Alchemy Forum 1001-1050

From January 25th 1996, the Alchemy forum was restructured and the messages were sequentially numbered. This is an unedited extract of messages 1001-1050.
Go to next 50 messages . Back to forum archive.

Thu Jun 06 14:57:11 1996
Subject: 1001 Plant Mutations

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 09:45:57 -0400
From: Clinton R. Armitage

The following method may be of some help to you.
Please feel free to critique as you wish.
......................................................................

A Formula for the Mutation of Plants

There is an initial premiss in this presentation. That
premiss is that all of creation seeks change, that it
has a mind of its own and as such, can exercise some
degree of choice based upon the circumstances with
which it is presented.

A secondary premiss is that all of creation is tied
together and by its very nature seeks, through mutual
cooperation, to evolve and in doing so brings about
change within the group itself.

The mental focus of imagery is the method employed.

Step 1: The Alchemist combines his/her energy with the
energy of the chosen living plant. This step may
require a number of attempts. It is accomplished
through an act of love. The Alchemist feels the at-
one-ness when successful. The plant may be dormant,
growing in a container or in the earth itself.

Step 2: The Alchemist asks the plant what it would
like to become, then listens to what the plant has to
say.

Step 3: The Alchemist creates the mental imagery
representing the new creation. All necessary human
senses are utilized. When this image is complete the
Alchemist quickly raises the frequency of the total
energy- as in a flash- and it is done.

Some background information which may be helpful:

As all in nature is in the process of evolving nature
takes advantage of the available energies at any point
in time/space. The Alchemist functions as a
transformer. The capacity to transform is commensurate
with the sum-total of energies available to the
individual Alchemist.

Surprisingly, perhaps, if the timing used by the
Alchemist is not forced - going with the flow - there
need be no concern regarding the time of day in which
the work is attempted, planetary placements, or other
outside factors with one possible exception: The
Alchemist should do the work alone, i.e. the energy of
doubt on the part of another participant - or the
Alchemist - would be disastrous.

The process is the same whether working with the
Plant, Animal or Mineral Kingdom.

Often what seem to be spontaneous mutations in the
Alchemists garden are probably the result of plants
having fun as the meditative state encompasses the
whole of the garden in an act of love.

[email protected]

Thu Jun 06 17:00:28 1996
Subject: 1002 Mystical/spiritual interpretation of alchemy

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 08:45:10 -0700
From: joshua geller

> The truth is - for those who base their understanding of alchemy on the
> documents, rather than on some fixed belief system - that spiritual
> allegorisation is inseparable from the work with matter. Alchemy cannot be
> reduced to one simplistic interpretation.

The truth also is, that material working is inseperable from spiritual
working, also from astronomy, agronomy and natural science as it was
understood generally. The ancients did not consider any of these
seperate things; they were all part of the same thing. To say it was
only material chemical working or that it was only spiritual
allegorization or that it was only any number of other things -- sex
magick recently had a vogue -- is to miss the point entirely.

josh

Thu Jun 06 19:44:16 1996
Subject: 1003 Psychological interpretation

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 96 09:54 PDT
From: Norm Ryder

>Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 17:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
>From: R. Brzustowicz
>
>I have generally felt that the stress on laboratory alchemy here was
>something of a compensation (or over-compensation) for the
>psycho-spiritual interpretations of alchemy -- and especially the
>psychological reductionisms -- that have been one of the dominant views of
>the subject during much of this century.
>But it's as pointless to exclude psychological and spiritual
>interpretations as it is to insist that they are the only ones that work.

Interesting how others see this list. I personally feel that laboratory
alchemy is "under stressed" on this list.
I do appreciate that many are not in a position to set up a laboratory (at
this time this includes myself) but I also feel that in order to advance one
must work in the three phases, not only work but also keep the three phases
in balance.

The connection between laboratory and salt, psycholgical and sulphur,
spirtual and mercury seem obvious to me.
I know of no laboratory alchemist that would only work with the salt. Can
an alchemist that prefers to concentrate on one phase really believe that
they can advance by ignoring the others?

Norm
[email protected]

Thu Jun 06 19:44:24 1996
Subject: 1004 Plant Mutations

Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 13:39:24 -0500 (EST)
From: OISPEGGY

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 09:45:57 -0400
From: Clinton R. Armitage

Thank you, Clinton, for an interesting post.

>The process is the same whether working with the
>Plant, Animal or Mineral Kingdom.

I did similar workings while pregnant with my son,
and continue to do them. A good thing to do during
any sort of bodily contact IMO.

>Often what seem to be spontaneous mutations in the
>Alchemists garden are probably the result of plants
>having fun as the meditative state encompasses the
>whole of the garden in an act of love.

What sort of mutations occur? Also, the term mutation
has IMO a negative connotation. Makes me think of
cancer. Isn't there a better term to use, one that
has to do with an entity reaching its highest potential?
Like "self-actualizing"? But, how can you tell the
difference between a self-actualizing plant mutation
and a "whoops! mistake" plant mutation.

Also, what difference would using hate make? Would
the mutations be the same as those you effect with love?

I might try this with snapdragons. I grow hordes of
snapdragons from seed each summer and they always
amaze me with their varying colors and heights. (I
mixed regular size with the dwarf, bushy snappers.) They
grow very fast too, a couple crops each season, so would
be a good choice for experiments. Viney plants, like
morning glory, good for experiments too. They seem to have
a mind of their own, with all the places their vines get
into.

Do you talk to your plants? I talk to mine when I pick
the flowers to make an elixer. I drink vibrations of the
rose to warm my heart and vibrations of clover for bodily
health. Anyone know what vibration of snapdragons would do?

As a sidenote, I sometimes find certain trees to be
very attractive. Right now there is a large River Beech
I visit -- about 50 years old, 40 feet tall, with scarletty
black leaves. Awesome tree in an awesome setting. I'm
trying to grow a few myself from seed. Would make a
powerful bonsai I think.

- Peggy -
[email protected]

Fri Jun 07 08:40:36 1996
Subject: 1005 Psychological interpretation

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: R. Brzustowicz

On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, Alchemy forum wrote:

> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 96 09:54 PDT
> From: Norm Ryder
>
>
> Interesting how others see this list. I personally feel that laboratory
> alchemy is "under stressed" on this list.

I don't have the patience (actually, the time: I'd have the patience if I
had the time) to do so, but it would be interesting to do a traffic
analysis and see what proportion of the messages here dealt with
laboratory work and what proportions dealt with non-laboratory work.

R Brzustowicz

Fri Jun 07 08:40:45 1996
Subject: 1006 Plant Mutations

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 14:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: R. Brzustowicz

On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, Alchemy forum wrote:

> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 13:39:24 -0500 (EST)
> From: OISPEGGY
>

{Well, that's how this mailer wants to do the attributions!}

>
> What sort of mutations occur? Also, the term mutation
> has IMO a negative connotation. Makes me think of
> cancer. Isn't there a better term to use, one that
> has to do with an entity reaching its highest potential?
> Like "self-actualizing"? But, how can you tell the
> difference between a self-actualizing plant mutation
> and a "whoops! mistake" plant mutation.
>

There is a conceptual disjunction here.

"Self-actualizing" might mean something like "fulfilling its potential as
given" (a full realization of the entelechy or implicit governing plan of
the organism) -- or it might mean something like "transcending the genetic
given" (with the idea that contact with the "inner plant" would help the
plant change its genetic makeup to something closer to its will, with the
implication that the plant had a will contraposed to the fulfillment of
its genetic potential).

R Brzustowicz

Fri Jun 07 08:41:04 1996
Subject: 1007 Psychological interpretation

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 16:41:40 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>Date: Thu, 6 Jun 96 14:22 NZST
>From: Pat Zalewski
>One method I used as a base for working into the psychological side of
>alchemy was to break things down into the seven steps and the twelve steps
>(leaving aside the three primary steps in this instance) . The 12 I
>associated to the Zodiac signs and the 7 to the esoteric planetary
>meanings. Its a good start in the right direction and I took it because I
>dabble a little in astrology. Baulbault tries to explain one aspect of this
>in Gold of a Thousand mornings. Fabricius picked up where Baubault left off
>and lent to more an astrological profile. The 12 steps is a good place to
>start if anyone can agree of what the 12 steps are.

*wow, Pat...this sounds like something from the Sefer Yetzirah...

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Fri Jun 07 08:41:21 1996
Subject: 1008 spiritual/psychological alchemy

From: Rawn Clark
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 21:21:54 -0400

Since there seems to be some genuine and non-derisive interest in "spiritual/psychological alchemy" lately, I offer the following. It is based
entirely upon my own experience and study, and is meant *only* in spiritual/psychological terms. There is absolutely no implied belittlement of "physical alchemy" here, nor any intended implication that "spiritual alchemy" is the only alchemy, so please don't try to find any. ;)
I welcome comment.

*******************(-; Rawnian alchemy ;-)**********************

Our materia is who we are at the moment of our consciously beginning the
spiritual-alchemical process. We express this through our personality and
so it is our personality with which we must first work. We begin with a
discipline of deep introspection because our personalities are for the most
part un- and sub-conscious creations. We generally know them only
slightly so our first task is to take stock of our personalities in the
minutest detail and with the utmost self-honesty, bringing them up to the level of
conscious awareness and control. When we know our personalities
thoroughly, only then are we fit to begin crafting them to a clearer, more
conscious expression of our essential selves.

The process of self-crafting the personality (the cycling of the Elements)
exposes the individuality...our Green Lion. The nascent individuality is
then led through a similar process of self-discovery and subsequent self-
crafting as it is brought to maturation...our Red Lion. While the
personality's self-crafting follows an Elemental rhythm of 4 (and by
extension, a Zodiacal rhythm of 12), the individuality's rhythm is Planetary,
and therefore based on 7.

Again, the process of self-crafting exposes a yet deeper level of Self and
the Self-crafted Individuality then pursues a Three-fold division and
purification of the Mental, Astral and Physical aspects of Self. Here there
is a rhythm of 3, yet the focus is 1. This is so because this process is the
final act of Solve', or separation, in preparation for the inevitable
Coagula.
It is the Goal of Unity which drives and directs here, not a mere lust for
differentiation.

The Coagula of the purified Principles is a process of complete and utter
integration, an eternally inseperable mixing of 3 into 1...the self-realized
Self. This implies a conscious and complete interpenetration of all aspects
of Self.

The only difference between the result of this spiritual-alchemical process
(which I'll call our Stone) and our begining materia is that the Stone is "conscious".
Self interpenetrates the begining materia in much the same way as it does
within the Stone, except that within the materia, lower aspects of ItSelf are
not directly conscious of higher aspects. Essentially, the process of
"spiritual alchemy" is the systematic integration of conscious awareness
throughout the whole of Self.

:) Rawn Clark
6 Jun 96

Fri Jun 07 08:41:28 1996
Subject: 1009 Plant Mutations

From: Barry Carter
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 18:23:54 +0000

Dear Friends,

Peggy said:

> As a sidenote, I sometimes find certain trees to be
> very attractive. Right now there is a large River Beech
> I visit -- about 50 years old, 40 feet tall, with scarletty
> black leaves. Awesome tree in an awesome setting. I'm
> trying to grow a few myself from seed. Would make a
> powerful bonsai I think.

I am interested in plant consciousness and evolution. Seth
("channeled" by Jane Roberts) said:

I hope to show that consciousness forms the environment,
and not the other way around.
I hope to show that all species are motivated by what I call value
fulfillment, in which each seeks to enhance the quality of life for itself
and for all other species at the same time.
This further unites all species in a cooperative venture that has
remained largely invisible because of beliefs projected outward upon
the world by both your sciences and religions, generally speaking. All
of your grandest civilizations have existed first in the world of dreams.
You might say that the universe dreamed itself into being.
-Jane Roberts, Dreams, Evolution and Value Fulfillment

You do not survive through cooperation, according to [the
evolution] theory, and nature is not given a kind of creative intent, but
a murderous one. Are you composed of murderous cells, then, each
spontaneously out to get each other? If your cell did not cooperate so
well, you would not be listening to this voice, and it would make no
sound. As you listen to me, the cooperative, creative adventure within
your bodies continues...Because consciousness creates form with
joy, there is no murder that you have not projected out of
misunderstanding and ignorance of the nature of that consciousness.
Roots do not struggle to exist. One species does not fight against the
others to live. Instead creativity emerges, and cooperatively the
environment of the world is known and planned by all the species.
What appears to be struggle and death to you at those levels is not,
for the experience of consciousness itself is different there, as is the
experience of your own cellular composition.
-Jane Roberts, The "Unknown" Reality

Trees have a certain kind of consciousness. The tree is
dissociated in one manner. It is in a state of drowsiness on the one
hand, and on the other it focuses the usable portion of its energy into
being a tree....the inner senses of the tree have a strong affinity with
the properties of the earth itself. They feel their growing, as you listen
to your heartbeat....They also experience pain which while definite,
unpleasant, and sometimes agonizing, is not of an emotional nature in
the same way that you might feel pain. It is as if your breath were to
be suddenly cut off. . .

A tree knows human beings also . . . by the vibrations in the
air as they pass, which hit the tree's trunk from varying distances, and
even by such things as voices. The tree does not build up an image
of man, but a composite sensation which represents an individual.
And the same tree will recognize the same person who passes it by
each day...
-Jane Roberts, The "Unknown" Reality

Remember...the vast web of intercommunication that unites
all species. Of course animals can communicate with man, and of
course man can communicate with other species--with all species.
Such communication has always gone on. Man cannot afford to
become aware of such communication at this point, simply because
your entire culture is based upon the idea of the animals' "natural"
subordinate position. The men who slaughter animals cannot afford
to treat those animals as possessors of living conciousnesses.
There is, beneath it all, an important unity, a sense of
communion, as one portion of earth's living consciousness dies to
insure the continued life of all nature. That natural sacrament,
however, turns into something else entirely when the gift is so
misunderstood, and when the donor is treated so poorly...
-Jane Roberts, Dreams, Evolution and Value Fulfillment

Barry Carter
Blue Mountain Native Forest Alliance
Voice 541-523-3357
Fax 541-523-9438

Fri Jun 07 18:44:03 1996
Subject: 1010 More on Alchemy

To: [email protected]
From: Jako Olivier

I'm studying Biomedical Technology it's a natural science course, some of
my subjects are anatomy and physiology, physics, chemistry, bio-chemistry
and microbiology. But in most of these subjects there's vague statements why
it is so, and there's differences in the explenation why it happens in a
certain ways.

And there's no place for philosophy in most of these, there's only laws or
theories, and these theories must be accepted there isn't always a "why?".

I don't know much about Alchemy but what I've heard is that all our natural
sciences evolved from it, and science in it's current state I don't think
that it only lost useless baggage, I think that it lost it's connection with
reality and truth.

Thus I would like to know more about Alchemy, how it started and in what
form it still exists ?

I'm interested in the philosophy, the mysticism and the chemistry.

Herman Olivier
Email : [email protected]

Fri Jun 07 18:44:18 1996
Subject: 1011 Psychological interpretation

To: [email protected]
From: Norm Ryder

>Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
>From: R. Brzustowicz
>I don't have the patience (actually, the time: I'd have the patience if I
>had the time) to do so, but it would be interesting to do a traffic
>analysis and see what proportion of the messages here dealt with
>laboratory work and what proportions dealt with non-laboratory work.

As long as there are some Laboratory based discussions I am content to
remain on the list. Some of the other discussions I read, others I save for
a later date but, best of all if I decide that a particular message is not
worth my time I make use of the delete button and carry on.

Because there are many facets to alchemy one can not study all of them
concurrently. I may want all of the books in the bookstore, I certainly
don't buy all of them nor do I even expect that I will ever find the time
to study all of them. With luck I will be able find the time to work with
all the ones that are of special significance to me.

And no I do not plan to do a traffic analysis and see what proportion of the
messages here dealt with laboratory work and what proportions dealt with
non-laboratory work. All that would prove was that I had time to waste,
studying the areas of alchemy that I am not particularly interested in would
be many times more beneficial to me than a traffic analysis.

Norm
[email protected]

Sat Jun 08 18:23:34 1996
Subject: 1012 More on Alchemy

From: Rex Phillips
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 02:10:43 -0700

Where did alchemy come from. First lets start with the medieval period of
alchemy. There were many famous alchemists in this period. Their names
go side by side with the brightest stars of the academic firmament, they
do indeed shine bright. You need not like them or know their names. Only
know they are numerous.
Next, the classical era, and times of antiquity. In this period too,
there are alchemical traditions in the east. We really have to ask
ourselves, what is alchemy. It has both spiritual and material
components. Philosophy is inseperable from the alchemical tradition, and
vice versa. The names change but the one remains. For instance these
broad branches of learning are called by differnt names in the mideval
period. Natural philosophy and ars hermetica are possible examples of
older names.
Do we ever see in chemistry the invisible atoms? Sometimes not. Hidden
variables, variables unaccounted for, experimental error, prejudice, and
so on. Chemistry has unanswerable questions just like her mother did.
There are today many sources of error, in any experiment, if you really
think about it. An interesting topic in itself.
I know of many other science majors who cite this as a common concern.
No philosophy, please. The flip side is that in the non-science majors
there is little capacity for "non-philosophical" thought. They usually
don't care much for the periodic table, moles, mathematics and such.
Both are a definate talent.
Sometimes we reject that which we are afraid of. But scientific thinking
has its uses right along co-equal with "magical" thinking. Presently,
both have their own respective uses and limitations. That both validly
exist in their own right is not exactly common knowledge.
Eliphas Levi, an author just recently mentioned on this forum, is
wonderfully eye-opening on some of the history of alchemy. "All masters
in alchemy who have written concerning the Great Work have
employed symbolical and figurative expressions..." -Levi. Should we take
this literally or figuratively (I am being both serious and ironic
here)?
All words and all ways of communicating are symbolic. All that is
written is by definition intimately bound up in the symbolic. Is this not true?
I am asking. That is, symbols and signs and hieroglyphics are symbolic,
not things in themselves. And the only means to communication is through
symbolic means. Is this also not true? Even if we for the moment admit
the possibility of telepathy, for the sake of argument, eventually signs
are likely to play an important part such as Levi suggests must be the
case--- somewhere along the line in the transmission of knowledge.
Douglas Hofsteader in Eternal Golden Braid Godel Escher Bach says
something similar at the end. Knowledge always has its material
component, law has its metaphor, sign have their referents and
signified. Historiology, semiotics, phenomenology, ahhhh!
matthew phillips
[email protected]
--
matthew phillips

Sat Jun 08 18:23:49 1996
Subject: 1013 More on Alchemy

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 12:23:58 +0200 (MET DST)
From: douwe

>From: Jako Olivier
>I'm studying Biomedical Technology it's a natural science course, some of
>my subjects are anatomy and physiology, physics, chemistry, bio-chemistry
>and microbiology. But in most of these subjects there's vague statements why
>it is so, and there's differences in the explenation why it happens in a
>certain ways.
>And there's no place for philosophy in most of these, there's only laws or
>theories, and these theories must be accepted there isn't always a "why?".
>I don't know much about Alchemy but what I've heard is that all our natural
>sciences evolved from it, and science in it's current state I don't think
>that it only lost useless baggage, I think that it lost it's connection with
>reality and truth.
>Thus I would like to know more about Alchemy, how it started and in what
>form it still exists ?
>I'm interested in the philosophy, the mysticism and the chemistry.

Hello Herman,

Welcome to the forum.

Alchemy dates from the beginning of the world so to say, because creation,
works following certain rules, and these rules can be called truely alchemical.
You may say that alchemy starts where science stops.

In the old days, there where many priest classes, who preserved the
knowledge of creation, later on it came to the people outside of those
classes in a more obscured manner.
True consciousness, in which one could know anything faded, so people didn't
know of these from first hand or direct insight, priest classes became less
priest like, and more corrupt, just leaving no more then a shadow of the
knowledge as it once was commonly known.
Like this you find a lot of holy scriptures which are hard to understand,
and which are so obscure that the masses don't seem to recognize the
universal truth in them anymore.

The true Knowledge never died out though, because as much it is real in
nature, just as much it is part of any human,, so any human is able to find
this true Knowledge back.
Like this it has been preserved by many groups of people found in any
country or culture, at any time of the past.

Alchemy as we know it now, is presumed to have come from China, by business
route to Alexandria and from there to Europe.
My own conviction is that practical alchemy already existed in Egypt and
surrounding countries since at least 3000bc, but that there was something
like a new cultural imput from China, that was very much in fashion in those
days, injecting the barely existing alchemy with a new interest.
(this tendency you see all trough the past.. some fading, and renewed
popularity regarding the subject.)
Like this (around 300bc) there started a mingling of chinese symbolism and
egyptian symbolism, (that both share a much older common source anyway)
Texts on alchemical matters aren't found from before 200 bc...

Alchemy compresses the three sciences together... and these are Religion,
art, and science... like religion for the spirit, art for the soul, and
science for the palpable matter (this order can be changed in three ways,
according to the level of consciousness one obtained)
All three worlds look different but in fact they are all one and the same
thing, they all react to One law, they are all subject of tension given my
the law of opposites...
Because if there where unity then there wouldn't be a world as we know it.

Still the idea of alchemy is to go beyond this world of opposites, in order
to find the Re-Union.
This is something that has to be done spiritually, and it can be imbued on
matter, if the matter is prepared according to the process trough which a
person would go if he would refind the Union.
Like this it is a psychological, philosophical and a practical thing.

This imbued matter is the Philosopherstone, in which case the stone is a
matter made philosophically receptical for the energies from beyond matter.

To get this stone you need to break down matter in its component parts, take
away the impurities, and join the opposites, which will join automatically
because they belong to each other like male and female.
The trick is to preserve these essential parts while you are taking the
initial substance apart, because most of the things you need are so volatile
that they easily escape, so there is talk of building eagle traps, snaring
dragons, catching birds, etc... in order to eventually fix the
volatile...(that the fixed needs to become volatile too, only has to do with
the necessity of the volatile to become fixed).
Having all the essential parts together, you'll have to purify them to
perfection, untill the three matters (spirit, soul, body....or mercury,
sulfur, and salt) are joined perfectly without any gap.

How to do all of this is a big secret because no matter is the same, and
because no moment is the same as the other moment.
Because of this, you need some special insight given to you by having gone
through the process (or through a part of it), so that you will know what to
do when in the process.

Alchemy is extremely simple if you have the eyes for it.

For the rest, alchemy exists in the same manner as it always did.
There are still societies and individuals who are focussing all their
attention on it.
A lot of these groups have taken only one aspect of the whole, and base
their teachings on it, some are only practical, others only magical, sexual,
spiritual, etc...
To me this doesn't count ...but who am I to judge?... I believe that the
world comes from One Universal point, and this point generates what you may
call alchemy... the rest of the world is only the subjected to the
alchemical process.
There are societies being focussed on this as well, but they are less eager to
be recognized by the masses.

If you have questions, then don't hesitate to ask.

douwe.

Sat Jun 08 18:23:58 1996
Subject: 1014 Psychological interpretation

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 14:00:20 +0200 (MET DST)
From: douwe

>From: Norm Ryder
>
>>Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
>>From: R. Brzustowicz
>>I don't have the patience (actually, the time: I'd have the patience if I
>>had the time) to do so, but it would be interesting to do a traffic
>>analysis and see what proportion of the messages here dealt with
>>laboratory work and what proportions dealt with non-laboratory work.
>
>As long as there are some Laboratory based discussions I am content to
>remain on the list. Some of the other discussions I read, others I save for
>a later date but, best of all if I decide that a particular message is not
>worth my time I make use of the delete button and carry on.
>
>Because there are many facets to alchemy one can not study all of them
>concurrently.

Isn't it true that all sides of alchemy are One big whole???
Personally I can't think of anything that has brought me further in the
practical alchemy then Philosophy, Kabbalah, Gnosis, etc. , and then mainly
for the reason that it is simpler to find the alchemical answers within the
growth of yourself then by laboratorial experiments.
Newton, Paracelsus, v, Helmont, etc... all saw all natural processes as
something which had to come at the second place, religion and its practice
had to come first... truth you just don't find in books, but in yourself, or
in the Liber Mundi... the book that shows all secrets as bare as they can
be, or in th Liber T. the true Torah (as the natural Laws), or the book of
Toth... all is one and the same thing, it is inner liberation and true
knowledge of the process.
Anything which can be written down is not worth to be known as it has been
written, it is just more matter adding to the world of matter... if you are
able to distill the spiritual side out of it, then you don't need more then
just only one good book.

>I may want all of the books in the bookstore, I certainly
>don't buy all of them nor do I even expect that I will ever find the time
>to study all of them. With luck I will be able find the time to work with
>all the ones that are of special significance to me.

I don't want to tell you how to live, but there is a point where everything
you do becomes part of the process, your reactions on daily actions will
change, and from this you will learn more then in any book.
(your actions are continuously imprinting your personal signature on things).
Then again you may find all of it in all the things which are most
significant to you aswel, because anything is everywhere as an analogy, you
just have to know how to delve it in the right kind of way.

douwe.

Sun Jun 09 14:23:11 1996
Subject: 1015 Psychological interpretation

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 96 12:25 PDT
From: Norm Ryder

>From: douwe

>Isn't it true that all sides of alchemy are One big whole???
>Personally I can't think of anything that has brought me further in the
>practical alchemy then Philosophy, Kabbalah, Gnosis, etc. , and then mainly
>for the reason that it is simpler to find the alchemical answers within the
>growth of yourself then by laboratorial experiments.
>Newton, Paracelsus, v, Helmont, etc... all saw all natural processes as
>something which had to come at the second place, religion and its practice
>had to come first... truth you just don't find in books, but in yourself, or
>in the Liber Mundi... the book that shows all secrets as bare as they can
>be, or in th Liber T. the true Torah (as the natural Laws), or the book of
>Toth... all is one and the same thing, it is inner liberation and true
>knowledge of the process.

>douwe.

Certainly all sides of Alchemy are ONE big whole, that is why one has to
develop all sides. A bird doesn't fly well with one strong wing and one
weak wing -- if they fly at all they will fly in circles.
Is it better to take the "simple" route or is it better to develop in a
balanced manner. Apply what you learn in one area to enhance your knowledge
in another.
No successful Alchemist that I know of has had an easy life. The route that
they take seems to be full of difficulties and their life may be considered
to be nearly constant calcining.
Why do I feel that one must spend time in physical alchemy? We live in a
physical world. I have tried ignoring a door and when I attempted to walk
though the doorway I was stopped. I have tried willing the door to open and
even telling the door to open, when I attempted to walk though the doorway I
was stopped. It was only when I acknowledged that the door was there and
reached out and turned the door handle that I was able to pass through the
door way.

Sun Jun 09 22:32:58 1996
Subject: 1016 Psychological interpretation

Date: Sun, 09 Jun 1996 11:48:53 +0000
From: A'yin Da'ath

>Why do I feel that one must spend time in physical alchemy? We live in a
>physical world. I have tried ignoring a door and when I attempted to walk
>though the doorway I was stopped. I have tried willing the door to open and
>even telling the door to open, when I attempted to walk though the doorway I
>was stopped. It was only when I acknowledged that the door was there and
>reached out and turned the door handle that I was able to pass through the
>door way.

This is an interesting point of view. Actually, it's an excellent way to
treat anything. Pardon the sudden jumps and analogies, but if we treat the
door as a spirtual move into a better place (i.e., philosopher's stone,
element of spirit, prima materia, etc.) then we again have a working
statement. People only achieve 'enlightenment' by acknowledging the
existance of the possibility of a higher self.

Similarly, it applies to psychology (wait - Didn't Jumg write an entire
tract on the psychological value of alchemy, and how to use alchemy in
psychology?). You want to fix things, you have to realize there are things
to fix (Wilhelm Reich said this exact statement in 'Character Analysis.')

I suppose the difficulty lies in practicing alchemy IN AS MANY WAYS AS
POSSIBLE. No clue is left as to how alchemy was practiced - as chemical,
spiritual, psychological, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum. It could hold true as
a methods of attainment in any of these systems.

X
[email protected]
http://users.aol.com/ayindaath/
-=Another more esoterically obvious derivation of my name=-

Sun Jun 09 22:33:09 1996
Subject: 1017 Plant Mutations

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 16:49:08 -0400
From: Clinton R. Armitage

>From: OISPEGGY

>I might try this with snapdragons. I grow hordes of
>snapdragons from seed each summer and they always
>amaze me with their varying colors and heights. (I
>mixed regular size with the dwarf, bushy snappers.) They
>grow very fast too, a couple crops each season, so would
>be a good choice for experiments. Viney plants, like
>morning glory, good for experiments too. They seem to have
>a mind of their own, with all the places their vines get
>into.

***********************************************************************

This reminded me of the work of Horticulturist Luther Burbank who, you will
recall, worked with plants around the turn of the century and was credited
with " creating " more new varieties of fruits and vegetables than anyone
else in known history. The story goes that he raised large quantities of
each known variety that he chose to work with. He would pass rapidly down
the rows discarding the vast majority, saving a few. He would instruct his
staff to burn the discards. This bothered them as the discards were
perfectly good and should be sold rather than destroyed. Exactly how he made
his selections and what else he may have done will probably never be known
but I believe it would be a mistake to presume that the work was done by the
plants alone. Luther Burbank was the Alchemist, his laboratory was the
field. He performed the art.

A legend persists that during the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 his
facilities which were located in Santa Rosa, north of San Francisco,
sustained relatively little damage while extensive damage resulted all
around. The glass panes in his greenhouses remained intact.

Have fun Peggy!

Sun Jun 09 22:33:21 1996
Subject: 1018 Thanks for the Info

From: Jako Olivier
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 17:37:57 +0200

Thanks everyone for the info you send me!

The explanation and the website were very usefull. It gave me a better
understanding of the nature of alchemy.
Haven't much time to go through the whole website, but what I've read helped
me clear up some of my questions and helped me with the understanding of the
subject.

My first contact with Alchemy was when I was looking at a homepage of Taoism.
But it was very vague on the subject and the only thing they had on Taoist
alchemy was a couple of Tai Chi forms and it was only names for certain
exercise positions, no real information on what it was or how it came to the
West.

There is still a lot I have to learn before I can start asking intellegent
questions on the subject, but if I don't ask I won't know.

I'm not sure if I understood the basic principal behind alchemy.... "alchemy
is a study of spirit and matter, but to be able to study either you should
first change your attitude towards nature and towards yourself, after you've
changed your attitude you can start seeing the weaknesses in yourself and
nature. Not only the weaknesses but also the strengths but by combining the
hielding with the rigid you improve both. Thus, you do not only improve the
individual but improve the surroundings aswell, not only to your own benefit
but also for the benefit of humanity and all creation."

Is this a valid statement to start a study into alchemy ?

Herman Olivier

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: [email protected]
OR
[email protected]

Mon Jun 10 11:39:07 1996
Subject: 1019 Any information on Francois Trojani?

In the Summer 1996 issue of Gnosis (No. 40), there is a long interview by Joseph Rowe with Francois Trojani, who it is said "is the author of a number of dense, cryptic, and very highly regarded articles on alchemy". I must confess to never having heard of him or his work. Does anyone have any further information?

Adam McLean

Mon Jun 10 17:09:27 1996
Subject: 1020 Psychological interpretation

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:03:02 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: douwe
truth you just don't find in books, but in yourself, or
>in the Liber Mundi... the book that shows all secrets as bare as they can
>be, or in th Liber T. the true Torah (as the natural Laws), or the book of
>Toth...

*I'm very curious what you mean by this Liber T, or book of Toth...if you
don't want to reply in public, see my email address below

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Mon Jun 10 17:09:35 1996
Subject: 1021 More on Alchemy

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:45:50 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: Jako Olivier/Herman Olivier
>I'm studying Biomedical Technology it's a natural science course, some of
>my subjects are anatomy and physiology, physics, chemistry, bio-chemistry
>and microbiology. But in most of these subjects there's vague statements why
>it is so, and there's differences in the explenation why it happens in a
>certain ways.

*I'm not sure what you mean by "there's vague statements why it is so"...

>And there's no place for philosophy in most of these, there's only laws or
>theories, and these theories must be accepted there isn't always a "why?".

*the scientists I have known in the most advanced theoretical work (a
couple of professors here at UT) have told me that more often than not it
is indeed this philosophical or imaginatory approach they employ when
trying to work out new answers...the fact is that classical science (and
the patch-work version of it we use now) has flaws, why else would there be
such things as the "black-body" problem?

>I don't know much about Alchemy but what I've heard is that all our natural
>sciences evolved from it,

*to say that "all our natural sciences evolved from" alchemy is a bit
reductive and really is a limited pov

and science in it's current state I don't think
>that it only lost useless baggage, I think that it lost it's connection with
>reality and truth.

*the way you phrased this I'm not sure what direction you intended, but
needless to say, there are many realities and many truths, or even many
ways to the same truth

>Thus I would like to know more about Alchemy, how it started and in what
>form it still exists ?
>I'm interested in the philosophy, the mysticism and the chemistry.

*I'm sure you'll get some suggested readings...I think you should read the
3rd part of Jung's Psychology and Alchemy, entitled Religious Ideas in
Alchemy. Then report back.

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Mon Jun 10 22:19:49 1996
Subject: 1022 Psychological interpretation

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:45:23 +0000
From: A'yin Da'ath

At 05:11 PM 6/10/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:03:02 -0500
>From: George Randall Leake III
>
>>From: douwe
> truth you just don't find in books, but in yourself, or
>>in the Liber Mundi... the book that shows all secrets as bare as they can
>>be, or in th Liber T. the true Torah (as the natural Laws), or the book of
>>Toth...
>
>*I'm very curious what you mean by this Liber T, or book of Toth...if you
>don't want to reply in public, see my email address below
>
>-G.Leake

I believe he is referring to 'The Book of Thoth' by Aleister Crowley. A
guide to the Tarot. Not only that, but prehaps the simplest explanation of
the basics of alchemy, the Naples Arrangement, QBLH and other subjects.

X
[email protected]

Mon Jun 10 22:19:59 1996
Subject: 1023 Thanks for the Info

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:39:43 +0000
From: A'yin Da'ath

At 10:35 PM 6/9/96 +0000, you wrote:

>I'm not sure if I understood the basic principal behind alchemy.... "alchemy
>is a study of spirit and matter, but to be able to study either you should
>first change your attitude towards nature and towards yourself, after you've
>changed your attitude you can start seeing the weaknesses in yourself and
>nature. Not only the weaknesses but also the strengths but by combining the
>hielding with the rigid you improve both. Thus, you do not only improve the
>individual but improve the surroundings aswell, not only to your own benefit
>but also for the benefit of humanity and all creation."
>
>Is this a valid statement to start a study into alchemy ?

This is a valid statement into the study of any subject. You MUST be willing
to reject any previous knowledge if it contradicts with what you are
studying, or you must be able to incorporate that knowledge into what you
are studying, and above all remain open-minded. As with walking into the
occult section of a bookstore, you must remember that NOTHING is the
absolute and primary source of all knowledge. No book 'teaches it all.'

But anyways... chew on this. The goal of alchemy, as far as I can see it, is
the purification of an object. Lead to gold. You are taking an item, and
removing all impurities, and consecrating it, and the output is the goal of
alchemy. Now there are multiple interpretations of this, of course - the
physical manipulation of an element, the spiritual manipulation of a soul,
or the psychological manipulation of the psyche. However all remain the same.

In fact, any religion offering a 'eucharist' is practicing this simple
alchemy. You take the bread, consecrate it, make it pure in the spirit of
god, and then consume it.

X
[email protected]
http://users.aol.com/ayindaath/

Mon Jun 10 22:20:16 1996
Subject: 1024 Psychological interpretation

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 07:58 NZST
From: Pat Zalewski

Here we go again on the practical verses theory approach to alchemy. To
undertake the practical you must undertake the theory in the first place, so
I feel that any theories produced would or should be understood by a
practical alchemist. Its also valid to study the mental approach to alchemy,
just look at the studies of Khunruth. They place themselves into an entirely
different catergory all together. The who things becomes psycholological
imagery. Alchemy has many offshoots, and frankly I would rather be aware of
them than not.There are still a lot of alchemical manuscripts out there that
still defy explanation and without the theoretical discussion on them some
of their meaning would be lost to us without the benefit of studying our
neigbours viewpoint as well. So lets stop this bloody nonsense and simply
post on alchemy regardless of what category they are in.

Tue Jun 11 06:31:18 1996
Subject: 1025 Thanks for the Info

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 12:31 NZST
From: Pat Zalewski

>But anyways... chew on this. The goal of alchemy, as far as I can see it, is
>the purification of an object. Lead to gold. You are taking an item, and
>removing all impurities, and consecrating it, and the output is the goal of
>alchemy. Now there are multiple interpretations of this, of course - the
>physical manipulation of an element, the spiritual manipulation of a soul,
>or the psychological manipulation of the psyche. However all remain the same.
>
>In fact, any religion offering a 'eucharist' is practicing this simple
>alchemy. You take the bread, consecrate it, make it pure in the spirit of
>god, and then consume it.
>
>X
>[email protected]

In my case I am trying to find cures for what ailes one. But to take your
point further, digestion of food in the body is also an alchemy of sorts.

Tue Jun 11 06:38:39 1996
Subject: 1026 More on Alchemy

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 21:16:50 -0700
From: Rex Phillips

Mr. Leake,

>>I'm studying Biomedical Technology it's a natural science course, some
>>of my subjects are anatomy and physiology, physics, chemistry, bio-chemistry
>>and microbiology. But in most of these subjects there's vague statements why
>>it is so, and there's differences in the explenation why it happens in a
>>certain ways.

>*I'm not sure what you mean by "there's vague statements why it is so"...

Mr. Leake, have you taken any sciences courses? If you have, then you
will realize that there are many times no answer, simple or otherwise,
why certain things are will be given. And your teacher will direct you
to the nearest philosophy board if you persist on asking him "why" this
and "why" that. This is probably the intended meaning in our bio-med
student's use of the word "vague." Still nobody can tell us the why of
gravity or the what of gravity. All science can tell us is the how of
gravity, simple if-then type statements which describe gravity's
operation. Science will usually not presume to tell you ultimately why
or what anything is so, they content themselves with observation,
experiment, collation of data, and analysis of data and such. No where
in the scientific method do you see the injunction to speculate wildly
about the ultimate meaning of such things as you have not first trapped
inside of a laboratory.

>>And there's no place for philosophy in most of these, there's only laws or
>>theories, and these theories must be accepted there isn't always a "why?".

>*the scientists I have known in the most advanced theoretical work (a
>couple of professors here at UT) have told me that more often than not
>it is indeed this philosophical or imaginatory approach they employ when
>trying to work out new answers...the fact is that classical science (and
>the patch-work version of it we use now) has flaws, why else would there
>be such things as the "black-body" problem?

Point well taken Mr. Leake, by all I hope, but this seems to me to be
mere quibbling on Mr. Leake's part. An important point indeed for
clarification purposes, but I don't think you are addressing honestly
this real person's real concerns. He didn't ask you to quibble with him
on these meaningless points which no doubt he is familiar with, being a
science major, he asked us to tell him a bit about alchemy. His
provisional statements were not severely flawed in the first place, so
we hardly need to expand on the nicities of something which he is
already familiar with.

>>I don't know much about Alchemy but what I've heard is that all our natural
>>sciences evolved from it,

>*to say that "all our natural sciences evolved from" alchemy is a bit
>reductive and really is a limited pov

No doubt the bio-med student's statement was overbroad, but there is a
small truth to it, important in itself. The fact that this "limited" pov
is even close to being what is in fact the case, is worth mentioning in
passing, as our bio-med student has done. I wonder how much your
contribution is really adding: I think people can spot a casual
generalization when they see one, take it for what it is, and not go out
and start proclaiming to any and all sundry that they have suddenly found
the one truth of all.

>> and science in it's current state I don't think
>>that it only lost useless baggage, I think that it lost it's connection
>>with reality and truth.

>*the way you phrased this I'm not sure what direction you intended, but
>needless to say, there are many realities and many truths, or even many
>ways to the same truth

I agree with Mr. Leake here, it was a bit hard to understand.

yours,
matt
[email protected]

Tue Jun 11 16:22:47 1996
Subject: 1027 Information on Francois Trojani

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 09:38:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Claude Gagnon

> In the Summer 1996 issue of Gnosis (No. 40), there is a long interview by
> Joseph Rowe with Francois Trojani, who it is said "is the author of a number
> of dense, cryptic, and very highly regarded articles on alchemy". I must
> confess to never having heard of him or his work. Does anyone have any
> further information?
> Adam McLean

Yes, I know him. I have met him in Paris in 1972, 1973 and 1980. He was a
friend of Jean-Pierre Bonnerot, a remarkable student of the Great Work.
Bonnerot could possibily retrace Trojani but I have lost the trace of the
former. I will look in my old letters if I can give you some references.
Sorry to give you just souvenirs when you ask for information.

Claude Gagnon

Tue Jun 11 16:22:56 1996
Subject: 1028 Psychological interpretation

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 15:50:09 +0200 (MET DST)
From: douwe

>Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:45:23 +0000
>From: A'yin Da'ath
>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:03:02 -0500
>>From: George Randall Leake III
>>
>>>From: douwe
>> truth you just don't find in books, but in yourself, or
>>>in the Liber Mundi... the book that shows all secrets as bare as they can
>>>be, or in th Liber T. the true Torah (as the natural Laws), or the book of
>>>Toth...
>>
>>*I'm very curious what you mean by this Liber T, or book of Toth...if you
>>don't want to reply in public, see my email address below
>>
>>-G.Leake
>
>I believe he is referring to 'The Book of Thoth' by Aleister Crowley. A
>guide to the Tarot. Not only that, but prehaps the simplest explanation of
>the basics of alchemy, the Naples Arrangement, QBLH and other subjects.
>
>X
>[email protected]

The Liber Mundi is the book of nature, in nature you may read anything
concerning the natural laws, and understand the basics...
If you are able to read this book then you are familiar with forces that
usually can't been seen by most people, and these forces you can read as if
they where books... (might sound strange but it is true, it feels like
reading)...
You may penetrate nature and see with more then just your natural eyesight.
You may know what a substance is and does medically, and in other ways etc.

The liber T. however is something else, it goes a step further, the liber T.
shows the law that generates something natural to spiritual, it is like the
Thav, the cross on which you will have to die to become resurrected... it is
like the tripod that calcines like Fulcanelli points out, it denotes a
threefold transformation.
It is not the Tarot, and not any other written work, appart then that it has
left some marks on matter like in gukkah in the Kabbalah.
The liber T. is the Law beyond the written Law.
This law exists and can be known directly at first hand, just as Christ says
somewhere that the old law fell and that the New Law arose... this new law
is the same as the old one, only in the second case it is an inner state of
being without any falseness.
This knowledge is a Hermetic one, hermetic in the way that it is beyond the
forces of nature, although it works on it.

This subject is very hard to be understood rightly, and that is why I have
hesitated to send in a reply on this.
I also don't feel like leading people into some speculations about this, I
rather would see that people would know for them self.

The Rosicrucians possessed the Liber Mundi, and the Liber T, and both are
ingredients of True Knowledge, knowledge of the World and the Knowledge of
the world beyond, and the part of return to this World of Eternity.

Regarding this (I won't go into it too deeply) there is a profound
connection between the Liber T., the name C Rosencreutz and the word
Beginning in the Bible.
The word BRAShYTh hides the word Bah Rosi Thav, as B -(Bah) RAShY -(Rosi) Th-(Thav= Cross)
The basic duality of Beth counting 2 may be changed to 20 reading it as a
positively activated duality as Caph or 'C' is, so that the word B-RAShY-Th
'Beginning', reads C-Rosi-cross, as the Beginning of the end of the Law.

I don't want to sound enigmatic, but I am sorry, I can't say more.

I hope that this will still be enlightening in some kind of way.

douwe.

Tue Jun 11 16:23:05 1996
Subject: 1029 Thanks for the Info

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 09:43:51 +0000
From: A'yin Da'ath

At 06:48 AM 6/11/96 +0000, you wrote:

>In my case I am trying to find cures for what ailes one. But to take your
>point further, digestion of food in the body is also an alchemy of sorts.

Exactly. This goal *underlies* any type of alchemy - from physical to
spiritual to psychological. Of course, this does not mean that every act is
one of removal. Often you need to add stimulus in order to take away
something else.

X
[email protected]

Tue Jun 11 20:05:15 1996
Subject: 1030 Psychological interpretation

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:47:58 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: Pat Zalewski
>Here we go again on the practical verses theory approach to alchemy. To
>undertake the practical you must undertake the theory in the first place, so
>I feel that any theories produced would or should be understood by a
>practical alchemist. Its also valid to study the mental approach to alchemy,
>just look at the studies of Khunruth.

*is there a particular passage or translation you recommend? I have all but
ignored Heinrich Khunrath, though have tasted the Ampitheatre Engravings.

*on another note, have you examined the recent Cambridge edition of the
Corpus Hermeticum?

> They place themselves into an entirely
>different catergory all together. The who things becomes psycholological
>imagery. Alchemy has many offshoots, and frankly I would rather be aware of
>them than not.There are still a lot of alchemical manuscripts out there that
>still defy explanation and without the theoretical discussion on them some
>of their meaning would be lost to us without the benefit of studying our
>neigbours viewpoint as well. So lets stop this bloody nonsense and simply
>post on alchemy regardless of what category they are in.

*d'accord! Nobody has the monopoly on truth.

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Tue Jun 11 20:06:19 1996
Subject: 1031 Trojanis

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:33:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Claude Gagnon

Now, I remember that Jean-Pierre Bonnerot had become, a few years ago, the
president of the Society devoted to the works of Josephin Peladan. We
could hope that, by sending a letter to Mr. Bonnerot, he would
eventually lead us to his old friend.
Bonnerot and Trojanis were very close friends when Bonnerot lived in
Paris on Saint-Jacques Street; they used to work often at the Arsenal. In
1980, I had breakfast with Trojanis who was selling by that time
ornaments in metal for chemnies. He was very informed on many things but, in my opinion, he was not a prolific writer. I am surprised as you are that he has written articles.
Hope it will help to have news from that companion.

Claude Gagnon

Tue Jun 11 23:33:14 1996
Subject: 1032 Trojani

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 22:08:01 +0000
From: Joel Tetard

Dear Adam

Following to your inquiry about Jean Trojani this is some information
which could help you (?).

According "3eme mill�naire" (n°35) Fran�ois Trojani wrote the following
papers (this is not a bibliography. Just a quick overview!) :

- "Pr�sentation des Tarots de Montegna", in "La Tourbe des Philosophes"
n°29
- "au sujet des particuliers", in "La Tourbe des Philosophes" n° 34-35
- a paper in Cahiers de l'Herm�tisme (special issue on Alchemy)
- "une relecture du Monde", in "3eme mill�naire" (n°35).

He wrote "Le Tarot de Montagna, commentaire alchimique" (Edition A.
Leydoux, Paris) and did the introduction of Bernard Husson's
"Transmutations Alchimiques".

Fran�ois Trojani did some lectures on alchemy with ATLANTIS association.
He is been said to have a good knowledge of alchemy (practical alchemy)
and astrology.

See my previous postings for contacts and addresses of La Tourbe,
Atlantis and 3 mill�naire.

Best wishes.

Tue Jun 11 23:33:22 1996
Subject: 1033 science/magic

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 16:30:13 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

Because of recent discussion on alchemy as a predecessor of some natural
sciences, I thought I'd post this clip from Michael Dummett's Game of
Tarot, from his chapter on Cartomancy pp93-4.

It is a mistake to assimilate magical theories and magical practices too
closely to scientific ones, to regard magic as simply a kind of erroneous
science: they have their own character, their own flavour, which
distinguish them from science independently of the empirical evidence;
there have, after all, been plenty of mistaken scientific theories, and,
for that matter, intellectually corrupt or plain silly scientific theories,
which,for all that they were ill-founded, do not tempt us to characterise
them as magical. Magic has the glamour of the fruit of the tree of
knowledge; the lure of the forbidden and the lure of power. One who
possesses this secret knowledge knows what it is not given to men to know;
and, with his knowledge, he can control events because he has access to
the primal forces that direct the workings of the universe. But, although
the pursuit of magical knowledge and of magical skill is likely to corrupt
not only the character but the intellect, it is equally a mistake to expect
magical doctrine and magical practice to make no coherent sense whatever,
to be a mere jumble of palpable absurdities. On the contrary, in the heyday
of magic in Europe, that is, during the Renaissance, magical doctrine
formed a coherent and subtle intellectual system which commanded the
adherence of many gifted individuals; indeed, recent historical research
has demonstrated how intertwined were these beliefs with the early
development of modern science.

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Tue Jun 11 23:33:36 1996
Subject: 1034 More on Alchemy

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 13:03:53 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: Rex Phillips
>>>I'm studying Biomedical Technology it's a natural science course, some
>>>of my subjects are anatomy and physiology, physics, chemistry, bio-chemistry
>>>and microbiology. But in most of these subjects there's vague statements why
>>>it is so, and there's differences in the explenation why it happens in a
>>>certain ways.
>
>>*I'm not sure what you mean by "there's vague statements why it is so"...
>
>Mr. Leake, have you taken any sciences courses? If you have, then you
>will realize that there are many times no answer, simple or otherwise,
>why certain things are will be given.

*I suppose I could ask whether you have taken any grammar courses...
*my question was more directed to the object of "it"

And your teacher will direct you
>to the nearest philosophy board if you persist on asking him "why" this
>and "why" that. This is probably the intended meaning in our bio-med
>student's use of the word "vague." Still nobody can tell us the why of
>gravity or the what of gravity. All science can tell us is the how of
>gravity, simple if-then type statements which describe gravity's
>operation. Science will usually not presume to tell you ultimately why
>or what anything is so, they content themselves with observation,
>experiment, collation of data, and analysis of data and such. No where
>in the scientific method do you see the injunction to speculate wildly
>about the ultimate meaning of such things as you have not first trapped
>inside of a laboratory.

*as I have in university life and in my professional life observed, it is a
bit of a generalization to say what "it" is that science is applied to. I
know people here(well, chatted with them at cocktail parties and other
social gatherings) at the University of Texas engaged in larger questions,
and many of us might be engaged in smaller ones. However to assert that
nobody in science questions the causes of events is patently absurd.

>>>And there's no place for philosophy in most of these, there's only laws or
>>>theories, and these theories must be accepted there isn't always a "why?".
>
>>*the scientists I have known in the most advanced theoretical work (a
>>couple of professors here at UT) have told me that more often than not
>>it is indeed this philosophical or imaginatory approach they employ when
>>trying to work out new answers...the fact is that classical science (and
>>the patch-work version of it we use now) has flaws, why else would there
>>be such things as the "black-body" problem?

>Point well taken Mr. Leake, by all I hope, but this seems to me to be
>mere quibbling on Mr. Leake's part. An important point indeed for
>clarification purposes, but I don't think you are addressing honestly
>this real person's real concerns. He didn't ask you to quibble with him
>on these meaningless points which no doubt he is familiar with, being a
>science major, he asked us to tell him a bit about alchemy. His
>provisional statements were not severely flawed in the first place, so
>we hardly need to expand on the nicities of something which he is
>already familiar with.

*I hardly think it is quibbling at all. My point is that philosophy is
vital in the whole approach to begin with. Too many scientists approach the
subject with their minds made up instead of open to possibilities. Hence
the "black-body" problem. Iron was not supposed to behave like that when
heated. A preconception. This is absolutely vital in the study of alchemy.
Forget what people said. It's not about literally turning physical lead
into gold. This guy wants to learn about alchemy, right. Rethinking one's
view of the universe or preconceptions about science and matter are hardly
"meaningless points which no doubt he is familiar with".

>>>I don't know much about Alchemy but what I've heard is that all our natural
>>>sciences evolved from it,
>
>>*to say that "all our natural sciences evolved from" alchemy is a bit
>>reductive and really is a limited pov
>
>No doubt the bio-med student's statement was overbroad, but there is a
>small truth to it, important in itself.

*d'accord

The fact that this "limited" pov
>is even close to being what is in fact the case, is worth mentioning in
>passing, as our bio-med student has done. I wonder how much your
>contribution is really adding: I think people can spot a casual
>generalization when they see one, take it for what it is, and not go out
>and start proclaiming to any and all sundry that they have suddenly found
>the one truth of all.

*rather than let things like this go, I thought it best to make this point.
Astrology for instance was another science from which one of our present
day sciences evolved. That said, I think it would be disingenuous to let
mainstream and reductive ideas about alchemy and other "ur-Sciences" go
unchallenged. To the thinking of too many people who think they've mastered
the subject, the people engaged in Alchemy and Astrology were superstitious
fools. In my mind, much of the true superstitions have survived, such as
the unsubstantiated claim that gold can be made from lead. This has been,
over and over, for centuries, interpreted literally. The truths about this
symbolic process need to come out.

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Wed Jun 12 08:24:40 1996
Subject: 1035 Plant mutations

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1980 02:40:44 -0700
From: Morgan Saletta

This discussion reminded me of Luther Burbank also. Apparently, he believed
that he and one of his sisters had inherited extra-sensory peception from
his mother, and also that his success with plants stemmed from his ability
to "tell" plants what to do.

Wed Jun 12 08:24:50 1996
Subject: 1036 Search

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1980 03:24:56 -0700
From: Morgan Saletta

My own impressions of alchemy have been gathered from many sources, and what
I have read has led me to seek deeper knowledge, which is why I have joined
this forum.

Alchemy seems to be a way of looking at the world and ourselves as part of a
process which is becoming manifest. This process is a result of the
unfolding of the dimensions from the void...1,2,3,4 or more? The unfolding
of complexity from a point is the assumption of the I-ching, as the 64
hexagrams unfold from the binary yin and yang. The asymetrical nature of the
universe in a result of the separation of the two oppositions. In one of the
"more on Alchemy" it was state that the purpose of alchemy is the union of
these opposites. Is a final union possible? Is it not the endless dance that
gives us infinity to work with. The square circles endlessly as the dragon
swallows its own tale. What happens on the other side of union--is this the
birth of another universe--the fusion of male and female?

Physical matter in the universe is the manifestation of a quintescence (of
vibratory nature)--dare I use the term energy. Alchemy is the process of
"raising vibrations" as Frater Albertus put it. Helium, Hydrogen, on through
the upward dance of complexity. Although physicists insist on entropy as a
law, this has yet to be seen. We do not yet know if the universe is open or
closed. As we jump through a system of scales, from sub-atomic to universal,
are we looking at an endlessly networked system--if the system of scales, or
planes is endlessly linked then it seems that entropy is not a good
assumption, except at the scales at which we have studied it.

The purpose of alchemy is the transformation of things material and
spiritual to a point of perfection. The study of the transformation of
matter in the laboratory and meditation thereon provides insights into the
transformative power of life. Life appears at the scale of the earth system
to retard or reverse entropy. Physicists will tell us this is because the
earth is an open system, recieving a surplus of energy from the sun. Is the
universe a closed or open system? Is life as we percieve it one
manifestation of an unfolding which is manifest also in the increasing (for
now at least) complexity in the universe.

Is the universe an open system? Is their a spiritual directive at work which
is not subject to entropy? In life the directive is information passed
through D.N.A.--is the directive for ordered information inherent in all
physical matter,making the manifestation of consciousness inevitable (a goal).

Is consciousness as manifest in organic life which arises from inorganic
material the goal of the alchemical process. At what level consciousness.
Universal? Are we merely a system of mirrors with which the universe can
look at itself?

Questions, questions. I hope this is not too rambling, but I really wanted
to wade into the stream, so to speak, and look forward greatly to comments.

I am interested in the physical as well as the mystical aspects of alchemy,
and am greatly enjoying the discussions, especially the plant mutations and
the more on alchemy.

Wed Jun 12 08:24:59 1996
Subject: 1037 Homunculus

From: Coulombe Patrice
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 20:03:07 -0400 (EDT)

Dear forum members,
I would like some information about Paracelsus's
concept of the homunculus. From the physical point of view, does he
really means creating a little living humanoid? Is it an allegory for the
Stone? What is the spiritual meaning of this concept?
Would you please excuse this elementary naive question came from
a non-iniciated person. The concept of homunculus seems mysterious enough
to me to start a discussion about it. So I would like your opinion on
this subject.

Fraternally
Patrice Coulombe
[email protected]
http://mistral.ere.umontreal.ca/~coulomp

Wed Jun 12 08:25:08 1996
Subject: 1038 Science/magic

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 21:42:44 +000
From: A'yin Da'ath
Subject: Re: 1033 science/magic

>From: George Randall Leake III
>
>Because of recent discussion on alchemy as a predecessor of some natural
>sciences, I thought I'd post this clip from Michael Dummett's Game of
>Tarot, from his chapter on Cartomancy pp93-4.
>It is a mistake to assimilate magical theories and magical practices too
>closely to scientific ones, to regard magic as simply a kind of erroneous
>science: they have their own character, their own flavour, which
>distinguish them from science independently of the empirical evidence;
>there have, after all, been plenty of mistaken scientific theories, and,
>for that matter, intellectually corrupt or plain silly scientific theories,
>which,for all that they were ill-founded, do not tempt us to characterise
>them as magical. Magic has the glamour of the fruit of the tree of
>knowledge; the lure of the forbidden and the lure of power. One who
>possesses this secret knowledge knows what it is not given to men to know;
>and, with his knowledge, he can control events because he has access to
>the primal forces that direct the workings of the universe. But, although
>the pursuit of magical knowledge and of magical skill is likely to corrupt
>not only the character but the intellect, it is equally a mistake to expect
>magical doctrine and magical practice to make no coherent sense whatever,
>to be a mere jumble of palpable absurdities. On the contrary, in the heyday
>of magic in Europe, that is, during the Renaissance, magical doctrine
>formed a coherent and subtle intellectual system which commanded the
>adherence of many gifted individuals; indeed, recent historical research
>has demonstrated how intertwined were these beliefs with the early
>development of modern science.

In this respect, I have to disagree completely.

All people enter the study of the occult for the purpose of power - sexual,
financial, physical, etc. It doesn't matter who - anyone who says that the
reason they entered the study for the purpose of raising themselves to
higher status is lying. But - the one thing that the study teaches is that
power isn't necessary. I myself entered in the hopes of gaining sexual
prowess, in hopes of getting revenge by that, in other words, a form of rape
that was safe. But after a while, after studying, I realized I didn't need
power. Money? Pah! It's bits of paper with ink on them. Physical power? In a
world that relies ever more on what you think, instead of what you do,
physical strength is useless. And sex... sex isn't necessary either. In
fact, sometimes you can learn more from staying away from sex.

As for magick and science not mixing... try Crowley's Book 4. ANYTHING can
be applied to science. It's just that the results might not be what you expect.

X
[email protected]

Wed Jun 12 08:25:17 1996
Subject: 1039 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 15:08 NZST
From: Pat Zalewski

George
Thanks for posting that clip by Dummett. I am not sure when he wrote it, but
by todays science he missed the bus. Prediction or Divination is very
closely allied with Quantum physics. Basically it says that since everything
happens in strings (see superstring theory) and bunches it can be predicted.
Individual magical flavour is also closely alllied with the Holographic
theory of the universe.In other words as you create it it happens. See
Talbot's 'Holographic Universe' for an explanation of the latter.

Pat Zalewski

Wed Jun 12 13:42:44 1996
Subject: 1040 Where to begin?

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:28:47 +0100 (BST)
From: D.R.Williams

I joined this forum out of curiosity, and from a desire to gain some kind
of knowledge of the true nature of the universe and my place in it! My
interest in the so-called paranormal goes back many years, but I have
never until now bothered to try and gain a disciplined body of knowledge.

The study of Alchemy seems to me to be facinating in its endless
complexity and symbolism, and now I would very much like to attempt to
learn. However as a newcommer to the work I am bewildered as to where to
start. My reading so far consists of some books on symbolism, and trying
to read C. G. Jung's book on the subject, but I would like to read
something more basic on the subject in order to provide me with a firmer
grounding.

With this in mind I would be extremely grateful if any of you could spare
their valuable time in advising me of where to begin.

Yours bewildered,
David R. Williams.

Wed Jun 12 16:17:35 1996
Subject: 1041 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 09:05:52 -0400
From: Clinton R. Armitage

>From: Pat Zalewski
>
> Prediction or Divination is very
>closely allied with Quantum physics. Basically it says that since everything
>happens in strings (see superstring theory) and bunches it can be predicted.
>Individual magical flavour is also closely alllied with the Holographic
>theory of the universe. In other words as you create it it happens. See
>Talbot's 'Holographic Universe' for an explanation of the latter.

************************************************************************

Yes, Yes, Yes !!!

Disregard the Subject headings on the Forum right now, meld it all, and you
see it at work! It is a truly amazing universe....

Wed Jun 12 16:17:48 1996
Subject: 1042 Plant mutations

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 10:58:47 -0500 (EST)
From: OISPEGGY

>From: Morgan Saletta

>This discussion reminded me of Luther Burbank also.

It wasn't much of a discussion since the original poster never
responded.

>Apparently, he believed
>that he and one of his sisters had inherited extra-sensory peception from
>his mother, and also that his success with plants stemmed from his ability
>to "tell" plants what to do.

Since his ability had stems on it then he must have had the power
to direct plants.

- Peggy -

Wed Jun 12 16:17:57 1996
Subject: 1043 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 11:05:30 -0500 (EST)
From: OISPEGGY

>[email protected]
>All people enter the study of the occult for the purpose of power - sexual,
>financial, physical, etc. It doesn't matter who - anyone who says that the
>reason they entered the study for the purpose of raising themselves to
>higher status is lying.

Not me. I started it in order to raise myself and I am not lying.
Actually, early on I would have chucked my esoteric studies in
a minute if I could just live a simple, happy life. Now I'm
hooked though. My point is that not everyone starts in order to
get power.

- Peggy -

Wed Jun 12 20:37:09 1996
Subject: 1044 Trojani

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 11:14:05 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: Joel Tetard
>According "3eme millenaire" (n�35) Francois Trojani wrote the following
>papers (this is not a bibliography. Just a quick overview!) :
>"Presentation des Tarots de Montegna", in "La Tourbe des Philosophes"
>n�29
>- "au sujet des particuliers", in "La Tourbe des Philosophes" n� 34-35
>- a paper in Cahiers de l'Hermetisme (special issue on Alchemy)
>- "une relecture du Monde", in "3eme millenaire" (n�35).
>He wrote "Le
>Tarot de Montagna, commentaire alchimique" (Edition A.
>Leydoux, Paris) and did the introduction of Bernard Husson's
>"Transmutations Alchimiques".
>Francois Trojani did some lectures on alchemy with ATLANTIS association.
>He is been said to have a good knowledge of alchemy (practical alchemy)
>and astrology.

*here's what I found on the UT online catalog.

* I was wondering if Tetard or someone familiar with Tetard's work could
write me privately (see my email address below). I'd like to see whether
Tetard links Atlantis to the Tarot in addition to alchemy
1 Trojani, Francois. / Commentaire alchimique de Francois Trojani. /
Garches, France 1985
BF 1879 T2 S95 1985 V.1 PCL Stacks
BF 1879 T2 S95 1985 V.2 PCL Stacks
2 Trojani, Francois. / Jeu du gouvernement du monde au quattrocento, vers
1465. / Garches, France 1985
BF 1879 T2 S95 1985 V.1 PCL Stacks
BF 1879 T2 S95 1985 V.2 PCL Stacks
3 Trojani, Francois. / Suite d'estampes de la Renaissance italienne dite
tarots de Mantegna, ou, Jeu du gouvernement du monde au quattrocento,
# / Garches, France 1985
BF 1879 T2 S95 1985 V.1 PCL Stacks

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Wed Jun 12 20:37:17 1996
Subject: 1045 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 12:08:26 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: Pat Zalewski
>Thanks for posting that clip by Dummett. I am not sure when he wrote it, but
>by todays science he missed the bus. Prediction or Divination is very
>closely allied with Quantum physics. Basically it says that since everything
>happens in strings (see superstring theory) and bunches it can be predicted.
>Individual magical flavour is also closely alllied with the Holographic
>theory of the universe.In other words as you create it it happens. See
>Talbot's 'Holographic Universe' for an explanation of the latter.

*both Dummett and Talbot I found via Cynthia Giles' flawed but pretty
decent Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore. The Dummett came out in 1981. I'm
not sure he necessarily misses the bus on science. It is a large area, hard
to generalize about. His point I think is that Magical systems were not the
basis for parlor games or telephone help lines. Your point is that there is
some science being done today which suggests synchronicity (and other
theories) as a way to explain events such as "divination" which are related
but not causal. Giles and others suggest that perhaps science and magic (or
alchemy) might be coming full circle, the tail back in the mouth perhaps?

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Wed Jun 12 20:37:26 1996
Subject: 1046 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 12:18:37 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: A'yin Da'ath
>In this respect, I have to disagree completely.
>
>All people enter the study of the occult for the purpose of power - sexual,
>financial, physical, etc. It doesn't matter who - anyone who says that the
>reason they entered the study for the purpose of raising themselves to
>higher status is lying.

*I'd like to see your evidence for such a conclusion. How you can claim to
know the hearts and minds of others seems like sheer folly.

>But - the one thing that the study teaches is that
>power isn't necessary. I myself entered in the hopes of gaining sexual
>prowess, in hopes of getting revenge by that, in other words, a form of rape
>that was safe. But after a while, after studying, I realized I didn't need
>power. Money? Pah! It's bits of paper with ink on them. Physical power? In a
>world that relies ever more on what you think, instead of what you do,
>physical strength is useless. And sex... sex isn't necessary either. In
>fact, sometimes you can learn more from staying away from sex.

*personally I think you're projecting personal biases into it. Do you know
about the concept of theurgy? What is the essence of the lesson taught in
the Faust legend? What is the purpose for finding the Stone or turning base
matter into Gold? If you say its for selfish reasons, then *you have
missed the point*. This is one of the main reasons, people, why solid
grounding in philosophy is necessary.

>As for magick and science not mixing... try Crowley's Book 4. ANYTHING can
>be applied to science. It's just that the results might not be what you expect.

*you are taking it in a way Dummett did not intend. Of course the two can
be mixed and in fact Dummett asserts this in the passage quoted, that
science and magical or hermetic philosophy were in fact mixed in the
Renaissance, and obviously has been done so again in the present century.
What he's warning us about is that classical science ignores philosophy
altogether, there is a void out there as far as the universe beyond, not to
mention causes. Or at least this is the sort of nihilistic materialist
philosophy Dummett is trying to say does not mix with magical/hermetic
theory.

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Wed Jun 12 20:37:35 1996
Subject: 1047 Science/magic

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 20:18:41 +0200 (MET DST)
From: douwe

>From: A'yin Da'ath

>All people enter the study of the occult for the purpose of power - sexual,
>financial, physical, etc. It doesn't matter who - anyone who says that the
>reason they entered the study for the purpose of raising themselves to
>higher status is lying.

This may however have happened in former lives so that the current one
displays a search for truth more then a search for physical excitement.
(I am talking of natural inclinations here).

The magically working, selfcentered desires, have over time materialized the
etherical worlds into solid matter.
Once conscious of this, there should be a return (the restoration, or
Tikkun), because materialization may be drawn so far that things will
crumble and break on the lightest touch.
This is a metaphor which in reality may be better compared with sounds...
If you have a light sound like a breeze or soft breath, then it restores and
organizes, but if you have a low and trembling sound then it disorganizes,
and it may disorganize so much that life is made impossible, for in the very
same way that you can't live somewhere where there would be such a heavy
sound which might make everything shake and tremble...(This is very clearly
observed in the ethers of the breath of someone)
In the old days this used to be a natural comparison, and that is why
earthquakes have been used as metaphorically, as a sign that the end is near.
This also holds true in the inner process of reorganization,
transfiguration, or individualization, wherein you'll have to go through some
critical time which also could be compared to those apocalyptic signs.
It is the same with the worlds process, and with the process in the laboratory.

In a sense this is what Alchemy is also about, the return out of the density
of any matter by keeping far from energy.

Dwelling in, and using these lower energies for a longer while will
disorganize you so thoroughly that you eventually will be begging for a
return to the lighter kind beyond energy.
But this also doesn't necessarilly take place in this current life.

douwe.

Wed Jun 12 20:37:47 1996
Subject: 1048 Where to begin?

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:06:13 -0500
From: George Randall Leake III

>From: D.R.Williams
>The study of Alchemy seems to me to be facinating in its endless
>complexity and symbolism, and now I would very much like to attempt to
>learn. However as a newcommer to the work I am bewildered as to where to
>start. My reading so far consists of some books on symbolism, and trying
>to read C. G. Jung's book on the subject, but I would like to read
>something more basic on the subject in order to provide me with a firmer
>grounding.

*We get this question all the time. David, it might be helpful for you to
post your email address so we can post to you privately. Also it would be
nice if we had a sort of FAQ. That said the most obvious place for you to
start, assuming you have WWWeb access is on Adam's alchemy web page -
http://www.levity.com/alchemy

*As far as Jung's approach, a very straightforward 100 pages to read, which
btw has pretty accurate history (with his spin on it of course) of alchemy,
is from his Psychology and Alchemy, the first few chapters of the section
entitled "Religious Ideas in Alchemy".

*Many core alchemical texts are up on Adam's web page. One recent discovery
is the well-edited and footnoted Cambridge edition of the Corpus Hermeticum

-G.Leake, 512-471-9117 [email protected]

Wed Jun 12 20:37:56 1996
Subject: 1049 Trojani - Tarot de Montegna

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 14:31:16 -0400
From: RawnClark

Joel mentions, re Trojani --

>He wrote "Le Tarot de Montagna, commentaire alchimique" (Edition A.
>Leydoux, Paris)

Does any one know if there's an English translation of this? Are there any
French/English speakers out there who have read this book and would be
willing to speak with me about it (in English)? Has any one out there
actively studied the Tarocchi del Mantegna? I was recently gifted a set of
the beautiful 1980 Italian reprint (cards) and am just discovering its wealth
of alchemical symbolism. I'd really like to correspond with someone who has
studied these images and compare notes.

Many thanks,
:) Rawn Clark
11 Jun 96

Wed Jun 12 20:38:05 1996
Subject: 1050 Science/magic revisited

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 14:43:01 -0400
From: Jon Evans, Writer at Large

> From: OISPEGGY
>
> >[email protected]
> >All people enter the study of the occult for the purpose of power - sexual,
> >financial, physical, etc. It doesn't matter who - anyone who says that the
> >reason they entered the study for the purpose of raising themselves to
> >higher status is lying.
>
> Not me. I started it in order to raise myself and I am not lying.
> Actually, early on I would have chucked my esoteric studies in
> a minute if I could just live a simple, happy life. Now I'm
> hooked though. My point is that not everyone starts in order to
> get power.
>
> - Peggy -

I'd have to agree with Peggy. Or, rather, agree with ayindaath from Peggy's
point of view. Or rather ... you see, it's complex statement, much like
alchemy and other arcane studies. You can't just say someone is studying the
occult for the purpose of power ... perhaps gaining power is a side effect of
studying the occult for knowledge's sake. Perhaps studying the occult allows
one to make the world better, which requires some sort of power other than that
with which we are born. Therefore, the study of the occult isn't for power,
but power is a tool one gains along the way. Making a broad statement like
that seems narrow minded, IMHO.

I'm new here, and not all that knowledgeable in the works of alchemy,
and I'm called more to the philosophy of it all. One thing I've noticed, in
the recent weeks, is the limitation of the philosophical/religious aspects of
alchemy to druidic/pagan studies. What about alchemical practices in the
"major" religions, such as Christianity and Judaism? After all, what's the
transformation of the host into the body and blood of Christ if not an
alchemical (albeit philosophically) transformation? There are less public
examples of this throughout many texts (although I'm hard pressed to remember
any off the top of my head).

Thoughts, rebuttals, opinions, or further information?

-Jon

Jon Evans | Cycling Commuter at Large
Writer/Trainer/Philosopher | [email protected]