is there a real philosophers stone?

_Z_

_Z_

from far far away
Messages
878
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
oxfordshire
is there a real philosophers stone?

oh no not that ole one :rolleyes: :D

ok we are not talking about making gold from base metals here. instead i would like to look at the idea of a given something that is truly universal to everything.
if we were to say; you belong to it, i belong to it, the chair i am sat on, the universe, ‘god’, being, time, dimension, infinity and the void all belong to it... what then is the something that all things belong to?
we tend to see things in their parts rather than the whole,probably because we can only envisage the whole by what we know of its parts. we know that there must be something beyond the universe, parallel universes and infinity etc, but it is impossible to know what they are and thus form an image in our minds of an entirety. we need not know everything to know that all things belong to the whole, it is presumed in physics that there is a [higgs boson] particle that all other particles are made up of. but what ties energy to time, dimension and indeed to being and ‘thought’, something in the original state and at the heart of existence must surely have universal properties?
an extraneous entity.
let us say that there is a universal ‘it’, one would imagine that it is completely unspecific in its nature, that it doesn’t have any given factors of known existence e.g. it is not energy or a particle, it has no shape dimension nor form, yet has the property of being absolutely anything!
now let us imagine it as an all encompassing entity; not only does it encapsulate the complete omniverse [all universes], but infinity and all-time too. so if we step back in time - before time itself thence into infinity [the void], we may view the universe from our extraneous perspective, all there is at this point is the void and the ‘philosophers stone’. infinity here may be visualise as dimensionless rather than vast, it is the place beyond time, thus it is that which exists after the universe and all universes [however paradoxical that sounds] but remember that it encompasses all. before a given universe exists it [the eye in the stone] sees existence in universal hindsight i.e. when the universe ‘ends’ all that has occurred lies within the stone, which laying beyond time in essence belongs also to the same place which is before time, thus the stone sees the progression of time in a similar context to memory.
the question then would be; is the ‘stone’ within us as a ‘tactile’ and usable essence? if it fundamental to everything and can perform any possible task then one wonders how can it be utilised. if we could discover it and master it then one could say; hey god, you are now an extraneous it!
 
from: Reflections on the Stone by Robert Bolton:

Traditional accounts of the Stone do not always distinguish it from the prima materia, as where both are referred to as the Unica Res (the unique or only thing) and 'Adam and Microcosm' (C.G.Jung, "Psychology and Alchemy", III,Ch.4). This implies that the usage of Hermetic thought differs here from that of Neoplatonism, for which matter is the lowest of realities, a mere empty and unstable receptivity. Instead, it is said to be 'the first hyle of the wise, the prima materia of perfect body,' and is said to be a substance in which everything is contained in a positive way, by which it has a creative power as a source principle in nature.(ibid. III, Ch.l, iii)

Jung quotes Mylius' statement that it is 'the pure subject and the unity of forms,' with both passive and active aspects. We are also told that this mysterious substance is called 'radix ipsius' (root of itself), and that ' Because it roots in itself it is autonomous and dependent on nothing.'(ibid. III, Ch.l, iii). But the supremacy it has in relation to other creatures does not include any question of its creating the world or itself; it has therefore a necessary autonomy in relation to nature, whereas in relation to God, this autonomy is something delegated. There are obviously close analogies between it and both God and the world, as might be expected of something which is a focal point for so many realities:

'The definition of this spherical being as . . . 'the most serene God,' sheds a special light on the perfect 'round' nature of the lapis which arises from and constitutes the primal sphere; hence the prima materia is often called lapis.'(ibid.)

At the same time, it is distinguished from God in this text as having arisen, like the world, from a massa confusa comprising all the elements. But this does not help us to understand why, in view of its subtlety, 'stone' should have been so prominent among the names used for this subject, when in its religious context it never had a name at all, except where it was referred to as the 'divine spark' in an unofficial manner.

James Hillman's explanation is that this is because, like a physical stone, it has the power to force its presence on our attention by its impenetrable and irreducible quality. Everything in nature from flowing water to roots of trees must yield to the presence of stones, which combine a certain power with inactivity. They can often punish those who ignore their presence. Stone-like properties, he says, are an emblem of freedom from subjectivity, and not merely as a quantity of hard and enduring material, but as a unique individuality, different from that of every other stone. Thus it evokes the idea of the monad.

The last point shows that it is not overly paradoxical that a very subtle reality could force itself on our attention as a stone does. The essential point here is individuation. Persons or souls encounter one another as quasi-atomic realities, which is why the soul is referred to in philosophy as a 'simple substance.' Just as the physical stone shows the qualities of impenetrability and irreducibility, so the individual soul is impenetrable inasmuch as it is the container of all natural forces in its representation of the world, to which it is not itself external.

Thomas
 
Is there a stone... That can keep you alive, make you imortal... Yeah sure is! Just talked to some ginger nut (ugly as sin that boy... Ulgy, as, sin...), a specky t*** and know it all teachers pet that are looking for it....
 
Makes me think of the midrash stories regarding the Zohar stone....

Also makes me think of what is playing out in the quantum physics world...that our building blocks, electrons, neutrons, protons...seem to pop in and of existence...that they react with others miles away simultaneously, that they aren't the smallest afterall...

That if you look at the earth and our solar system...they look like individual items...some big blue marble orbiting that glowing yellow ball...but we know that it isn't an individual thing but an infinite number of individual things...as are we humans...as is each cell...as is each atom...as is...

So in one case perspective? All a matter of perspective?

Watch a magician, we are amazed, it is magic until we know the trick, and then it is reduced to ... nothing?? Something so amazing a minute ago....and the dove was actually just in your coat pocket?? Say it ain't so.

So what was the amazing part? If it all was simply nothing and easily explained? It was all in our mind...

As is this reality...it is nothing until we make it so.

Four minute mile.
 
The last point shows that it is not overly paradoxical that a very subtle reality could force itself on our attention as a stone does. The essential point here is individuation. Persons or souls encounter one another as quasi-atomic realities, which is why the soul is referred to in philosophy as a 'simple substance.' Just as the physical stone shows the qualities of impenetrability and irreducibility, so the individual soul is impenetrable inasmuch as it is the container of all natural forces in its representation of the world, to which it is not itself external.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It demands contemplation by virtue of it's sheer irreducibility. Dark energy, dark hungry chaos, and dark matter. It is the object of emptyness.
 
seriously though...

i hear that the philosophers stone was merely a metaphor for man's spiritual progression... that his mind, the base matter, was the lead, and such was turned into gold by using the philosophers stone, which was mind...

I have had a little look at alchemy from a practical angle and I do believe that you can turn base metals into something which resembles gold quite easily, but have yet to test my theory in reality... I am saving such endeavours for my retirement, and hopefully this will stave off penury...
 
Francis king said:
and still so handsome, 17th...
Click to expand...


Such a charmer.


Francis king said:
seriously though...

i hear that the philosophers stone was merely a metaphor for man's spiritual progression... that his mind, the base matter, was the lead, and such was turned into gold by using the philosophers stone, which was mind...
Click to expand...

I don't know if it is the same harry potter... But there is one with a mirror.... I would say that would be a better metaphor.
 
sorry i can’t answer all of your replies - i am glad you are enjoying the thread!

thomas, hi
the prima materia of perfect body,’ and is said to be a substance in which everything is contained in a positive way, by which it has a creative power as a source principle in nature
Click to expand...

alchemists have this view of an original perfection, but why positive and not negative as well? i am imagining that an ‘it’ that is everything would contain all potentials, i would see the ‘prima materia’ as being superseded by something that is not only the basis of physicality but also of spirit, being mind and everything including ‘god’ - would you not agree? it would be an universal 'it' and all things would be conducive to its way and essence.

its impenetrable and irreducible quality
Click to expand...

interesting that they saw it like this - hence the term stone is used. perhaps though we should be looking for something that is the complete opposite e.g. that which has universal dextrosity and malleabilty.
so the individual soul is impenetrable in as much as it is the container of all natural forces
or is it contained by all narural forces whist not being entirely enchained by them e.g. in death or trauma the soul is released kind of like water being squeezed from a sponge.

great reply, thanks!

wil, hi
makes me think of what is playing out in the quantum physics world
Click to expand...

that is one of the things that brings it to my mind. :) also a similar thing on the mental level:
see below ‘a single thought that lasts forever’.
perspective has a lot to answer for lol interesting point about the planets etc wil.
perhaps when we find something that cannot be explained we will for the first time be truly amazed.
again, nice reply!

A single thought that lasts forever
in this thought experiment we are simply removing all objects and seeing thought as a free flowing entity, singular yet simultaneously plural i.e. mind as it is beyond the veil of ignorance [physicality].
imagine a single line of thought that enters your mind, then exits and immediately becomes a part of another thought-stream in someone else’s mind. There is one line that veers off on a tangent with every dualism or change in meaning that it encounters, we may imagine this to be like a family tree of thought-streams. It doesn’t like it when people ‘butt in’ to conversations as this is not going with the stream, to which we usually react aggressively, the disjointedness of discourse is due to distance i.e. The further away on the tree of thought-streams that people are on, then the more conflict shall arise. A proper discourse according to ‘the line’ will be where a theme is followed through without becoming disjointed, different branches of though trains will be brought into the fold without conflict. Although the line of thought runs on many parallels there remains a hollow epicentre - so to say, where the line wants to run as a single stream. This produces an effect like magnetism - to present a general path [like the tao of universal thought], perhaps one that in real terms equates as history.
‘the mind doesn’t end after the thought’. Thoughts can be seen as like raindrops hitting the ocean of the eternal mind.
you think something, you then right it down, yet there is a continuance from the moment your pen joins and leaves the paper. Do you get ‘impressions’ about people when you read their writings, does the personality carry on through?
‘Every thought has an action, every event a cause’. But not all thoughts are realised, thoughts are ‘selected’ in becoming actions, but do all thoughts have an effect? Sometimes i write something down then decide to delete it, then curiously i notice that the deleted sentence has had an effect almost as if i had said it, could it be that what ever happens on the line of thought, it produces a resonance or has an effect regardless of weather or not it is spoken. This effect i would think is proportional to the amount of presence it has in the mind, which would equate to the amount of time the thoughts are on the line. On another level every question has a given set of obvious answers, you will notice that in the course of a conversation, a line will form and the discourse will tend to follow that line, or at least a wiggly coil around its body.
where the line begins and where it ends i don’t know, however if it has a beginning and an end then it belongs to or is a single entity. It extends throughout existence, wherever there is mindfulness capable of thought. The meeting of two worlds [like if we had first contact with aliens] would be literally the meeting of two worlds or branches of thought, this is an extreme example similar to when two races meet for the first time or when different people meet in general terms either for the first time or after a long separation, usually there is awe or a sense of joy arises when mind worlds meet.

 
Yes there is a Philosopher's Stone, and it's everywhere about- as the old woodcuts show.

It's Carbon.

The pillars of Solomon's temple- as the Freemasons know it.
 
_Z_ said:

alchemists have this view of an original perfection, but why positive and not negative as well? i am imagining that an ‘it’ that is everything would contain all potentials, i would see the ‘prima materia’ as being superseded by something that is not only the basis of physicality but also of spirit, being mind and everything including ‘god’ - would you not agree? it would be an universal 'it' and all things would be conducive to its way and essence.
Click to expand...


No negative because opposites do not truly exist. The negation of a thought is a thought itself. You can observe this with any child: tell them not to do something, and what they hear is "something: that might be fun to do!" I think the reason laws prohibiting things are generally failures -- ie people do what is prohibited anyway -- is because of this as well. A good law should tell people what to do, and not what not to do, because either one is an idea, and providing a good idea is better than providing a bad idea and then telling someone not to do it.

The philosopher's stone maybe comes from the idea contained in the Emerald Tablet, which describes life coming from the source into the world and back to the source, enriched, over and over again.

The language of the Emerald Tablet sounds to me a lot like the Tao Te Ching, by Lao Tzu. Just yesterday I ran across a 2nd book by Lao Tzu -- I hadn't known he had any others attributed to him. It's called Hua Hu Ching. The goal is beyond definition or description, as he admits, but can be reached through a process of

There is no way to define it, no combination of symbols to accurately describe it, but a formula for obtaining it which is just the process of life itself: VITRIOL, "go into the world, live and observe, understanding, and discover the hidden jewel" is my translation, of the formula which I see as derived from the Emerald Tablet. But this is exactly what is described as well in Hua Hu Ching, the conclusion of which follows:

(81) With all this talking, what has been said? The subtle truth can he pointed at with words, but it can't be contained by them. Take time to listen to what is said without words, to obey the law too subtle to be written, to worship the unnameable and to embrace the unformed. Love your life. Trust the Tao. Make love with the invisible subtle origin of the universe, and you will give yourself everything you need. You won't have to hide away forever in spiritual retreats. You can be a gentle, contemplative hermit right here in the middle of everything, utterly unaffected, thoroughly sustained and rewarded by your integral practices. Encouraging others, giving freely to all, awakening and purifying the world with each movement and action, you'll ascend to the divine realm in broad daylight. The breath of the Tao speaks, and those who are in harmony with it hear quite clearly.


​
 
omner

thank you for an most interesting post.

No negative because opposites do not truly exist.
Click to expand...

they ‘exist’ in electricity as they exist holistically and philosophically. i see what you mean though, in essence they do not, yet that which emerges than becomes them does. thence they are an outer expression both physically and in terms of meaning and entity.

The negation of a thought is a thought itself
Click to expand...

indeed! i would say that the negated thought belongs to the essence becoming thoughts, just as physicality arises form the same primal entity. thought and existence begin in/as the whole becoming parts in transience.
A good law should tell people what to do, and not what not to do,
yes, also; is it not so that either way people are not all the same and will always act according to who they are. then laws cannot represent every kind of person, so people will agree and disagree with some laws, then act accordingly thence breaking some laws.

the Tao Te Ching, by Lao Tzu. Just yesterday I ran across a 2nd book by Lao Tzu -- I hadn’t known he had any others attributed to him. It’s called Hua Hu Ching. The goal is beyond definition or description,
Click to expand...

i didn’t know that too! here’s a thread i was going to do on this very topic:
http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/question-against-science-reason-and-7925.html#post120659

nice meeting you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top