Alchemy and The Philosopher's Stone is Real

Whut?

*glances nervously at his avatar picture*

reply to post by inforeal


My understanding is that Geber, if we are to pick only one Geber that is, lived in around the 8th century. I haven't read on him in a while and may be incorrect.

But i DO know that Zosimos has been found confirmed as an alchemist living a few hundred years before him.

It is my opinion that alchemy is among the oldest "sciences" of mankind. It has intertwined within it a theory of everything. I believe Pythagoras to be an alchemist of the soul, not using material substance but rather the ethereal. Of course, his Hellenistic roots would make this all the more plausible.

I also have the opinion that Moses (Tutmosis) represents an alchemist. The thing is, the "magick" of alchemy was historically relegated to initiates in the various Mysteries.

ETA: i wonder why the connection is so rarely made between classical alchemy, and the Amerind mystics such as the Yaqui? It would seem to me that the different cultures initiated different thought processes that basically both were trying to take different paths to the same goal. "Magick" is merely controlling the flow of time from the past to create the present and future. It isn't incantations, but rather skillful behaviors and actions.

Numerous are the newcomers interested in this science for the wonders she offers to understanding. This sensational nebula surrounds Alchemy with a diffuse cloud made of dreams and fantasies, covering an attraction for the seeker that the epochs never could erase, generated most of the time by our own Philosophers in their hermetic treatises. We often meet studious circles debating about the reality of a spiritual alchemy which could exist independently of another alchemy called "practical" or "operative". These adversaries offer burning feuds on this subject and the absence of all temperance pushes them to close the debates, each group rejoining his side, well determined to protect their respective doctrine, Internal Magistery against External Alchemy clearly separated. These illegitimate disagreements serve to prove an ignorance and incomprehension of what true Alchemy is.
The hermetic Quest, which can be qualified as a rational mysticism, has cohorts of investigators, from the uneducated to the scholar, vehemently engage themselves in these debates playing with concepts which augment incessantly in quantity and intensity, redoubling in rhetoric to serve their egos so as to shine in public, this simply proves that their hermetic foundations are stale. The principal cause is this primal incomprehension of Alchemy which brings them to elaborate different ingenious assumptions to fill in the vacant void left by their plain ignorance.
So was born Alchemy called spiritual, modern and futile invention, in the attempt of appropriating itself a Science which fails them but which attracts lust in men that show themselves as geniuses who believed they could decipher the mysteries which humanity thought unfathomable and get drunk off of this deception. They abuse the credulous agitating their misleading knowledge in the form of elitist speeches, that cover especially a formidable occasion for these new gurus in difficulty for recognition, to walk about their fantasies of greed to be one day considered as master torchbearers in a non-codified environment, very little explored and unknown in its alchemical reality. When hermeticism is confined to this occult and mysterious domain, there unconsciously develops a supernatural field of lawlessness where all control is operated by the powerful, the resounding, the dazzling..
One thing is very certain, without having read numerous writings of authors with the reputation of having been reknown adepts, to understand great subtleties they share and pin point on the Work, it is impossible and absolutely futile to imagine we could know anything.
The philosophical pendant of this difficult science has many thinking that it is a science of speculation as new age groups emerge in anti-materialistic, ascetic ideologies.
And Geber is simply known to be one of the few recognized arab adepts having brought Alchemy to Europe, the occidental world in the Middle Age. I suggest that those learned in the matter share their views intead of failing to construct an objective study. Authors speak of the generation of metals without which it is absolutely impossible to conceive anything positive. So the question is, can someone say even the faintest thing of it?
Has anyone even read more than one or a couple of hermetic authors?
I'd like to see those express themselves if they please!

reply to post by AlRub


I, personally, am not as well versed. However, I would definitely say I am of a deeper understanding that your average layperson.

Regardless, I am intrigued with what you are saying. And if you don't mind a conversation with yourself, invite you to post your treatise here.

Where are our two "adepts" !?
I mean the one with "2012" in his pseudo, and the author of the urine book.
Maybe they have enough assurance to speak up a bit?

I found the stone.

It is the soul.

Now doesn't this silence serve to prove no one here is learned in the hermetic philosophy nor the study of the Great Work ?
I'll be waiting here patiently 'til one of the so-called "adepts" of this forum show themselves..
If i receive no reply, then you will know what to think of their urine and short authoritative posts in the past.
Cheers to all, in the hope of exchanging with a like-minded friend of the Art.

reply to post by IndieA


The Stone is a tangible chemical body, red which can be pulverized when dry and liquefied when warmed, it is a fixed fusible, metallic Salt, and our mines' gold digested to a purity and life uncomparable to what nature can produce on its own, without the Philosopher's artifice.

Stop talking nonsense and just read the book: bookofaquarius.forgottenbooks.org...

Will do, you probably shouldn't have asked, your ridiculous theory regarding urine, and most likely other ideas you've embroidered around this substance will be ridiculed by none other than Alchemy's long historical line of Adepts, and of course, yourself.
I know for a fact that you've no tangible result and especially no true Medicine nor Stone of metallic conversion, and your attempt to fool those with a feeble understanding and much hope will be put to light and highly condemned.
Those like you have searched, and your disillusion regarding chemical practice and tangible results made you think it was possible for you to fool so many in this non-codified environment where the first to speak is also the first heard.
I feel it is my charge here to expose you, expect verbal joust with me, on a science you skimmed through long enough to trump. As we say, it is on. I've already exposed the reason for the latter 17th century's use of the word "urine" to qualify this first philosophical, essential and crude mercury. The rest will come very soon, LET THIS BE A WARNING to all those credulous enough to search for this agent outside the mineralo-metallic realm, as forewarned by many adepts, like in urine, and other highly improper substances likely to dissolve Metals.

OK, sure. Would you mind creating a new topic for this debate that you want? I appreciate the publicity.

I am a little busy at the moment, but will try to answer when I can.

reply to post by sign00


Isn't what he/she wants to debate the very topic of this thread?

What if the sole and unique element of the "philosopher's stone" is not urine but semen?

What if the manipura chakra (the city of jewels) or, more specifically, the navel region plays an extremely important role to Produce and Distribute this ambrosia in the body?

What if Napoleon Bonaparte consciously or unconsciously showed us exactly what to do (the exact body mudra) to produce this "philosopher's stone"?

There's nothing to prepare or ingest.

You're ALL mistaken.

reply to post by AlRub

Strange enough someone thought urine as the key ingredient.

I don't know about any Philosophers Stone (real or symbolic) but if I'm looking for the fountain of youth and want to use magic then I would create a change in my consciousness (which is all magic really is) to accept the idea that I am immortal. We die because we are in a death-ist culture. We have been all told we will one day die. We get what we believe. A change in mass consciousness would more likely hold the key to immortality than any other thing including this stone.

Originally posted by LunaKat
I don't know about any Philosophers Stone (real or symbolic) but if I'm looking for the fountain of youth and want to use magic then I would create a change in my consciousness (which is all magic really is) to accept the idea that I am immortal. We die because we are in a death-ist culture. We have been all told we will one day die. We get what we believe. A change in mass consciousness would more likely hold the key to immortality than any other thing including this stone.

The first human being did not have culture around him telling him that he was going to die, and yet he still did. I think it's more likely that we die because death actually exists, rather than some secret to immortality that we could somehow harness somehow by some change in mass consciousness.



(to all on this thread who think the philosopher's stone exists):
Immortality of the physical body doesn't exist, but death is nothing to be afraid of. Being hyped up about a fake magical stone is serving to make you waste your entire life worrying about death instead of spending your life enjoying the life you have.

reply to post by spacekc929


Hi spacekc, we don't really know the consciousness of the first human being..and don't even want to go into that cause some people will say it was Adam and Eve and others will say it was aliens and so on. Fact is..no one knows. But I still do believe that a change in mass consciousness is the key. But as I think about it..it might not be such an effort because science is closing in on this all the time. Already they are saying that today's children may live to 150..so it draws closer and closer. If not immortality, certainly a much longer life span than we now know. And we don't need a stone for that.

Another thing about the first human being..is that he/she may have come to the wrong conclusion. Let us say the first human being saw the seasons change and felt when the tree lost all its leaves that the human inferred it died. That the first human did not realize yet it would come back..so the fish began dying and all around him/her started to show death. I said a tree but it could be a lot of things..when mass consciousness is limited to one or just a handful of the first humans..an error like that in conscious beliefs is really grave (pun intended )

A change in consciousness could correct that error ..although it might take several generations to fully wipe out the idea of death...but still the more that consider it, the faster the "discoveries" will occur and the shift in our mind-body-spirit will take place.

I love what you wrote in the second paragraph. Very true

reply to post by pepsi78


Thank you Pepsi78, jeez, urine and semen.... what else will i hear, blood? sweat? spit?
This only shows the lack of knowledge and the illiteracy of some who post without a single hint..
As this is a pretty difficult science even for those who are learned, please post if you have quotes to back it up, because this thread ends up speculating so far away that it's becoming truly destitute of any studiosity.

A sulfuric mineral, a mercurial metal; the two bodies, and a saline androgynous agent, the metallic crude semen and dissolvant as Ripley asks to start the Work in trinity, to not quote dozens more..

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I don't think his original intention was to debate but to present us his theory in which he founded all his hopes, aka "urine", hopes to be largely accepted, as he's been by people debuting in this extremely subtle science.
The proof of this is the very simple-minded book itself and its diffusion without any true results (and he knows this), his forum which attracts rather fans of Alchemy through "Full Metal Alchemist", which is of such low grade i don't know if you realize, so theres no danger that they'll question him...etc.
Look, Author of the Aquarius wipes, this isn't personal, i have a bit of respect for those who are learned even in only the alchemical principles, but going all out with so little made karma show me the way to you for this reason. Your enterprise is due to crumble under the crushing weight of what'll come and wasn't meant to outlive those like me.
But we can speak in a gentle and less satyric manner if only you start reckoning this fault of yours, and start correcting your erring with what we will be able to extract, compound and conjecture upon together..
See that this is a friendly hand i'm holding out, and i won't tolerate even a hint of pretense nor arrogance from you if you decide to do this study together for the good of those who are trying to understand alchemical practice, not the one belonging to people who have a mind conducive to amplify and swell and are literalists and lachrymists as some would say, but the only one which has been so well veiled, that noone here offered any true investigation into it.
My intentions are good, if yours are too, prove it.
Cheers

reply to post by AlRub


I don't know how urine could do such things since it's the result of residual stuff.
Drinking urine will make you sick because urine is a byproduct, not of nature but of animal processing, all processed foods are bad, I see urine no other way as a processed byproduct. I rather not say but think of what effect would urine have ? and what effects all byproducts have that come out of a process.

The term residual waste comes to mind, this is no different than toxic residues from other sources, toxic wastes.