Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

Patrons of the Sacred Art

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 57

Thread: Can you make the stone without the solvent?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwellings View Post
    I think you need to consider alternative viewpoints.

    What if nature already gives everything you need in a package, kind of like a cake mix?

    It still poses the difficulty of exactly mimicking nature but that can be figured out by observation and comman sense.
    How can such a thing possibly exist already made somewhere in nature and yet NOBODY has ever noticed it???

    There is nothing to "mimick" in nature because IT DOES NOT MAKE THE SECRET SOLVENT OR THE STONE. If it did, we would expect mineralogists from time to time to encounter this remarkable product in some caves or mines, but no such thing has ever happened, and it will never happen. Nature does not know how to make the secret solvent or the Stone. The amount of coincidences that would have to happen for the right materials, the right proportions and the right treatments to occur in a natural setting are simply astronomical. You have better chances of winning the lottery than for the right conditions to be met in nature for it to be able to make the secret solvent and the Stone. These things are the product of man's intelligent and intentional industry. All that nature can do is provide raw matters.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by pierre View Post
    I'll ask you this with a lot of respect JDP and I'll give this topic over for my part, I do not want to bore anyone with my crazy thoughts, but... have you ever considered that there may be a way that nothing is necessary to dissolve...?
    No, because if that was the case then alchemy would have ceased to be a "mystery", or a "dream", or a "delusion" for most of humanity a long time ago. All that would require is for you to be a bit lucky and stumble upon this mythological matter somewhere in nature. But it's just not going to happen. The reason why alchemy is pretty difficult to discover is precisely because it is not as simple as just finding some substance already made somewhere and just "cooking" it inside a flask. This in fact takes us back to that whole "one matter only, one vessel only, one furnace only" nonsense trap, which unfortunately tormented and ruined a lot of seekers who spent the rest of their lives searching for such a substance somewhere in nature. Too bad it does not exist. YOU have to make this "one substance", and you do so by working on a secret combination of several materials, which materials nature can provide for you. Nature will not do the mixing and treatments for you, though. It can't. It doesn't know how. Nature does not "think", it just "does" what it "does" and it just "is" what it "is". Only man can figure this out. It requires intelligence and purposeful design.
    Last edited by JDP; 04-13-2017 at 07:46 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bridger Mountains
    Posts
    1,798
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    How can such a thing possibly exist already made somewhere in nature and yet NOBODY has ever noticed it???
    Cause have you like, even seen the new episode of New Girl?!? It's like, totally OMG!
    Art is Nature in the flask; Nature is a vial thing.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    745
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwellings View Post
    I think you need to consider alternative viewpoints.

    What if nature already gives everything you need in a package, kind of like a cake mix?

    IT DOES!

    The Artist needs to prepare his starting Matter. Which, for all intents and purposes, is "already found" out "in Nature" just raw. Raw meaning that we must prepare this incredible Matter in order to produce the results we seek...

    Honestly, I am under the impression JDP & I are fundamentally in agreement with each other, but semantics is what is impedes us from openly agreeing with each others' statements.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    1,153
    Quote Originally Posted by pierre View Post
    Time will tell, Illen... time will tell.
    Don't stray the course...

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    7,845
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiorionis View Post
    Cause have you like, even seen the new episode of New Girl?!? It's like, totally OMG!
    I know, totally rad. Epic to the max Bro.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    It doesn't know how. Nature does not "think", it just "does" what it "does" and it just "is" what it "is".
    You clearly are not following the scientific advancements that are happening on a daily basis. Although I agree that Nature does not "think", because that is a pretty "low" concept that usually only humans entertain. However Nature is more conscious that you think. And this is not some New Age mumbo-jumbo... as we speak our knowledge of evolution is about to change. It is not "survival of the fittest", rather "survival of the most fit to co-operate". And now I am quoting NASA hardcore scientists by the way. Nature is conscious. The universe is built on energy. Only "fools" call it magic. Those that know and understand call it normal.

    Donít let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmuldvich View Post
    IT DOES!

    The Artist needs to prepare his starting Matter. Which, for all intents and purposes, is "already found" out "in Nature" just raw. Raw meaning that we must prepare this incredible Matter in order to produce the results we seek...

    Honestly, I am under the impression JDP & I are fundamentally in agreement with each other, but semantics is what is impedes us from openly agreeing with each others' statements.
    I think it's more like a problem of basic arithmetic: I don't understand how can you agree with the "one matter only" claim when in fact that "one matter only" is actually made from the interaction between several substances, and many of the more honest alchemists, including the above cited Fulcanelli, openly admit it without any problem. It is therefore not really "one matter only". For the "one matter only" claim to be 100% true all you would have to do is pick up "one matter only", what the claim literally says, and then work on it BY ITSELF, NOTHING ELSE ADDED TO IT. Now you tell me how in blazes can you possibly prepare the secret solvent from "one matter only" because the only thing you can do to that "one matter only" is heat it by itself inside a flask, there is nothing else you can do to it, if you add ANYTHING to it (even something like moisture from the air, A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G-!) then the claim is no longer true and it is obviously misleading, because you would in fact be working with more than "one matter only". So there is no way that this is going to happen. No single natural substance heated by itself, nothing else added to it in any way, shape or form, will EVER show you all the phenomena described by the alchemists. For centuries countless seekers who fell for this trap took all sorts of minerals, or plant or animal derived products by themselves, without mixing them with any other, and proceeded to distill and/or digest them. Of course, none found anything of what the alchemists described. The reason is simple: the "one matter only" they spoke about is really an artificial concoction (what the above cited Fulcanelli calls the "Philosophical Mercury") made by the alchemist himself, and he does this by making several carefully selected matters in the right proportions interact with each other (yes, "reactions", folks, without them NOTHING happens), first to produce the secret solvent, and then to produce the "sulphur" or "earth" that will be joined to it "radically" to form the Stone/Elixir, and not something they fortunately and very conveniently found "somewhere" already made for them by nature ready to be "cooked" up into the Stone.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by dev View Post
    I know, totally rad. Epic to the max Bro.



    You clearly are not following the scientific advancements that are happening on a daily basis. Although I agree that Nature does not "think", because that is a pretty "low" concept that usually only humans entertain. However Nature is more conscious that you think. And this is not some New Age mumbo-jumbo... as we speak our knowledge of evolution is about to change. It is not "survival of the fittest", rather "survival of the most fit to co-operate". And now I am quoting NASA hardcore scientists by the way. Nature is conscious. The universe is built on energy. Only "fools" call it magic. Those that know and understand call it normal.

    I guess that next you will be telling us about how rocks have "feelings" too, and how they are master chess players as well

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,651
    Blog Entries
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    I guess that next you will be telling us about how rocks have "feelings" too, and how they are master chess players as well
    Vegetable, animal, and mineral species are (hermetically speaking) different emulations from an unspecified Prima Materia. If we refer to spiritual alchemy, we would consider this Prima Materia to be consciousness itself.

    The four elements, while in laboratory work, refer to state changes of matter, when refering to spiritual alchemy, we think in terms of state changes in conciousness.

    Fire being the higher self or spiritual properties of the mind
    Air being the intellectual properties
    Water being the emotional properties
    Earth being the properties of sensation

    Do rocks have a water element? Therefore....
    Join me; on a voyage of stupidity, and self discovery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=vccZSHroTG4

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bridger Mountains
    Posts
    1,798
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by elixirmixer View Post
    Fire being the higher self or spiritual properties of the mind
    Air being the intellectual properties
    I have also heard these two as being switched around. That the Air principle is the higher self and/or spiritual properties of the mind, and the Fire principle is the intellectual properties or 'light of the mind'.

    The curious thing, and something I think you might be interested in, EM, is that Hollandus says something about how Fire and Air are inseparable.

    Is this what the "solvent" targets?
    Last edited by Kiorionis; 04-14-2017 at 02:06 AM.
    Art is Nature in the flask; Nature is a vial thing.

+ 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