Patrons of the Sacred Art

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

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 27 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 262

Thread: Is Spiritual Alchemy A Valid Path?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    202
    Thx for the link Andro it is very interesting to me personally!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by JinRaTensei View Post
    Would you consider things like "hallucinogenic visions" or astral travel or generally everything "Mumbo Jumbo Jedi Mind trick" what shamans worldwide are doing daily?
    What about healing/regeneration(self remission/spontaneous self healing), precognition or knowledge one should not have according to physics?

    What about dreams if they tell us things about "reality" also fake?
    What about mushrooms and DMT ?
    What about remote viewing?

    Where exactly is your line between "reality" and everything else?
    Can anyone prove that what Shamans claim they do is real? It goes on inside their heads, no one can prove anything regarding such claims. Who knows what goes on in there under the influence of hallucinogens.

    There is a difference between the claims of alchemy, which are of a more concrete and substantial nature, and thus subject to investigation and proving/disproving, and all the claims you just mentioned, which there is no way of proving them.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    202
    Sure there is a way to proof it, personal experience. Just because most of us have not had such experiences does not mean the experiences of others are lies or delusions. And there is "proof" for many things considered fringe and not possible.
    Like I say where do you draw your line of what is real?
    Is the Astralbody real?
    Is the "soul" real?
    Are Telekinesis and Psychokinesis real?
    Are remote viewing, precognition and prophecies real?
    Are lucid dreaming, astral travel and dreamwalking real?

    Because their is scientific "proof" for all of it out there.

    Just tell me..or rather yourself where do you draw the line of what is real and spend a day with google and a open mind trying to proof yourself "right" or "wrong"

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    161
    Blog Entries
    4
    I wasn’t going to post a reply. Way too much negativity on this thread for me. Although I feel that there is a chance that my words may help so I shall just reply as simply as I can.

    1. The body, and mind, are material objects last time I checked, not mumbo jumbo. (Non-materialists, completely see your view too; on the fence myself too. Just talking in terms a materialist may understand.)

    2. From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy. Most of these philosophies coming from the east, from Ancient Greece, China, Tibet, Egypt, etc. And as they came closer to the west got more and more right brained.

    3. As for the whole idea of alchemy being a practical art. That only seems to be the case in the West. The East was more about internal alchemy and creation of tinctures for health from herb. As far as I am aware, from what I have read. For example Neidan and Waidan.

    As it got more western and right brained it seem it changed, two reasons I can think of:

    i. To convince people (kings, lords, people with money) that it was worth paying them to do research.

    ii. Western greed causing the chase for gold. Perhaps after seeing all the gold in the east they were astounded, and perhaps doubted the amount of work the eastern people may have put in to get it. Perhaps thinking that they could just magic it up. Superstitious lot the westerners lol. (I am one myself)

    4. Looking at the reasons someone may wish to create gold. Generally this will come down to them feeling that they need something that they currently don’t have in their life. And we can distill this to feelings of wanting to be happy.

    Why not jump straight into the finding ways to be happy part?

    5. Personally I am not sure how practical alchemy is any more likely to bring gold into our personal reality than spiritual alchemy. As a realist, I find it more likely that I could bring gold into my reality by trading and being good at it, by purifying my will and motivation for hard work. I feel it is much less likely that I will turn a base metal into gold. Especially as, as far as we are aware, all the gold on earth was created in the furnace of a star.

    It is proven that we can produce gold, although it takes massive amounts of energy, more energy than most chemical reactions will ever create. The energy costing much more value than the gold will give in return. It seems to me like exchanging a chicken for some eggs.

    Whereas, using the ancient art of metal work, we may turn iron into steel, and steel into a sword, then sell the sword for much more gold than the cost of the steel, or the amount of time it took us to make it. Or we may take common chemicals and turn them into gunpowder. Another great way to make some money. Although both being weapons, not my cup of tea. Although a much easier route to gold in my eyes.

    Western alchemy, for me, was just the beginning of chemistry and physics. Which I do totally like to learn about. Although that is common knowledge in the west. The part that seems more hidden, or esoteric, to me is inner alchemy, and psychology. I personally prefer to see alchemy as a label for my love of esoteric wisdom, and my goal as an alchemist is to educate myself. To me knowledge is an alchemists true gold. And I am not saying that my way is the only way. All road lead to rome eventually.

    My personal goals are to learn about how sacred geometry is linked to physics, how linguistics can become more advanced, how linguistics effect the mind, getting to know myself and how my mind works, how reality is encoded in the brain, etc. I feel I will get much more value from this, than I could from any gold. I would have to agree with dev, alchemists chasing gold will only end up ending up with fools gold in the end. Even if it is pure Au, it can’t truly make you happy.

    Personally, to me, the philosophers stone is a tablet of information. Hence the name. It is all the alchemists knowledge and wisdom distilled and concentrated into the smallest form he can, then ‘etched on a tablet’ for prosperity. The philosophers stone to me is metatrons cube, knowledge of harmonics, mathematics, chemistry, physics, knowledge in its simplest form, etc.

    And through this knowledge one can get as much gold as one wants if the knowledge is used for that means.

    Finally, I would like to say, these are just my views, and I do not profess that they are correct, right, 'the way' or 'the true path'. Please, can we just get on. As alchemists we are already outsiders to 'popular' society, lets not have infighting eh?

    Much love to you all. Wishes of peace and happiness.

    Loki
    Last edited by Loki Morningstar; 08-10-2016 at 11:06 PM.
    Distill fact from theory, fixate on inferences drawn.
    Upon which points does the mystery turn?
    "What's the matter?", one asks.
    "The universe is mental!", one replies.
    Know The Self.
    Loki Azazel Morningstar (LAM)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,257
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki Morningstar View Post
    From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy.
    Actually in my humble opinion alchemy is a direct result and offspring of shamanism, and the shaman is the true alchemist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki Morningstar View Post
    Way too much negativity on this thread for me.
    Yes, well it is a very negative affair to be knee deep in materialism.

    Also finally I would like to say that to denounce an entire section of the forum to be a hoax is a bit insulting to all the people that spend time there. I can only imagine if I create a thread saying Practical Alchemy is a hoax and a sham... which I don't think it is.

    I think the world needs more bisexuality. Straight people and homosexual people are on equal ground: they only have one option (although gays usually have at least tried the other option before they go rogue)!!!

    Last edited by Awani; 08-11-2016 at 12:10 AM.
    Donít let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.


  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by JinRaTensei View Post
    Sure there is a way to proof it, personal experience. Just because most of us have not had such experiences does not mean the experiences of others are lies or delusions. And there is "proof" for many things considered fringe and not possible.
    Like I say where do you draw your line of what is real?
    Is the Astralbody real?
    Is the "soul" real?
    Are Telekinesis and Psychokinesis real?
    Are remote viewing, precognition and prophecies real?
    Are lucid dreaming, astral travel and dreamwalking real?

    Because their is scientific "proof" for all of it out there.

    Just tell me..or rather yourself where do you draw the line of what is real and spend a day with google and a open mind trying to proof yourself "right" or "wrong"
    Personal experience is merely anecdotal evidence, it is not actual proof. For something to constitute "proof" it needs to be able to be replicated and confirmed by others. The claims of Shamanism, Telekinesis, Psychokinesis, "astral travel", etc. have not been confirmed anywhere. When put to the test UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS, failure to replicate any such claims has been the only result. That professional magician, James Randi, through his educational foundation has in fact for a long time been offering a million dollars for anyone who, UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS (meaning: NO CHEATING POSSIBLE), can demonstrate the reality of any such claims, and so far all the tons of applicants they have had through the years have totally failed to prove any of such claims. The results of Randi's challenge are an excellent example of the staggering amount of self-delusion among people who harbor such credulous ideas. Most of the failed challengers were really totally convinced they could perform the weird things they claimed, yet when put to the test they all miserably failed. Of course, they always have a never-ending parade of "explanations" and excuses rather than finally accept that they have no proof whatsoever of their claims, but those among them who once again were given more chances to prove their claims failed again, and again, and again, and again...

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki Morningstar View Post
    I wasn’t going to post a reply. Way too much negativity on this thread for me. Although I feel that there is a chance that my words may help so I shall just reply as simply as I can.

    1. The body, and mind, are material objects last time I checked, not mumbo jumbo. (Non-materialists, completely see your view too; on the fence myself too. Just talking in terms a materialist may understand.)

    2. From what I gather, all alchemy started in philosophy. Most of these philosophies coming from the east, from Ancient Greece, China, Tibet, Egypt, etc. And as they came closer to the west got more and more right brained.

    3. As for the whole idea of alchemy being a practical art. That only seems to be the case in the West. The East was more about internal alchemy and creation of tinctures for health from herb. As far as I am aware, from what I have read. For example Neidan and Waidan.

    As it got more western and right brained it seem it changed, two reasons I can think of:

    i. To convince people (kings, lords, people with money) that it was worth paying them to do research.

    ii. Western greed causing the chase for gold. Perhaps after seeing all the gold in the east they were astounded, and perhaps doubted the amount of work the eastern people may have put in to get it. Perhaps thinking that they could just magic it up. Superstitious lot the westerners lol. (I am one myself)

    4. Looking at the reasons someone may wish to create gold. Generally this will come down to them feeling that they need something that they currently don’t have in their life. And we can distill this to feelings of wanting to be happy.

    Why not jump straight into the finding ways to be happy part?

    5. Personally I am not sure how practical alchemy is any more likely to bring gold into our personal reality than spiritual alchemy. As a realist, I find it more likely that I could bring gold into my reality by trading and being good at it, by purifying my will and motivation for hard work. I feel it is much less likely that I will turn a base metal into gold. Especially as, as far as we are aware, all the gold on earth was created in the furnace of a star.

    It is proven that we can produce gold, although it takes massive amounts of energy, more energy than most chemical reactions will ever create. The energy costing much more value than the gold will give in return. It seems to me like exchanging a chicken for some eggs.

    Whereas, using the ancient art of metal work, we may turn iron into steel, and steel into a sword, then sell the sword for much more gold than the cost of the steel, or the amount of time it took us to make it. Or we may take common chemicals and turn them into gunpowder. Another great way to make some money. Although both being weapons, not my cup of tea. Although a much easier route to gold in my eyes.

    Western alchemy, for me, was just the beginning of chemistry and physics. Which I do totally like to learn about. Although that is common knowledge in the west. The part that seems more hidden, or esoteric, to me is inner alchemy, and psychology. I personally prefer to see alchemy as a label for my love of esoteric wisdom, and my goal as an alchemist is to educate myself. To me knowledge is an alchemists true gold. And I am not saying that my way is the only way. All road lead to rome eventually.

    My personal goals are to learn about how sacred geometry is linked to physics, how linguistics can become more advanced, how linguistics effect the mind, getting to know myself and how my mind works, how reality is encoded in the brain, etc. I feel I will get much more value from this, than I could from any gold. I would have to agree with dev, alchemists chasing gold will only end up ending up with fools gold in the end. Even if it is pure Au, it can’t truly make you happy.

    Personally, to me, the philosophers stone is a tablet of information. Hence the name. It is all the alchemists knowledge and wisdom distilled and concentrated into the smallest form he can, then ‘etched on a tablet’ for prosperity. The philosophers stone to me is metatrons cube, knowledge of harmonics, mathematics, chemistry, physics, knowledge in its simplest form, etc.

    And through this knowledge one can get as much gold as one wants if the knowledge is used for that means.

    Finally, I would like to say, these are just my views, and I do not profess that they are correct, right, 'the way' or 'the true path'. Please, can we just get on. As alchemists we are already outsiders to 'popular' society, lets not have infighting eh?

    Much love to you all. Wishes of peace and happiness.

    Loki
    Then why bother with alchemy if you are not interested in transmutation of base metals into noble ones and the Philosophers' Stone? Seek another pursuit that matches your goals. I don't get the obsession some people have with trying to hijack alchemy for their own occult beliefs. This would be as absurd as me trying to hijack, say, astrology, and claim that the real goal of astrologers was really just astronomy, not make bizarre predictions based on arbitrary interpretations of planetary motions. No: that is what astrology was always about. Trying to claim otherwise is simply wrong, so I don't attempt to hijack it for any other discipline. Well, alchemy was always about transmutation and the Stone, that simple.

    Regarding alchemy among the Chinese: they too were interested in transmutation, but not as much as the medicinal/longevity aspects of the subject (the chief obsession of the Chinese alchemists was to eventually become one of the "immortals".) The whole "internal alchemy" thing (meaning, no operations with actual substances) among the Chinese is obviously a gross misunderstanding by some excessively mystically-minded later writers who either totally failed to achieve the goals of alchemy and tried to give the subject some other meaning in the face of such failure to achieve an actual "Elixir", or never in fact understood alchemy's goals to begin with and gave it a fanciful interpretation.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    161
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Personal experience is merely anecdotal evidence, it is not actual proof. For something to constitute "proof" it needs to be able to be replicated and confirmed by others. The claims of Shamanism, Telekinesis, Psychokinesis, "astral travel", etc. have not been confirmed anywhere. When put to the test UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS, failure to replicate any such claims has been the only result. That professional magician, James Randi, through his educational foundation has in fact for a long time been offering a million dollars for anyone who, UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS (meaning: NO CHEATING POSSIBLE), can demonstrate the reality of any such claims, and so far all the tons of applicants they have had through the years have totally failed to prove any of such claims. The results of Randi's challenge are an excellent example of the staggering amount of self-delusion among people who harbor such credulous ideas. Most of the failed challengers were really totally convinced they could perform the weird things they claimed, yet when put to the test they all miserably failed. Of course, they always have a never-ending parade of "explanations" and excuses rather than finally accept that they have no proof whatsoever of their claims, but those among them who once again were given more chances to prove their claims failed again, and again, and again, and again...
    I will personally give you a thousand pound if you can prove you are not part of an elaborate experiment, a brain in a jar being stimulated with electrodes to perceive the existence you are living in. Shaman, Philosophers, Religious, and truly critical Scientists, have been thinking about this idea for thousands of years, and they still haven't figured it out. You sound like an fundamentalist atheist alchemist; any good scientist, alchemist, or philosopher should always be agnostic, or on the fence in my eyes.

    I think you are judging something before you have even really looked deep enough in my eyes. How many people have proved they could change base metals into gold through chemistry under scientific conditions? I am pretty sure Randi's experiment would work just as well for this claim.

    I would have to agree with dev here. Alchemy most likely was started by herbal shaman. There is much historical proof of this. Shamans also being the first philosophers, the first thinkers we could say. Plus a lot of the ideas of ancient alchemy were based on the ideas of Plato's geometry principles, and other philosophers ideas. So alchemy certainly seems to have it's roots in philosophy of some variety. So if anyone is 'hijacking' alchemy as you put it, even though I do not judge either way, it is the western gold hunters.

    Personally, I do not believe either is possible. Many of the spiritualist claims, or the claim of being able to turn metals to gold. I try not to believe anything as much as possible, just to get an understanding. At the same time, I would like to see someone argue against geometry, or philosophy, and I would not personally judge anyone, ever. If that is their personal path, that is their personal path.

    As I said, all roads lead to Rome. All I personally do it to look for is greater understanding of the things we do 'know'. "I know one thing, and that is I know nothing", although I do know that "I am a thinking thing, that is, a being who doubts, affirms, denies, knows a few objects, and is ignorant of many …", but at the end of the day "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool".

    I personally do not judge people for their views. Nor do I judge people for lacking people skills. At the end of the day, both shall effect them much more than they will me.

    I wish you all the best, I hope you find what you are 'actually' looking for, and if you wish for friendship, or companionship, on your journey toward truth, I am more than willing to support you in any way I can to get there.

    Love and Light.

    Loki.

    P.s. I feel my post on what my definition of alchemy may actually help in this situation. I am not saying it is the definition, or the way, but at a minimum it explains my ideas of what alchemy is, and why I 'bother with' Alchemy.
    Last edited by Loki Morningstar; 08-11-2016 at 06:06 AM.
    Distill fact from theory, fixate on inferences drawn.
    Upon which points does the mystery turn?
    "What's the matter?", one asks.
    "The universe is mental!", one replies.
    Know The Self.
    Loki Azazel Morningstar (LAM)

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    202
    JDP

    Just for good form, I have mentioned twice now that there is scientific proof for the fringe I mentioned out there. With scientific I mean reproduceable facts like society in the west accepts it as scientific method.
    If you have not come across such information than maybe you have not looked deep enough or at the wrong places...but this would just lead to the next circular reasoning between us, what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?
    Irony being since personal experience is the only thing true we can ever do/experience and you view it as anectdotal means that you disregard the only part of your existence with any meaning, imo.
    What if I show a video with the president of the USA saying it is real? Just a liar?
    What if I show you a video with an experiment and scientists who demonstrate how the fringe is real? Just a fake?
    What if I show you reports of evidence an testimony?Just missinterpretation and delusion?

    I assume that your position and own view is honest and that you are a integer person like most of us. So do not avoid these questions but please just drop a short line what evidence would be credibe for you, if any at all. That way we will know if this conversation is an approach to seek truth or an approach to seek conflict.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,002
    Quote Originally Posted by JinRaTensei View Post
    JDP

    Just for good form, I have mentioned twice now that there is scientific proof for the fringe I mentioned out there. With scientific I mean reproduceable facts like society in the west accepts it as scientific method.
    If you have not come across such information than maybe you have not looked deep enough or at the wrong places...but this would just lead to the next circular reasoning between us, what would you "accept" as proof? A video? A statistic? A famous person saying it on television? A clinical study? What other than personal experience would you deem credible?
    Irony being since personal experience is the only thing true we can ever do/experience and you view it as anectdotal means that you disregard the only part of your existence with any meaning, imo.
    What if I show a video with the president of the USA saying it is real? Just a liar?
    What if I show you a video with an experiment and scientists who demonstrate how the fringe is real? Just a fake?
    What if I show you reports of evidence an testimony?Just missinterpretation and delusion?

    I assume that your position and own view is honest and that you are a integer person like most of us. So do not avoid these questions but please just drop a short line what evidence would be credibe for you, if any at all. That way we will know if this conversation is an approach to seek truth or an approach to seek conflict.
    Once again you are showing that you do not have a proper understanding of what "proof" is. You keep bringing up gratuitous personal claims that have not been proven by anyone. They are just claims and boasts. Anyone can make them. I could tell you, for example, that by flapping my arms real hard I can actually fly. Would you believe such nonsense without actual proof, though? No? Well, good, neither would I. So don't you think that if the proof that you so much think has already been given really existed the world would be a much different place than it is? Yet the official stance of the scientific world on such claims continues to be the exact same one: no one has proven any such claims. As two popular sayings go, "talk is cheap" and "the proof is in the pudding". And so far nobody has "eaten" this "pudding" when it comes to the the gratuitous claims you keep bringing up as if they were "proof" of something.

+ Reply to 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