Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

Patrons of the Sacred Art

+ Reply to Thread
Page 23 of 23 FirstFirst ... 13 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Results 221 to 224 of 224

Thread: Short Dry Path (Ars Brevis)

  1. #221
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwellings View Post
    There is no Bullshit in the above lines. If you understand it thoroughly, you know Alchemy in its entirety and nothing can stop you from succeeding likewise if you do not understand it you know nothing of Alchemy.

    So, judge for yourself.

    This is the golden passage and acts as the "moment of truth" for your understanding. Go try it.
    But there is "bullshit" in that passage, "philosophical" baloney, designed to trap unwary people. If you don't take a look at what he himself points out in another passage (quoted further above) you will not understand what this deceitful trick consists of, namely: the "one substance only" is itself a COMPOSITE OF SEVERAL. Before you realize this you will keep on hitting stumbling blocks and never advance anywhere, because such a "one substance only" does NOT exist in nature. It is an artificial substance made by the alchemist himself. Amazing that so many seekers are still falling for this old & tired trap. Even as far back as Zosimos it was "disarmed" and plainly exposed, yet still countless generations of seekers kept on falling for it over and over.

  2. #222
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwellings View Post
    From what you have said above, can I conclude that there must exist a first matter in the universe especially from the first line of your reply?
    No, not necessarily. Things can have their own composition, unique of their own. Anything that exists must have it. Iron is not the same thing as gold, beef is not the same thing as chicken, Coca-Cola is not the same thing as 7Up, etc.

    When alchemists say metallic, they mean in terms of spirit not actual physical terms.
    What they mean is derived from metals, or the minerals where metals come from.

    I also do not think that we are dealing with vulgar materials. So, the particular processes cannot be carried forward to Alchemy IMO.
    At one point you must start with "vulgar materials". There is no escaping this, because nature does not make anything but "vulgar materials", available to everyone all the same, the difference is in how they are manipulated and used. Nature does not make the alchemical substances used for making the Stone, those are made by the alchemist himself, but by manipulating the vulgar materials that nature or human industry puts at his disposal.

    Yes metals and minerals to varying degree are dry but there may exist a certain mineral which is sufficiently wet & dry so as to partake in the work.
    Which one? For hundreds of years people (and not just seekers after the Stone) have been placing just about every kind of mineral that has been found inside retorts/alembics/distilling-flasks and heating them (this was the main technique in what used to be called "fire analysis" or "analysis by fire" in past centuries; the chymists, and then the chemists, applied it to virtually all substances that fell into their hands, to see what products would they give off by heat alone.) None of them has ever delivered anything remotely resembling the secret solvent of alchemy.
    Last edited by JDP; 3 Days Ago at 11:03 PM.

  3. #223
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    But there is "bullshit" in that passage, "philosophical" baloney, designed to trap unwary people. If you don't take a look at what he himself points out in another passage (quoted further above) you will not understand what this deceitful trick consists of, namely: the "one substance only" is itself a COMPOSITE OF SEVERAL. Before you realize this you will keep on hitting stumbling blocks and never advance anywhere, because such a "one substance only" does NOT exist in nature. It is an artificial substance made by the alchemist himself. Amazing that so many seekers are still falling for this old & tired trap. Even as far back as Zosimos it was "disarmed" and plainly exposed, yet still countless generations of seekers kept on falling for it over and over.
    The composite or rebis that we take for one matter happens quite later not at all to be confused with what he said.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    No, not necessarily. Things can have their own composition, unique of their own. Anything that exists must have it. Iron is not the same thing as gold, beef is not the same thing as chicken, Coca-Cola is not the same thing as 7Up, etc.

    What they mean is derived from metals, or the minerals where metals come from.

    At one point you must start with "vulgar materials". There is no escaping this, because nature does not make anything but "vulgar materials", available to everyone all the same, the difference is in how they are manipulated and used. Nature does not make the alchemical substances used for making the Stone, those are made by the alchemist himself, but by manipulating the vulgar materials that nature or human industry puts at his disposal.

    Which one? For hundreds of years people (and not just seekers after the Stone) have been placing just about every kind of mineral that has been found inside retorts/alembics/distilling-flasks and heating them (this was the main technique in what used to be called "fire analysis" or "analysis by fire" in past centuries; the chymists, and then the chemists, applied it to virtually all substances that fell into their hands, to see what products would they give off by heat alone.) None of them has ever delivered anything remotely resembling the secret solvent of alchemy.
    Truth be told, I can write very little against your reply. If you think in terms of chemistry, I dont think anything profitable can come out of it. Start with the first matter, then derive from there. That is all I can say. See if it changes your world view.

  4. #224
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwellings View Post
    The composite or rebis that we take for one matter happens quite later not at all to be confused with what he said.
    What he says there is about the beginning of the work. Where do you think he is telling you the "one thing" is coming from if not from the AT LEAST 3 SUBSTANCES he is talking about under "decknamen"? So, can you really make the Stone with "only one substance" according to him? No, not really. The "one thing" itself is made from several. It is this kind of "games" that many alchemists like to play to confuse as many seekers as possible.


    Truth be told, I can write very little against your reply. If you think in terms of chemistry, I dont think anything profitable can come out of it. Start with the first matter, then derive from there. That is all I can say. See if it changes your world view.
    What "first matter"? No such thing is found anywhere in nature. You will find a multitude of substances in nature, and all of them are "specified". Best advice I can give you: don't waste time with the Aristotelian-based theoretical musings about matter of many alchemists. It will get you nowhere fast, just like it took droves of seekers nowhere for centuries.

+ 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