Apech

Not you too, traitor!

Gosh

ok

ok? Just ok? is that a no ok or a yes ok? or an ok ok? or a perhaps ok?

But dependent origination is predicated on ignorance -not seeing things they really are precipitates the 12 point chain leading to birth , death and suffering. It is not really a statement about being as such. While Samkhya and related schools do ask the question what is the nature of being and come up with a solution.

Yes what if? Prana and citta come back into the frame with Tantra. So … what are we to make of this?

Reverse side - first part. (O) my heart of my mother [2 times], (O) my heart while I existed [C3] upon earth, do not stand against me as a witness, do not oppose me in [C4] in the tribunal, do not be hostile against me in the presence of the Great God, Lord of the West. [C5] Although I have united (myself) to the land (i.e. died) to the great western side of Heaven, may I flourish upon earth!" Some slight elements of mistranslation here but not too bad, I think. It starts by saying 'My heart, my mother' twice for emphasis. It is not saying 'heart of my mother' which makes no sense anyway - why would he have his mother's heart? Gross! He is addressing his heart as his 'mother'. So why? The heart, (ab), is the psycho-spiritual centre of a person. It is their mind, their volition and character. The heart is seen as issuing commands to the rest of the body, the limbs to move, the tongue to speak and so on. So while we moderns think of the brain as the centre of function for the Egyptians it was the heart. So in this sense it is volition. It is our mother because it makes us who we are. It determines our character, our likes and dislikes, things we hold dear, things we hate and so on. This makes sense really because we are gestated and born from our mothers, we rely on them to give us our physical body and even more than this it is recognised that when we are born, our pristine sterile foetus is covered in the birth canal with all the micro-organisms, gut bacteria and so on which we need to survive. Also in our childhood it is our mother who protects, guides and embraces us in our early years. So there is a lot to us beyond our conscious mind. A whole load of inherited 'stuff'. Then it says 'my heart when I existed on earth' i.e. in the land of the living. Here the word for heart is not 'ab' but 'h3ty' which means literally 'that which is in front (of our chests)' i.e. the physical heart. So the ab heart was our physical heart in life but lives on as a spiritual entity after death. In some versions of this Spell it says 'my heart through all my kheperu' i.e. through all my phases of being, or stages of life. Which indicates that it is the heart/mind which gives us continuity through life (or even lives?). Then the text goes on to talk about the famous Judgement Scene where the heart is weighed against the feather of ma'at. And it asks the heart not to speak against him at this time before the tribunal (or the 42 assessors who act as judges). So if the ab-heart is your mind (in effect) why would it speak against you? For speaking against you leads to the dreaded 'second death' of final extinction. This seems odd doesn't it? The only answer as far as I can see, is that the heart/mind was understood to include all the subconscious mood, feelings, memories, thoughts and so on which we have. All the baggage which we carry with us. As we live we hope that we have done good things but to be honest the picture is mixed isn't it. We have a conscience with which we need to be reconciled. There was a close association between the heart and the tongue. The heart was said to think about what to do and then issue instructions through the tongue. So the voice, what is spoken reflects what is in the heart. This is why those that get through the judgement are called 'true of voice' which is usually translated as justified. Although I have united (myself) to the land (i.e. died) to the great western side of Heaven, may I flourish upon earth! Or better 'United with the ground and under the great Western sky, I flourish on earth.' This is the aspiration to live after death. Both united with the ground and the West are images of being dead.

Buddhism is a bit unusual as it doesn’t really have an ontology. In most other systems there are subtle substances , for instance citta in Samkhya and yoga philosophy. All three of the three treasures are subtle substances, jing being the most condensed form of qi above the physical.

Welcome.

Sorry but no they don’t.

Does it? please explain.

Yes I try to just let the text speak for itself without much in the way of my own or modern narrative. I just find it works better this way. I think someone like Crowley who was creating his own system (inspired in this case by Egypt) placed things within his own understanding - even creating new terms like Hadit and so on. I think this is perfectly valid if you have a high level of realization (which I don't). So I tend to be cautious. The Shadow is clearly very important to the Egyptians but while a lot is written about the Ba and the Ka, even though the shade or shadow turns up in all the underworld literature there is very little in the way of explanation. So I have to rely on insight and intuition. However I did find one interesting thing. In the Tomb of Ay (I think) the four entities, the Ka, the Ba, the heart and the Shadow are shown being held by the four Sons of Horus. So there is a correspondence there. And I am confident of a correspondence between the Sons of Horus and the four elements of Hermetic thought. This would suggest that the heart/body is related the Earth, the Ka to Water, the Ba to Fire and the Shadow to Air. Which fits with shwty (shadow) and Shu god of air. So I am leaning to consider the Shadow as a conceptual body or mental body perhaps. Yes. Although the Egyptians had a very idiosyncratic view of the solar cycle. I think they would have expressed this as East - West, East - West again. Midnight and midday would be when North and South conjoined (like the uniting of heaven and earth). The midnight practice would have been the union of Osiris and Ra (Khepri) and the noon would be the winged disk. I used to do a daily dawn and sunset practice. Perhaps what happens at midnight is about deep dreamless sleep. Passing through doorways is a key Egyptian concept both in the Dwat and for entering and exiting the dwat and the horizons. Absolutely yes. I wish I could do it! That's interesting. Like avoiding the second death as the Egyptians would have it. In fact the text on the reverse Spell 30b will address this in part perhaps.

Not really it’s just that ‘science’ doesn’t allow for anything other than the gross physical and is therefore limited.

Substance in the real meaning of the term.

The MCO is part of Neidan.

Guilty as charged

In traditional Chinese philosophy, qi can be interpreted as a kind of substance in this metaphysical meaning—though it’s not a perfect fit with Western categories, and Chinese thought often prioritizes process over static being. Here’s a structured breakdown: Underlying Role of Qi: Qi is the foundational “stuff” or dynamic substrate that underlies all manifestations in the cosmos. In the Huainanzi (2nd century BCE compilation of Daoist and cosmopolitan ideas), qi is the primordial medium from which heaven, earth, and the myriad things (wanwu) emerge and to which they return. It “stands beneath” appearances by animating forms: mountains, rivers, human bodies, and even thoughts are temporary coagulations or patterns within the flow of qi. Before form (xing), there is qi; it condenses into matter (like yin-qi forming solids) and disperses into ether (yang-qi as vaporous energy). This makes it the persistent ground for change—e.g., a tree’s growth, decay, and rebirth are shifts in qi’s configurations, not illusions atop a void. Comparison to Western Substances: Aristotelian Parallel: Aristotle saw substance as primary being (prote ousia), with matter (hylē) as the indeterminate substrate shaped by form (eidos). Qi echoes this as a proto-material force: in neo-Confucianism (e.g., Zhang Zai’s Correcting Youthful Ignorance, 11th century), qi is the “Great Void” (taixu) that isn’t empty but filled with this subtle substrate. It’s what endures beneath accidental changes—like how a statue’s bronze persists while its shape alters. Vs. Cartesian or Lockean Views: Unlike Descartes’ res extensa (extended substance) or Locke’s primary qualities (solid, impenetrable stuff), qi isn’t rigidly material or dualistic. It’s more fluid, akin to Spinoza’s single substance (Deus sive Natura) where attributes (like energy flows) express an underlying unity. Qi “stands beneath” by being the monistic principle: all dualities (yin-yang) arise from its movements. Evidence from Chinese Texts: In the Yellow Emperor’s Inner Classic (Huangdi Neijing), qi is the root of life: “When qi gathers, there is life; when it scatters, there is death.” It underlies physiological appearances (symptoms, pulses) as the invisible essence—much like how Kant’s noumenon underlies phenomena, though qi is immanent (within the world) rather than transcendental. Daoist alchemy (neidan) treats qi as the “original breath” (yuanqi), the substratum refined through practices to reveal immortality. It’s not superficial energy but the hypostatic ground of being. Limitations and Nuances: Process Over Static Substance: Chinese ontology (e.g., in the Yijing or Book of Changes) emphasizes transformation (bianhua) via qi, not eternal unchanging substrates like Plato’s Forms or Aristotle’s unmoved mover. Qi itself transforms, so it’s a “substance-in-flux”—more Heraclitean (everything flows) than Parmenidean (being is one and unchanging). Calling it a pure substance might Westernize it too much; it’s often paired with li (pattern/principle) in Song dynasty thought, where li is the “what” and qi the “how.

qi is a substance in this sense

So .... anyway ... the next interesting part of the text is this: "make the path of the Ba, the Akh, and the Shadow, for I am equipped so that (I) might shine therein [B4] (as) an equipped-one. Make for me the path to the place in which Re, Atum, Khepri,[11] and Hathor are therein." We've already talked about the Ba and the akh. But here they include the Shadow (shwty). When the Ba goes to the East it is accompanied by the Shadow. Although the Shadow cannot fly as the Ba does. Usually the Shadow is shown as a black silhouette in the shape of the person. So it is an entity which has form but no substance. In a way it is the reflex of the ba which is luminous, an entity of pure form, an entity of air and not light/fire. Then the text talks about four gods. Here these gods represent four cycles or stages which are outlines in the Book of the Dead. 1. The path of Re (Ra) is a path of seeing - of seeing the sunrise and realising one's identity with the sun. 2. The path of Atum where you absorb the qualities of the sun into yourself back to the primordial substance of your being. 3. The path of Khepri where you perform transformations to universalize your understanding 4. The path of Hathor where you reside in perfect joy/bliss of 'unity'.

Depends what you mean by real I suppose. why do you put the three treasures in the past ?

gas is a phase of matter , but yes oxygen is a substance - what point are you making?

Substance literally means what stands under ... so for instance the substance of a table might be wood. So the wood is more 'basic' or underlying in the sense that if there were no wood there would be no table (provided it is a wooden one). In the case of internal alchemy the substance(s) are what lies behind appearance. The deeper you go the more 'real' you get ... in the sense of being without dependence on anything beneath. I think the question 'is the MCO real' is the wrong one. It would be better to ask 'does it work?' or 'what does it do?' or perhaps 'how do you make it work' but this question gives rise to the general question 'can you make it work or does it just happen'. Most if not all energy exercises/techniques or practices simply replicate intentionally things that happen naturally. So a certain breathing practice if done with conscious will simply replicates something that would arise naturally if the circumstances arise. For instance vase breathing, abdominal breathing, embryonic breathing and so on are all like this (in my experience). I would put the MCO in the same category. The danger in practicing without first achieving deep meditational states is that you replace the genuine cycling of energy with an imagined substitute which does not and cannot hit the spot so to speak. But equally you have to gain some familiarity with the subtle body and its workings in order to progress and so as you absorb intellectually the principles of the working of the subtle body this in itself stimulates it into action.

I’m no bible scholar and would like to know what this means.

Sorry to hear about your father my thoughts and prayers are with you.

Hi and welcome