesting about the nature of things. Or maybe I'm just deluding myself because I'm in a safe place away from mineral work for the moment.

JDP
01-11-2018, 05:33 AM
A link to the actual words would be nice ;)

But I joke. I'm going to just start referring to my works in the plant kingdom as apothecary, I have no interest in "gold making." But I will be sure to test my latest magestry with lead. It isn't the stone, unless this mystical secret water is actually distilled water, and the whole thing with metals is a farce. At best I'm expecting a circulatum.

Back on topic, the dry method is by "dry distillation?" That would imply that the solvent is created in the preparation of the materia, yes? Then it would be "one material," dry distilled into a solvent, a black stinking earth, a black "salt," and maybe some other crap? Sounds like what the plant people do to me.

I'm going one kingdom at a time myself, but I've used theory from mineral work to guide my progress. There are operations in the mineral kingdom that are essential for mastery of vegetables, in my humble opinion.

Excuse my ignorance in this wet way/dry way stuff. To me the origins of any particular tincture that would plant the seed of an idea that something greater could be created, and thus beginning the first study of the stone starts with a boiling pot. Until you master that operation, there's no need to attempt anything greater. When you see the black earth rise from the ocean, then you will learn something interesting about the nature of things. Or maybe I'm just deluding myself because I'm in a safe place away from mineral work for the moment.

If you are a member of the more "private" Rubellus Petrinus forums where the author in question also is a member, you know what he has written on the subject. He has NOT succeeded in making the Stone.

The difference between the "dry" way/method and the "humid" one is that the secret solvent is prepared in a solid form. It is one of the peculiarities of the secret solvent that it can present itself in several forms: liquid (like a "water"), solid (like a salt), & several points in between both extremes (i.e. waxy/buttery/fatty/greasy/oily/unctuous)

elixirmixer
01-11-2018, 05:43 AM
Both water and salts can be "charged", hence the two different methods, and the many different potential magnets of both aspects of getting stoned.

Dragon's Tail
01-11-2018, 05:43 AM
The difference between the "dry" way/method and the "humid" one is that the secret solvent is prepared in a solid form. It is one of the peculiarities of the secret solvent that it can present itself in several forms: liquid (like a "water"), solid (like a salt), & several points in between both extremes (i.e. waxy/buttery/fatty/greasy/oily/unctuous)

sounds oddly like a sulphur rather than a mercury

JDP
01-11-2018, 05:53 AM
sounds oddly like a sulphur rather than a mercury

Such are the arbitrarities of alchemical nomenclature. But the secret solvent in its solid & semi-solid forms melts with heat and then in its liquefied state performs its peculiar dissolving action on the metallic matter/s it is put in contact with. Thus the "mercurial" assignation to it, despite its solid/semi-solid outward appearance in ordinary conditions.

Andro
01-11-2018, 08:40 AM
Loads of uncorroborated "hocus pocus" in his posts/texts (including one you know all too well and which I will not explicitly mention here [...] pointing out the logical fallacies and total lack of evidence for this claim.)

Merely naming a substance that is already often mentioned in R+C texts, is not a logical fallacy. As for the lack of evidence, we can say this about EVERYTHING we have not observed/experienced directly, including the authors you have deemed "legit". Maybe they were the "Hocus-Pocus People" of their times? Maybe the "witnesses" of those transmutations, like agent Mulder, wanted so much to believe that they could be tricked with relative ease, in spite of their "learned" background?

The Zeitgeist is always changing. People, however - not so much.


How do we know if they really succeeded in making the Stone? Well, since they are no longer around they can't actually show us (but in the case of the above mentioned "Theodorus Mundanus" we have at least two historical witnesses who independently witnessed transmutations performed with samples of the Stone provided by him: Edmund Dickinson and Robert Boyle), but that's what the point is for studying the works they left behind, to see if we can replicate their claims. But at least their claims can be taken seriously, unlike characters like "Rhoend".

Well, they are indeed no longer around. And "witnesses" can have a variety of ulterior motives to tell such stories. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I am just saying we can not truly KNOW. Until we have made THE stone ourselves, we are still basing our research on unproven assumptions. Which is fine - that's what lab research is for! To either prove or disprove theories, models, etc...

Those authors are essentially no different from some contemporary ones, unless we're employing the logical fallacy of "appeal to antiquity". All of them check all the boxes, claim the stone and provide operative instructions that can be replicated. The only difference IMO is that they are not our contemporaries and can not be subjected to same the level of scrutiny that our contemporaries are subjected to. (People like Patrick Riviere, etc...)

True Initiate
01-11-2018, 08:38 PM
I have both versions (English and Spanish) because they were gifts from one of its authors.
I'd say that it's an excellent book... specially because it provides a Modus Operandi, but also an obsessive chemical analysis of the results of every single step.

So the books are already out??? The only problem is i can't find them anywhere for purchase. Are they so limited?

zoas23
01-12-2018, 01:17 AM
So the books are already out??? The only problem is i can't find them anywhere for purchase. Are they so limited?

I have no idea, T. I.
All I know is that the Spanish edition was sold following a procedure that was quite similar to the Alchemy forums Anthology (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4334-Alchemy-Forums-Anthology).

I have no idea of what they are going to do with the English edition, but if I was interested, I would probably ask the Publisher http://www.salamanderandsons.com/contact
(I wrote to them in the past about some book, I can't remember what I needed, but they replied very fast).

The English version I have is NOT an official S&S book, but a gift from one of its authors, a home-made copy that was simply a gift. So I do not even know if the books have already been printed or not, nor I know anything about their distribution plans... but it is easy to ask the publisher.

Kiorionis
01-12-2018, 03:54 AM
but if I was interested, I would probably ask the Publisher http://www.salamanderandsons.com/contact
(I wrote to them in the past about some book, I can't remember what I needed, but they replied very fast).

Well it will be interesting if they respond. I just looked at their site, specifically their closure announcement (http://www.salamanderandsons.com/closure-announcement). Have they moved sites, or are they closed for business? They must be up to something if their website is still live.

z0 K
01-13-2018, 07:52 PM
Back on topic, the dry method is by "dry distillation?" That would imply that the solvent is created in the preparation of the materia, yes? Then it would be "one material," dry distilled into a solvent, a black stinking earth, a black "salt," and maybe some other crap? Sounds like what the plant people do to me.


That is right! The secret solvent is created in the dry distillation. The secret solvent is a solvent inside a solvent which is composed of philosophical mercury and sulfur. It is clearer to say the secret solvent received in the dry distillation is a combination of alchemical water, fire, and air that are purified then rejoined. How that is done is the difference between receiving a solid, liquid or waxy cream.

Dragon's Tail
01-13-2018, 08:38 PM
That is right! The secret solvent is created in the dry distillation. The secret solvent is a solvent inside a solvent which is composed of philosophical mercury and sulfur. It is clearer to say the secret solvent received in the dry distillation is a combination of alchemical water, fire, and air that are purified then rejoined. How that is done is the difference between receiving a solid, liquid or waxy cream.

The more I learn about dry distillation, the more surprised I get. Like the fact that wood tar can be used for medicinal and even candying purposes, even though most people around me would immediately turn their noses up to it. Also interesting is methanol vs turpentine production from different types of wood (hardwood deciduous vs pine). Water is another product, as is acetic acid...

soo... in a way, these things might be procurable by other means. Distilled liquors usually contain methanol unless it's fractioned off, and the bacterial attack on alcohol makes acetic. I wonder how much the tar produced by distilling a tincture has in common with its dry distilled neighbor. Hmmm. Makes me wonder about a lot of things in the text, and as per this conversation, the many, many different paths that could (potentially) lead to the same things.

z0 K
01-14-2018, 04:32 AM
The more I learn about dry distillation, the more surprised I get. Like the fact that wood tar can be used for medicinal and even candying purposes, even though most people around me would immediately turn their noses up to it. Also interesting is methanol vs turpentine production from different types of wood (hardwood deciduous vs pine). Water is another product, as is acetic acid...

soo... in a way, these things might be procurable by other means. Distilled liquors usually contain methanol unless it's fractioned off, and the bacterial attack on alcohol makes acetic. I wonder how much the tar produced by distilling a tincture has in common with its dry distilled neighbor. Hmmm. Makes me wonder about a lot of things in the text, and as per this conversation, the many, many different paths that could (potentially) lead to the same things.

We are on the same track. Wood tar or any bio-tar contains Elements essential to the secret solvent. The pyro-water obtained from the dry distillation contains Elements essential to the secret solvent. If you think with a chemistry modus of operations the possibilities become frustratingly compounded. It is mind numbingly complex to think about all of the possible ligatures for the combining into the secret solvent. It is much easier to simply follow the alchemical protocols detailing the relationships between Fire and Water which penetrate, and Air and Earth which coagulate.

Some find it impossible to believe and therefore cannot see it, but the Fifth Element controls the manifestation of the Philosophical Matter that precipitates the chemistry molecules. The Uncertainty Principle reveals that searching for the culprit responsible for the Philosophical manifestation through chemistry will be unsuccessful. If one had the Stone one could not reverse engineer it because the Fifth Element is lost when the molecules It held together are deconstructed. Attempting to reconstruct the Stone by synthetically compounding the molecules observed in the deconstruction ends in failure to produce the Stone because the Fifth Element is not in control of the process. The Fifth Element is Life specifically and Intelligence in general.

If you have that all paths lead to the same things.

alfr
01-14-2018, 05:03 AM
We are on the same track. Wood tar or any bio-tar contains Elements essential to the secret solvent. The pyro-water obtained from the dry distillation contains Elements essential to the secret solvent. If you think with a chemistry modus of operations the possibilities become frustratingly compounded. It is mind numbingly complex to think about all of the possible ligatures for the combining into the secret solvent. It is much easier to simply follow the alchemical protocols detailing the relationships between Fire and Water which penetrate, and Air and Earth which coagulate.


WOOD secret solvent ? etc etc
MAYBE IN THIS ARTICLE LINK of the our Lynn Osburn of the 2009 maybe ? there are some interesting to analyzed deepen about this ?
quote :

...We are on the same track. Wood tar or any bio-tar contains Elements essential to the secret solvent. ...

www.alchemylife.org/Pages/PhiloSpiritWine/PhiloSpiritWine.html

regard alfr

Andro
01-14-2018, 06:05 AM
Simple and honest question:

Has anyone working with wood tar/bio-tar or dry distillation of plant matters ever obtained a "secret solvent" able to act on metals, more specifically to open and re-incrudate gold?

Kiorionis
01-14-2018, 07:01 AM
Has anyone working with wood tar/bio-tar or dry distillation of plant matters ever obtained a "secret solvent" able to act on metals, more specifically to open and re-incrudate gold?

At the moment, my research in this area is aimed towards alchemo-spagyric medicines. So unfortunately I have nothing to say about the dry distillate’s effects on metals or gold.

theFool
01-14-2018, 11:56 AM
So the books are already out??? The only problem is i can't find them anywhere for purchase. Are they so limited?
A google search shows some information for this book from the "National Library of Australia":

https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/187077954?selectedversion=NBD52191902
There is an "order copies" button there but it doesn't work. I can't understand if they have the book in the library or not.

It seems also that there exists a download link in this site:
http://emelybooks.com/download/the-dry-path-of-alchemy/
or here:
http://bookdownloadforfree.com/link/the-path-of-alchemy/
but I doubt they are serious sites.

True Initiate
01-14-2018, 02:20 PM
This is only pre-publication record. It was never published in english.

https://s9.postimg.org/fw7vnbqzv/Unbenannt.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/fw7vnbqzv/)

I have managed to track down only two promotional pdfs in spanish and one in english.

https://s9.postimg.org/eiku5nty3/image.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/eiku5nty3/)https://s9.postimg.org/d4xsno4ij/image.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/d4xsno4ij/)

You can download them here:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/9cxrbhcqydc6jre/%5Benglish%5D+Dry+Path_update_April_2014.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/file/frzj21ofbzg6z2v/%5Bvia+email%5D+Dry+Path_update_April_2014.pdf

z0 K
01-14-2018, 06:48 PM
Simple and honest question:

Has anyone working with wood tar/bio-tar or dry distillation of plant matters ever obtained a "secret solvent" able to act on metals, more specifically to open and re-incrudate gold?

Once you know what Elements are in the secret solvent you can refine the modus of preparation and get the Elements from other sources. The Elements involved are easiest to obtain all together by the dry distillation of biomass. The Fifth Element is included with the other four by Nature.

The simple vegetable menstrum when all the Elements are purified and joined will act on metals, copper and iron I have seen without any preparation of the Cu and Fe. Gold requires further experimentation and augmentation of the simple vegetable menstrum. For such types of experimentation I study Ripley mostly though Weidenfeld is great if you get Ripley. Cyliani is good also.

True Initiate
01-14-2018, 07:59 PM
Secret solvents are always prepared from the matter you are working with, whatever the starting matter was.

Dragon's Tail
01-14-2018, 08:32 PM
Once you know what Elements are in the secret solvent you can refine the modus of preparation and get the Elements from other sources. The Elements involved are easiest to obtain all together by the dry distillation of biomass. The Fifth Element is included with the other four by Nature.


Now that I'm farther into my own process, I am seeing more and more, connections between my extractions and what I've seen in your videos and other readings on dry distillation. It seems that it all starts the same, separation of a black earth, a red(ish) wine, and a white salt. I agree that chemical curiosity in these things is fruitless beyond a certain point, I was only pointing out that similar "materials," even chemical ones seem to come out of organic substances by different processes. Heat the earth strongly, and it will swell and vomit up toxicity. Purification of the Sulphur seems simple, but in practice, it's a pain until you know the "right" process to get at "the good stuff"

You start with one thing, and end up with a handful of separated things, trying to apply elemental theory to them, discovering their physical features (color, smell, taste, resistance to heating). You said "Once you know what elements are in the secret solvent," and even with the simplest of preparations, there are many to pick from and many ways to interpret them, purify them, and combine them. I'll have to look up some Ripley texts. I've mostly only seen the scrolls with pictures on them, and those always warrant further examination.

In my opinion, where I am at the moment, the right process is far more important than the right "starting material." Figuring out which pieces are truly representative of which elements. Perhaps I should start testing these things that I construct against metals, instead of sniffing and tasting. I have plenty of elemental copper lying around.

JDP
01-15-2018, 02:25 AM
Secret solvents are always prepared from the matter you are working with, whatever the starting matter was.

Nice "philosophical" fairy tale. Too bad that empirical reality is very different from such speculative fantasies and the correct matters to work with are of crucial importance to be able to prepare the secret solvent of alchemy.

JDP
01-15-2018, 02:33 AM
Now that I'm farther into my own process, I am seeing more and more, connections between my extractions and what I've seen in your videos and other readings on dry distillation. It seems that it all starts the same, separation of a black earth, a red(ish) wine, and a white salt. I agree that chemical curiosity in these things is fruitless beyond a certain point, I was only pointing out that similar "materials," even chemical ones seem to come out of organic substances by different processes. Heat the earth strongly, and it will swell and vomit up toxicity. Purification of the Sulphur seems simple, but in practice, it's a pain until you know the "right" process to get at "the good stuff"

You start with one thing, and end up with a handful of separated things, trying to apply elemental theory to them, discovering their physical features (color, smell, taste, resistance to heating). You said "Once you know what elements are in the secret solvent," and even with the simplest of preparations, there are many to pick from and many ways to interpret them, purify them, and combine them. I'll have to look up some Ripley texts. I've mostly only seen the scrolls with pictures on them, and those always warrant further examination.

In my opinion, where I am at the moment, the right process is far more important than the right "starting material." Figuring out which pieces are truly representative of which elements. Perhaps I should start testing these things that I construct against metals, instead of sniffing and tasting. I have plenty of elemental copper lying around.

There will come a point in your investigations where you will (painfully, at your own expense of time and money, as it happened to countless other seekers throughout history) realize that you can't make either the Stone or the secret solvent with "only one thing" (in the literal sense that expression MALICIOUSLY wants to fool you into thinking) and also that identifying the correct substances (notice the PLURAL) to work with is in fact crucial and not some "triviality" subordinated to the "modus operandi".

alfr
01-15-2018, 03:01 AM
hi
to well understand the true key for as we must made the external solvent secret philosophical and or the SVP etc (as i always say in many my posts ) is very good study very deep prodromus of weidenfeld

https://www.scribd.com/document/341659938/From-Weidenfeld-s-Prodromus-Libri-Secundi-1

here all book but it is all in latin sorry

https://books.google.it/books?id=CIxmAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA339&lpg=PA339&dq=Weidenfeld%27s+Prodromus+Libri+Secundi&source=bl&ots=fmJL31wYCj&sig=xj9Ep8o8oDy7uglB9hamdLSrcKs&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi5npCKh9nYAhVCyaQKHW0ID4cQ6AEIMDAB#v=on epage&q=Weidenfeld's%20Prodromus%20Libri%20Secundi&f=false

my best regard alfr

but nb also the solvent philosophical is possible have by same matters in alchemy way method an matter are many see text and manuscript RC the thesauro thesaurorun, the toeltius, the secret exatsi of federico gualdi, etc etc nb in alchemy there are many matters many way and many method

Dragon's Tail
01-15-2018, 03:44 AM
There will come a point in your investigations where you will (painfully, at your own expense of time and money, as it happened to countless other seekers throughout history) realize that you can't make either the Stone or the secret solvent with "only one thing" (in the literal sense that expression MALICIOUSLY wants to fool you into thinking) and also that identifying the correct substances (notice the PLURAL) to work with is in fact crucial and not some "triviality" subordinated to the "modus operandi".

You are probably right. I'm already diverting some future time to the procurement of certain substances that I believe important, and I have the means at my property to make them using only a little gas and time while I'm chopping trees. At the moment I haven't ruled out certain "impurities" as being important.

I don't want you to think I'm ignoring you JDP, I really am not. I see merit to your ideas, and when I started this path, I was foolish enough to think that a "pure magestry" of the plant kingdom would have to come from not only one species, but from an individual. It was a romantic idea, but not very practical, unless you have something that will extract it fully in one step, otherwise there isn't enough "quintessence" in most of God's creations to survive the pouring and grinding and transferring from pot to pot.

BUT. I'm a humble seeker, and at the moment I need to expand my understanding of purifying things, and being able to identify the "right" things to purify. Every fractional step results in two or more products, even in my simple spagyric identities. That's why I post about what might seem to be random chemical curiosities sometimes. The processes I accumulate and experience, at least as I believe, are helping. And so far I've only broken a couple pieces of glassware, most of them easily replaced (random jars and such from food items). If I start going off about "having the solution" but needing some expensive equipment, I hope you're still here to slap me with a dose of reason. I don't plan on buying a bunch of gold and dissolving it to make gold, that's for sure, though I can spare a scrap sheet of gold leaf for curiosity.

I do think it's interesting to note, however, that sometimes wide ranging substances AND methods can produce the same chemical substances, possibly alchemical substances as well. I also think I have a lot of techniques that still need working on, and if nothing else, my experimentation with plant material makes plenty of stuff that is helpful to me now. My tinctures and concoctions thus far have worked well for me, and they are my little prizes as I continue to investigate the works. Hopefully, when I'm ready to start with metals, I'll have a much better idea of how to interpret the texts and how to work for fruitful results every step along the way, to offset the perpetual failures that come with pursuing the stone.

True Initiate
01-15-2018, 11:11 AM
Nice "philosophical" fairy tale. Too bad that empirical reality is very different from such speculative fantasies and the correct matters to work with are of crucial importance to be able to prepare the secret solvent of alchemy.

Analyze every Path in alchemy and you will learn that every solvent is derived from the starting matters.

All vegetable paths are using solvents derived from either fermentation (alcohol), calcination (Alkali) or cold pressing (oils) the starting matter. If your vegetable matter was grapes then you will end up with spirit of wine, tartar and wine acid.

In Lead Acetate path the solvents are derived from lead and acetic acid resulting in acetone and red oil.

In the wet Antimony path the solvent is made from antimony and mercuric chloride resulting in butter of antimony.

In the dry antimony path green lion is extracted from antimony regulus with the help from salts used used in the process. Canseliet extracted the green lion from antimony with nitre and others do it with so-called golden salts.

JDP
01-15-2018, 01:45 PM
Analyze every Path in alchemy and you will learn that every solvent is derived from the starting matters.

All vegetable paths are using solvents derived from either fermentation (alcohol), calcination (Alkali) or cold pressing (oils) the starting matter. If your vegetable matter was grapes then you will end up with spirit of wine, tartar and wine acid.

In Lead Acetate path the solvents are derived from lead and acetic acid resulting in acetone and red oil.

In the wet Antimony path the solvent is made from antimony and mercuric chloride resulting in butter of antimony.

In the dry antimony path green lion is extracted from antimony regulus with the help from salts used used in the process. Canseliet extracted the green lion from antimony with nitre and others do it with so-called golden salts.

You seem to strangely overlook the fact that these "paths" are no such thing but simply blind and failed attempts by "puffers" to make the Stone. No genuine "path" (and there's only a comparative handful of those) can work without THE secret solvent of alchemy, which can only be made from the correct substances.

True Initiate
01-15-2018, 01:55 PM
Those paths came from masters such as Fulcanelli, Canseliet, Urbigerus and others.

Weidenfeld
01-15-2018, 02:47 PM
Those paths came from masters such as Fulcanelli, Canseliet, Urbigerus and others.

I wouldn't consider the so called "modern masters" as those ones who could had
been successful, but I like definitely to exclude Baro Urbigerus from those ones:cool:

JDP
01-15-2018, 03:03 PM
Those paths came from masters such as Fulcanelli, Canseliet, Urbigerus and others.

Says who? Canseliet was not any "master" of alchemy, he never succeeded in making the Stone with his antimonial ideas. Fulcanelli clearly talks about the absolute necessity of the secret solvent (notice the singular) in alchemy, he does not condone any such great multiplicity of "paths" working with all manner of different matters and solvents. Urbigerus writes in a mostly obscure manner that makes it very difficult for his would-be interpreters to know what substances he was working with.

Dragon's Tail
01-15-2018, 03:20 PM
Analyze every Path in alchemy and you will learn that every solvent is derived from the starting matters.

All vegetable paths are using solvents derived from either fermentation (alcohol), calcination (Alkali) or cold pressing (oils) the starting matter. If your vegetable matter was grapes then you will end up with spirit of wine, tartar and wine acid.

In Lead Acetate path the solvents are derived from lead and acetic acid resulting in acetone and red oil.

In the wet Antimony path the solvent is made from antimony and mercuric chloride resulting in butter of antimony.

In the dry antimony path green lion is extracted from antimony regulus with the help from salts used used in the process. Canseliet extracted the green lion from antimony with nitre and others do it with so-called golden salts.

Your kind of making his point in a way. These paths (save the plants) are all material + something else (solvents, acids, salts). Why is it so hard to make the leap that a special "something else" would be required for the opus magnus? I might be overlooking something here as to where these other things are derived from, but in any case, some kind of solvent needs to be prepared ahead of time, except plants where theoretically the solvent can be extracted from them, but even so the addition of water/yeast is the most usual method, because the water content in the plant is low enough to warrant addition. Yeast and bacteria found on the leaves or seeds can fuel the digestive process, but it takes a lot of extra time and a little luck.

I'm not going to state a case on who's right or wrong, I haven't been in any of those people's labs, and it's impossible to know who is some random author making derivative works from earlier writings vs who actually made a transmutation with 100% certainty. Certainly there is a way that "feels" natural, but that could be subjective. Also where stuff comes from.

Nitre can be worked out of the air with a long laborious process, it can be collected or produced from the earth and waste products. It can certainly be considered natural for any mineral process as the "water that doesn't wet the hands," but it could also be considered foreign to most extracted ores.

In the end it's all a matter of trying stuff and seeing what works. I'd be a fan of people posting some of their failures on the forums with thoughts and guidance. That might be much more productive than the constant back and forth. Some of these threads already exist, but they focus more on successes. Learning from each others failures could be equally, if not more productive.

True Initiate
01-15-2018, 04:26 PM
Your kind of making his point in a way. These paths (save the plants) are all material + something else (solvents, acids, salts). Why is it so hard to make the leap that a special "something else" would be required for the opus magnus?

That special something could lie in the special state of matter. A good illustration comes from Roger Caro in his cinnabar path:

https://s10.postimg.org/41q6uqd05/24878_6-new_122_1090lo.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/41q6uqd05/)

In the first picture we see that vapours in the flask are plasmatized. How could this be if KOH is used as a catalyst? Hard to imagine that KOH has the strength to turn sulphur vapour into the plasma state. There is something special about that flask...

Kiorionis
01-15-2018, 04:50 PM
I'd be a fan of people posting some of their failures on the forums with thoughts and guidance. That might be much more productive than the constant back and forth. Some of these threads already exist, but they focus more on successes. Learning from each others failures could be equally, if not more productive.

Me too, actually. Feel free to start a new thread on the topic :)

Dwellings
01-15-2018, 06:30 PM
I have a doubt. If we follow the dry path of antimony and end up with Green Lion after following the appropriate process. The next step involves Green Lion devouring the Sun.

The problem here is the Sun does not like high temperatures. How do you resolve this problem?

While in the wet path with gentle temperatures, this is a non issue.

Andro
01-15-2018, 06:44 PM
Also, I am amazed at our ability to turn what is a simple process into such a complicated mess that most do not know their way around it.

Well, I'm glad at least one of us (you) knows his way around it. I'm not being sarcastic. If you know, I'm truly glad for you.

Personally, I also have zero interest in complications, although I also have very little interest in the "Dry Path" as it is presented on this thread.

According to other R+C texts, the "Wet Path" simply means using the sulfur of metallic gold, whereas in the "Dry Path", we use the Earth we have after completing the First Rotation (Ph. Mercury).

ICH is quite explicit about this distinction, while Cyliani only hints at it, describing in his "Hermes Unveiled" only the path with metallic gold. "Recreations" does the same.

It appears that in the Fulcanelli nomenclature, the "Dry Path" is closer to what you guys are discussing here...

JDP
01-16-2018, 05:05 AM
That special something could lie in the special state of matter. A good illustration comes from Roger Caro in his cinnabar path:

https://s10.postimg.org/41q6uqd05/24878_6-new_122_1090lo.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/41q6uqd05/)

In the first picture we see that vapours in the flask are plasmatized. How could this be if KOH is used as a catalyst? Hard to imagine that KOH has the strength to turn sulphur vapour into the plasma state. There is something special about that flask...

Yet another non-path, actually. A total dead-end. It's amazing how all these utter failures to produce anything remotely like the Stone are nowadays considered supposed "paths" by many too enthusiastic and empirically inexperienced seekers! In fact they are simply just the product of naive "interpretations" of alchemy which have only proven over and over how mistaken and out of touch with reality their authors were. The "acetate path", the "cinnabar path", the "amalgams path", the "antimony path", the "dew path", the "sea-water path", the "rain-water path", the "double cheese burger with bacon and French fries path", the "my brother's smelly old tennis shoes path", etc. Nonsense! Nothing but "stabs/shots in the dark" by failed dilettantes.

First actual rule of alchemy: No Secret Solvent = No Philosophers' Stone. Period!

True Initiate
01-16-2018, 08:00 AM
I have a doubt. If we follow the dry path of antimony and end up with Green Lion after following the appropriate process. The next step involves Green Lion devouring the Sun.

The problem here is the Sun does not like high temperatures. How do you resolve this problem?

While in the wet path with gentle temperatures, this is a non issue.

We will see if we manage to get our hands on the book but it is very hard to find.

Dwellings
01-18-2018, 05:43 AM
Well, I'm glad at least one of us (you) knows his way around it. I'm not being sarcastic. If you know, I'm truly glad for you.

Personally, I also have zero interest in complications, although I also have very little interest in the "Dry Path" as it is presented on this thread.

According to other R+C texts, the "Wet Path" simply means using the sulfur of metallic gold, whereas in the "Dry Path", we use the Earth we have after completing the First Rotation (Ph. Mercury).

ICH is quite explicit about this distinction, while Cyliani only hints at it, describing in his "Hermes Unveiled" only the path with metallic gold. "Recreations" does the same.

It appears that in the Fulcanelli nomenclature, the "Dry Path" is closer to what you guys are discussing here...


We will see if we manage to get our hands on the book but it is very hard to find.

The Dry path as mentioned in Cyliani and ICH is the way of the poor. There is no first rotation. Dry path takes 4 days while ICH talks about 2-3 hours which is Ars Brevis and some concepts from this thread can be employed there. ICH deliberately mixes both.

The Dry path as mentioned in this thread I consider impossible for the reason that, at the end of purification you must have two objects and it is also questionable whether Green Lion in pure state can survive high temperatures.

Andro
01-18-2018, 06:08 AM
ICH talks about 2-3 hours

Would you mind locating the source text, where ICH specifically talks about 2-3 hours? Perhaps I missed it...

Weidenfeld
01-18-2018, 07:29 AM
Would you mind locating the source text, where ICH specifically talks about 2-3 hours? Perhaps I missed it...

Sorry for my intervention ... ;-)

darum auch Philaletha, wann er von der Bereitung der aus dem gemeinen Tintur redet, saget; daß dieses bey weiten nicht der wahre Weg der Weisen sey, nämlich zu der Universal-Medicin zu gelangen, darum weil im trockenen Wege das in Zeit 2 bis 3 Stunden, durch die Universal- plusquamperfect gemachet, auch die Tinktur an und vor sich selbst in kurzer Zeit ohne viele mühsame Arbeit perficirt wird, so nennen sie auch diesen Weg den kurzen und leichten

2-3 Stunden = hours

Andro
01-18-2018, 07:41 AM
Vielen Dank :)

Is this from "Des Hermes Trismegists Wahrer Alter Naturweg"?

If yes, which chapter, if you don't mind? I can't believe I missed it after reading it so many times :)

Weidenfeld
01-18-2018, 07:50 AM
Vielen Dank :)

Is this from "Des Hermes Trismegists Wahrer Alter Naturweg"?

If yes, which chapter, if you don't mind? I can't believe I missed it after reading it so many times :)

It's in chapter I.

Andro
01-18-2018, 08:23 AM
Thanks, found it!

You did not insert the symbols (or their meaning).

So it goes more like this (with added meaning of the symbols):

darum auch Philaletha, wann er von der Bereitung der Tinktur aus dem gemeinen Gold redet, saget; daß dieses bey weiten nicht der wahre Weg der Weisen sey, nämlich zu der Universal-Medicin zu gelangen, darum weil im trockenen Wege das Gold in Zeit 2 bis 3 Stunden, durch die Universal-Tinktur plusquamperfect gemachet, auch die Tinktur an und vor sich selbst in kurzer Zeit ohne viele mühsame Arbeit perficirt wird, so nennen sie auch diesen Weg den kurzen und leichten.

English translation (with symbol meanings included):

Therefore Philaletha, when speaking about the preparation of the Tincture from common Gold, says that this by no means is the true path of the wise, namely to achieve the universal medicine. This, because in the dry path the Gold, within 2 to 3 hours, is made pluperfect by means of the universal Tincture, and the tincture is perfected to and from itself in a short time without a lot of tedious work, hence they call this path the short and easy.

It follows that when he mentions 2-3 hours, we already have the Universal Tincture, by means of which the Gold is "perfected" (presumably brought to a tinctural/tinging state).

So I'd say we should read this stuff very carefully (says me, who missed this paragraph entirely :))...

When he writes about the Tincture itself (in the "dry" way), he only says "short time", with no specifications in terms of hours. He could also be referring to the same aforementioned operation of bringing the Gold to tinctural state, in which case we also need to already possess the Universal Tincture to "tinge" the Gold, so it can in turn "tinge" other metals.

The time required to collect the starting matter(s) is apparently not included in the "short time"...

"Chemical Moonshine" gives a time frame of 3-4 days for what appears to be the same operation:

"So then give the tincture its Ferment, either Sol or Luna in a crucible in a strong fire for 3 or 4 days, that the metal stands in flux or continual fusion, and so our heavenly Salt of all metals ennobled and together with either Sol or Luna transmuted to a tincture. When this occurs, take a little of this tincture, wrapped in Wax, projected on imperfect metals, when in fusion, so you will accomplish Miracles."

Andro
01-18-2018, 10:32 AM
To summarize the previous post:

Upon careful reading, it becomes reasonably understandable that the time frame of 2-3 hours (ICH) or 3-4 days (Chemical Moonshine) refers in fact to bringing metallic Gold into a tinctural state, AFTER we ALREADY possess the "Universal Tincture". No specific time frame is given (in those texts) for the Work on the Universal Tincture itself.


ICH talks about 2-3 hours which is Ars Brevis.

So, from the text, it appears that ICH's time-frame of 2-3 hours does not refer to 'Ars Brevis', but only to the fermentation/orientation with gold after having already completed the Universal Tincture (in the 'way of the poor').

Dwellings
01-18-2018, 01:34 PM
To summarize the previous post:

Upon careful reading, it becomes reasonably understandable that the time frame of 2-3 hours (ICH) or 3-4 days (Chemical Moonshine) refers in fact to bringing metallic Gold into a tinctural state, AFTER we ALREADY possess the "Universal Tincture". No specific time frame is given (in those texts) for the Work on the Universal Tincture itself.



So, from the text, it appears that ICH's time-frame of 2-3 hours does not refer to 'Ars Brevis', but only to the fermentation/orientation with gold after having already completed the Universal Tincture (in the 'way of the poor').

Making metallic tincture of Gold is mentioned in numerous treatises. In all of the, they mention the need to use high temps and throw philosophers stone to molten Gold and wait till the entire thing turns red. High temps by their very nautre is the quickest way to go about.

Secondly, if you read the context in which he speaks, it becomes obvious that he is talking of preparation of the stone not of fixation of the stone to metallic kingdom. He is substituting tincture for stone when he ought to speak of stone.

Another question to ask is why is there significant time difference in two treatises for the same operation?

Therefore Philaletha, when speaking about the preparation of the Tincture from common Gold, says that this by no means is the true path of the wise, namely to achieve the universal medicine. This, because in the dry path the Gold, within 2 to 3 hours, is made pluperfect by means of the universal Tincture, and the tincture is perfected to and from itself in a short time without a lot of tedious work, hence they call this path the short and easy.

From your translation, it must be asked:
He speaks of 'Tincture from Common Gold' and then in the same line talks of 'to achieve universal medicine', Why?
For once you resolve the above, you realise that such an operation is a practical impossibility.

Andro
01-18-2018, 02:00 PM
From your translation.

It's not my translation. While I'm multilingual, this particular translation is not mine, but the 'official' published one (http://www.lulu.com/shop/ich-a-true-freemason/hermes-trismegistus-old-and-true-natural-path/paperback/product-20126001.html).

Andro
01-18-2018, 02:12 PM
He is substituting tincture for stone when he ought to speak of stone.

Yes.


Secondly, if you read the context in which he speaks, it becomes obvious that he is talking of preparation of the stone not of fixation of the stone to metallic kingdom.

No.

It says that in this specific operation, the gold is perfected by the "Universal Tincture" (meaning the stone, previously prepared without the use of gold).


He speaks of 'Tincture from Common Gold' and then in the same line talks of 'to achieve universal medicine', Why?
For once you resolve the above, you realise that such an operation is a practical impossibility.

It's not impossible IF the gold is "tinged" by the "tincture" (=stone) so it can, in turn, "tinge" other metals. There are many textual references for this, especially those dealing with orientation.

According to this text: In the "way of the poor", the Universal Tincture (=stone) is prepared/achieved without the use of gold. This is also referred to as 'The Path of the Wise'. The tincture/stone of this 'poor-path' is then "fermented" with gold, to "perfect" it into a tinctural state.

I'm basically just saying what the text says.

Dwellings
01-18-2018, 02:24 PM
No.

It says that in this specific operation, the gold is perfected by the "Universal Tincture" (meaning the stone, previously prepared without the use of gold).


Indeed, my mistake.



It's not impossible IF the gold is "tinged" by the "tincture" (=stone) so it can, in turn, "tinge" other metals. There are many textual references for this, especially those dealing with orientation.

According to this text: In the "way of the poor", the Universal Tincture (=stone) is prepared/achieved without the use of gold. This is also referred to as 'The Path of the Wise'. The tincture/stone of this 'poor-path' is then "fermented" with gold, to "perfect" it into a tinctural state.

Contradictory is what I meant and by taking it at face value, recognizing its practical impossibility. Anyways, we both spoke the same thing, you elaborated it.

Andro
01-18-2018, 02:24 PM
Indeed, my mistake.

Contradictory is what I meant and by taking it at face value, recognizing its practical impossibility. Anyways, we both spoke the same thing, you elaborated it.

Then all is well :)

Thanks!