Magical Madness

[Nungali]

thank you all for your input.

 

Maybe you could also help me find a starting point for my studies of alchemy? a text you recommend a commentary to a text, an essay, book? Again with an emphasis on alchemical psychology or spiritual transmutation ( I got Jungs "Secrets of the golden flower" thats not a western source text but I think still very interessting read)

 

 

You probably already know, but sometimes it is so obvious it is missed ;

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/alc/emerald.htm

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Thank you for the generosity of your detailed response. I was pressed for time yesterday and don't have much to spare today.  In my previous post:
 

Yes, the Western concept of Tantra is very limited and most Westerners would be surprised to learn that the earlier pre-Tibetan forms of "Tantra", such as represented by Shingon, have nothing to do with sex at all, but all of that is a complex subject, too complex to get into here.

 
I cited Shingon as a ready example of an earlier pre-Tibetan form of "Esoteric Buddhism" that while it originated in India it traveled through China, was well established in Japan by the time Buddhism was being introduced into Tibet.
 

and my understanding of pre Buddhist Tantra or the origins of tantra are somewhat different (I think). I met Bettina Bäumler a scholar of Kashmir Shivaism and indian Tantra and its history some years ago, we were waiting in line to meet H.H. Karmapa.

she told me her research of Tantra showed that there was Tantra as an own movement for a very long time before it became Hindu or Buddhist.
She also told me how many siddhas seem to appear in both lineages. Two examples: Goraknath the great siddha and origin of the Nath tradition of Shivaism is also one of the 84 buddhist mahasiddhas of India. On the otherhand also Tilopa the origin of the Tibetan Buddhist Kagyu Lineages seems to be part of the Hindu lineage of Tantra

 
Ancient religious uses of sex are well known:

Sacred Sex and Temple Prostitution
 
Why call them Tantra?  Tantra was originally a term which meant a category of scripture with a wide subject matter, but was misused by Nineteenth Century Western Scholars as a term for a certain type of teaching and practice, those which were explicitly sexual, whether symbolically or actually, in nature.  To call ancient religious sexuality "tantric" simply projects this mistake into the past.  You could call them proto-tantric if you want, as something that contributes the ultimate synthesis, and its mistaken interpretation by Western Scholars, but they need to be studied and understood on their own terms, and then they can be studied as to how they were assimilated into Hindu and Buddhist "Tantra".
 
Returning to Shingon:
 

Now Shingon I always thought of as the Japanese interpretation of Indian Tantric Buddhism. I also remember reading that Shingon only uses the outer Tantras (mostly connected with outer and inner rites of purification)

what means outer tantras?
the Nyigma tradtition (that I am most fimiliar with) talks about 9 Yanas

now as far as I know shingon only holds the lineages for the outer tantras - hence no sexual yogas (those are part of the Anuyoga system - just a very small part)

 

This is all very nice, but it is also Nyingma-centric and all sects portray themselves as the highest and best.  I have seen this attitude too many times to take any one of them seriously.  How do you suppose Shingon masters categorize all these later scriptures?  How do you analyze and compare the claims of different religions and sects within them?  This is a question about which I started thinking in my teens, a long time ago.

 

As I said this is an issue far too complex for development here and I don't want to put much more time into it here or now.

[RigdzinTrinley]

R T , how would you define 'tantra' generally then , as a term ? I thought the literal interpretation of the word was 'text' ?

 

I use the term generally to define a system that utilizes various complexities and stimulus - in short , magical technology; color, sound, movement, regalia, implements, rites and ritual, etc. as opposed to an 'austere' or 'bare' system that seems to aim at 'pure consciousness' - 'without the trappings' - One example is in Japan , Shinto seems like the first and some forms of Zen the second. I am not sure where I picked up this concept from ? regardless, I have long held the view that 'tantra' is a system that is much wider in scope than the 'sexuality' that modern fascination seems to have attached to it.

Yes Tantra usually refers to a set of texts that are said to be transmitted in a divine way - mahasiddhas have contact with certain aspects of the enlighten mind or are directed to a place where they find tantric teachings hidden by great adepts, dakinis, or shiva himself (the shiva scriptures of vasugupta f.e.)

 

the tibetan word for thos scriptures is gyü (rgyud) that means in this context continuum - and points to the fact that nowness awerness is already enlightened and has been since the beginningless beginning... or something like that

 

for example you have the GyüLama (Sanskrit: UttaraTantra; English: the sublime Continuum) transmitted to Asanga in a serious of encounters he had with the next Buddha Meitreya while he was receiving teachings from him in the Buddhafield of Tushita

 

I also feel that tantric procedures are magical in nature and inner alchemy - the only major difference is the motivation of Bodhicitta

thats more or less the only thing that really distinguishes shaktism / shivaism and buddhist tantra (they even share many deities and rites and emblems, mantras etc)

 

thats why I came here I felt I can learn more about the similarities of the western hermetic tradition and eastern tantra

 

the focus on only this one tiny method (sexual yoga) out of almost infinite ways to discover that everything is divine is unfortunate yes

 

and I reply a bit later to Zhongyongdaoist (I need some more chai first)- just for now, I do not think that the nyigma classification is the ultimate way of writing a list of buddhist vehicles, its one - and tibetan buddhists (escpecially the tibetans themselves, believe it or not) are incredibly in love with their lists, language, tradtition etc. I made some lamas laugh about that fact by telling them that from my time with tibetans I learned that the basic attitude of many tibetans(lamas included) seems to be something like: "we are the best human beings on this planet, and our religion is better then all others - we don't have to discuss this either, because its obviously true!"

 

one favourit quote from the local tailor "all religions are good, but ours is just a bit better"

or from one of my tibetan language tutors "you know why you have a cold? you speak too much english - if you would only speak tibetan you wouldn´t be sick so often"

 

too funny those people

 

I will defenitely check out the books you mentioned - thank you, I also found some introductory writings on the websites that Michael (Servus Michael ) shared.

Edited October 14, 2015 by RigdzinTrinley

[FraterUFA]

In short - which books or essays would you recommend to go a bit deeper into western alchemy (I'm not interested in tinctures and herb extracts, but psychological and spiritual alchemy)

 

The difficulty with this statement is that the extracts of plants and metals are a fundamental part of alchemy. It is like saying that you want to study Christianity but don't aren't interested in Christ.

 

UFA

[Nungali]

...

 

I also feel that tantric procedures are magical in nature and inner alchemy - the only major difference is the motivation of Bodhicitta

thats more or less the only thing that really distinguishes shaktism / shivaism and buddhist tantra (they even share many deities and rites and emblems, mantras etc)

 

I have noticed a great similarity ....  in my limited perspective ... but then I tend to do that; seek what is common in divergent systems. 

 

 

 

thats why I came here I felt I can learn more about the similarities of the western hermetic tradition and eastern tantra

 

Going back to the sexual aspect, there is also a large tradition of this within context of the western 'magical'  tradition  ( I hesitate to use the modern  term 'Sex Magic' ) ... I would not recommend many modern books on that, but there is a wealth of interesting though 'rare and obscure' material before the flood of stuff that seemed to have come on the tail of the Crowley and the 'eastern invasion'  during the 70's .  ( Ida Craddock , P.B. Randolph, The brotherhood of Eluis , etc . )

 

 

http://www.idacraddock.com/intro.html

 

http://hermetic.com/sabazius/randolph.htm

 

( In the strange world of  Cowboy Western Platonists, meet table rapping spiritualists, meet post Victorian 'sex magicians'    )

 

https://newtopiamagazine.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/thomas-johnson-platonism-meets-sex-magic-on-the-prairie/

 

 

 

 

 

 

the focus on only this one tiny method (sexual yoga) out of almost infinite ways to discover that everything is divine is unfortunate yes

 

The original aim of magical sexual practice ( as above - in the west ) was entirely different ... originally it was to help create a happy healthy family with 'spiritual' children, bought into this world with magical intention . 

 

(That has to be better than accidentally getting pregnant { or getting someone pregnant }  after drinking too much and having sex in front of a blaring TV    ) 

 

 

 

 

and I reply a bit later to Zhongyongdaoist (I need some more chai first)- just for now, I do not think that the nyigma classification is the ultimate way of writing a list of buddhist vehicles, its one - and tibetan buddhists (escpecially the tibetans themselves, believe it or not) are incredibly in love with their lists, language, tradtition etc. I made some lamas laugh about that fact by telling them that from my time with tibetans I learned that the basic attitude of many tibetans(lamas included) seems to be something like: "we are the best human beings on this planet, and our religion is better then all others - we don't have to discuss this either, because its obviously true!" 

 

I got ... why study western occultism ?  It all comes from Blavatsky and she learnt off lamas ... just go straight to them ... cut out all this mistaken middle stuff   

 

 

 

one favourit quote from the local tailor "all religions are good, but ours is just a bit better"

or from one of my tibetan language tutors "you know why you have a cold? you speak too much english - if you would only speak tibetan you wouldn´t be sick so often"

 

too funny those people

 

I will defenitely check out the books you mentioned - thank you, I also found some introductory writings on the websites that Michael (Servus Michael ) shared.

 

One dynamic I found , I got on heaps better with the few visiting monks or lamas I have run into than with their followers.

 

Back to  tantra being magical, I noticed that many of my western magical implements have eastern counterparts .... especially when considering the whole range of western ones ,  as in an evocative rite.  I was talking about this to some 'high up' Buddhists  that run a center here and were waiting for the arrival of an important lama.  I was talking about the use of the 'magical dagger' and comparing it to a phurba (which they were not sure about ) but they had a dorje on the altar . I said; well, what do you use that for ?

 

They seemed horrified at the suggestion ... non of them use it !  It just sits there as a symbol. Lama may take it up and use it 'a bit '. 

 

What when he uses it a 'lot' in 'magical operation'.   That was high lama business, they said and didnt concern them  ... nor me   < looks down nose at me >

 

"Really ? Its somewhat the opposite in western magic ... the practitioner uses the tools straight off , sometimes, the first practice is to make or acquire the first basic 4. " ... more horrified looks ... whatever. 

 

The the lama arrived, we all did our things, latter I had the same conversation with the lama over tea and bikkies.  He didnt mind at all, and seemed to find the conversation and comparisons interesting, at times he noticed a difference, or corrected me on a Tibetan  ritual implement usage. The followers seemed shitty about that. 

 

Another time - this time the lama came to our place, he really gave them a serve !     ( I am not sure the followers noticed )  At the end I asked him questions, we talked, laughed a bit, he was a great guy.

 

Later, some followers approached me a bit pissed off and said I was far to casual with him, I should have been more respectful ... mhe , Lama didnt seem to mind at all ... he seemed to like jokes and laughing. 

[Nungali]

...

 

Nungali, I am curious for your take (and others can chime in here as well if they please) on the interest in life extension that took place in Leary, and some of those who followed the path he marked. I mention this because the focus also took place during Regardie's lifetime, but I never saw much in the way of commentary from him about his feelings on the matter. In some ways, I have seen death as both a motivator and a definer of one's accomplishments. If there is no end, there is no reason to confront procrastination or entropy. There is always time to "do it later".

 

 

Smile ?   [ S M I² L E    ]   - its been a while since I got into that . I tend to get more into the Exo-psychology side. 

 

I personally dont buy the SM ( Sapce migration ) but  I do buy I²  ( intelligence increase)  ... the life extension ... to  a degree  but not to the extent at all where R A Wilson ( a proponent of SMILE ) had his murdered daughters head frozen (thats all they could afford ) in hope of a future 'resurrection science' . 

 

My own view has become '  indigenously   shamanic '  ;  when I die I go back to earth .  Even the doctor picked it up in me ( "I can put you on medication for it, but it will make you feel like crap and will only extend your life for a few years .... in a hospital bed. You seem like the type that wont want that, and when the time comes, just wander off into the bush. " )

 

He sure read me right !  I am no immortalist .

 

As far  as Leary's own life extension goes .... I will leave that up to the individual to decide.

 

Curious ... as he was dead ... while he was still alive   

 

 

[Nungali]

The difficulty with this statement is that the extracts of plants and metals are a fundamental part of alchemy. It is like saying that you want to study Christianity but don't aren't interested in Christ.

 

UFA

 

Yes, but, as valuable as it is, this is your opinion ... many people see and focus more on a  magical psychological spiritual side of alchemy. As you probably know, I use it for agriculture .  There it definitely uses 'extracts of plants' but the extract is done by an entirely different and ( to some ) 'non alchemical' process, and avoids the use of metals. 

 

I know some will  find that fascinating and other will rail against that as not alchemy at all ( in their opinion ) 

 

IMO the alchemical use of plants and metals is but one way of showing, defining and experimenting with an alchemical process ....  it is the process that is important and that can be used and interpreted  in a variety of ways. 

[RigdzinTrinley]

reading about Ida and her views and realisations made me smile - thanks for that connection. I read "the mass psychology of fascism" by reich recently and I'm sure that as I read more of Ida (and that I want to do) I will find that she and reich are very similar beings and did similar work for society

 

isn't Ida the name of one of the channels? Ida, Sushumna, Pingala no?

 

those two discovered something very important but different from what the indian siddhas discovered and transmitted (maybe Ida was more on their gig then Willi was)

 

I just say this much: no need for a partner in any of their practices and the desired goal is to be free of any sexual desire and desire in general

 

so its not about 10h of sexual intercourse or malemultiorgasms etc. etc. thats modern neo tantra - nothing wrong with that in my opinion either, healthy sexuality is important (for the non siddha)

 

anyway what the siddhas thought

is about freedom from desire (attachment) - good ol' Buddhism after all

Edited October 15, 2015 by RigdzinTrinley

[noonespecial]

Yes, but, as valuable as it is, this is your opinion ... many people see and focus more on a  magical psychological spiritual side of alchemy. As you probably know, I use it for agriculture .  There it definitely uses 'extracts of plants' but the extract is done by an entirely different and ( to some ) 'non alchemical' process, and avoids the use of metals. 

 

I know some will  find that fascinating and other will rail against that as not alchemy at all ( in their opinion ) 

 

IMO the alchemical use of plants and metals is but one way of showing, defining and experimenting with an alchemical process ....  it is the process that is important and that can be used and interpreted  in a variety of ways. 

 

Got me to thinking how some of the earlier forms of hip-hop and electronic music were 100% the result of an alchemical process, separating the samples from a diverse group of older songs, a horn from here, a snare from here, kick drum, melody, a bassline from here, purification, eq'ing the samples, filtering the shit parts, editing and arranging them, removing the dross, the boring parts, coagulating, bringing them back together for a new better song even unrecognizable from the original material in some of the more masterful work, final mixing, mastering and arrangement - now we have a song that could possibly even cause the chills, a direct psycho-somatic effect upon listening, the auditory equivalent of ingesting an elixir. 

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Warning:

The following post is in dubious taste and may not be suitable for all Dao Bums, reader discretion is advised.

 

 

So . . .

 

. . . R A Wilson ( a proponent of SMILE ) had his murdered daughters head frozen (thats all they could afford ) in hope of a future 'resurrection science' .

Robert Anton Wilson had his daughter's head frozen. All of sudden this fabulous piece of satire makes much more sense to me:



The Head Museum

Matt Groening is such a bad boy, ya just gotta love him. (Sorry about the horrible English there, but sometimes, ya just gotta use it.)

Of course it could just be a coincidence, and not a deeply revelatory synchronicity.

Note to self: File under Pseudo-Scientific Madness.

[Michael Sternbach]

Yes, but, as valuable as it is, this is your opinion ... many people see and focus more on a magical psychological spiritual side of alchemy. As you probably know, I use it for agriculture . There it definitely uses 'extracts of plants' but the extract is done by an entirely different and ( to some ) 'non alchemical' process, and avoids the use of metals.

 

I know some will find that fascinating and other will rail against that as not alchemy at all ( in their opinion )

 

IMO the alchemical use of plants and metals is but one way of showing, defining and experimenting with an alchemical process .... it is the process that is important and that can be used and interpreted in a variety of ways.

Well said.

 

There is actually a rich tradition of using the alchemical symbolism (!) for representing psychospiritual conditions - it didn't start with Jung. You find this examplified in such illustrious proponents of the art like Michael Maier and Thomas Vaughn. Even a mystic like Jacob Boehme was freely using Alchemical symbolism.

 

Personally, I emphasize the importance of laboratory Alchemy, but I fully recognize that the language of Alchemy often describes psychological processes that are occuring in parallel with, and potentially independently from what is happening in the lab. The latter in turn is meant to reflect but the working of Nature on a microcosmic level. Thus Alchemy and its symbolical language are nothing less than universal.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

[Michael Sternbach]

Got me to thinking how some of the earlier forms of hip-hop and electronic music were 100% the result of an alchemical process, separating the samples from a diverse group of older songs, a horn from here, a snare from here, kick drum, melody, a bassline from here, purification, eq'ing the samples, filtering the shit parts, editing and arranging them, removing the dross, the boring parts, coagulating, bringing them back together for a new better song even unrecognizable from the original material in some of the more masterful work, final mixing, mastering and arrangement - now we have a song that could possibly even cause the chills, a direct psycho-somatic effect upon listening, the auditory equivalent of ingesting an elixir.

What you described is an Alchemical process by itself, if we don't stick to the letter.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

[FraterUFA]

Yes, but, as valuable as it is, this is your opinion ... many people see and focus more on a  magical psychological spiritual side of alchemy.

 

It is my opinion, but it is backed up by centuries of alchemical texts which on the whole are overwhelmingly referring to physical processes, not psychological or spiritual (though not devoid of those things either). This modern, singularly spiritual interpretation began with Atwood and other authors, a consequence (I believe) of alchemy's displacement by chemistry and the parallel development of the scientific method.

 

Michael refers to Boehme as being a counter-example of this. I have studied Boehme and he was not an alchemist. He was a Christian mystic who overlaid his mystical practices on the teachings of the alchemists. Though he claimed he knew how to make the Philosopher's Stone, he also basically said that "he hadn't gotten around to it yet". We have heard that same refrain countless times from armchair alchemists throughout the ages.

 

Indeed, the vast majority of alchemical texts are entirely incomprehensible in the lens of a purely spiritual interpretation. This has been exhaustively demonstrated by AE Waite and other authors, including modern academics, who have demolished the purely "spiritual interpretation" of alchemy. 

 

But before anyone goes misinterpreting my words, let me state explicitly that there is a very deep spiritual aspect to alchemy.

 

As you probably know, I use it for agriculture .  There it definitely uses 'extracts of plants' but the extract is done by an entirely different and ( to some ) 'non alchemical' process, and avoids the use of metals. 

 

If you're extracting from plants, then it actually doesn't avoid the use of metal. Plants are made in no small part of metal: Potassium.

 

Interestingly, humans are made of another: Sodium (as well as potassium, iron, copper and others).

 

Puts the whole "metals" thing in a whole new light, doesn't it? 

 

I know some will  find that fascinating and other will rail against that as not alchemy at all ( in their opinion ) 

 

It sounds more like spagyrics to me. That doesn't make it any less useful, but my interpretation of what alchemy is much stricter than what is loosely thrown around today. 

 

IMO the alchemical use of plants and metals is but one way of showing, defining and experimenting with an alchemical process ....  it is the process that is important and that can be used and interpreted  in a variety of ways. 

 

I think few people here (Michael Sternbach and Kio maybe excepted) have an appreciation for what alchemy truly entails. It is not a matter of simple spagyrics, which is content to separate three things, call them "principles" and mix them back together. Alchemy requires the complete separation of the three principles, their purification - both inner and outer - and then enlists nature to put them back together in accordance with her laws. The outcome is not more of the same, it is an entirely new, often unrecognizable substance with unusual properties, such as salts that can evaporate or float in mid-air.

 

These principles are only purified when they are considered "homogeneous"... that is, they cannot be divided into discrete substances. Such an operation entails the elimination of all corruptible elements and requires the death of the living system in its natural form. If a true alchemical operation were performed on a garden, that garden would no longer exist as corruptible, earthly plant life. The very thing which made it a living organism (the Binary) would have been reduced to a nearly imperceptible state, rendering it a close approximation of an eternal substance in material form.

 

I like gardens. They are pretty. I don't think we should do alchemy to them. :-)

 

Anyway, everyone is free to believe what they like. I comment only from the perspective as a working lab alchemist.

 

Best,

UFA

[FraterUFA]

There is actually a rich tradition of using the alchemical symbolism (!) for representing psychospiritual conditions - it didn't start with Jung. You find this examplified in such illustrious proponents of the art like Michael Maier and Thomas Vaughn. Even a mystic like Jacob Boehme was freely using Alchemical symbolism.

 

I can't say when it comes to Thomash Vaughn as I haven't studied him as much as others. Michael Maier's works are very subtle but they do refer to actual lab processes, as far as I have been able to determine.

 

Best,

UFA

[Nungali]

It is my opinion, but it is backed up by centuries of alchemical texts which on the whole are overwhelmingly referring to physical processes, not psychological or spiritual (though not devoid of those things either). This modern, singularly spiritual interpretation began with Atwood and other authors, a consequence (I believe) of alchemy's displacement by chemistry and the parallel development of the scientific method.

 

Michael refers to Boehme as being a counter-example of this. I have studied Boehme and he was not an alchemist. He was a Christian mystic who overlaid his mystical practices on the teachings of the alchemists. Though he claimed he knew how to make the Philosopher's Stone, he also basically said that "he hadn't gotten around to it yet". We have heard that same refrain countless times from armchair alchemists throughout the ages.

 

Indeed, the vast majority of alchemical texts are entirely incomprehensible in the lens of a purely spiritual interpretation. This has been exhaustively demonstrated by AE Waite and other authors, including modern academics, who have demolished the purely "spiritual interpretation" of alchemy. 

 

But before anyone goes misinterpreting my words, let me state explicitly that there is a very deep spiritual aspect to alchemy.

 

yes, and I will add that what I consider alchemy is not purely spiritual . For me, it has to have a practical and beneficial outcome (.as I consider even 'purely spiritual' systems should as well.

 

If you're extracting from plants, then it actually doesn't avoid the use of metal. Plants are made in no small part of metal: Potassium.

 

Interestingly, humans are made of another: Sodium (as well as potassium, iron, copper and others).

 

Puts the whole "metals" thing in a whole new light, doesn't it? 

 

Yes, thanks for correcting my general, brief and somewhat slack terms .  I should have said ' non processed metals * or even  ' metallic reactive vessels '  .  Two principles seemed to be at the bottom of this ;  the metals may react with the substance and change it  ( a good glass water drinking  bottle is different from a lead one ) , this crosses over to 'fumes' , especially petro-chemical ... which are considered 'Ahrimanic' , that is, they disperse or negate the  'spiritual' energy now encapsulted within the substances.  Then there is also the idea that these substances give off some type of energy that does the same as the above but on a non-material level. 

 

For example, I much prefer to work with ( even making tea )   simple earthen ware vessels. 

 

When I do work with metals  ( not alchemically, but smelting and crystallizing ) I still have to do it in a stainless steel crucible to get the best results. 

 

It sounds more like spagyrics to me. That doesn't make it any less useful, but my interpretation of what alchemy is much stricter than what is loosely thrown around today. 

 

For me, in essence, it is being able to  'get'  ( or 'separate' )  the 'spirit' of a  special substance   and  put it into a medium that can hold it. It's qualities should then be able to be transferred , in some way, into the receiving substance so that is transformed into 'spiritual substance', or energized with it. The resultant substance should be beneficial . 

 

I think few people here (Michael Sternbach and Kio maybe excepted) have an appreciation for what alchemy truly entails. It is not a matter of simple spagyrics, which is content to separate three things, call them "principles" and mix them back together. Alchemy requires the complete separation of the three principles, their purification - both inner and outer - and then enlists nature to put them back together in accordance with her laws. The outcome is not more of the same, it is an entirely new, often unrecognizable substance with unusual properties, such as salts that can evaporate or float in mid-air.

 

I agree with the bold as,  it might be a substance that looks like another  but behaves differently  .   

 

These principles are only purified when they are considered "homogeneous"... that is, they cannot be divided into discrete substances. Such an operation entails the elimination of all corruptible elements and requires the death of the living system in its natural form. If a true alchemical operation were performed on a garden, that garden would no longer exist as corruptible, earthly plant life. The very thing which made it a living organism (the Binary) would have been reduced to a nearly imperceptible state, rendering it a close approximation of an eternal substance in material form.

 

  ... only if you didnt understand the process . 

 

If the ' stone'  can transmute other stones by 'touch' alone, the 2nd stone is 'transformed' . I suppose one could say the old stone died ?  But, no ... you dont have to dig up your garden and burn and calcify it to transform it. 

 

In this system, most of the stages are already done by nature.  In the case of treating a field for grazing ;

 

There is grass. That gets 'destroyed' by the cow eating it. All the processes circulate inside the cow, though its chambers and stomachs. Then we get manure.  The first substance.  

 

( pauses until clamor passes  " Not this old , first matter is shit thing again ! "    .....    I can post the textual refs if any one wants them, that leads to this particular conclusion ) 

 

...... 

 

The the substance is collected, and the process is repeated outside of the cow, using the horn as an alembic  and the earth burial as 'Mary's bath' , nature is the laboratory .  When this matter has been changed into 'gold'  it is preserved as a 'stone', in some cases it is made of stone where quartz crystal replaces the manure ).

 

When needed the stone is 'dissolved' in 'special water' and  the water, now containing the 'spirit' of the substance is spread onto fields, increasing the nourishment of the grass ( and , as they say, the 'nature spirits' as well ) .... which the cows then eat and devour / destroy .... etc .  Increasing the energy and vitality at each round or cycle. 

 

Now some of these processes might seem 'out of order' ... but they also seem like that when comparing some texts ... perhaps as they were written in flamboyant symbolic imagery, they also cut and pasted a bit  ?  

 

I like gardens. They are pretty. I don't think we should do alchemy to them. :-)

 

Oh ... BD gardens are very 'pretty'  ... here, have some BD rhubarb ;

 

 

 

 

Or how about a little tiddle 

 

 

 

http://biodynamics.net.au/best-biodynamic-wine-in-the-world/

 

 

Anyway, everyone is free to believe what they like. I comment only from the perspective as a working lab alchemist.

 

Best,

UFA

 

We are not that far apart ... my lab is in nature. 

 

 

Thank you for your contribution  

[Jadespear]

Difficult for some       and difficult for all when the magician plays the mad man, but like the king and the pauper ... its more obvious when the madman plays the magician 

 

As to your resolute ending question about the will..... I think it is a part of our conscious mind, which is sustained by vital forces of life that surround us.  From the point of view of a magician, strictly speaking, the will is the most powerful, dangerous, expansive, illuminating, and binding capability of ones own mind and emotions.  It is made of intention and energy, when combined with thought movement it becomes a super force displaying real manifestations in the physical world that we live in, that become real based upon the intensity, quality, and quantity of it's total expression.  There are wills of individuals, wills of groups, and wills of the unseen that shape our lives..etc.

[FraterUFA]

yes, and I will add that what I consider alchemy is not purely spiritual . For me, it has to have a practical and beneficial outcome (.as I consider even 'purely spiritual' systems should as well.

 

Yep, I know. That comment was not directed at you, of course.

 

For me, in essence, it is being able to  'get'  ( or 'separate' )  the 'spirit' of a  special substance   and  put it into a medium that can hold it. It's qualities should then be able to be transferred , in some way, into the receiving substance so that is transformed into 'spiritual substance', or energized with it. The resultant substance should be beneficial . 

 

I would agree that there is something to that which is fundamental to alchemy.

 

  ... only if you didnt understand the process . 

 

I'm not sure what you mean. The final (and intermediate) products of lab work do not look like nor can they act in the same manner as their previous natural body did. The binary force which allowed them to manifest in that state has been removed and so the usual living processes we recognize no longer apply.

 

To avoid the usual misunderstandings which take place with statements like this, here is an example. What is shown below is the Prima Materia of approximately 20 lbs of wood:

 

 

We can pour these jars out in a field and they will not grow. There is still the tie to life, but there is nothing I or anyone else can do that will revert the contents of these jars back to their original form of a tree. From the standpoint of virtually everyone other than the alchemist, the contents of these jars are dead.

 

 

If the ' stone'  can transmute other stones by 'touch' alone, the 2nd stone is 'transformed' . I suppose one could say the old stone died ?  But, no ... you dont have to dig up your garden and burn and calcify it to transform it. 

 

The 2nd stone will indeed have died. Its transformation would be cleaner and faster than would take place with the original manual process, but it is fundamentally the same process. Transmutation requires death.

 

In this system, most of the stages are already done by nature.  In the case of treating a field for grazing ;

 

There is grass. That gets 'destroyed' by the cow eating it. All the processes circulate inside the cow, though its chambers and stomachs. Then we get manure.  The first substance.  

 

( pauses until clamor passes  " Not this old , first matter is shit thing again ! "    .....    I can post the textual refs if any one wants them, that leads to this particular conclusion ) 

 

There's a lot of support for the idea that cow shit could be used as a starting matter. It may even make an excellent choice. But it is not the Prima Materia.

 

 

The the substance is collected, and the process is repeated outside of the cow, using the horn as an alembic  and the earth burial as 'Mary's bath' , nature is the laboratory .  When this matter has been changed into 'gold'  it is preserved as a 'stone', in some cases it is made of stone where quartz crystal replaces the manure ).

 

A sealed putrefaction such as the one I think you are describing could (theoretically) result in an alchemical product, I admit. It would take a long time, probably no less than a year, depending on what exactly you're doing. 

 

When needed the stone is 'dissolved' in 'special water' and  the water, now containing the 'spirit' of the substance is spread onto fields, increasing the nourishment of the grass ( and , as they say, the 'nature spirits' as well ) .... which the cows then eat and devour / destroy .... etc .  Increasing the energy and vitality at each round or cycle. 

 

Makes sense actually.

 

Now some of these processes might seem 'out of order' ... but they also seem like that when comparing some texts ... perhaps as they were written in flamboyant symbolic imagery, they also cut and pasted a bit  ?  

 

Yes. But what I think you're describing is actually not very well known and not depicted in any old texts or images that I'm aware of. Those almost always depict a manual operation, while what you are describing is a simple and natural shortcut.

 

Oh ... BD gardens are very 'pretty'  ... here, have some BD rhubarb ;

 

 

Those are some awful small trees. Are you sure you're doing it right? :-)

 

UFA

[Nungali]

As to your resolute ending question about the will.....

 

What 'resolute ending question ' ?    You quoted my statement and referred to some question  ? ? ? 

 

I think it is a part of our conscious mind, which is sustained by vital forces of life that surround us.  From the point of view of a magician, strictly speaking, the will is the most powerful, dangerous, expansive, illuminating, and binding capability of ones own mind and emotions.

 

 

I would say that  the most powerful is the 'imagination' - the seat of the soul .

 It is made of intention and energy, when combined with thought movement it becomes a super force displaying real manifestations in the physical world that we live in, that become real based upon the intensity, quality, and quantity of it's total expression.  There are wills of individuals, wills of groups, and wills of the unseen that shape our lives..etc.

 

and the 'will' of unconscious drives and desires  that effect what we believe is our conscious ( or chosen) will . 

[Nungali]

Yep, I know. That comment was not directed at you, of course.

 

 

I would agree that there is something to that which is fundamental to alchemy.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean. The final (and intermediate) products of lab work do not look like nor can they act in the same manner as their previous natural body did. The binary force which allowed them to manifest in that state has been removed and so the usual living processes we recognize no longer apply.

 

To avoid the usual misunderstandings which take place with statements like this, here is an example. What is shown below is the Prima Materia of approximately 20 lbs of wood:

 

 

Nah !  That is a condensation of the archetypal resultant  of specific trees 

 

here is a picture of the prima materia  of wood 

 

 

 

Or ....  prima materia  could be 

 

 

Names assigned to the Prima Materia in Ruland's 1612 alchemical dictionary, Lexicon alchemiae sive dictionarium alchemistarum.^[9]

• Microcosmos
• The Philosophical Stone
• The Eagle Stone
• Water of Life
• Venom
• Poison
• Chamber
• Spirit
• Medicine
• Heaven
• Clouds
• Nebula or Fog
• Dew
• Shade
• Moon
• Stella Signata and Lucifer
• Permanent Water
• Fiery and Burning Water
• Salt of Nitre and Saltpetre
• Lye
• Bride, Spouse, Mother, Eve
• Pure and Uncontaminated Virgin
• Milk of Virgin, or the Fig
• Boiling Milk
• Honey
• A Spiritual Blood
• Bath
• A Syrup
• Vinegar
• Lead
• Tin
• Sulphur of Nature
• Spittle of the Moon
• Ore
• The Serpent
• The Dragon
• Marble, Crystal, Glass
• Scottish Gem
• Urine
• Magnesia
• Magnet
• White Ethesia
• White Moisture
• White Smoke
• Dung
• Metallic Entity
• Mercury
• The Soul and Heaven of the Elements
• The Matter of all Forms
• Tartar of the Philosophers
• Dissolved Refuse
• The Rainbow
• Indian Gold
• Heart of the Sun
• Chaos
• Venus

 

 

 

We can pour these jars out in a field and they will not grow. There is still the tie to life, but there is nothing I or anyone else can do that will revert the contents of these jars back to their original form of a tree. From the standpoint of virtually everyone other than the alchemist, the contents of these jars are dead.

 

I dont think I get the point here.   If I pour out BD 500 in a field 'it' wont grow, the grass will and it will be transformed by the substance. If you take one of your preparations it wont grow inside you to replicate the substance but you will grow and be transformed. 

 

Preparation 500, 501 are dissolved with water , from the viewpoint of science, this is 'just water' but to a BDer it is 'alive' and not 'dead' .

 

The 2nd stone will indeed have died. Its transformation would be cleaner and faster than would take place with the original manual process, but it is fundamentally the same process. Transmutation requires death.

 

 

There's a lot of support for the idea that cow shit could be used as a starting matter. It may even make an excellent choice. But it is not the Prima Materia

 

A sealed putrefaction such as the one I think you are describing could (theoretically) result in an alchemical product, I admit. It would take a long time, probably no less than a year, depending on what exactly you're doing. 

 

Half a year ...   over winter for manure based 500 and over summer for quartz based 501.  (of course there is a 3rd main one - 3rd principle) based on clay . 

 

 

Makes sense actually.

 

 

Yes. But what I think you're describing is actually not very well known and not depicted in any old texts or images that I'm aware of. Those almost always depict a manual operation, while what you are describing is a simple and natural shortcut.

 

I can detect it , however I may be biased towards that interpretation.   Its still a manual operation , the equipment is different . There are times in both processes where manual operation is required but also, non, its patience, then that is required while the 'natural processes' go about their work 

 

And if you peek inside the substance (500 ) there are all these strange little creatures inside the 'alembic' doing a lot of the work for you   

 

 

 

At one stage 500 is full of tiny little microscopic black bugs, then black and white then more white ones ... I havent seen any red ones in it  though 

 

 

 

 

Those are some awful small trees. Are you sure you're doing it right? :-)

 

UFA

 

 

Something about that gardener isnt right   

[FraterUFA]

Names assigned to the Prima Materia in Ruland's 1612 alchemical dictionary, Lexicon alchemiae sive dictionarium alchemistarum.^[9]

 

There are a lot of errors in that book, though it is one my favorite references. The list you provided is quite accurate however.

 

As for the true identity of the Prima Materia, Sophia decides who she will reveal it to and who remains in darkness.

 

 

I dont think I get the point here.   If I pour out BD 500 in a field 'it' wont grow, the grass will and it will be transformed by the substance. If you take one of your preparations it wont grow inside you to replicate the substance but you will grow and be transformed.

 

That is how you know your preparation, while perhaps being a great medicine, isn't what the alchemists are talking about. The stone can reproduce itself, just as vegetable life does. It is a living being.

 

Best,

UFA

[Nungali]

Reproduce itself just as vegetable life does ?   You cant mean . just the same as vegetable life ? ... by 'sexual' division and rejoining ? Surely not

 

I have always considered it had a transforming power that changes other substances, not that it reproduces itself to make more of the original 'substance' .  i Have either got something very wrong about this part, or this is a novel approach ?

 

 

Then ( if you have managed to make it )  your stone must now be many stones  ? 

 

Does anyone else have this 'reproduce itself just like vegetable life'  concept   ( or a document ref. )  ?

[RigdzinTrinley]

Back to the topic....

 

How did nungali like the Energized Meditations book from Dr.Hyatt?

 

The exercises presented in there are all from reichian vegetotherapy (or slightly adapted and made sound more spiritual in adaptation and result)

 

 

I like the book actually its fantastically weird