Alchemical Symbolism

Start with Pythagorus. Then the symbols make sense. They are a language unto themselves.

>>19030247
Sorry...forgot linky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwxZ21qRdMg

>>19030412
Thanks. I'll look into it. Any remark on the nature of alchemy? Was there a physical aspect to it at all or was it all metaphor?

>>19030424
All metaphor. The church didn't mind free gold but people getting eternal life by cutting out the middle man would be a burning at the stake type offense.

>>19030453
Alright. I suspected that most texts were a mixture of metaphor and actual experimental processes to throw off the layman. I'm sure there are later people who studied alchemy and wrote texts believing that the process was entirely physical. Seems like one of the keys is differentiating between the two.

>>19030424
Alchemy culmination of all ancient knowledge. It articulates the relationships of all things, including those which are not perceived by our senses. It is foundation of Astrology, Tarot, etc. but also describes music, geometry, color, temperature, pressure, gravity...pretty much everything. I would describe it as the articulation of the fundamental forces of the universe.

>>19030247

I liked Cleopatra's audiences a lot.

File: tmp_1937-Facebook-·-d7d644-101545032.png (34KB, 500x316px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x316px

>>19030247
To understand Fire, Water, Earth, and Air, look to their primary elements: Heat - Cold, Dry - Wet.

Heat and cold are not different from traditional thermodynamics. The dichotomy of dry and wet however refers to solidity or fluidity. Nichola Tesla mastered the physics of this dichotomy when he utilized the fluid properties of sonic dynamics to split a solid steel beam into equal parts.

The fascinating part about the solidity - fluidity dichotomy is how well it translates to social dynamics. Simply put dogmatic thinking is when a person's social patterns are solid. If one belief system is thought to be incorrect, then the dogmatic thinker judges all related belief systems from that source to be incorrect, just as a solid is defined by how moving one part of the substance's material system causes all parts to move in unity with it.

Contrary to this, a logical thinker can fluidly examine each belief in a system independently. However, similar to solids and fluids, logically examining each individual piece of a belief system takes longer, just as a sonic wave propogating through a fluid takes longer than a sonic wave through a solid. And so while logical thinkers have more diversity available to their minds, dogmatic thinkers respond more quickly to situations.

And a master is someone who knows how to convert solid social systems into fluid ones, and back again when and where the master chooses.

>>19030472
>Seems like one of the keys is differentiating between the two.
Different anon, but that's a fair assessment.
Sounds like you're on the right track.

File: divineishidden.jpg (141KB, 405x484px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 405x484px

>>19030472

Alchemists were the original /x/philes.

>>19030247
>Any tips on reading alchemical texts?
Learn the symbolism, learn the associations between things.
>I know that the elements represent qualities but i'm not sure how these are used in the context of alchemy.
There are a shitton of them and I'm too lazy to list them all here.

>>19030247
https://mega.nz/#F!AE5yjIqB!y7Vdxdb5pbNsi2O3zyq9KQ
This might be from the board sticky. I know it has an Alchemy folder.

>>19030490
Interesting interpretation. From this perspective it kind of looks like alchemists attempted to bridge the gap between the physical and the mental by explaining them as being composed of the same principles.

File: tmp_5946-7009-animal_earsgenderbentglowing_eyeskyubeypuella_magi_madoka_magicared_eyestailwhite_hair558028868.jpg (80KB, 850x630px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 850x630px

>>19030629
It's because to an alchemist, people are just another state of matter.

It's why the study of alchemy sometimes drives a person to madness. It can be difficult to hold onto meaning in life, after successfully reducing the human experience to the same sets of processes as the chemicals which drive the human body's life force in the first place.

Do not make the full realization of alchemy an end unto itself, or you will end up completely solving your own existence. This kills the alchemist.

>>19030247
There was a time, way back. when vocabulary wasn't has developed as today.And making up new terms directly for this practice would've been both painful for the writer and hard to comprehend for the reader. Using physical words to describe abstract theories

File: 3d8ffdc3782f0399577883c391c168bb.jpg (438KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 1600x1200px

First of all, alchemy isn't only about spiritual processes. Everyone who pretends to have a smattering of Hermetic knowledge should know that "As above so bellow means" naturally implies practical Alchemy as well as spiritual. And everyone should know that their favorite alchemists from the antiquity to the Reneissance and up until the 19th century are all PROVEN to have done practical work. If you want practical alchemy go with Fulcanelli. If you want spiritual alchemy...go to Yoga i guess. Because no one ever defined how to do "spiritual alchemy".

>>19030782
So you are basically saying that there is a metaphorical spiritual side in addition to the practical physical experiments. Like I said earlier, it looks like differentiating between the two is up to the reader. I'm surprised that nobody has revealed the principles of "spiritual alchemy" before though. I'm looking for a sort of glossary (if it exists) that translates these arcane terms.

>>19030405
Any specific texts you recommend?

>>19030782
>>19030884
This "practical alchemy" sounds like a pipe dream of a fantasizer who wants life to be like television.

Have you yourself ever done "practical alchemy"? Have you seen it? So why do you believe it? Because you read about it?

"Spiritual alchemy" (which you suggest "no one ever defined how to do) IS practical alchemy. If you don't want to be an automaton and subject to every paltry outside influence which causes fluctuations in your state of mind and self, then you want alchemy.

Buddhism is alchemy. Christianity is alchemy. Sufism is alchemy. Religions are alchemy. You are the base metal, or lead, originally, and you are meant to be converted to gold. Not everyone is converted to gold. The elements are found inside of you. Most people are sleeping automatons who only serve to add their little bits of energy to nature then die uselessly.

Alchemy is practical because it is making a change in your inner state which is actually just a higher form of chemistry we don't know much of according to "science". It's the crystallization of a certain substance that you could call a soul.

>>19031842
Exactly. This is what I am asking. I know the true meaning of these texts is veiled behind symbolism. The entire art can't just be a rudimentary form of chemistry. I'm just looking for a way to interpret them.

>>19031867
Ah, if you're the OP, I didn't mean to rag on you since you seem to be humbly asking. I was just ragging on the guy who seemed to be giving information on something I'd be very surprised he knew much about in real life.

I would say that you take the whole thing in the framework of the transmutation of the self and try to understand the elements in this context, as each alchemist writers in their own way. It may be impossible to create a coherent, single framework to unite it all. The keys may have been lost to decode what is essentially an occult (the meaning of which is hidden) doctrine.

However, I would like to strongly suggest that you view it as the transmutation of the self/soul out of the body. I am not all for mainstream science but any sane person can see that, not only is there no practical way these people could have known how to convert lead to gold without there being proof of it, but also that this is quite an unspiritual pursuit if it really were just that.

>>19031891
No worries. Yeah, I agree that these works are best read in the framework of the transmutation of the self. The authors of these texts valued knowledge, learning, and self discovery (I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that one stated that material wealth means nothing). To think that they lusted after physical gold is absurd.

File: IMG_20170520_030837_01.jpg (52KB, 720x1043px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 720x1043px

Anybody know what this symbol is? I think it's alchemic. This is important.

>>19030247
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYbyDBgIto4

>>19032424
Looks kinda like a goeic sigil.

>>19030247
Read modern alchemist books. It makes more sense for a beginner.
And i agree to what is said before, alchemy is a practical art.
You must work with the matter again and again to start understanding alchemy.
Any craftsman will know what it means to work everyday with your hand until there is something more to it.

>>19032548
That was my first thought. Didn't find anything close enough in those lists.

>>19030453
No, it was not all metaphor. There was literal, physical practice of alchemy. That is beyond a doubt. Figurative and literal alchemy are not mutually exclusive. There is also sexual alchemy. All three exist(ed).

File: 1493617070887.jpg (589KB, 1999x1332px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 1999x1332px

There you go

>>19030247
I think it would be worth your time to read The Hermetic Tradition by Julius Evola. It's the best general book on the symbolism of Western alchemy that I've found so far.

>>19030405
What are you talking about? We don't have anything from the Pythagorean schools. Do you mean just to read what others have said or surmised about his school? I'd love to know, I'm very interested in Pythagoras. In terms of how he relates to Alchemy, I sort of see where you might get that, but not really. How did you find that sort of connection?
Admittedly, I don't know as much about his system as I would like, given its mystery, but I have a vague idea about the numerical order and the importance of ratios and volume.

>>19034872
Thanks for the recommendation. I found some other texts that explain the metaphorical "spiritual" alchemy too. It basically explains that this "higher" alchemy has as much in common with chemistry as freemasonry has with masonry.

>>19034892
I looked into the teachings of others that followed in his footsteps. I found a good explanation of the elements, but haven't seen anything explaining the alchemists terminology (aside from Plato's description of Man being a Mineral with his roots in the heavens and feet on the Earth).

>>19030247
OP, look, you're going to have do a bit of background reading and some visual research.

I suggest reading - very carefully - Holmyard, Burckhardt, Evola, on alchemy, in that order, and in parallel, going through Adam MacLean's free materials on his website. If you like his approach, then give the man a break and pay for one of his longer courses. He's one of the best and generous to a fault with his time and knowledge.

Once you're familiar with some of the terminology, say after you've read Holmyard, start taking a peek at some of the foundational Hermetic texts, then some of the shorter alchemical texts available in English. That ought to frighten you back to the books and MacLean.

Have fun!

>>19030782
This is total rubbish, anon.

Categoric ignorance, without any sources, and vague statements, the opposite of which are in fact true.

And your crass ignorance on spiritual alchemy is laughable. GTFO.

References: Evola, Burckhardt, Holmyard , as mentioned earlier.

>>19031842
Did you read what i said? All, i mean ALL alchemists that you quote and pretend are spiritual have done practical work. Name an alchemist and i will provide with quotes to their chemical work. But i doubt you 'spiritual' cats can name even one. You get all your knowledge from lame youtube videos. Spiritual alchemy is a pipe dream. People are using it without defining it or knowing what it means. Everyone defines it however they like to make them feel good about whatever nonsense they are practicing. Its either nothing or everything, like you just said (every world religion) so its a meaningless term. Search for the alchemical livraries that i often post and educate yourself.

>>19037527
Or better yet let me cut your suffering and post the two biggest alchemical libraries on the internet, that i redact, because your dire need of education demands it.

https://mega.nz/#F!jBk3nBwC!3kbcd3Yb0I1Dkw6GCBLY1A
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/uldbxpm2nyw7a

>>19037545
Thanks for the links. Check out the texts on alchemy by Ethan Allen Hitchcock. He believes (and gives examples from alchemical texts) that the subject of alchemy is Man and the goal is spiritual. I agree that there were those who practiced physical alchemy, but based on the author's views these people missed the original meaning. I don't know if this is true or if alchemy was a physical paractice and groups later used alchemical terms to describe their own system of spiritual development. There are arguments for both cases.

>>19037048
Someone mentioned the Evola text above but not the other two. I'll check them out. Also, if you haven't looked into the works by the author in the post above I recommend them.

>>19037752
Yea, it's a popular meme opinion. Basil Valentine, Khunrath, Saint Germain are PROVEN to have done practical work. And these are the alchemists that the proponents of the spiritual theory like to cite as exemplary spiritual alchemists. It's laughable really.

There have been some great responses so far. Let's keep this going.

>>19030692

>It's why the study of alchemy sometimes drives a person to madness.

Well historically, that probably had more to do with the fact that they were throwing together random experimental chemical concoctions and drinking them just to see what happens. And often times inhaling toxic fumes too.

Final bump

No this one is. bump