Practical Alchemy - An Introduction

[Eshai]

So like Biology, Physics and Chemistry, I think that Alchemy is a branch of science, albeit a very much misunderstood branch.

Interesting. Chemistry, from my perspective, is less a branch of science in itself as other, well defined branches such as biology, physics, toxicology, geology, etc. Chemistry is sometimes regarded as the "central science," meaning that all endeavors of science utilize chemistry for their aims. It appears that alchemy is no different, as the chemistry employed in alchemy is a tool for a greater purpose.

if the purpose of alchemy is for you to reach a higher state of being / existence then you might save some time by throwing atheism out the window

Indeed, reaching a "higher" state of being is not my purpose.

I am one of the Profane.

[Ghislain]

Eshai, there are many branches of scienceI just wanted to use a few to give the idea. We could look at life as a whole, like a cake, but this could be broken down into its component part such as eggs, flour, butter, sugar...etc...ect...; then further still into the chemical nutrients in the soil...etc..etc... I guess it depends on what point one would like to focus.

The video below is much like the cake...



Exploring the Universe: Big History 2

The Sun & The Earth: Big History 3

Life Begins: Big History 4

Note the similarity of Alchemical processes.


Ghislain

[Ghislain]

Well, I started so I guess I should finish...

The Evolutionary Epic: Big History 5

Human Evolution: Big History 6

Dev in the vid' above you may be interested on the point made at 10:50 especially 12:26

Migrations and Intensification: Big History 7

The Modern Revolution: Big History 8

The Anthropocene and the Near Future: Big History 9

The Deep Future: Big History 10

And so ends the brief history to the beginning of Alchemy

The next big question is, "What is Dark Matter/Energy and what can we do with it?"

Ghislain

[KnowledgeSeeker]

Can I ask what’s the difference between ‘practical alchemy’ to spagyrics? I mean I tried to learn it by following the steps in some books or sources such as ‘real alchemy’ and alchemist’s handbook but that is apparently seen as spagyrics, which is considered ‘alchemy’ for some reason in public perception.

If somebody can help explain thanks, I want to learn this path and do not necessarily want transmutation as a goal but mainly because alchemy can explore things that contemporary ‘science’ is limited from doing being one of them which is fascinating.

[JDP]

Can I ask what’s the difference between ‘practical alchemy’ to spagyrics? I mean I tried to learn it by following the steps in some books or sources such as ‘real alchemy’ and alchemist’s handbook but that is apparently seen as spagyrics, which is considered ‘alchemy’ for some reason in public perception.

If somebody can help explain thanks, I want to learn this path and do not necessarily want transmutation as a goal but mainly because alchemy can explore things that contemporary ‘science’ is limited from doing being one of them which is fascinating.

For all its operations alchemy relies on a secret solvent that, so far, only the alchemists have discovered how to prepare and has remained unknown to all other branches of empirical science, and which allows for preparing transmuting "tinctures" (i.e. substances that when projected over much larger amounts of molten metals cause them to change into silver or gold.) Spagyrics uses a wide variety of solvents for its operations, and it cannot produce any transmuting "tinctures" (not that it was ever its objective to begin with.) "Spagyrics" = medicinal "chymistry" (notice the archaic spelling of this last word, not "chemistry".)

[KnowledgeSeeker]

For all its operations alchemy relies on a secret solvent that, so far, only the alchemists have discovered how to prepare and has remained unknown to all other branches of empirical science, and which allows for preparing transmuting "tinctures" (i.e. substances that when projected over much larger amounts of molten metals cause them to change into silver or gold.) Spagyrics uses a wide variety of solvents for its operations, and it cannot produce any transmuting "tinctures" (not that it was ever its objective to begin with.) "Spagyrics" = medicinal "chymistry" (notice the archaic spelling of this last word, not "chemistry".)

Is the objective of people who called themselves alchemists then to find the solvent?

Also if it was so widely used until chemistry replaced it then where would the records of how it was made most likely kept or is it dead until somebody finds it again?

[JDP]

Is the objective of people who called themselves alchemists then to find the solvent?

Yes, because without it there is no way of making the Stone.

Also if it was so widely used until chemistry replaced it then where would the records of how it was made most likely kept or is it dead until somebody finds it again?

Who says that chemistry "replaced" alchemy? That's the fairy tale that chemists tell themselves and the rest of the world. How can you "replace" an EMPIRICAL FACT???

As for the "records": that's what alchemy books are about: this "water" or solvent, but they never explain how to make it in a 100% clear manner that even simpletons could replicate it. That's the whole point of studying and trying to "crack" alchemical texts. To learn this secret and then apply it to making the Stone or some other alchemical "tincture".

[z0 K]

In addition to what JDP said Spagyric practices actually discard the key Elements to make the Secret Solvent for the Vegetable Stone by burning the matter into smoke that is allowed to escape into the air.

[Florius Frammel]

In addition to what JDP said Spagyric practices actually discard the key Elements to make the Secret Solvent for the Vegetable Stone by burning the matter into smoke that is allowed to escape into the air.

One should add that z 0k got this very interesting interpretation by studying the works of the two Hollandus and Ripleius. There are quite some hints about this practice in Junius' book too. I couldn't find any backing up of this theory in the works of other alchemists like Basil Valentine however.

Edit: Sorry! All is good! z 0k wrote about the vegetable stone. I read his lines too quick and thought he was talking about "the" stone.

[Kiorionis]

What’s the difference, FF?