• The migration to this new platform is complete, but there are a lot of details to sort out. If you find something that needs to be fixed make a post in this thread. Thank you for your patience!

Dew

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
In another thread I posed a question about dew but got no answer.

Another poster suggested that dew that appears on say blades of grass is far more enriched or potent than dew that is extracted directly from the air.
He said that the former is "nourished by the earth".

Does anyone have experience to confirm this?

Is ground dew, being closer to the earth, gaining from the vapours rising out of the earth? Is dew collected from the air (say using a large metal sheet) less potent/useful because it has already lost much of its strength by having been circulating freely in the air?


This link was posted on the forum back in 2011:



It shows how to create a "Dew Pond", a self filling shallow basin of dew water

Would this be as potent as dew collected from the grass? Or would it be less potent because the vapours from the ground are probably not in contact with this dew water because of the substances used to create the shallow basin?
 

Illen A. Cluf

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
1,591
Odd, because I thought I read somewhere, long ago, that the dew should not touch the ground - or metal. I can't recall where I read that.

I believe that's why sheets were hung off the ground and later wrung. I've seen some videos where the practitioner soaked the dew directly from the grass, using sheets, which would seem opposed to the concept of it not touching the ground.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
Odd, because I thought I read somewhere, long ago, that the dew should not touch the gorund - or metal. I can't recall where I read that.

I believe that's why sheets were hung off the ground and later wrung. I've seen some videos where the practitioner soaked the dew directly from the grass, using sheets, which would seem opposed to the concept of it not touching the ground.

I've never tried pegging sheets just above the ground. I'm not sure whether the vapours would condense in the sheet as well as they do on blades of grass. I'll have to try it sometime. I suspect dragging sheets along the wet grass would be far far more productive but you'd need to filter the collected dew.

I ask this whole question because very clearly people have now invented/designed devices that are able to capture the vapours and condense them and channel the resulting dew into a container of some kind. So you could set this up and leave it overnight and just find all the dew collected next dawn.

However, I'm just curious as to whether ground dew is more potent.

i.e. Imagine a drop of dew forms on a blade of grass. Then for many more hours the earth vapours keep rising and go into that formed drop so it gets super saturated (nourished) by the earth.

Conversely imagine you collect dew using an apparatus that condenses the vapours maybe 2-3 meters above the ground. That dew drops into a container and is thus not being constantly saturated by the continual rising vapours from the earth.

On yet another angle, take the dew pond idea in the link I gave.

If this shallow basin fills naturally with dew (and does so say on a full moon day) does the dew gain more and more potency from the rays of the moon as it sits there?

I suppose there are multiple things at play here.

Do the vapours from the earth provide anything to existing drops of dew that have formed?

Do the rays of the moon provide anything to existing drops of dew or ponds of dew that have formed?

Do we need both for max potency?
 

Illen A. Cluf

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
1,591
The clean linen sheets would readily allow for the circulation of the vapours from both above and below and be separated from the bacteria, etc. on the ground. It would also allow any rays from the moon to penetrate overnight. You would have to remove the sheets before the sun arises. Using dew require a ridiculous amount, in order to extract enough SM.
 

Illen A. Cluf

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
1,591
Be careful, though. Remember what Fulcanelli taught:

"We also know that the dew of May or Emerald of the philosophers is green and that the Adept Cyliani metaphorically declares this vehicle to be essential for the work. Thus, we do not claim to insinuate that it is necessary to collect, as certain spagyrists and characters of the Mutus Liber, the nocturnal dew of the month of Mary, by attributing to it qualities which we know it does not have. The dew of the sages is a salt, not a water, but it is the special coloration of this water which is used to designate our subject."
 

Jahara

Interiora
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jan 24, 2022
Messages
64
In my experience collecting the dew, what really made the difference was the ground. My method to collect dew was with frozen plastic bottles, I firstly collected in piece of land with flooring, more precisely the backyard of my house. I've collected about 3 to 6 liters of dew in a month, I got some salts.

When I tried the same experiment in a open field, no flooring only earth in the groud the experience was very different, the salt which I got in one day in this place was the same quantity which I got in one month in my backyard and the water was white.

The bottles were placed on a plastic tray directly on the floor.
 

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
In my experience collecting the dew, what really made the difference was the ground. My method to collect dew was with frozen plastic bottles, I firstly collected in piece of land with flooring, more precisely the backyard of my house. I've collected about 3 to 6 liters of dew in a month, I got some salts.

When I tried the same experiment in a open field, no flooring only earth in the groud the experience was very different, the salt which I got in one day in this place was the same quantity which I got in one month in my backyard and the water was white.

The bottles were placed on a plastic tray directly on the floor.

Did the dew collect in the bottles themselves or on the outside and thus dripped into the tray?
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
I've never tried pegging sheets just above the ground. I'm not sure whether the vapours would condense in the sheet as well as they do on blades of grass. I'll have to try it sometime. I suspect dragging sheets along the wet grass would be far far more productive but you'd need to filter the collected dew.

I ask this whole question because very clearly people have now invented/designed devices that are able to capture the vapours and condense them and channel the resulting dew into a container of some kind. So you could set this up and leave it overnight and just find all the dew collected next dawn.

However, I'm just curious as to whether ground dew is more potent.

i.e. Imagine a drop of dew forms on a blade of grass. Then for many more hours the earth vapours keep rising and go into that formed drop so it gets super saturated (nourished) by the earth.

Conversely imagine you collect dew using an apparatus that condenses the vapours maybe 2-3 meters above the ground. That dew drops into a container and is thus not being constantly saturated by the continual rising vapours from the earth.

On yet another angle, take the dew pond idea in the link I gave.

If this shallow basin fills naturally with dew (and does so say on a full moon day) does the dew gain more and more potency from the rays of the moon as it sits there?

I suppose there are multiple things at play here.

Do the vapours from the earth provide anything to existing drops of dew that have formed?

Do the rays of the moon provide anything to existing drops of dew or ponds of dew that have formed?

Do we need both for max potency?

I think it's possible you are injecting some things where they don't belong, or maybe I'm leaving them out. We wont know until the stone is actually constructed who, if anyone was right or wrong. That said, and very humbly, I would suggest the following line of thought, and affirm again that this is only meant as an alternative counterpoint and not meant to be argumentative in any way.

Consider that the dew is already the part that has been nourished, rather than something needing to be nourished.

It's mother is the moon, and it's father is the sun. This isn't talking about astrology, but about how birth is given to the one true thing. Where do the sun (day) and the moon (night) meet? They meet twice, once at dusk and again at dawn. At dusk the moon is "in the mood" and gladly receives the seed of the sun, which plunges into her full force, retiring shortly after.

Overnight is the incubation. As the temperature cools more and more and plants open the polarity shifts, instead of falling from the sky, the humidity rises from the earth, nourished by it and nascent.

As the sun returns at dawn, or just before, the dew is now at full strength. It has received it's very being from the co-mingling of its parents (day and night, the sun and the moon), it has been carried in the air and nourished by the earth (as per a scientific article I posted in another thread dew always has much higher concentrations of earthly impurities than rain, and takes those impurities from the dust and elements of the earth. At dawn it is fat and happy.

And if the sun comes to bear on it it will dry up, losing not only it's humidity back to the sky, but also those "impurities" or "salts" or whatever you want to call them will return not only to the earth, but back to the sky as well, as many components in the dew mix chemically to for volatiles which return to the air, the seed of the next batch. Thus the sun devours it's own child just as the serpent eats it's own tail, only to repeat the cycle of death and rebirth again, ad infinitum.

This is my understanding of dew, of my own observations and studies, I offer it for study and curiosity and not to convert anyone to my view, but to nourish the flow of ideas. I believe that some armoniac can be extracted from it, but there are probably much better and easier ways to get the solvent. Still, it is a fascinating curiosity and I shall continue to work with rain and dew and see where these experiments go over time, because it definitely does seem like the purest, and most noble path.

,DT
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
Be careful, though. Remember what Fulcanelli taught:

"We also know that the dew of May or Emerald of the philosophers is green and that the Adept Cyliani metaphorically declares this vehicle to be essential for the work. Thus, we do not claim to insinuate that it is necessary to collect, as certain spagyrists and characters of the Mutus Liber, the nocturnal dew of the month of Mary, by attributing to it qualities which we know it does not have. The dew of the sages is a salt, not a water, but it is the special coloration of this water which is used to designate our subject."
As it's concentrated, first it resembles pickle juice and then the orange and red start to come out.
 

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
Many thanks DT

I'm not sure from your thoughts there that you understood my question aright. I say this because you say firstly:

"Consider that the dew is already the part that has been nourished, rather than something needing to be nourished."

and then say:

"As the sun returns at dawn, or just before, the dew is now at full strength"


The latter statement is what I expected, which is essentially the notion that a drop of dew forms at point A in the timeline and then once formed is being continually nourished by either the vapours rising from earth or from the influence of the moon and then we eventually arrive at point B which is before dawn and at this point the dew is fully "nourished".

Correct me if you mean something else.

I may well be wrong in my assumptions but it feels instinctive to me that a drop of dew that has formed at point A is not going to be the same as a drop of dew at point B.

This is fundamental imo because it significantly impacts how we should collect dew.

If we devise a contraption that makes dew drops appear (point A) and immediately captures/channels them into a collecting receiver then I would (again instinctively) expect that at point B, before dawn, those dew drops have not changed at all (except some might have evaporated).

Let's say the collector is a bucket for argument's sake.

Do you think that the dew collected in the bucket is still receiving something or being nourished/strengthened by any other factors whilst it's in that bucket? i.e. from the moon's influence or from the surrounding air vapours?

This is why I think dew was traditionally collected at point B using sheets to pick up those fully nourished dew drops.

I suppose in the end the only way to tell is to test both types of dew
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
I suppose in the end the only way to tell is to test both types of dew

Yep, this is how you find out for certain. I'm pretty sure you are going to find though that at least chemically, dew that condenses on a blade of grass is just the same as dew that condenses on a sterile piece of glass, the major difference being when it lands on grass it's now being charged with whatever dirt or dust or whatever impure component it's come to rest on. If we followed that logic then what would be special about the dew itself, when we could charge a fine-mist sprinkler to scatter distilled water for us to "collect."

I guess spiritually the difference would still be there, but chemically, something else entirely has happened, and the way I see it the chemicals affect the process just as the process affects the chemicals.

In the experiment I posted a while back the collection bottles were placed 1m off the ground and they were looking specifically for particles from the highway, metals from exhaust, as well as other contaminants in the soil. I'm not sure of the exact process but being near the earth seems to nourish the dew while if it were on the earth perhaps that would be like drowning the baby in a bath of milk?

I don't know and can't answer to it, but I would suspect the dross that we pick up from the ground isn't worth the improved bounty. I even wander about what kind of sheeting I can use to start collecting the dew.

Another fascinating question would be if a device were created to gather the dew (like a dehumidifier) would moisture collected during the day resemble that at night?? I don't have the lab equipment to test it chemically, but again, you boil a gallon down to salt and you could weigh the salt you get I suppose, that would tell you something.
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
This is fundamental imo because it significantly impacts how we should collect dew.

If we devise a contraption that makes dew drops appear (point A) and immediately captures/channels them into a collecting receiver then I would (again instinctively) expect that at point B, before dawn, those dew drops have not changed at all (except some might have evaporated).
I missed a bit, I think because I'm wondering something similar.

I've been collecting the "primum ens" dew last week so watching. I noticed that sometimes it's easier to collect some right before I go to sleep and then put the pan back out. Lots seems to be created some nights during the earliest darkened hours. In the morning, the structure of things is colder, so I think after the sky starts to warm then the dew starts condensing very fast because in the air it's temp changes while all the massive surfaces around take longer to warm up.

Generally, I have no idea. The symbolism I specified above mainly persists to what I've observed and how it compares to alchemical symbolism. I find myself wondering as well, does this description infer that it should be collected in the morning? Yes. Does it assume that the sheet needs to be out all night?? no, not really.

Because it's the moisture in the air I think that is maturing. Circulating through the earth and hovering just above it. It can dissolve and hold onto the bounties of the earth while still a vapor, I thing, and then we get into chemistry that the last bit of condensing is really just a trick of some of those nourished vapors huddling together on a cool surface. So as long as the sheet is cold enough to do the collection. I don't see that it would matter so much.

And again, I would be really curious to see differences between dew collected at different times under similar location, but this is probably more experimentation than I'm set up to handle. It would be a magnificient experiment though, at least chymically. Set an ice bath out filled with glass jars and let everything cool down, then open each one in sequence for about an hour, let it collect dew inside, then close it up and open the next. Then test the amount collected, if possible run spectrum analysis (but who among us has access to that), maybe boil it down and record the weight of solids vs the amount collected to get a ratio in mg/L. Something tells me those last two bits would be very difficult and time consuming.

And then there's the conditions.. If we are to keep the conditions as close to identical as possible, we'd have to collect and test over several months to get a baseline established, lol.

Sorry I'm rambling. I guess we just have to put faith in what feels most right and work to the completion of the art, but if z0k is right about the solvent as he's mentioned 100 times then it really doesn't matter so much, and the dew is just an ingredient that will collect the Azoth so more salts = more better no matter how it's collected (though a purer salt probably better) but you can get the same from dry distilling a tree so why bother, lol.

But if he's wrong, and that secret salt of dew is what we are after to kick off the process... ... then how we collect it might be the most important decision we make.
 

black

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,442
Correct me

OK, I have said this many times before on this forum and will continue in the hope that someone reasonably smart enough may listen.

Hi Pilgrim

Dew, Water (rain, river, sea, well, etc) or Air will not give you the Entrance into Alchemy that you are looking for.

If you were about 20 years old I would say "sure, have a play with it for 10 or so years and see what you get".

Working with these things is only an exercise in proof of concept .... but will not give you what you need to work the Alchemic Processes.

To work the Primary Alchemic Process and all successive Processes the Alchemist requires a most powerful and abundant amount of Our Mercury (Secret Solvent, "Pure" SM, Alkahest, The Agent, etc) and this is a total impossibility to be able to collect from Dew, Water (rain, river, sea, well, etc) or Air.

The earth has been collecting and storing (from the rains and dews) over millions of years what the Alchemists need to work with.

Adding dirt/earth to water and trying to distill off Our Mercury is a complete waste of time.... we are not
children, we are Alchemists.

Urine being a water is also a total waste of time if you want to Enter into Alchemy.
 

Philosophical

Rectificando
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
207
@black

What in your mind is a magnet? If you are referencing the GCH study from another thread I would concur, it wont give you philosophic mercury.

The dirt/water is definitely presented as a proof of concept I would say. The water doesnt contain mercury and yet is very helpful at stoking the central fires of the matter. This is alluded to later in the text.

I thought you had said in the past that works with urine can provide valuable lessons? What lessons would they be?

I myself appreciate your contribution but your manner is a little confrontational imo. Where would you start? Marcasite?
 

black

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,442
@black

What in your mind is a magnet?
In Alchemy a magnet is something that has a strong affinity with something else.

A good example of this is the Agent and the Patient.

Another example .... "Pure" SM (Our Mercury, Secret Solvent, Alkahest, etc) is the greatest magnet for all Quintessence .... in fact it is the only magnet for Quintessence (Soul, Alchemic Oil, etc).
If you are referencing the GCH study from another thread I would concur, it wont give you philosophic mercury.

The dirt/water is definitely presented as a proof of concept I would say.
I would say "proof of concept" only through allegory .... not through lab practice as you will get nothing of value from a handful of earth gathered from a paddock.
The water doesnt contain mercury and yet is very helpful at stoking the central fires of the matter. This is alluded to later in the text.

I thought you had said in the past that works with urine can provide valuable lessons? What lessons would they be?
Similarities in the processes/recipes ..... but this again is allegory for the Alchemic Process.

Almost all of the students of Alchemy accept the written works as gospel which is laughable .... a simple example is the number of members trying to putrefy gold (Au) in the hope of making the Philosophers Stone.

They believe what they read in the books as gold (Au) and have no understanding at all about Our Gold or Our Mercury or anything else related to Alchemy.

It's a total waste of time looking for Our Mercury (Secret Solvent, etc) in urine ... but it is possible to extract a Quintessence (Soul) from urine or feces ..... I would also call this a waste of time as the Quintessence (Soul) is so much more abundant in the blood and easier to extract from the blood.
I myself appreciate your contribution but your manner is a little confrontational imo.
Thank you Philosophical.

Yes my manner is a little confrontational as I get a bit pissed off with those that pretend to know something about Alchemy when they have not even collected One (1) Small Drop of "Pure" SM let alone performed the Primary Alchemic Process.

The other members that have Entered into Alchemy will no longer post here as they consider that most of the members just post rubbish.

My Alchemy Teacher has asked me to continue to post here with information that has been proven and tested to be true and correct .... so I will.
Where would you start? Marcasite?
I worked for a few years fulltime studying and lab work with no genuine Alchemic progress e.g. no "Pure" SM = no Alchemy.

Only when I asked my Mentor/Alchemy Teacher for help did I start to gain understanding of the Great Work and see positive Alchemic results e.g. "Pure" SM = Alchemy.

Only through constant guidance from an Adept Alchemist or directly from the Divine Light (Our Creator) can any student gain Entry into Alchemy and continue to advance in this Divine Science.

Philosophical ...... Where would you start ? :)
 

Philosophical

Rectificando
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
207
In Alchemy a magnet is something that has a strong affinity with something else.

A good example of this is the Agent and the Patient.

And so, in your opinion, no matters discussed in GCH are of any use making magnets that have any use in collecting the astral spirit? Do you see the astral spirit as separate from philosophical mercury?

I would say "proof of concept" only through allegory .... not through lab practice as you will get nothing of value from a handful of earth gathered from a paddock.

I actually mostly agree here. Perhaps something of very small value could be made but not where I focus my efforts. However each of the parts of the matter described can be obtained after putrefaction, for this meadow earth there is no putrefaction.

Similarities in the processes/recipes ..... but this again is allegory for the Alchemic Process.

Almost all of the students of Alchemy accept the written works as gospel which is laughable.

I'm curious what you think of the Golden Chain of Homer as a text. What value does it teach it's readers? I dont think the golden chain would give one the stone but I do believe it holds great value and a doorway to the work finding its beginning.

They believe what they read in the books as gold (Au) and have no understanding at all about Our Gold or Our Mercury or anything else related to Alchemy.

I concur, I'm not interested in working with gold. Perhaps it could be useful much later into the work but when they talk about making common mercury and fermenting with gold (such as Ruesenstein MS) they mean something different. I have been pretty clear in other recent posts as to where we should begin to look for 'gold'.

It's a total waste of time looking for Our Mercury (Secret Solvent, etc) in urine ... but it is possible to extract a Quintessence (Soul) from urine or feces ..... I would also call this a waste of time as the Quintessence (Soul) is so much more abundant in the blood and easier to extract from the blood.

There are so many texts that allude to animal wastes being of use. The ICH, Recreations, Zadkiel, Hermetic Sanctum, Cyliani is a great example. Not to mention Ali Puli's Centrum Naturae Concentratum. Is it at all possible that you are overlooking something? I dont see SM as something completely remote, it's something I see must be a fairly common place thing but very weak, alchemy is concentrating and purifying it so it is much much more potent.

Yes my manner is a little confrontational as I get a bit pissed off with those that pretend to know something about Alchemy when they have not even collected One (1) Small Drop of "Pure" SM let alone performed the Primary Alchemic Process.

The other members that have Entered into Alchemy will no longer post here as they consider that most of the members just post rubbish.

Who are these members whose posts would be likely very good reading if they have indeed entered into alchemy? I would love to see more diverse opinions and proper debate here, especially from people who claim to have entered into alchemy. Also whose posts do you suggest totally ignoring?

My Alchemy Teacher has asked me to continue to post here with information that has been proven and tested to be true and correct .... so I will.

What I find difficult about this is, and I mean this with all due respect, I find your posts very hard to follow. I find it hard to see what you think is a good path to follow as opposed to what is bad. I'm not asking you to prove yourself to me but whose proof are we speaking of here?

Only when I asked my Mentor/Alchemy Teacher for help did I start to gain understanding of the Great Work and see positive Alchemic results e.g. "Pure" SM = Alchemy.

Only through constant guidance from an Adept Alchemist or directly from the Divine Light (Our Creator) can any student gain Entry into Alchemy and continue to advance in this Divine Science.

I dont know what form your communion happens, what its prerequisites are and I dont remember you posting this clearly before. I pray to my vision of creator for guidance, from things you've mentioned, our visions of what this creator is are likely different.

Philosophical ...... Where would you start ? :)

I am starting by looking at the changing states of matter and how repeated changing of states changes the essence of the matter over time. I have been very open in my posts lately about my MO without saying absolutely everything. I believe someone familiar with alchemy properly would understand my words of where I have started and how I am choosing to proceed.

Edit: Maybe this post would be better in the GCH introduction topic as its drifted far from dew but our effort in the GCH study group was brought up subtely so addressed it here. I'll let mods decide that one.
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
It's all theory until you have the stone. After all, if you haven't made it then how can anyone be so certain about their processes, their view of the SM and the secret solvent, their view of the gold which needs putrefication after being combined with the solvent, etc etc etc.

I understand that a lot of members and ex members here have seen and performed wonderous experiments, but myself I wouldn't say any particular process is "incorrect" until I had the elixir. To do so is positing your hypothesis as law before it has been proven.

Also so many have a different view of what we are chasing, silver or lead to gold, inner transformation, incredibly long life, a daily medicine, magic in a flask, there are so many viewpoints on the stone itself and what it actually does that again, it's impossible to pin down ONE process that might be the RIGHT way, and some (if not all) of the authors are liars, or perhaps just making prose to sell books. Afterall, that's where the real money and fame in alchemy seems to stem from, lol, especially now with new-age market growing so rapidly over the last few decades.

I think about this a lot. Even upon seeing different things described by the philosophers I wonder sometimes if they only described these processes to lead us astray, and at the end of the day nothing is to be trusted except God's will.
 

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
My view is that the great things do exist. There's just too much reference to them going back too far and spread among all the mainstream religions and other faith systems for it to be made up. It would be the hoax of all time.

What I feel sure has happened is that 100s/1000s of years ago they could not have envisaged computers and technology and the advancement of science so they felt safe hiding their secrets in the variety of ways they did, in cryptic texts, in paintings, in sculptures and so on.

Fast forward 100s of years and suddenly all those texts can be cross referenced and searched in the wink of an eye. Secrets hidden in a variety of (then) complex codes that would take an adept years to decipher by painstaking hand written work can today be solved in an instant with a computer. This being the case the ones who have/know the secret I think launched a huge campaign to desperately try and stem the obvious damage that would be done when they realised where technology was going. I think this involved changing religious tomes, removing key parts that would give things away (like the missing parts of the Gospel Of Judas etc) and flooding humanity with deliberate misinformation via alchemy texts and so on.

The secrets were originally kept by people like monks imo hidden away in their remote monestaries. Pretending to be recluses by really just quietly beavering away the Great Work away from prying eyes..

Dragon's Tail said:
Also so many have a different view of what we are chasing, silver or lead to gold, inner transformation, incredibly long life, a daily medicine, magic in a flask, there are so many viewpoints on the stone itself and what it actually does that again, it's impossible to pin down ONE process that might be the RIGHT way

Yes this is true and something oft ignored by some posters. For example the assumption that we must all "enter into alchemy" rather than aiming for something else.

My own primary goal at this time is to find a super potent life force medicine that can restore a person from all illnesses and ailments and ideally which would prolong life. This is the priority because we're all heading for death are we not and so there is a sense of urgency needed. Step 1 is to prevent or delay that death to buy more time to study and work out the next set of goals which might for example be personal transformation into a different type of being, human 2.0 etc.
 

Pilgrim

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Mysterious Stranger
Joined
Apr 26, 2023
Messages
558
Let's get back on topic

. . . .


Dew
 

theFool

Lapidem
Patron of the Arts
Honorable Meister
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
1,233
Dew is one of the most promising "prima materias" to work with. We have some threads around documenting various curiosities out of it. We have also "Mutus Liber" which clearly starts the opus with dew and guides us till the end.

Another fascinating question would be if a device were created to gather the dew (like a dehumidifier) would moisture collected during the day resemble that at night?? I don't have the lab equipment to test it chemically, but again, you boil a gallon down to salt and you could weigh the salt you get I suppose, that would tell you something.

Have you ever done this experiment? What color of salt you get after the boildown?
 

Dragon's Tail

Invenies
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
606
Have you ever done this experiment? What color of salt you get after the boildown?
As I said, it would be a pain in the but to carry out over and over and over. But I did recently boil down 50L of rainwater and made a post about it. There were two salts, a red and a white.
 

black

Hermes Trismegistus
Patron of the Arts
Hermetic Pilgrim
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,442
And so, in your opinion, no matters discussed in GCH are of any use making magnets that have any use in collecting the astral spirit? Do you see the astral spirit as separate from philosophical mercury?
I have used this analogy before .... some scientists estimate that we can extract 1 gram of gold from every 100 million tonnes of sea water.

I view Astral Spirit the same in air, water or dew .... the amount that can be collected over a period (many months to years) of time is not sufficient to do any practical work in the laboratory.

In theory it is there (in rain, etc) but it is of no practical use to any Alchemist that is working the Alchemic Process.

Nature retains, farms and concentrates this Astral Spirit for the Alchemists to collect when they require it.
I actually mostly agree here. Perhaps something of very small value could be made but not where I focus my efforts. However each of the parts of the matter described can be obtained after putrefaction, for this meadow earth there is no putrefaction.
I will discuss this "putrefaction" in the next post or so with Pilgrim in relation to Dew.
I'm curious what you think of the Golden Chain of Homer as a text. What value does it teach it's readers? I dont think the golden chain would give one the stone but I do believe it holds great value and a doorway to the work finding its beginning.
For me the GCH is just another Alchemical text that is only clearly understood by an Alchemist that has been shown or has worked the Alchemic Process.

I feel I could say that all of the students of Alchemy can gain no understanding if any at all from GCH or any Alchemic texts.
I concur, I'm not interested in working with gold. Perhaps it could be useful much later into the work but when they talk about making common mercury and fermenting with gold (such as Ruesenstein MS) they mean something different.
Yes .... most of the time they mean something very different to what is perceived by the students of this Work.
There are so many texts that allude to animal wastes being of use. The ICH, Recreations, Zadkiel, Hermetic Sanctum, Cyliani is a great example. Not to mention Ali Puli's Centrum Naturae Concentratum.
I'm not talking about animal wastes being of use .... I'm talking about the Alchemist using his own blood Alchemically worked to give a Tincture that will increase the Frequency of the Alchemists Soul (Quintessence).

There are many steps up the Alchemic Ladder and many ways to increase the Frequency of Quintessence (Soul) via Alchemic Processes.
Is it at all possible that you are overlooking something?
Please continue ..... I'm listening.
I dont see SM as something completely remote, it's something I see must be a fairly common place thing but very weak, alchemy is concentrating and purifying it so it is much much more potent.
Alchemy does not concentrate or purify "Pure" SM .... Alchemy is the Alchemic Process brought about by the use of "Pure" SM (Our Mercury, Secret Solvent, Alkahest, etc)

Why would you think that Alchemy would concentrate or purify "Pure" SM ?????
Who are these members whose posts would be likely very good reading if they have indeed entered into alchemy? I would love to see more diverse opinions and proper debate here, especially from people who claim to have entered into alchemy. Also whose posts do you suggest totally ignoring?
I would suggest to read all of the Practical Alchemy posts.
What I find difficult about this is, and I mean this with all due respect, I find your posts very hard to follow. I find it hard to see what you think is a good path to follow as opposed to what is bad. I'm not asking you to prove yourself to me but whose proof are we speaking of here?
There is only One Path into Alchemy and that is via Our Mercury, Secret Solvent, Alkahest, "Pure" Spiritus Mundi, etc what ever name you choose to call IT... pretty simple.
I dont know what form your communion happens, what its prerequisites are and I dont remember you posting this clearly before. I pray to my vision of creator for guidance, from things you've mentioned, our visions of what this creator is are likely different.

Yes .... possibly.