So I am riffing off of Crowley's "Magick in Theory and Practice" for the title of this thread.
I have just come into a cache of alchemical books and have been reading and studying the historical roots and mysteries behind the progenitor of modern science. Recently Issac Newtons papers on Alchemy have finally been published after suppression by the Royal Society for years.
Newton was not only a prolific experimenter in the nascent sciences, as well as a deep thinker on theological issues, but it turns out his real passion was Alchemy! In fact his alchemical interests are what led to his "discovery" of calculus, experiments with light, and his theories on gravity and forces. This is the "stuff" that modern day "Science" would rather you not know.
Science is the bastard child of Alchemy! I studied Physics, Chemistry and Electrical engineering at University and that fact makes me laugh with delight!
But here are a few interesting observations about the alchemical practice that I want to note down:
1.) Alchemy has the central belief that "As above so Below" and that the Spiritual aspect of the alchemist is as important as the physical aspect, if not more important.
2.) The most prolific scientists (Tesla comes to mind) used alchemical processes to make their discovery and then most of them sort of "wrote that out" of their discoveries or papers. Tesla, for example would build his experiments and apparatus in his mind first - in complete color and three dimensions. He would get great lightning bursts of inspiration.
I am interested in those here who are perhaps practicing alchemists or who are also interested in this subject.
There’s a lovely alchemy story where an Alchemist is staying with a couple. While he’s out the couple steal some of his philosopher’s stone or the red powder, and try to change some lead into gold. However, the experiment fails, and when the Alchemist returns the couple confront him complaining that they couldn’t make it work. The Alchemist smiles and simply says “go check it now.” The couple run back to the crucible, and find that the lead has indeed turned to gold. This shows that the power of transformation isn’t in the chemistry, it’s in the Alchemist.
Well, I'm bumping this thread as I really thought there would be more practicing or at least interested Alchemists here on the forum.
I really thought Shawn would chime in here, after all - with his deep knowledge of Runic forms, Numerology, and Magick in general, I suspect he has come across a reference to Alchemy once or twice.
But the truth is we are all doing "Alchemy" of one sort or another. We create our reality regardless if we realize it or not.
So lets here it from some alchemists out there!
Sorry , David...missed it , as I had to do medical trimming work...;)
Will be busy for next day or two...but I will try to address this before
then , more thoroughly...thanks for your good thought of me...
Truth is , I was a guest for the three day Alchemy Conference in L.A.
California , in 2009 , where I met Masura Emoto , Nassim Haramein ,
Mantauk Chia , Robert Bartlett , and many more...
And interacted with them , rather extensively...
( then flown to a breakthrough technology conference in Canada ,
followed by a multi day workshop with Vernon Wolfe in Vancouver ,
for consultation with the code applied during the event )
So yeah...will get back to you , I do have much to add...
Meantime , you can , if you choose , ponder this , and the possibilities
inherent in the code , if what I am stating is true...
These are the runes , associated with these elements...which are as well
the sonics , and shape of the strings at the center of those atoms...
Octavial based sonics...( in octaves )...frequencies , producing oscillations...
As far as Ormes , however...I was given free "alchemical gold" , aka mono - atomic
gold , for two years...I myself , did not notice a major change , *however* I had just
experienced a nineteen day "kundalini" experience , where I went between worlds
and saw raven turn white , sun turn black ( nigredo process ) , saw the peacock
rainbow ( frequency spectrum ) , got "downloaded" with vast amounts of information
and was literally "pulled apart , and put back together" , as in the cauldron of the
shaman...or the spirits initiation...
So *that* might have affected the transformative power of the "normal" experience
claimed by the Orme alchemists...;)
Will be back...here is that sheet for now , again...I believe you saw it before , but
for those who have not...( by the way , a Rosicrucian speaker and myself had quite
a conversation about these two columns of symbols , and the expanded paired version
which results in the pairing of elements , producing the "peacocks tail"...;)...)
Is this in a book, or are these your personal notes? I'd love to read more, but I noticed the hole punched pages, so if its yours, when will you publish? If you've got some published source material I'd love to look it up.
All my work , yet one of my former students did
the graphics for me , approximately 2004...
Yet , this is not UPG , yet the code I speak of underlying
consciousness and the unified field as we know it , and are
discovering...thus from a *very* ancient tradition , some
have called the Primordial Tradition , or knowledge of the
"fallen angels" , given long ago...
Many names , many cultures , throughout time...
Same arrangement of colors was known in that right hand
column , as the "Rainbow Bridge Of Asgard"...or many other
names , as one of the names for the grid , is the Chromatic
Color Scale Of The Rosicrucians...
Coded in the abbreviation of their name The Ancient Accepted
Mystical Order Rosy Cross , or in reverse , abbreviated :
With the rune "Eck" , which can mean charge...( frequency )
I have been working on the book for 23 years...thousands and
thousands of pages of notes , illustrations , formulas , spells...
I am currently looking for help , or funding , or both , to organize and publish...
Here is a photo of just some of my notes...
But here is me teaching years ago , in Calgary , Canada ,
after that alchemy conference , and breakthrough tech
conference...they wanted me to focus on 2012 , so I did...
But , if you are ever out my way...we can speak of you visiting
and sharing time , and info...*that* is magic !
Okay, I am definitely going to listen to this and attempt to absorb your idea about the underlying runic language which I suspect would be very beneficial to a true understanding of alchemy, if not essential to it.
I have a working theory that I use for my occult work that I originally called “Quantum Animism”, but I’ve since realized that it parallels the Animism inherent in Alchemy. Additionally, some of the work I’m doing with it is very Alchemical in nature, involving transformation, so I’ve since called it “Alchemical Animism.” The theory includes the idea that energy/matter in manifestation has “complexes” like Platonic forms behind it, which thought/intent can influence in the same way you can influence another person by communicating with them. This opens the door to using Information Theory in an Alchemical way.
Very Rupert Shelfrake of you (Morphic Fields). Just finished reading two of his fascinating books. This all goes along with the Alchemical idea of "mono-atomic" states of elements (sometimes called "ORMES"). When an element that is stable in even a single atom state, such as Gold, Lead, Antimony, Mercury, it displays very different properties than when it is in a crystal lattice.
This is the idea of the "Philosophic Gold" or "Philosophic Mercury" for example. The metals in this state are a fine talc like powder that does not behave anything like the metals as you normally know them. They don't even display the usual spectrum unless heated to 5000 degrees in an arc furnace, then they revert back to their normal lattice state.
Yes, Sheldrake and I agree on the basic idea of Morphic Fields with the exception of the role of randomness. The universe isn't random. Additionally, while Sheldrake identified the habitual aspects of morphic fields, he was not able to identify how this effect transmitted to matter. Instead, he replaced the “natural law” assumption with a morphic fields assumption. My K-Field theory is based on a mathematical proof and experimental physics, and it does explain how it interacts with matter. So, I don't use the Sheldrake's ideas directly, but you can see the K-Field as a type of Morphic field. It definitely serves the function of an Akashic record.
Math like chemistry is a medium of alchemy so I've been working with a Hydrodynamic model of what I call the K-Field, but might as well be the Astral plain or part of the collective unconscious. The model started with Thought and Memory based on James Hillman's theories on the unconscious as the Underworld. This is also based on Decision-Field theory, but that's a bit harder to explain. I've since added Desire so that I have an equation D = T * M which works metaphorically or in analogy, but I can't yet do any calculations because some of the values are not yet measurable. However, I have also mapped this back to classic alchemy so that D=Sulfur, T=Mercury, and M=Salt. That's D for Desire, T for Thought and M for Memory.
The issue is that there are so many different kinds and interpretations of alchemy, for example Carl Jung thought that all alchemy was a form of psychological symbolism and practice, and others have interpreted it in a symbolic sense. There are also many other complex interpretations of alchemy such as that of Rudolf Steiner that incorporate both spiritual and physical aspects. Then there are other "practitioners" such as the "Paracelsus College"which regard alchemy as a basically physical practice with spiritual aspects.There are also living alcchemical traditions in the Arab world, and China and India all with different interpretations of the nature of alchemy.
We also note that Crowley's ideas of sexual alchemy are paralleled in many different cultures, and are by no means hiss own "invention".
There is even a traditional Celtic Druidic form of alchemy! So the question of alchemical practice always needs to be prefaced by a statement of which interpretation of alchemy one in referring to. Having practised every publicly known former alchemy over the years(and a few forms unknown in public) am of the opinion that there is no one meaning of alchemy as all the different forms work very well, and many of them in spite of the differences intheory and practice have been successfully "road tested"over the centuries.