Is Spiritual Alchemy A Valid Path?

[Awani]

...but this tells me that you do care and invest a lot of time in this stuff.

I certainly do. It has brought me joy, happiness, healing, wealth, peace and power. Why would I reject anything that produces such results?

Hare Krishna. Praise the Lord. Allah is Great. I bow before the Intergalactic Energy of Mysterious Mumbo-Jumbo Woo-Woo for providing me with the Flesh of the Gods, and for the Grace of the Embrace of all that is sacred, divine, eternal and loving. Ha ha ha [a laughter of awe and joy, not mockery].

...not to make it easy for people to become rich at my expense.

Yeah Man, I agree with what you say. I would hate for people to achieve peace and enlightenment at my expense. That would be so disconcerting. Screw everyone else. I am the most important person in the world and everyone else deserves to bask in my glory and wealth.

A serious question (if you dare to answer): would you consider yourself (currently) rich or poor? In other words are you lacking in money? Do you live in a crappy home? Do you have to work for low pay? What is your financial situation? If I knew that it would help me understand where you are coming from.

[Hellin Hermetist]

Hi JDP

I think we have to be clear here that what you are
talking about is ARCHEMY not ALCHEMY.

Is this correct ?

I would say transmutational chemistry. I believe that the word archemy was another phony invention of Fulcanellians.

[Hellin Hermetist]

Yes. Obviously I would not reveal the secret to making the Stone, since that one actually gives a lot of profit for the operator. But when it comes to "chymical" methods that can also achieve transmutations, the majority of them can't leave a profit for the operator, so I have no problem eventually revealing those. My objective is didactic: to prove that transmutation is very much real and thus encourage seekers to continue their labors since the objective is not "impossible" by any means (contrary to what chemists and physicists think), not to make it easy for people to become rich at my expense.

But again you can make a real fortune if you reveal in public that transmutation is not impossible, as I showed you in my previous message.

[JDP]

I certainly do. It has brought me joy, happiness, healing, wealth, peace and power. Why would I reject anything that produces such results?

Hare Krishna. Praise the Lord. Allah is Great. I bow before the Intergalactic Energy of Mysterious Mumbo-Jumbo Woo-Woo for providing me with the Flesh of the Gods, and for the Grace of the Embrace of all that is sacred, divine, eternal and loving. Ha ha ha [a laughter of awe and joy, not mockery].



Yeah Man, I agree with what you say. I would hate for people to achieve peace and enlightenment at my expense. That would be so disconcerting. Screw everyone else. I am the most important person in the world and everyone else deserves to bask in my glory and wealth.

A serious question (if you dare to answer): would you consider yourself (currently) rich or poor? In other words are you lacking in money? Do you live in a crappy home? Do you have to work for low pay? What is your financial situation? If I knew that it would help me understand where you are coming from.

I am neither rich nor poor. What most people would label "middle class".

[Awani]

The perfect place to be then. Enough to have what you need, and not too much... or is it never enough?

[JDP]

Again you assert empirical certainty without evidence, offering a priori deductions in place of empirical evidence without clearly indicating so. This is disingenuous. You give reasons why you are not prepared to give findings JDP and these may be valid I suppose. However you cannot assert that your work is empirical without offering actual empirical evidence. This is especially important in the area of Alchemical transmutation because of the number of con-artist who have taken money and given nothing in return in modern times and historically. Indeed if memory serves correct Steve Jobs the late CEO of APPLE ignored conventional medical treatment in preference for Alchemical remedies. So JDP you suggest your experiments have monetary value and refuse to currently show findings. Will you eventually be giving your findings but for a small fee? May I suggest instead you apply for patents.

My findings will eventually be published, so the only "fee" will be that of buying a regularly priced book. And many people interested in the subject will not even have to pay that since eventually they will be able to just borrow the book from whatever libraries purchase copies of it. But all this will be in the future, there is still much to do. The amount of work to be done on translations alone is staggering, as most of the pertinent literature on the subject is still only to be found in Latin and/or German, two languages I have basic knowledge of but not enough to easily waltz through these texts. This alone slows down the pace a lot. And then comes the actual empirical testing of the processes, which is another time-vampire.

[JDP]

The perfect place to be then. Enough to have what you need, and not too much... or is it never enough?

But I want more!

[Awani]

Oh my. Well good luck. I hope you get truckloads of gold then... just remember that what can seem to be a blessing can also be a curse.

[JDP]

I would say transmutational chemistry. I believe that the word archemy was another phony invention of Fulcanellians.

Yes, and I would actually say "chymistry" rather than "chemistry", to better distinguish it from our modern "ordinary" chemistry that keeps denying that transmutation through "chemical reactions" is possible.

Regarding "archemy": the word seems to have been coined by the 16th century Venetian priest Pantheus, but he did not use it in the sense that Fulcanelli did. According to Pantheus, "alchemy" is supposedly "fake" and only produces superficial colorations or vulgar alloys, pure deception. "Archemy" is another discipline, better than "alchemy" but still makes too many promises it cannot keep. But a third discipline called "voarchadumia" is "true" and produces real gold. This strange inversion of terms is very unusual and nobody that I know of has followed Pantheus' bizarre terminology. It is somewhat similar to what Michael Maier would try to do later on in the 17th century with the terms "alchemy" and "chymia/chymistry", but which he himself sometimes amusingly contradicts. For example, in his first published book (Arcana Arcanissima) he uses the terms "alchemy" and "alchemists" in a negative sense, to mean fraudsters and knaves who sell phony processes and empty promises, while "chymia/chymistry" and "chymist" he uses in a positive sense to mean the science of making the Stone and its practitioners (in other words, for what most other authors simply use the terms "alchemy" and "alchemist") But in his Symbola Aureae Mensae he often uses the terms "alchemy" and "alchemist" in the same positive sense as "chymia/chymistry" and "chymist". Cases like Maier's are weird regarding how could they have happened in the first place since most of the authorities he follows and quotes have no problem using the word "alchemy" and "alchemist" in a positive connotation, meaning the science or "art" of making the Stone and its practitioners, while they use a host of other names ("fools", "clowns", "the vulgar", "sophists", "puffers", "multipliers", "vulgar chymists") to mean those who do not know how to make it and use other methods to try to make silver and gold.