Patrons of the Sacred Art

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 290

Thread: Secrecy & Alchemical Initiations

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Vesta.
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post

    The earliest alchemists have told us that alchemy was first brought to us
    by the gods or angels. They also tell us that it was in exchange for sex with
    our women whom they found beautiful. You can see these relationships in
    biblical writings and the book of Enoch; even Zosimos passes down this
    knowledge of alchemy's origin.
    ~You Misunderstand; Knowledge Was Granted Out Of Compassion—Out Of Love As It Were—To Those The Benei Ha'Elohim Took As Companions (As Well As To The Resulting Offspring Of Their Unions), It Was Not Done To Satisfy Any Base Trade Transaction, I.E., It Was Not Done In Exchange For Sex.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    4,568
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Road View Post
    ~You Misunderstand; Knowledge Was Granted Out Of Compassion—Out Of Love As It Were—To Those The Benei Ha'Elohim Took As Companions (As Well As To The Resulting Offspring Of Their Unions), It Was Not Done To Satisfy Any Base Trade Transaction, I.E., It Was Not Done In Exchange For Sex.
    Misunderstand? I understand both stories just fine.
    Why must one be right and the other wrong?
    The universe I know has an infinite capacity to mediate from the One.
    http://serpentrioarquila.blogspot.com/

    "To conjure is nothing else than to observe anything rightly, to know and understand what it is." - Paracelsus

    "Why, then, don't you act when you see the danger of your conditioning? The answer is you don't see... seeing is acting." J. Krishnamurti

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Vesta.
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    Misunderstand? I understand both stories just fine.
    Why must one be right and the other wrong?
    ~The Answer Is Simple—One Is Historical Truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    The universe I know has an infinite capacity to mediate from the One.

    ~Yes, And Engender Many Shadows... I Prefer Myself To Dwell Above The Fray Of Maya.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    4,568
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Road View Post
    ~The Answer Is Simple—One Is Historical Truth.



    ~Yes, And Engender Many Shadows... I Prefer Myself To Dwell Above The Fray Of Maya.
    I think you will find that historical truth is not other than maya.
    http://serpentrioarquila.blogspot.com/

    "To conjure is nothing else than to observe anything rightly, to know and understand what it is." - Paracelsus

    "Why, then, don't you act when you see the danger of your conditioning? The answer is you don't see... seeing is acting." J. Krishnamurti

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Vesta.
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    I think you will find that historical truth is not other than maya.

    ~But Heavenly Truth Is Another Matter.
    .. (Which Is The Whole Point).

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    4,568
    Blog Entries
    4
    Heavenly truth is another matter.

    Whose whole point? I started this thread and you want to tell me what the point of the thread is?
    Interesting.

    I've described one point. You've described another.
    I see both as valid. You see me misunderstanding.
    It was you who did not stand under the point of this thread.
    You stepped out from under it and made your own point.

    Fine. But you're not qualified to presume what I understand.
    http://serpentrioarquila.blogspot.com/

    "To conjure is nothing else than to observe anything rightly, to know and understand what it is." - Paracelsus

    "Why, then, don't you act when you see the danger of your conditioning? The answer is you don't see... seeing is acting." J. Krishnamurti

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Vesta.
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    Heavenly truth is another matter.

    Whose whole point? I started this thread and you want to tell me what the point of the thread is?
    Interesting.
    Truly? I Make No Point Which You Yourself Have Not Already Acknowledged. Though By Your Admission You May Not Agree With The Practice; Nevertheless You Correctly Ascertain The Origins Of The Inviolable Oath As Having Root In The Divine. This Covenant Is Not Fashioned To Bind The Spirit As Some May Conceive, But Only To Purpose.

    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    I wonder what God meant to them - which God will reveal it?
    Their Progenitor Grants Such Wisdom; This Is The Deity They Honor Above All Others. In Exchange For The Light Of Revelation, All Who Are Of Their Number Are Required To Uphold The Dread Oath.


    Quote Originally Posted by solomon levi View Post
    I've described one point. You've described another.
    I see both as valid. You see me misunderstanding.
    I Found It Puzzling How One Who Acknowledges The Heavenly Could Ascribe To Such, Base Motives. It Seemed To Me, A Discrepancy To Be Addressed. I Confess I Still Do Not Understand How One Can Disparage His Creators.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    4,568
    Blog Entries
    4
    I find it puzzling that you would ignore all the various writings from
    various ancient civilizations which tell us that the gods found the
    earth women beautiful and "came down" and had sex with them, often
    in exchange for knowledge, secrets, etc.
    If these writings are not evidence of "historical truth", as you say, what is?
    It's quite clear that they found them beautiful and had sex. In some other
    writings and mythologies we find them falling in love, but not all of them.

    In some stories it is very clear that the gods are base. Rape is not an uncommon
    act for the gods to perform. Nor murder, genocide, slavery, animal and human sacrifice, etc, etc.

    You seriously want to tell me such events did not happen and are not historical truths?
    That only your one version of love is the historical truth?
    I didn't invent this. I'm merely quoting ancient historical texts.

    For you to say I misunderstand merely means I don't understand the same as you.
    Yours is not the only way to understand things, nor THE historical truth.
    History is a very long span of time in which this planet has been visited by different gods
    many times - not just once by ultruistic loving gods.

    "I Confess I Still Do Not Understand How One Can Disparage His Creators."
    Well, I don't consider "the gods" my creators. For me, Creator should be singular,
    and not a singular god-being but rather a singular substance (Universal Prima Materia) which
    is creator and created - one, not two.
    The gods of the bible and many other mythologies are extraterrestrials that didn't
    create man so much as genetically alter him. They are not God any more or less than I am
    or you are, but demanded to be worshipped as gods because of their advanced knowledge
    and technology - base indeed. Though the serpent/Enki/Ea may be considered relatively more
    loving than Enlil/Jehovah, as some ancient religions (the greek, for example) point out.
    It is quite obvious to me that there are historical histories that take the perspective of
    either side, depending on which god they worshipped - the eagle/sky god/Jehovah-Enlil or the
    serpent/water-earth god/Enki/Satan/etc.
    To speak of one historical truth is narrow-minded IMO. Do you deny others their religions as well?
    Everyone is misunderstanding except those who agree with your one version of things?
    I'm not interested in such a view. It is not historically true that there is one historical truth.

    Alchemy, revealed by the All-One to those followers of nature is a different topic IMO, if that is
    what you are speaking of. It does not contradict this topic, but runs simultaneously parallel to it.

    I object to calling anyone's view a misunderstanding simply because it doesn't agree
    with your view. It's a very diverse world we live in. Since my "god" is the All-One, I try not to
    negate anyone else, for that "disparages god" in my book. There are infinite understandings.
    A misunderstanding is a non-entity - I've never seen one, though I used to believe they existed
    when my thinking mind was more dominant than my perceptive mind.
    http://serpentrioarquila.blogspot.com/

    "To conjure is nothing else than to observe anything rightly, to know and understand what it is." - Paracelsus

    "Why, then, don't you act when you see the danger of your conditioning? The answer is you don't see... seeing is acting." J. Krishnamurti

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,327
    Blog Entries
    1
    Dear Mr. Solomon Levi,

    You once again managed to leave me speechless with your eloquence and open-ended ways of perception.

    WOW.

    Thank you ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

    And a BIG e-Hug

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    4,568
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thanks Androgynus. I needed a hug.

    I still have to figure out how my all-embracing view objects to calling anyone's view a misunderstanding.
    I am all-embracing BUT I don't embrace anything not all-embracing. hahaha!

    It feels the same as the Ouroboros swallowing its tail. It's the same as when I embrace Oneness to the
    point of uselessness and get blasted back into duality. There's some weird membrane there where the manifest
    and unmanifest are constantly alternating at some incredible speed. Or like falling into a black hole will eventually
    create a singularity and blast you out of a white hole on the other side.
    This leads to that and that leads to this.
    Carlo Suares, the great qabalist, defines the Aleph:
    "Aleph is the unthinkable life-death, abstract principle of all that is and all that is not."
    http://serpentrioarquila.blogspot.com/

    "To conjure is nothing else than to observe anything rightly, to know and understand what it is." - Paracelsus

    "Why, then, don't you act when you see the danger of your conditioning? The answer is you don't see... seeing is acting." J. Krishnamurti

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts