. The Philosopher's Matter

[Pilgrim]

Very nice piece Lux. Eloquently written.

 

[ggkvarma]

They want to play games with our lives, don't play, wreck everything they are doing. Get the secrecy and cryptic crap into the dustbin, those days are over trust me. Good luck and take care.

I am still confused about the oath of the sages, to keep the art in secrecy, the after effects of revealing will bring the world economy into crisis. But I believe that the art must be passed down to a suitable person.

What’s your opinion, Schmuldvich?

 

[tAlc]

I am still confused about the oath of the sages, to keep the art in secrecy, the after effects of revealing will bring the world economy into crisis. But I believe that the art must be passed down to a suitable person.

What’s your opinion, Schmuldvich?

Happy to see you again.

Schmuldvich is no longer on this forum unfortunately.

There is a verse in the Bible where someone was brought to the third heaven and saw unspeakable things, things which are not to be spoken about down here on Earth which reminds me of Our Art.

Some people aren't ready for certain knowledge it'll bring about their doom as well as others.

It seems to me that Alchemists experience some sort of Divine supernatural event where they become convinced that the Art should not be given to the World and too many Alchemists all share a fear of Divine Providence or God if they were to reveal the Art to the World.

I believe some sort of revelation is revealed to the Alchemists in the End or near the End of their Work but I'm not certain though it certainly looks that way.

There is a passage in the Bible where someone was brought up to the third Heaven and witnessed unspeakable things which they are not to speak about on Earth, similar to how Alchemy is not to be revealed to people. Maybe Heaven or God has something to do with the Secrecy after all?

 

[nav2010]

Without anywhere else to put this little addition to my introduction, I have decided to post here instead.

The question is why even post at all? Perhaps it's just to say one was here.

The starting matter is the hardest because it is elusive. Not by nature - it is everywhere, and even if it not somewhere, if you give it some time it will be there eventually. No, it is elusive because the mind makes it illusive. The question of what it could possibly be is what makes it more difficult than it needs to be. I truly believe that all that is required is an observation of a natural environment to reveal what the starting matter is. Afterwards, with ingenuity, one can figure out where to find more concentrated forms of this starting matter. To start though requires an inward turning, and to set ones affairs in order. What I mean by this is that before we can begin to observe, we must clean the observation lens of the mind - of the prejudices and assumptions of perception. All the superfluous programs that culture has installed into the operating system are a hindrance as they pose pre-calculated answers that are wrong. We must observe, and to do so we must first silence that which is within. Finnegan gets rebuilt, humpty dumpty is put back together, Osiris is rebuilt. Beginagain.

No, I am not saying there is anything remotely mystic about this. More like, lose your illusions, your pre-conceptions. What we want is the immediacy of a conception (not "pre"-conception) based on a natural observation of the environment. The stains on the mind can be hard to remove - especially when they have been there a long time. Perhaps one could concoct a fascimile of an external "mind", clean, free from pre-conception, in which to produce observable phenomena, then use this as a rear view mirror while driving a car in reverse to figure out what dirrection to steer. A lab! That's all fine and well, but the phenomena observed is still filtered through a dirty mind. "Well I'll just get some more higher end labware then".

"Whoa" I hear you say - so and so has it figured out, and they don't have a clean mind! Well this is a bit more subtle, but the more you tread a path the more defined (and easier to find next time) it becomes. Sometimes people can be put into the right observational mind frame through trauma and happen upon a path that way. I don't know if it's a recommended path though, in the sense that you cannot reliable produce a type of trauma that is guaranteed to show the path, whereas working on clearing the mind of illusions and preconceptions is working toward the process by which the path will be naturally revealed. Not that this is not practiced in many different ways though - there is a whole intellectual side quest learning about the role of trauma in initiation, military training, invocations, or even classic cult type mind control.

Let's get back to the observation of the natural environment. What environment is to be observed? The screen of a computer? The view outside a window? Perhaps the second one is best - but it depends on the view. Are you in a city? In the country? Does this matter? Yes. Can you find the starting matter in downtown Tokyo? Certainly - but with all the million other things to observe, I think perhaps you will miss it when you see it, or at the very least if you chance upon it consider it a vile thing and pass it by. What do we even mean by natural? Could one argue that all things produced in the universe are natural? What about thoughts? Are those natural as well? Or do we need to inspectigate the gnostic line of thinking until we are throwing semen at the sky in defiance of being created? What does vile even mean? Low value? What is value? Worth? Worth to who?

We may inquire if the starting matter is one thing only, or can be many different things. It is one thing in itself, just as an idea is one thing in itself, but it can present itself as a multitude of things. In fact nearly all things have some vague connection to the starting matter, in the sense that given time and processes, they will be more "starter matter like". I would argue though that some things will take a whole lot longer to become "starting matter" than others, but as far as I can think of it, I cannot come up with anything that will not eventually contribute to being a starting matter, if not becoming it itself. This whole thing is just another intellectual trap though. The starting matter is made of many different things, and at some arbitrary point it becomes the starting matter. We call it a pie when it comes out of the oven - but is it still a pie before it is baked? Before the filling is put in? Is it a pie when the ingredients are put to to make the dough? When the flour is milled? When the rays of the sun allow the wheat to photosynthesize? More importantly, is the starting matter in the dictionary?* It is. Oh boy! Only so many things it could be then! The intellect is sure to figure it out now. Gotcha! Some brighter than me will point out that the starting matter is merely a carrier for an active quality or principle or thing. I suppose just like the pie is merely a carrier for calories. I don't make this distinction here though.

I suppose one could ask the question of how different people have found the starting matter, as if that would derive some clue, some hint of a commonly shared observation that could be dissected by the surgeons of intellect, so we may reverse engineer a solution. I think the answers are both mundane and ridiculous - open to ridicule. "Aha! you think it is xyz? What a joke! I know for a fact it is uvw!" and on and on. Some more dull than others will concede that the true word for the starting matter is merely a collection of letters. Others, even duller, will point that these letters are merely symbols. One even less bright will mention that these symbols are just representations of a facet of a 4th dimensional entity - the expressions of an idea over time, as represented by the intellect in order to facilitate communication of ideas to one another. The darkest of them all does not even think. Make yourself dark enough to see the light of nature.

Why not just tell people what it is? Because they are not ready. What does that even mean. It means that the process of understanding as it unfolds will reveal what the starting matter is when the time is right. Time is right for what? When the time is right for understanding, which is to say when observation has been able to occur without the impediments of preconceptions. It is useless otherwise and has no benefit except to further create intellectual traps to add more stains on the mind. I suppose one could draw a parallel to the western esoteric distinction between da'ath as the gap from tipharet to binah, but this is also meaningless unless one specifically understands what those things mean, and it's simpler to just cut the cord of the intellect completely instead of trying to untie tangled extension cords. "But But But" you interject - can't I just plug in a tangled extension cord and still get power to my nightlight at the other end? "Yes my dear, but you will trip on it in the night and think you are being attacked by a thin orange octopus that lives on the carpet and you will spend the next 2 decades in therapy trying to untangle it all".

Fine why not just tell them what the starting matter is, and let them decide how they want to go forwards with it? Search this forum. It's been mentioned, in many different forms. Like the elephant in the dark room, people investigate different aspects of it based upon their own pre-conceptions of what it is, or their own specific observations without expanding it to the general. In all of those threads are people pointing out why it cannot be what it is. Don't worry, the secret keeps itself. The intellect has concocted a blind spot to an element of it's own design in order to funnel a reality that is neat and ordered and logical according to a set of rules it is not even aware exists. Perhaps an "AI" will be able to alter it's own programming. Perhaps one day "I" can alter its own programing too. These are traps. Turn off the programming. The fear of descending into chaos is a projection cast by intellect based on fear of losing control. There is no opposite of "organized", unless one think of the end result of entropy, but that is pure homogenity, which by definition is outside the boundary of organization in the first place. This is a lie the mind tells itself to soothe the long nights, among many. The concept that god made adam in order to rule over the animals is an interesting line of thought that one could mine for infinite fools gold. The animals, and the whole rest of the damn show were ruling over themselves quite well thank you very much.

One more try. At least show us pictures of the homes and environments of those who have found the starting matter. Or at least a description of these homes, so we may sift and filter all this data and find the commonalities. Okay, some lived in straw huts, some lived in rock castles, and some live on the back of camels. Camel? Do you mean Gimel? The symbol for a staff or a throwing stick? A staff to rule the herd, or a throwing stick to lob a concentrated laser beam of thought into the void? Don't get dis-tract-ed.

I think mysticism is a misunderstood analogy. I'm reminded of having to explain to my partner how a carburetor works, and knowing that they don't understand it inside and out, I draw parallels to more commonly understood phenomenon in order to use a series of falsehoods to illustrate a general mode of operation. The idea that one could reverse engineer that series of generalized falsehoods to create a working carburetor is comical.

* I prefer the thesaurus.

Imagine a cycle that is complete. The earth in its creation is now complete. If we take apart all the elements contained within it, there will be other elements that preceded it, then on top of that another quasi element which allowed it to happen.

We're looking for the quasi element.

In other words, if gold was created by transmuting silver, the silver itself is still inside the gold along with the quasi element which allowed it to happen.

If we extract the quasi element from any metal it will allow certain metals to go to their next stage of development.

The problem is, the quasi element can't and won't exist on its own? Why? Because it would find the nearest victim and attach itself to it. This in itself tells you that the quasi element is volatile and unstable.

 

[Lux Natura]

If we take apart all the elements contained within it, there will be other elements that preceded it, then on top of that another quasi element which allowed it to happen.

Right, so another way of saying this is to seek the root cause that set creation or causality in motion. I think the issue here is that the flow from that "quasi element" that is so infinitely volatile and seeks to manifest, to the end result of physical creation, exists as an infinite gradient, but we try to define it, as if that flow exists in discrete steps.

The same way we can imagine that it seeks a nearest victim, or seeks a nearest home or nest, in order to manifest or materialize, we too seek the nearest answers to capture the quasi idea that itself is volatile and unstable (unstable from the point of view of organized intellect at least). Now disorganized intellect, which for example holds paradoxes in perfect harmony, is more able to access this gradient I think - but these are just my thoughts on it, not a judgement other peoples view on the process.

I agree that it can be exacted from nearly anything. Why seek metals specifically? Why not drywall, or from the keys on the keyboard as one types a response, or from a bird song one hears in a dream? If it permeated across all creation, and enters into all things (which I do believe it does), then it's arbitrary what one chooses to extract it from, or to capture it in, as regardless what that thing is, it still need to be prepared in some way, because the capture exists as a result of a processes of preparation, and not an inherent quality of the material prior to it being prepared. Again, my opinion. Could be some materials are more "open" to the idea of being prepared, and are thus easier to work with, but then other materials could be convinced to try this new fad of being "open to the possibilities" as well, no? Or perhaps the idea that we can weigh up different materials and categorize them on a scale of how "open" they are to the possibility of being prepared is just part of the moralizing quirk of language and human consciousness.

When I say that one can find it anywhere, I am being literal about it, not symbolic, and I think a "quasi-element" explanation is just as valid as any other, so long as it serves the purpose it is designed to do, and gives tangible results.

 

[nav2010]

Right, so another way of saying this is to seek the root cause that set creation or causality in motion. I think the issue here is that the flow from that "quasi element" that is so infinitely volatile and seeks to manifest, to the end result of physical creation, exists as an infinite gradient, but we try to define it, as if that flow exists in discrete steps.

The same way we can imagine that it seeks a nearest victim, or seeks a nearest home or nest, in order to manifest or materialize, we too seek the nearest answers to capture the quasi idea that itself is volatile and unstable (unstable from the point of view of organized intellect at least). Now disorganized intellect, which for example holds paradoxes in perfect harmony, is more able to access this gradient I think - but these are just my thoughts on it, not a judgement other peoples view on the process.

I agree that it can be exacted from nearly anything. Why seek metals specifically? Why not drywall, or from the keys on the keyboard as one types a response, or from a bird song one hears in a dream? If it permeated across all creation, and enters into all things (which I do believe it does), then it's arbitrary what one chooses to extract it from, or to capture it in, as regardless what that thing is, it still need to be prepared in some way, because the capture exists as a result of a processes of preparation, and not an inherent quality of the material prior to it being prepared. Again, my opinion. Could be some materials are more "open" to the idea of being prepared, and are thus easier to work with, but then other materials could be convinced to try this new fad of being "open to the possibilities" as well, no? Or perhaps the idea that we can weigh up different materials and categorize them on a scale of how "open" they are to the possibility of being prepared is just part of the moralizing quirk of language and human consciousness.

When I say that one can find it anywhere, I am being literal about it, not symbolic, and I think a "quasi-element" explanation is just as valid as any other, so long as it serves the purpose it is designed to do, and gives tangible results.

The notion which is put forward that all elements are created in supernova explosions is a protective side of chemistry.
Yet the entire scientific fraternity knows full well that a human being doesn't consume enough calcium in our lifetime to create our bone struction. In studies done in parts of the world where calcium is less abundant, they found there was no difference to people who lived in calcium rich environments. Magnesium was therefore transmuting into calcium through one oxygen atom in the human body.
That tells you that nature has the secret to transmutation not just in the mineral world but the biological world too.
From this you can conclude that there is a set pattern. We start off with hydrogen, helium, lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. Those are the magnificent 8 which are created just by adding another atom to the previous element. Once you get to oxygen, creation changes somewhat. Oxygen starts attacking all other elements which preceeded it, it is the winged menace, the destroyer of worlds and the creator of other worlds. Nature wanted it this way and that's the way it is.

 

[Lux Natura]

The notion which is put forward that all elements are created in supernova explosions is a protective side of chemistry.

I myself think this is a leftover myth / pattern that is modelled upon the development of the "big bang" theory, which itself is a reimagining of the myth of creation as encoded within the "tzim-tzum" and "ain/ain soph/ain soph aur" of jewish mysticism. That we have "reorganized the formula to include these symbols" is not a proof, in my opinion, of the concrete reality of anything, except that you can re-arrange symbols and their attributed meanings in order to derive an explanation that is supported within the same structure that defines those symbols. A bit circular, perhaps.

The creative concept of solar / death-of-solar (very saturnian myth here btw) is just more of the reimaged mythology as well on a smaller scale. The miracle of the moment of big bang creation is replaced, on a smaller scale, by the miracle of solar-death creation, along with a bunch of other motifs - fast expansion, creation of new particles / elements in a very short period of time, release of mass amounts of energy, etc.

By all of this I don't mean to say that it is false - hydrogen does fuse to helium and heavier elements, yes. The concept of fusion past iron only occurring in supernova was just a theory (symbolic myth testing) that made sense in that belief system because it was informed by prior belief systems as well that shared that as a common thread.

We start off with hydrogen, helium, lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. Those are the magnificent 8 which are created just by adding another atom to the previous element. Once you get to oxygen, creation changes somewhat. Oxygen starts attacking all other elements which preceeded it, it is the winged menace, the destroyer of worlds and the creator of other worlds. Nature wanted it this way and that's the way it is.

Yes, one can follow all sorts of maps in order to try to make sense of things. There are geometric progressions dealing with the nucleus of atoms, harmonic and overtone progressions of atoms and their isotopes, explanations via electron orbits (and their own geometries and harmonic thereof), etc. The principles remain the same, regardless what "system" one uses to grasp it.

Unfortunately some systems are, perhaps, less adaptable than other systems when it comes to map-making, and if one confuses the map-making with the actual territory being described, it can lead to issues, such as you speak of, as the blindspot in classical chemistry's understanding of the creation of calcium - which chickens can do just fine even if there is no apparent calcium in their diet.

 

[nav2010]

I myself think this is a leftover myth / pattern that is modelled upon the development of the "big bang" theory, which itself is a reimagining of the myth of creation as encoded within the "tzim-tzum" and "ain/ain soph/ain soph aur" of jewish mysticism. That we have "reorganized the formula to include these symbols" is not a proof, in my opinion, of the concrete reality of anything, except that you can re-arrange symbols and their attributed meanings in order to derive an explanation that is supported within the same structure that defines those symbols. A bit circular, perhaps.

The creative concept of solar / death-of-solar (very saturnian myth here btw) is just more of the reimaged mythology as well on a smaller scale. The miracle of the moment of big bang creation is replaced, on a smaller scale, by the miracle of solar-death creation, along with a bunch of other motifs - fast expansion, creation of new particles / elements in a very short period of time, release of mass amounts of energy, etc.

By all of this I don't mean to say that it is false - hydrogen does fuse to helium and heavier elements, yes. The concept of fusion past iron only occurring in supernova was just a theory (symbolic myth testing) that made sense in that belief system because it was informed by prior belief systems as well that shared that as a common thread.



Yes, one can follow all sorts of maps in order to try to make sense of things. There are geometric progressions dealing with the nucleus of atoms, harmonic and overtone progressions of atoms and their isotopes, explanations via electron orbits (and their own geometries and harmonic thereof), etc. The principles remain the same, regardless what "system" one uses to grasp it.

Unfortunately some systems are, perhaps, less adaptable than other systems when it comes to map-making, and if one confuses the map-making with the actual territory being described, it can lead to issues, such as you speak of, as the blindspot in classical chemistry's understanding of the creation of calcium - which chickens can do just fine even if there is no apparent calcium in their diet.

An important aspect of alchemy is the fact that the human body in order to transmute magnesium to calcium doesn't need to undergo calcination, putrefaction, distillation, dissolution etc. It just quietly goes about its business.
Many alchemists I've read have always stated that you must look at nature first and follow her lead and I respect that statement.
So the 'key' for transmuting magnesium to calcium is inside the human body and like I've said before, itn't it funny that the difference between magnesium and calcium is exactly one oxygen atom? Oxygen, the winged menace remember which likes to attack?
There is also another experiment which was performed in Japan on a regular basis of transmuting sodium to potassium, again just one oxygen atom seperates the two respective elements.
I can give you a link to a series of experiments describing them.
But just going back to alchemy, it seems that in nature, the wonder of nature that is, things are gently coerced into transmutation whereas a large proportion of alchemy seems like we are bringing a sledge hammer to a game of domino's.
Just a thought.

 

[nav2010]

I'll tell you what I'm going to do here. I don't usually talk about transmutation into gold because its a contentious subject with myself and other members but today I will.

If you are transmuting silver to gold which is additive transmutation you need to bring two things to the table.

The key, which will open the metal silver.
The filler, which will provide you with the missing 18 protons.
There is only one key in the world and there is only one filler in the world.

How it works? The key must be in its single elemental form and have attached to it in this case 3 fillers so you would be looking at tricarbon monoxide which is a radical oxocarbon molecule found in space.
The molten silver is unlocked by the monoxide and the three carbon atoms enter the silver through the door injecting their 18 protons.

There is no violence, no opposition to change only ionic transfer which is mathematically perfect.
All transmutation is mathematical perfection.
That's what happens in the human body, unlock the door, jump in and lock the door behind you.
No sledge hammers needed.

 

[Pilgrim]

The filler, which will provide you with the missing 18 protons.

Shouldn't that be 32 protons (79 - 47)?

 

[nav2010]

Shouldn't that be 32 protons (79 - 47)?

yes, i'm glad you paid notice.
The key goes in with the filler so it this case the key (8) goes in with four carbon (24) to make 32.
When George Oshawa did the experiment from sodium to potassium they found only the key went in (8)
When George Oshawa did the carbon to iron they found firstly the key and the filler went in together (14) but it doubled up to 28 in a micro second using another key and filler.
For some reason which they couldn't explain, the 28 (nickel) became unstable and dropped to 26 (iron) plus some heat.
I repeated this around about 2000 with an arc welder.
In fact, I did more than George Oshawa ever did during that time with a silver and carbon anode and cathode.
The arc of the welder, produces monoxide because of the ultraviolet discharge.
If people knew the truth, the real truth that is on mass, there would be hell to pay.

 

[nav2010]

When you apply high current underwater in various situations @Pilgrim, it is important to know at that stage that only three elements are involved. The H2O (water) and the carbon anode and cathode. So in retrospect you have hydrogen, carbon and oxygen in that situation.
A few weeks ago I posted a thread in which I explained the cancer curing ratio's of certain substances per se:-
Ivermectin chemical formula is C46 H74 O14
Fenbendazole chemical formula is C15 H13 N3 O2 S
THC chemical formula is C21 H30 O2
All three cure cancer.
Tannic acid chemical formula is C76 H52 O46 or C28 H28 O14
All four have a different ratio of C, H and O which are the elements they all have in common.
This is an indication that the ratio is not important and that as long as the numbers of C, H and especially O are high, it will be effective.
If anyone on this forum thinks that the three main elements involved in electrical and chemical transmutation of elements and the curing of cancer is some kind of strange coincidence then they must be unhinged.
I was put on this earth to show people this, its my duty to show people this and I'm the only one showing it at this moment in time because god entrusted me to do it right.
Love and peace.

 

[Andro]

@nav2010

Just so the topic of this thread doesn't get derailed with biological transmutations and cures for cancer (we have dedicated threads for those topics), what do you suggest is the "Philosopher's Matter"?

 

[nav2010]

@nav2010

Just so the topic of this thread doesn't get derailed with biological transmutations and cures for cancer (we have dedicated threads for those topics), what do you suggest is the "Philosopher's Matter"?

Hi @Andro, I'm showing the relationship of transmutation to biological health, the underlying factors which connect the two. This isn't covered very well anywhere on the forum where you could say its a concrete connection.

The philosophers matter as you aspire to is the key which opens up metals as well as other elements and is the same key which opens up the human body to receive help in a biological sense.

The reason why alchemists through the ages couldn't get their hands on it is because it doesn't exist in its elemental form, it only ever existed as a benign pair in which its power is absorbed and defused within the pair. It will not seek work to do therefore.
If you find a way of splitting the benign pair, the singular will seek work to do but not the same work as the pair once did.
So there are two sides to the philosophers matter, transmutation and health.

Within chemical transmutation itself, you need to bring several things to the table. A prefect mathematical equation, the key (PM), a filler, a carrier and the initial metal itself such as copper, silver etc.

Within electrical transmutation you need the same apart from a carrier because the current becomes the carrier.

Within biological proceedings, you need the same as chemical transmutation apart from a perfect mathematical equation but you still need a carrier.

The key or the philosophers matter is none other than our little friend, monoxide or singular elemental oxygen. The destroyer, the creator, the attacker and the key to all doors.

 

[nav2010]

The one that attacks and is programmed to attack by god himself, is the one that seeks the doors to open. For if he doesn't attack he will never find those doors.
Always remember that.

 

[nav2010]

But once everything is attacked, doors opened and the work is done, god must provide refuge for our little friend for if there is no refuge he will keep attacking and the universe will be chaos.

So god gave him refuge within himself, he made him benign as a pair, contented and happy just a little.

But beware of splitting the contented pair, because if you part them they will seek doors and work to do.

 

[Andro]

alchemists through the ages couldn't get their hands on it

I very much doubt that the genuine alchemists of the past couldn't "get their hands" on their Philosopher's Matter.

The philosophers matter as you aspire to is the key which opens up metals as well as other elements [...] singular elemental oxygen

I'm not denying that his can be one of the possible keys for the "opening" that you mention.

But it's not the "Philosopher's Matter" that the Ancient Alchemists worked with.

Their Philosopher's Matter/Philosopher's Earth often becomes corporified as a very fixed, friable, salt-like solid, unless it's united with its own Agency, and then it's more like a resin, butter or oil, or even of a vitreous consistency in some cases. Some even call it "wax". See the Central Salt thread.

I find this to be a major stumbling block for many practicing alchemists, having to grasp that the Matter(s) of Alchemy are not inherently/initially corporeal, not even as a subtle gas, but must be made corporeal by the practitioner. I don't negate the possibility that your little friend may be of some assistance in this endeavor.

 

[Lux Natura]

To get back to the topic, here is another take on the philosophers matter.

It is primarily a composition of two separate things, or more specifically the interaction between two separate things, that upon later reflection end up being understood as two parts of one and the same things, or as one that developed from the other. One more subtle, and one more gross, but only relative to each other, as the gross part is still subtle in itself.

The primary subtle part I would say "can be everywhere, but is not found anywhere". It is exceedingly volatile in nature. It is found everywhere but goes un-noticed as a natural matter of course. Only certain types of unnatural perturbations are able to make it visible or manifest, and even then the tendency is for it to return to its previous "invisible" nature. It is always close at hand. It is incredibly well hidden, and while so many people devote their lives looking for it, and never find it, that in itself is a bit of a tragedy, because so many times they were so close to it, but likely were unable to recognize what exactly they were looking for, or what they had when they had it, and thus discarded it as a possibility. Literally like the rock you trip over while you are out looking for a rock.

I think much work starts with understanding what it is one is looking for. If one has this understanding, in my opinion, that primary portion becomes much easier to "capture", but if one does not have this understanding, then I don't think it can ever be found. You could systematically go through every possible thing or combination of things in the universe and fail to know it or capture it without that primary understanding of "what it is you are looking for". Until you know what it is, you cannot hope to capture it. I think it is spoken clearly of in many writings, but only if one knows how to read what is written. If one glosses over a word, and thinks it means something common / surface level, and fails to see what it is referring to, once can read about this part very clearly, and still completely miss what is being said.

The second part of the matter I would say "can be anywhere, but is not everywhere". Although it is not found everywhere, one can still find it close to home, wherever home is. It is hidden within matter, or more specifically in certain matters, which are quite common, and in those matters it exists due to an innate quality of the matter itself. It is found wherever life exists, of that I am sure, and even where life does not exist, it can be found in potential. I think this part is metallic in nature, although by that I don't mean its a metal. It's common enough that one can work with nearly any common matter for this second part, and not too much thought needs to be put into it, although later on one can streamline this by knowing what matters are easier to work with.

Later reflection shows that the first part of the matter, the more subtle part, was born out of the second part of the matter, the more gross part. Investigation of nature reveals that it is always slowly undergoing transformation, and with enough time and attention to detail, once could trace the transformation of the second part into the first part.

The philosophers matter thus is created via the union of these two things, of the return of the subtle part to the gross part. There is a much clearer way of saying this all, but it would probably be immediately ridiculed as "oh no can't possibly be that!", or relegated to some other "kooky belief system that is viewed as being unworthy of further investigation".

I believe that the concept that it can only be "revealed by god", whatever that may personally mean to you, i.e. god as a higher force, the true inner self, the wisdom of the collective unconscious, insight into the nature of being, or however you parse it, is a core truth, and without this, one will not find it. I don't mean one has to be religious either, or believe in the monotheistic god.

I think once one finds it, it greatly opens up possibilities, giving a wide variety of ways one can work with it. It can even end up manifesting as seemingly different outwardly "paths".

 

[nav2010]

I very much doubt that the genuine alchemists of the past couldn't "get their hands" on their Philosopher's Matter.


I'm not denying that his can be one of the possible keys for the "opening" that you mention.

But it's not the "Philosopher's Matter" that the Ancient Alchemists worked with.

Their Philosopher's Matter/Philosopher's Earth often becomes corporified as a very fixed, friable, salt-like solid, unless it's united with its own Agency, and then it's more like a resin, butter or oil, or even of a vitreous consistency in some cases. Some even call it "wax". See the Central Salt thread.

I find this to be a major stumbling block for many practicing alchemists, having to grasp that the Matter(s) of Alchemy are not inherently/initially corporeal, not even as a subtle gas, but must be made corporeal by the practitioner.

The salt of which you speak is not the PM but the carrier of which I spoke.

The prima materia has to be carried and placed in a location for it to do work.

The whole of alchemy was to isolate the PM, trap the PM then carry it to a place of work.

Take for example the pinning of the sheets in March and April that the sages performed. They pinned cotton sheets out under a moon lit star studded sky then at the crack of dawn, rushed out and put the sheets through a mangle, collected the dew and began their alchemical work.

What do you suppose they were doing?

The answer lies in the star studded sky in spring months. As the dew settles on the sheets the ultraviolet light coming from the cosmos entered the dew and as a result caused the formation of ozone or O3 in that very dew, a lot of it in fact. This has now been proven in science to be absolutely true.

They then took that dew and as the O3 degraded back to O2 they were able to trap monoxide in a carrier and keep it there.
Our little attacker and opener of doors is now trapped and able to do work.

If you also trap carbon within that carrier, you now have the stone that carries both the key and the filler.

It simply is a crystalized hydrocarbon monoxide, as simple as it gets but more complicated in its workings than we'll ever know.

 

[Andro]

The salt of which you speak is not the PM but the carrier of which I spoke.

Actually, no. I know exactly what the "carrier" is in my own work. But the actual, tangible and workable Philosopher's Matter is as I described it, and chemistry has no classification for it.

It simply is a crystalized hydrocarbon monoxide

I think your are describing a possible chemistry of the wrappers/carriers, not of the actual Matter. The Ph. Matter, as the Hidden/Occult Passenger inside the chemical Wrapper(s), is responsible for the unusual crystallization and other unusual properties, which some refer to as "allotropes".

But you've given me an idea of another mineral to experiment with, one I've been already considering but haven't explored enough yet...

 

[nav2010]

Actually, no. I know exactly what the "carrier" is in my own work. But the actual, tangible and workable Philosopher's Matter is as I described it, and chemistry has no classification for it.

I think your are describing a possible chemistry of the wrappers, not of the actual Matter.

Of that I know you are 100% wrong if I could be so blunt.

The problem with alchemy is that it involves beliefs that the stone can only be produced in alchemical ways and not chemical ways.
The fundamental problem which chemistry has is the opposite. It knows the stone can be produced through chemical means but its fundamental principles won't allow it to believe the stone will work.

In retrospect alchemy is the old form of chemistry and chemistry is the new form of alchemy. In actual fact they are both the same and if people persist with the notion that they are different they will fail in either alchemy or chemistry.

I know, for an absolute fact, that no one on here has ever transmuted one element to another whether it be a metal or otherwise.
I also know that no one on here has made any substance that will cure cancer or any other serious illness.

I also know that everyone on here does not recognise the principles that connect transmutation to the biological qualities that the stone is capable of.

The name of the game is not bragging rights, its not oneupmanship, its not withholding information, its not trying to become something you will never ever be.

The name of the game is honesty, integrity, openness and trying to educate to the best of our ability without filling the forum full of unsubstantiated nonsense and drivel.

 

[Andro]

Of that I know you are 100% wrong if I could be so blunt.

And you are entitled to believe that. If your model works for you, great.

without filling the forum full of unsubstantiated nonsense and drivel.

What "unsubstantiated nonsense and drivel" are you referring to?

I know, for an absolute fact, that no one on here has ever transmuted one element to another whether it be a metal or otherwise.
I also know that no one on here has made any substance that will cure cancer or any other serious illness.

Please provide the irrefutable evidence for this claim. Otherwise it's just an unsubstantiated speculation. Mod Note: Also, we don't talk/speculate about other people here. Please be mindful of that. People got banned in the past for such behavior. Totally unnecessary and avoidable.

The name of the game is not bragging rights, its not oneupmanship

I was put on this earth to show people this, its my duty to show people this and I'm the only one showing it at this moment in time because god entrusted me to do it right.

Please see: Alchemy and Megalomania

 

[nav2010]

I can't quote your separated sections.

In answer to your LOL, no its not an oxymoron but I know what ya thinking.

The true answer is based on my own vanity, on whether I'm here to help people or I'm here to take accolades in my own eyes.

If people have transmuted then lets have a video of them doing it, anything, sodium to potassium, magnesium to calcium or even copper to silver, lets have a video show. Talk is cheap and full of vanity.

The drivel I'm referring to is messing with dangerous stuff, chemicals and then talking about actually consuming it which I was reading the other day from a post way back.

I'll make you a deal. Someone show me a video of transmutation and I'll show you something from my end.

Or anything really, something biological or anything that shows me they understand alchemy as a work in progress.

 

[Andro]

If people have transmuted then lets have a video of them doing it, anything, sodium to potassium, magnesium to calcium or even copper to silver, lets have a video show. Talk is cheap and full of vanity.

No one here (that I know of) has claimed on the open forum that they've achieved transmutation, except LeoRetilus in 2009.

You are the one who made the claim that no one did it, therefore the burden of proof rests with you and no one else.

"Nobody posting about it" is is not the same as "nobody did it".

Again, the burden of proof rests with the one making the claim.

 

[nav2010]

No one here (that I know of) has claimed on the open forum that they've achieved transmutation.

You are the one who made the claim that no one did it, therefore the burden of proof rests with you and no one else.

I've read differently, I've been on here 15 years and some have.

I don't venture into transmutation myself, its a dangerous thing to do and you wouldn't be here long if certain parties found out.
You asked me to prove no one on here has performed transmutation, the fact that no one has showed evidence of such a undertaking is enough to suspect that they actually haven't.

If you are speaking about yourself and that was a masked suggestion that you have done it yourself but don't wish to say, only your own vanity can answer whether that is true or not. I don't know your vanity but suspect through your avatar that you wish to be the dark secretive figure of Andro the mysterious. Hahaha.

There's a lot of that in alchemy, its like Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets.

No more secrets! Remember the film?