Hermetic Corpus And Alchemy Edit 0 2…
Hermetic Corpus And Alchemy?
Day Month Year?
Location, City, State?
Description
Audio Link
Transcription
Other links
Terence McKenna: Well, it is a small group and this was my intent by focusing on the Hermetic Corpus and alchemy. I've just gotten tired of talking about psychedelic drugs and always saying the same things over and over again, nevertheless it's a challenge to go outside my own bailiwick. Imean I've had an interest in hermeticism and alchemy since I was about 14 and read Jung's psychology and (of) alchemy and it opened for me the fact of the existence of this vast literature, a literature that is very little read or understood in the modern context. The Jungians have made much of it, but to their own purposes and perhaps not always with complete fidelity to the intent of the tradition. We'll talk a lot about the Jungian approach but there are other approaches even within the 20th century. I believe, since I don't have the catalog I'm not absolutely certain, but I believe the catalog urged you to read Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition by Dame Frances Yates and this is, though Frances Yates scholarship is very controversial, I think that to get an overview of the landscape her book is probably the best single book between covers. It's not pleasing to some factions and we can talk about that, I mean, we will probably discover within the group all strains of alchemical illusions and delusions that have always driven this particular engine, but I thought to get one book that sort of covered the territory that was a good one to start with. Well then I found out that it's very hard to get this book. I didn't realize that because it's been sitting on my shelf for years. Richard Bird found a reprint at the Bodhi Tree. I wasn't aware of this particular edition so, though probably none of you brought it with you in heavily underlined form, if after this weekend you want to try and get it, it is available and if you can't get that edition, why, a good book service can probably come up with the first edition which is Routledge Kegan Paul.
I wouldn't hold a weekend like this simply to go over a body of ancient literature if I didn't think it had some efficacy or import for the modern dilemma and some of you may know the song by the Grateful Dead in which the refrain is "I need a miracle every day." I think any reasonable person can conclude that the redemption of the world, if it's to be achieved, can only be achieved through magic. It's too late for science. It's too late for hortatory politics.
Well, it's very interesting - every ancient literature has its apocalypses and in the hermetic literature there is a prophecy, I think it's in book two but that really doesn't matter, and the prophecy is that a day will come when men no longer care for the earth and at that day the gods will depart and everything will be thrown into primal chaos and this prophecy was very strongly in the minds of the strains of non-Christian thought that evolved at the close-at the centuries of closure-of the Roman Empire. When you look back into historical time it's when you reach the first and second centuries after Christ that you reach a world whose psychology was very much like the psychology of our own time. It was a psychology of despair and exhaustion. This is because Greek science which had evolved under the aegis of democratian atomism and Platonic metaphysics had essentially come to a dead end in those centuries. We can debate the reasons why this happened. An obvious suggestion would be that they failed to develop an experimental method and so everything just dissolved into competing schools of philosophical speculation and a profound pessimism spread through the Hellenistic world and out of that pessimism and in the context of that kind of universal despair which attends the dissolution of great empires a literature was created from the first to the fourth centuries after Christ which we call the Hermetic Corpus or in some cases the Trismegistic Hymns. Now this body of literature was misunderstood by later centuries, especially the Renaissance, because it was taken at face value and assumed to be at least contemporary with Moses if not much older. So the Renaissance view of Hermeticism was based on a tragic misunderstanding of the true antiquity of this material and there are people, hopefully none in this room, who still would have us believe that this literature antedates the Mosaic Law, that it is as old as Dynastic Egypt. But this is an indefensible position from my point of view. In the early 16th century two men, a father and son, Issac and Marik Casaubon, showed through the new science of philology, that this material was in fact late Hellenistic. Now, I've always said that I am not a Classicist in the Viconian sense, in the sense that there is a certain strain of thought that always wants to believe that the oldest stuff is the best stuff. This is not the case to my mind. To my mind what is amazing is how recent everything is. So I have no sympathy with the fans of lost Atlantis or any of that kind of malarky because to me what is amazing is how it all is less than 10,000 years old. Anything older than 10,000 years puts us into the realm of an aceramic society relying on chipped flint for it's primary technology.
What the Hermetic Corpus is is the most poetic and cleanly expressed outpouring of ancient knowledge that we possess. But it was reworked in the hands of these late Hellenistic peoples and it is essentially a religion of the redemption of the earth through magic. It has great debt to a tradition called Sevillian which means to mean Mandeanism and Mandeanism was a kind of proto-Hellenistic gnosis that laid great stress on the power of life, Zoa, Bios, and in that sense it has a tremendously contemporary ring to it.
We also are living in the twilight of a great empire, and I don't particularly mean the American empire, I mean the empire of European thinking created in the wake of the Protestant Reformation and the rise of modern industrialism, the empire, in short of science. Science has exhausted itself and become mere techni. It's still able to perform its magical tricks, but it has no claim on a metaphysic with any meaning because the program of rational understanding that was pursued by science has pushed so deeply into the phenomenon of nature that the internal contradictions of the method are now exposed for all to see. In discussing alchemy especially we will meet with the concept of the coincidencia opositorum, the union of opposites. This is an idea that is completely alien to science. It's the idea that nothing can be understood unless it is simultaneously viewed as both being what it is and what it is not and in alchemical symbolism we will meet again and again symbolical expression of the coincidencia opositorum. It may be in the form of a hermaphrodite, it may be in the form of the union of soul and Luna, it may be in the form of the union of Mercury with lead, or with sulfur, in other words alchemical thinking is thinking that is always antithetical, always holds the possibility of by a mere shift of perspective its opposite premise will gain power and come into focus. I think it was John, when we went around the circle, who mentioned his interest in shamanism. There's a wonderful book called The Forge and the Crucible by Mircea Eliade in which he shows that the shaman is the brother of the smith, the smith is the metallurgist, the worker in metals, and this is where alchemy has its roots. In a sense, alchemy is older han the Trismegistus Corpus and then it is also given a new lease on life by the philosophical underpinings which the Corpus Hermeticum provides it. Alchemy, the word alchemy, can be traced back to mean Egypt or a blackening and in its earliest strata it probably refers to techniques referring to dying, meaning the coloring of cloth, and gilding of metals, and the forging and working of metal. I mean, we who take this for granted have no idea how mysterious and powerful this seemed to ancient people and in fact it would seem so to us if we had anything to do with it. I mean how many of us are welders or casters of metal. It's a magical process to take for instance cinnibar, a red, soft ore and by the mere act of heating it in a furnace it will sweat liquid Mercury onto its surface. Well, we have unconsciously imbibed the ontology of science where we have mind firmly separated out from the world. We take this for granted, it's effortless, because it's the ambience of the civilization we've been born into but in an earlier age, and some writers would say a more naive age, but I wonder about that, but in an earlier age mind and matter were seen to be alloyed together throughout nature so that the sweating of mercury out of cinnabar is not a material process, it's a process in which the mind and the observations of the metalworker maintain an important role, and let's talk for a moment about mercury because the spirit Mercurius is almost the patron deity of alchemy.
You all know what mercury looks like-at room temperature it's a silvery liquid that flows, it's like a mirror. For the alchemists, and this is just a very short exercise in alchemical thinking, for the alchemists mercury was mind itself, in a sense, and by tracing through the steps by which they reached that conclusion you can have a taste of what alchemical thinking was about. Mercury takes the form of its container. If I pour mercury into a cup, it takes the shape of the cup, if I pour it into a test tube, it takes the shape of the test tube. This taking the shape of its container is a quality of mind and yet here it is present in a flowing, silvery metal. The other thing is, mercury is a reflecting surface. You never see mercury, what you see is the world which surrounds it, which is perfectly reflected in its surface like a moving mirror, you see. And then if you've ever, as a child, I mean I have no idea how toxic this process is, but I spent a lot of time as a child hounding my grandfather for his hearing aid batteries which I would then smash with a hammer and get the mercury out and collect it in little bottles and carry it around with me. Well, the wonderful thing about mercury is when you pour it out on a surface and it beads up, then each bead of mercury becomes a little microcosm of the world. And yet the mercury flows back together into a unity. Well, as a child I had not yet imbibed the assumptions and the ontology of science. I was functioning as an alchemist. For me, mercury was this fascinating magical substance onto which I could project the contents of my mind. And a child playing with mercury is an alchemist hard at work, no doubt about it.
Well, so then, this is a phenomenon in the physical world and then mind is a phenomenon in the Cartesian distinction, which is between the Res Extensa and the Res Verins. This is the great splitting of the world into two parts. I remember Al Wong once said to me, we were talking about the yin yang symbol, and he said you know the interesting thing is not the yin or the yang, the interesting thing is the s shaped surface that runs between them. And that s shaped surface is a river of alchemical mercury. Now, where the alchemists saw this river of alchemical mercury is in the boundary between waking and sleeping. There is a place, not quite sleeping, not quite waking, and there there flows this river of alchemical mercury where you can project the contents of the unconscious and you can read it back to yourself. This kind of thinking is confounding to scientific thought where the effort is always to fix everything to a given identity and a given set of behaviors. Now, the other hermetic perception that is well illustrated by just thinking for a moment about mercury is the notion, and this is central to all hermetic thinking, of the microcosm and the macrocosm. That somehow the great world, the whole of the cosmos is reflected in the mystery of man, meaning men and women, it's reflected in the mystery of the human mind/body interface. So, for an alchemist, it makes perfect sense to extrapolate from this internal, what we call internal psychological processes, to external processes in the world. That distinction doesn't exist for the alchemist, and let me tell you, the longer I live the more I am convinced that this is absolutely the truth.
The myth of our society is the existential myth that we are cast into matter, that we are lost in a universe that has no meaning for us, that we must make our meaning. This is what Sartre, Kierkegaard, all those people are saying, that we must make our meaning. It reaches its most absurd expression in Sartre's statement that nature is mute. I mean, this is as far from alchemical thinking as you can possibly get because for the alchemist nature was a great book, an open book to be read by putting nature through processes that revealed not only its inner mechanics, but the inner mechanics of the artifex, the person working upon the material, in other words, the alchemist.
Well, in other contexts I've talked about the importance of language and how our world is made of language and part of the problem in understanding alchemy is that the language is slipping out of our reach. We are so completely imbued with the Cartesian categories of the Res Verins, the world of thought, and the Res Extensia, the world of three dimensional space, and causality, and the conservation of matter and energy, and so forth that in order to do more than carry out a kind of scholarship of alchemy we have to create an alchemical language, or a field in which alchemical language can take place. Some of you may have been with me a couple of weeks ago in Malibu when Joan Halifax and I debated the roots of Buddhism and I think Joan deserves great credit for saying that Buddhism would never have taken root in America were it not for the psychedelic phenomenon. Not that Buddhism is psychedelic, it in fact is fairly touchy about that, but Buddhism would have gotten nowhere in America had not psychedelics created a context for Buddhist language to take root, And I wager that I would never have gotten to first base with proposing a weekend on alchemy at Esalen were it not understood that psychedelics have prepared people for the notion that mind and world can be pureed together like mercury and sulphur, like the Sophic waters, to create a new kind of understanding because otherwise modernity has fixed our minds in the category of Cartesian rationalism and so I will not claim, and do not in fact think it's so, that there was anything overtly psychedelic in the sense of pharmacologically based about alchemy. When we look back through the alchemical literature there's very little evidence that it was pharmacologically driven. Only when you get to the very last ademptions of the alchemical impulse in someone like Paracelsus do you get the use of opium. But it is interesting that the great drugs of modern society were accidentally discovered by alchemists in their researches; distilled alcohol is a product of alchemical work and then, as I mentioned, opium was very heavily used by the Peracelsian school. But what they possessed was an ability to liquify their mental categories and then to project the contents of the mind onto these processes and read them back.
Now this is what made alchemy so fascinating to the Jungian school because the Jungians were discovering the unconscious and they realized, before Jung's involvement with alchemy, that the best material for psychotherapy to work upon was dreams and mythology and these were the two poles of the data field that the discovery of the unconscious was working on. Well then Jung had the prescience to realize that alchemy, which to that point, as the gentleman over here said, had been dismissed as a naive effort to turn base metals into gold-this is the first fiction that you have to absolutely purge from your mind, the only alchemists who ever tried to turn base metals into gold were charlatans, the so-called puffers. They were called that not only for their exaggerated speech but for their use of bellows to drive their fires. Alchemy has always had a core of true adepts and then a surround of misguided souls and outright con artists who were trying to change base metals into gold. Now, it's interesting that science, in its naivety, in the 20th century has actually completed the program of pseudo-alchemy. You can, if you have a sufficiently powerful nuclear reactor, change lead into gold. I mean, the cost is staggering. It has no economic importance whatsoever but it can be done by bombarding gold with a sufficient amount of heavy particles. Lead, you can change it into gold, but this is not what the original intent was. In fact, when we look at the history of 20th century science we will see that, in a way, it's a misunderstanding of what the alchemical goals were to be and, one by one, it has done these things that were stated goals of the alchemists except that the alchemists always spoke in similes and in a secret control language that was symbolic.
Ok, now, another point that was brought up in going around the circle was the externalization of the soul and what we're trying to do in this weekend is study and talk about the idea of redeeming the world through magic. And how is this to be done? Well, the philosopher's stone is a complex of ideas that, no matter how you divide it, no matter how you slice it, it's very difficult to hold the pith essence of this concept, but what it really comes down to is the idea that spirit is somehow resident in matter in a very diffuse form. The goal of hermetic thinking and later alchemy is the concentration and redemption of this spirit, a focusing of it, a bringing of it together. This is an idea that was common in the Hellenistic world not only to hermetic thinking but also to Gnosticism.
Gnosticism is the idea that somehow the pure, holy, real light of being was scattered through a universe of darkness and of Saturnine power and that the goal is that by a process which we can call yogic or alchemical or meditative or moral/ethical, the light must be gathered and concentrated in the body and then somehow released and redeemed. All esoteric traditions, East and West, talk about the creation of this body of light and we will not, in this weekend, talk very much about alchemy, non-western alchemy, Taoist and Vedic alchemy, but in those systems too the notion is about the creation of this vehicle of light. This is one metaphor for the externalization of the soul.
The philosopher's stone is another and I will challenge you to try and imagine what the achievement of the philosopher's stone would be like because it's in trying to think that way that you begin to dissolve the categories of the Cartesian trap. So, image for a moment an object, a material, which can literally do anything. It can move across categorical boundaries with no difficulty whatsoever. So what do I mean? I mean that if you possess the philosopher's stone and you were hungry, you could eat it. If you needed to go somewhere you could spread it out and sit on it and it would take you there. If you needed a piece of information, it would become the equivalent of a computer screen and it would tell you things. If you needed a companion, it would talk to you. If you needed to take a shower you could hold it over your head and water would pour out. Now, you see, this is an impossibility. That's right, it's a coincidencia opositorum. It is something that behaves like imagination and matter without ever doing damage to the ontological status of one or the other. This sounds like pure pathology in the context of modern thinking because we expect things to stay still and be what they are and undergo the growth and degradation that is inimical to them, but no, the redemption of spirit and matter means the exteriorization of the human soul and the interiorization of the human body so that it is an image freely commanded in the imagination.
Imagination. I think this is the first time I've used this word this evening. The imagination is central to the alchemical opus because it is literally a process that goes on the realm of the imagination taken to be a physical dimension. And I think that we cannot understand the history that lies ahead of us unless we think in terms of a journey into the imagination. We have exhausted the world of three dimensional space. We are polluting it. We are overpopulating it. We are using it up. Somehow the redemption of the human enterprise lies in the dimension of the imagination. And to do that we have to transcend the categories that we inherit from a thousand years of science and Christianity and rationalism and we have to re-empower and re-encounter the mind and we can do this psychedelically, we can do this yogically, or we can do it alchemically and hermetically.
Now there is present in the world at the moment, or at least I like to think so, an impulse which I have named the archaic revival. What happens is that whenever a society really gets in trouble, and you can use this in your own life-when you really get in trouble-what you should do is say "what did I believe in the last sane moments that I experienced" and then go back to that moment and act from it even if you no longer believe it. Now in the Renaissance this happened. The scholastic universe dissolved. New classes, new forms of wealth, new systems of navigation, new scientific tools, made it impossible to maintain the fiction of the Medieval cosmology and there was a sense that the world was dissolving. Good alchemical word-dissolving. And in that moment the movers and shakers of that civilization reached backwards in time to the last sane moment they had ever known and they discovered that it was Classical Greece and they invented classicism. In the 15th and 16th century the texts which had lain in monasteries in Syria and Asia Minor forgotten and untranslated for centuries were brought to the Florentine council by people like Gimistos Placo(sp?) and others and translated and classicism was born-its laws, its philosophy, its aesthetics. We are the inheritors of that tradition but it is now, once again, exhausted and our cultural crisis is much greater. It is global. It is total. It involves every man, woman and child on this planet, every bug, bird and tree is caught up in the cultural crisis that we have engendered. Our ideas are exhausted-the ideas that we inherit out of Christianity and its half-brother science, or its bastard child science. So, what I'm suggesting is that an archaic revival needs to take place and it seems to be well in hand in the revival of Goddess worship and shamanism and partnership but notice that these things are old-10,000 years or more old-but there was an unbroken thread that, however thinly drawn, persists right up to the present.
So the idea of this weekend is to show the way back to the high magic of the late Paleolithic, to show that there were intellectual traditions, there were minority points of view that kept the faith, that never allowed it to die. And, to my mind, this alchemical, hermetic, Gnostic, Egyptian, Caldean thread is the thread and if we unravel it with sufficient care and attention then we can build a bridge from the otherwise nearly incomprehensible high magic of the late Paleolithic. We can get it as near to ourselves as John Dee, who died in 1604. We can discover that it's no further away form us than the beginning of the 30 years war and, for my money, after that, it gets pretty mucked up. I mean, after Ulias Levy, who's already waffling, I'm not very interested in the occultism of the 17th, 18th and 19th century but it's not necessary because scholarship gives us the Caldean oracles, the Trismegistic Hymns, the library at Nag Hammadi, and so forth and so on. So my impulse is to, in the most austere sense, re-popularize, reintroduce this kind of thinking so that people can live it out. Then, step, by step, we can evolve our language and evolve our understanding to make our way back to the garden, back to Eden.
It's occurred to me recently, you know it's said that Christ opened the doors to paradise, yes, but he closed the doors to Eden and paradise is a very airy place where everybody sits around on clouds strumming their lyres. I think that what we want to do is make our way back to the alchemical garden. That's where our roots are. That's where meaning is. Meaning lies in the confrontation of contradiction-the coincidencia opositorum. That's what we really feel, not these rational schemas that are constantly beating us over the head with the "thou shalts" and "thou should." but rather a recovery of the real ambiguity of being and an ability to see ourselves as at once powerful and weak, noble and ignoble, future-oriented, past-facing. We each need to become Janus-based(?) and to incorporate into ourselves the banished contradictions of being that so haunt the enterprise of science. We can leave that behind and when we do we reclaim authentic being. And authentic being, make no mistake about it, is what alchemical gold really is. That's what they're talking about-authentic being.
Q: So right now we're lead?
TM:That's right, we're Saturnine and we'll talk about Saturn and Pluto and all of that. Yes, tomorrow we'll talk about the stages of the alchemical opus and though the stages are many and multifarious, it all begins in what is called the negrado, the blackening, the depths of the leaded, Saturnine, chaotic, fixed place. And that's where we have been left by science and modernity and so forth and so on. That's where the alchemist loves to begin. That's where he or she stokes the fire and begins the dissolucio et coagulatio that leads to the appearance of the stone.
I'll show you some books and this is by no means exhaustive. The literature on hermeticism and alchemy is vast and I could have brought 5 or 6 boxes of this size from my own library. This a smattering. It doesn't mean that what I show you is the best. It simply tries to spread over a large area. Oh, someone put this here. This is a new novel that's just been published by Lindsay Clark called The Chemical Wedding and I see last week it was number 10 on the New York Time's best sellers list which is astonishing for such an obscure subject. It's a retelling of a famous incident in alchemy in the 19th century when a woman named Mary Alice Datwood, who had a very, very close relationship to her father, Dr. South, and the two of them worked together, she on a text, he on a long poem and to make a long story short, eventually they decided to destroy both the poem and the book feeling that they had said too much and given the secret away-at least that's one version. So this is fictionalized retelling of that incident intercut with a modern cast of characters very clearly modelled on the poet Robert Graves. So if you like to absorb your information in a fictionalized form, this is a wonderful book. John Borman the movie director recently optioned this book-the guy who made "The Emereld Forest" and "Excalibur" so we may have an alchemical movie downstream, a year or two.
A number of compendiums of alchemical texts have been published over the centuries and if you wish to study alchemy you have to obtain these. If you're fortunate enough to read French you should read Vespugiare and Berthelo. They collected alchemical texts into encyclopedic-sized volumes but unfortunately these have never really come into English. One that did come into English is the Museum Hermeticum Amplificarum et Theatrum, I think, which A.E. Waite, who some of you may know for his role in the Golden Dawn, collected. There are about 40 alchemical texts and all the greats are in here: Lull, Vilanova, Michael Maier, Basil Valentine, Kramer, Edward Kelly and so on and so forth.
The place to begin, I think, is obviously with the question "Who is Hermes Trismegistus?" What are we talking about here? I mean, this sounds so incredibly exotic to people. The Renaissance had the concept of what it called the Presqui Poaloque (sp?) and if my Latin and Greek irritates you, you have to understand you're dealing with a boy from a coal mining town in Colorado, so I do mangle these things. The Presqui Paoloque were Orpheus, Moses, and primarily Hermes Trismegistus. Hermes Trismegistus was the primary source, from the point of view of the Renaissance, of this whole mysterious tradition and, you recall from last night's lecture, this is based on a misunderstanding. The Renaissance believed that Hermes Trismegistus was older than Moses. We know now, thanks to Issac and Marik Casaubon, two philologists of the early 17th century, that definitely the Hermetic corpus was composed between the first and second centuries after Christ. The method of the Casaubons was to examine the philosophical language of the Corpus Hermeticum and show that there were words and phrases there that were post-Platonic and derivative of philosophers whose dates we have fully in hand. Now, if you go to an occult bookstore you will find that, to this date, this error persists. There are people who still want to claim that this stuff is older than dyanstic Egypt. There are even books, I was in Shambala weeks ago, claiming to teach you how to change lead into gold. Well, from my point of view this just evokes a small smile. The old errors persist. The Puffers are still at it. But what Hermes Trismegistus is is a character who appears in many guises in these hermetic dialogs. The hermetic hymns are usually couched in the form of dialogs between Hermes and his son Thoth and Thoth takes the position of the uninitiated ingenue who is sitting at the feet of the master. Thoth asks questions: what is the true nature of the world, what is the true nature of man,and Hermes answers and the general form of these texts, with exceptions, because there are 20 of them, is an intellectual dialog which builds to an ecstatic revelation and then in the wake of the ecstatic revelation there is a hymn of praise to Hermes Trismegistus. Trismegistus means thrice-blessed and is sometimes called Hermes Triplex to distinguish this Hermes from all the other Hermes of early, middle and late Greek thinking. Hermes is of course the messenger god, the god of scribes. The reason this Ibis-headed being holding a staff is embossed on the cover of each of these books is because this is how Hermes Trismegistus, Thoth Hermes was imagined. He was associated with the scribe god of the Egyptian pantheon. The two distinguishing factors that stand out, at least for me, that I think you need to incorporate into your thinking about hermeticism, two very important concepts. The first is the divinity of human beings-an extraordinarily radical idea in the context of late Hellenistic thinking. We all operate under the spell of the concept of the fall of man. Man is an inferior being, errors were made in the Garden of Eden and that we are far, far from the nature of divinity. All magic, and all magic in the West is derivative from this tradition, takes the position that man is a divine being, men and women are divine beings. The Corpus Hermeticum actually refers to man as God's brother and this is a double-edged perception. It gives tremendous dignity to the human enterprise but it also raises the possibility of the error of pride and hubris. In the Renaissance, Marcello Ficino boiled this notion down to the aphorism "man is the measure of all things." And you may notice that this is the position of science, that man is the measure of all things, that it is up to us, we can decide the course of the cosmos. All magic stems from this position. This is why the church was so concerned to stamp out magic-because it assigns man an importance that the church would rather reserve for deity. So that's the first great division between Christian thinking and hermetic thinking. An entirely different conception of what human beings are and when we get into the text, I'll read you some of these passages. Now, the second distinguishing factor, and notice that position on man empowers tremendous freedom, man is the measure of all things, the second distinguishing factor in hermeticism is the belief that we can control fate, that we can escape from cosmic fate. The late Hellenistic mindset, and what you get in the Gnostics, is the belief that because of astrology, because of the stars, we are subject to control from these exterior forces. In most Gnostic thinking the whole concern is to somehow evade what is called the hemarmeny (sp?), cosmic fate. And in the Gnostic systems, the only way it can be done is by ascending through the shells of cosmic, ordering forces-the archons, the planets, the planetary demons, and so forth and so on, and then beyond the hemarmeny, which is actually thought of as a place in space that you burst through when you transcend fate. What the hermetic thought is is that these fates become personified as the decans, as stellar demons, and then it is held that there is a magic, a magical system, which is possible where you can call these archangels to your side and work with them and not be subject to the inevitable working of the cosmic machinery and this burst like a revelation over the late Hellenistic world because there was such philosophical and emotional and political exhaustion that this comes, this is a counterpoint to the message of the New Testament, which is a similar message, that you can be saved in the body, that you can escape the inevitable dissolution and degradation laid upon us by time. So, these are the two distinguishing factors: the divinity of man and the possibility of using magic to evade the machinery of fate. So, I want to read some of the Corpus Hermeticum to you to give you the flavor of it, but before I do, I want to say something about the history of these texts. You're all familiar, more or less I'm sure, with Apuleius' The Golden Ass, which is a novel of initiation which is late Roman. Apuleius also put together what is called the Asclepius and the Asclepius is true hermetic literature that was not lost. It was the only one that was available throughout the Dark and Middle ages. All the rest was lying untranslated in Syrian Monasteries until Gemistus Plethon in 1490 brought these manuscripts to Florence, to the court of the Di Medicis and then the translation project began. The only other hermetic material that was accessible throughout the high Gothic period was a book of magic called the Picatrix. And the Picatrix was probably written in the 1200's although this elicits screams of dissent from the burning-eyed faction. But reason dictates that we consider Picatrix 12th century so only the Asclepius and the Picatrix represented this strain of thought before the 1460's. And the importance of hermetic thinking can be seen by the fact that Gimistis Platho brought Plato to the Florentine council as well as Hermes Trismegistus. And when Marcello Ficino sat down to do this translation work Cosumo Di Medici said "Plato can wait, I'm getting old. You do the Hermetic Corpus first. That's much more important. We'll sort out this Plato business in a few years." And so it was done. It was completed in 1493 and in 1494 Cosumo died so he never saw the translations of Plato but felt that the Corpus Hermeticum was more important. I mention this to show you the importance that was attached to this stuff. Here is one of the key passages on man's nature. This is from Book one of the Corpus Hermeticum: "But mind the father of all, he who is life and light gave birth to man, a being like to himself and he took delight in man as being his own offspring for man was very goodly to look on, bearing the likeness of his father. With good reason then did God take delight in man for it was God's own form that God took delight in and God delivered over to man all things that had been made." This is the basis of the Ficinian statement man is the measure of things. "And man took station in the Maker's sphere and observed the things made by his brother who was set over the region of fire. And having observed the Maker's creation in the region of fire he willed to make things for his own part also. And his father gave permission having in himself all the workings of the administrators." This is a reference to the angel heirarchary "And the administrators took delight in him and each of them gave him a share of his own nature." So man is the brother of God and a creature at home with the angels. This idea is echoed in the Asclepius which you'll recall was available throughout the Middle Ages. "The range of man is yet wider than that of the demons" meaning the angels - this term is transposable in its hermetic thought "The individuals of the human kind are diverse and of many characters. They, like the demons, come from above and, entering into fellowship with other individuals they make for themselves many and intimate connections with all other kinds" and then the famous passage "man is an honor then, Asclepius, honor and reverence to such a being. Man takes on him the attributes of a god as though he were himself a god. And he is familiar with the demonkind for he comes to know that he is sprung from the same source as they. And strong in the assurance of that in him which is divine, he scorns the merely human part of his own nature. How far more happily blended are the properties of man then those of other beings. He is linked to the gods inasmuch as there is in him a divinity akin to theirs. He scorns that part of his own being which makes him a thing of earth and all else with which he finds himself connected to by heaven's ordering he binds to himself with the tie of his affection." So this is an incredibly radical conception of what it means to be human. So radical that it is unwelcome even in the present context. Notice the modern feeling of this stuff. This is not biblical rhetoric. This is philosophical discourse as we know it and carry it out ourselves. This is a passage on the adept and initiation. Let me see who's speaking here, Thoth speaks to Pimondres, this is book one, "But tell me this too, said I, God said 'let the man who has mind in him recognize himself' but have not all men mind?" And then Pimondres replies " Oh man, said mind to me speak not so, I even mind come to those men who are holy and good and pure and merciful and my coming is a succor to them and forthwith they recognize all things and win the father's grace by loving worship and give thanks to him praising and hymning him with hearts uplifted to him in filial affection." Again the reference to being God's brother in filial affection. "And before they give up the body to death which is proper to it they loathe the bodily senses knowing what manner of work the senses do." This introduces the theme of asceticism. Like the Gnostics, there is in much of hermetic literature a kind of horror of the earth, a desire to ascend and to get away from it. Scott makes the distinction between what he calls pessimistic Gnosis and optimistic Gnosis. And within the 20 texts of the Corpus Hermeticum you get vacillation on this point. In some cases the Mandaean, the Cebian(?) tendency is there and the world soul is invoked and the whole of creation is seen as a living being involved in this soteriological process, this process of salvational mechanics through magic. In other texts this Gnostic horror of matter is strongly stressed. It's very clear that the Hellenistic mind was ambivalent on this point. Even as we are ambivalent on this point. It's a real question, are we here to be the caretakers of the earth or are we strangers in the universe and is our task to return to a forgotten and hidden home no trace of which can be found in the Saturnine world of matter. It's very hard to have it both ways. You're going to have to take a position on that and these people were forced into the same dilemma. There's no middle ground between those two positions and so that dichotomy, that conundrum, haunted a lot of hermetic thinking. Here is the hermetic creation myth. This is book three, paragraphs one through a few, and you'll see the comparison and similarities with the Christian creation myth but with extraordinary differences. "There was darkness in the deep and water without form and there was a subtle breath, intelligent, which permeated the things in chaos with divine power. Then, when all was yet undistinguished and unwrought, there was shed forth holy light and the elements came into being. All things were divided one from another and the lighter things were parted off on high, the fire being suspended aloft so that it rose unto the air and the heavier things sank down and sand was deposited beneath the watery substance and the dry land was separated out from the watery substance and became solid. And the firey substance was articulated with the gods therein and heaven appeared with its seven spheres and the gods, visible in starry forms, with all their constellations and heaven revolved and began to run its circling course riding upon the divine air. And each god by his several powers set forth that which he was bidden to put forth. And there came forth four-footed beasts and creeping things and fishes and winged birds and grass and every flowering herb, all having seed in them according to their diverse natures for they generated within themselves the seed by which their races should be renewed." And then it goes on to describe the birth of man. This kind of thinking is what alchemy seized upon in it's ambitions. One way of thinking of what alchemy came to attempt is, the thinking went like this - since man is God's brother, the purpose of man is to intercede in time and it was believed that ores, precious metals and things like this grew in the earth. It was a thorough going theory of evolution that reached right down into the organic realm. It was thought that gold deposits in the earth would actually replenish themselves over time. It's passages like this that give permission for that kind of thinking. In line with that, we're now in book four and remember the tone changes slightly from book to book, they were, after all, written over a 300 year period by various people. "You must understand that God is pre-existent, ever existent, and that he alone made all things and created by his will the things that are. And when the creator had made the ordered universe, he willed to set and order the earth also and so he sent down man, a mortal creature made in the image of an immortal being, to be an embellishment of the divine body for it is man's function" - here it comes, the purpose of man according to book four - "for it is man's function to contemplate the works of god and for this purpose he was made, that he might view the universe with wondering awe and come to know its maker. Man has this advantage over all other living beings, that he possess mind and speech. Now speech, my son, God imparted to all men but mind he did not impart to all. Not that he grudged it to any, for the grudging temper does not start from heaven above, but comes from being here below in the souls of those men who are devoid of mind." This introduces the concept of an elect, or a perfectee, a heirarchy of human accomplishment and understanding and this is also basic to Gnosticism. It's not for everyone, they're saying, it's for the pure of heart and what pure of heart means depends on the school you're looking at. For some, it was mathematical accomplishment. For others, it was contact with the logos, for others it was the ability to resist the temptations of the senses. But there was always the sense of the higher and lower possibilities within the human experience. Questions? I'm still back in the last lecture we shared on plant intelligence. So I'm listening to all this divinity of man and wondering where the position of the plant realm or the planning(?) was. There was one section where you read that, so... Yes. This is the opening of book 12 and this is a heavy Mandaean sensitivity, this sensitivity to life. This whole cosmos, and notice how this transcends even the Buddhist point of view because in Buddhism plants have no soul, this is a tremendous failure in the Buddhist perception as far as I'm concerned, o.k., this is book 12 - "Now this whole cosmos, which is a great god and an image of he who is greater and is united with him and maintains its order in accordance with that will, is one mass of life and there is not anything in the cosmos, nor has been through all time, from the first foundation of the universe, neither in the whole, nor among the several things contained within it that is not alive. There is not, and has never been, and never will be in the cosmos, anything that is dead. For it was the father's will that the cosmos, as long as it exists, should be a living being and therefore it must needs be a God also. How then, my son, could there be dead things in that which is a God, in that which is an image of the father, in that which is one mass of life. Deathness is corruption and corruption is destruction. How then can any part of that which is incorruptible be corrupted or any part of that which is a God be destroyed." And there are other passages. Ah, this is a good one. This is book 18, "For as the sun, who nurtures all vegetation also gathers the first fruits of the produce with his rays as it were with mighty hands, plucking the sweetest odors of the plants, even so we too, having received into our own souls, which are plants of heavenly origin, the efflux of God's wisdom must in return use his service for all which springs up in us." Now, this conception that the human soul is a plant is a unique idea. I don't know of another tradition, Those of us who were in Ojai heard Johanes Wilbur(sp?) talk about how, among the Amazon Indians, the Guiral(sp?), men actually marry trees. They actually take trees as their wives, a tree, and it is a man's job throughout his life to take care of this tree with the same tenderness and affection which he lavishes on a living wife. This is a more radical conception than that. This is the conception that the most important part of us is a plant. It reminds me of the joke that I occasionally make in these groups, the notion that animals are something invented by plants to carry them from place to place. Well, according to this, that's right on. So, the sensitivity to the vegetative nature is so great that it raises the plant to be the pith essence, the soul of man, the brother of God! So you see the valuation of the vegetative universe is of an extremely radical type. The upper echelon of humanity that was given the mind, was that predetermined at birth or can someone develop a mind? No, it is not predetermined. It is something that is acquired through cultivation of a relationship to, in the hermetic language, nous, the higher mind, and in the Gnostic language logos, the informing spirit. Nothing is predetermined in the hermetic system because through magic we can overcome the energies of cosmic fate. This is the great good news of hermeticism, that we are not subject to fate. We should probably talk a little about this logos concept. This is something which seems very alien to modern people unless they are psychedelically sophisticated. The logos was the sine qua non of Hellenistic religion and what it was was an informing voice that spoke in your head or heart, wherever you want to put it, and it told you the right way to live. You get this idea even in the later Old Testament where it's said that the truth of the heart can be known. It's no great dilemma to know good from evil, you simply inquire of your heart, "is it good or evil?" and you will discover a voice which will tell you and all the great thinkers of this Greco-Hellenistic period sought and cultivated the logos. Plato had his demon. Everyone sought the informing voice of the nous, that's what it's called in Neo-Platonism and then in hermeticism and then in Gnosticism, the logos. For modern people, well no, for me, the only way I've ever had this experience is through the presence of psychedelic substances and then it is just crystal clear, there's just no ambiguity about it. Somehow, it's possible for an informing voice to come into cognition that knows more than you do. It is a connection with the collective unconscious, I suppose, that is convivial, conversational, that just talks to you about the nature of being in the world and the nature of your being in the world. It's puzzling to us because it seems so remote, for us a voice in the head or the heart is pathology and you may know the famous story of, in the first century, some fishermen were off the shore of the island of Argos in the Mediterranean Sea and they heard a great voice from the sky and the voice said, "great Pan is dead." Well, people like Lactantius and Euseibus, these patristic fathers, the people who built Christianity, who took the Gospels and turned them into a world religion, they took this annunciation from the sky of the death of Pan as the annunciation of the change of the Aeon. By the Aeon, I mean these roughly 2,000 year periods that are associated with the equinocial procession. Do you all understand how this works? That over 26,000 years, the helical rising of the solsticial sun slips slowly from one house to another and around AD100, there's argument because these things are never precise, the age of Picses began and the previous Aeon ceased and the cosmic machinery, the great gears of the largest scale of the cosmic machinery, clicked past a certain point and into the age of Picses and this was then taken as very fortuitous for Christianity because Christ was associated with the sign of the fish and it was seen as a Picsean movement. I believe that it's entirely possible that the logos in that rough moment in time fell silent and it has been silent for 2,000 years so what we have is the exegesis of text and Noetic archeology of the sort we're carrying on here. Now, a phenomenon as trivial and hyped on as channeling can be seen as the reawakening of the logos. The long night of Picsean silence is ending and the spirit of nous is again moving in the world, speaking in the minds of the adepts and the heirophants who have the techniques and the will to connect with this stuff. I don't know how I got off on that. But obviously this kind of literature can be seen as the last message from the fading logos. The last statements before the change of the Aeons rendered this control language very difficult and non-intuitive and somewhat incomprehensible. Reading...you broke off, and I had a puzzlement about the use of the word mind. What, in this context, does this refer to? It's Scott's translation of this word nous. It simply means this universal, permeating intelligence. The statement there is that it is only available to an elite through... Through asceticism and desire, intent. There are proscriptions, they lived a life of purity, although their definitions of purity varied widely. Man is brother of God and yet we have to earn it. This seems kind of a denial of that. That's right. This persists right up to this moment. The quote I always love is from Thomas Hobbes' Levaithan. Hobbes was the great theoritician of modern government and social systems and he was basically a paranoid S.O.B. and he says in the Levaithan "man to man is likened to an errant beast and man to man is likened to a god." It's absolutely true, you know, our noblest aspirations and our most hideously dehumanizing activities take place in the context of our relationship to other people. This is what the alchemists were trying to do - separate the gold from the dross. They were trying to take the errant beast, and when we look at alchemical art we will see dragons, dogs, pigs, we will see the errant beast and we will see the angelic beings that are trying to be separated out of our nature. This is within each and every one of us. Man to man is likened to a god and man to man is likened to an errant beast. This question has to do with mind. According to my understanding of some of the Platonic tradition and Neo-Platonic thought, this has to do with the divided line in Plato. You can divide that line...into five stages of knowing. You start with the senses as being agency or avenue, knowing something about something like contact - most external form of knowledge - the level above the senses is designated as the instincts, it's an inactive knowing, in that sense a biologically active knowing that we have. The third stage is described as sometimes estimation, this is, an approximation, yes, this characterized mainly sort of logical activity and then the next level of cognitive activity is reason and this reason is not the type of reason we normally engage in, it's a very different, a very creative type of activity. Above the reason is what they call intuition or intellect or nous and that's put in as the fifth. And would that be revelation? Reason is a creative activity and one can generate and think things through with creative ability. One goes through activity and stages of the activity and things transpire over time and one comes to complete understanding of the thing one is trying to grasp and sometimes that's described as discursive activity although the logical activity is discursive. So you're moving through a process...pieces, the nous or the intellect of the higher mind grasp things in totality. It doesn't engage in... In rasiosination(sp?). You raise an important point which further complicates the picture, but it's how it was, folks. The reference here is to Neo-Platonism which is a kind of parallel tradition to what we're talking about. Plato had at least a couple of phases in the evolution of his thinking. The young Plato is a rational thinker but the later Plato, apparently after he fell under the influence of Pythagorean schools, becomes a full-blown mystic and then in the late Roman empire, almost a thousand years after Plato, we have to remember, in our minds these people get squeezed together like they could all have dinner together, but Plotinus is as far from Plato as we are from King Connaught so you have to bear in mind the scale of history. But, so 900 - 1,000 years after Plato a Byzantine school of philosophy arouse around Porphery, Plotinus and Procelus as the major exponents and they worked with the late Plato and elaborated a beautiful mystical cosmology. This is what I did a workshop on here a year ago and many of those ideas and terms parallel conceptually the stuff in the Corpus Hermeticum and if you're of a certain intellectual bent you may find yourself more comfortable with the Neo-Platonists than this. This tends to be emotional, evocative, poetic and while there's great poetry in Plotinus there's also very tight thinking that goes along with it. And there are other traditions, I'm making it simple for you, there was a whole tradition called the Caldean oracles and this was a collection of 100 or more fragments all of which were the great commentaries of Eusebius in 30 volumes. The Amblicus(?) is one of them. That's all lost, we don't have that material and it is in a way the most mysterious of these traditions because it just didn't survive and it may be that that, the Caldean Oracles is the missing link to push this stuff several centuries back into time because the Caldean Oracles may actually be pre-Platonic. There's considerable evidence of that. But these are very arcane matters. You have to give yourself over to a lifetime of learning these languages and the philology of these languages to penetrate this stuff.
Neo Platonism was Byzantine, basically Constantinople. The Hermetic Corpus was largely Alexandrian. There were also Christian Platonists in Alexandria. There were certain centers: Rome, Alexandria, Byzantium, Heliopolos in Egypt was a cult site that was maintained for a very long time. If you're interested in this stuff but don't like to absorb it this way, Flaubert, of all people, the Flaubert of Madame Bovary, wrote an incredible novel called The Temptation of St. Anthony in which he describes second century Alexandria in a fictionalized form and gives you a real flavor for the intellectual complexity of the Alexandrian world. Christianity had not yet gelled, it was many things, so you not only have Gnostics of five or six schools: Simonists, Valentinians, Baselideans and so forth, but you also have Christians, a numbers of cults calling themselves Christians, who were in fierce competition. Docetists, Montanists, and later Nestorians. There were Gymnosophists from India, people who were actually carrying yogic doctrines into the Mediterranean world, plus you then have all the surviving cults of the older Egyptian strata, the Cults of Isis, and Seville, and Dionysus, and Adonis, it just goes on and on. The richness of this intellectual world is very, there's nothing comparable in our experience and it shows the passion with which people were trying to understand the dilemma of a dying world because this is what they were confronted with. The intellectuals of the empire could feel it all slipping through their hands. Flaubert gives a wonderful picture of this. Flaubert has a very romantic streak. It's like smoking hashish, reading this book - the attention to fabrics, architecture, food and odor. And because the subject matter is the temptation of St. Anthony, it's an excuse to describe these temptations in all their sensual richness and erotic kinkiness. It's a wonderful way to absorb this material.
Somebody else raised the point of the elitism, of an elite group of people. And if one considers a society like the one you had in Alexandria, or some of the other centers, the only people who really had access to this were first of all people who had money and who were well educated and could read so already you had an elite group.
Yes, definitely. What survives from a civilization is it's literatures and these literatures are usually the production of an elite. We have to remember, don't have any illusions about the Roman Empire. I always think of the wonderful description, I don't even know why it's there, Boris Pasternac, in Doctor Zhivago, goes off on a riff about Rome and he describes it as a bargain basement on three floors. This was an empire that lived by human cruelty. It was on the backs of slaves that this airy, intellectual speculation was based. It was a tremendously pluralistic society but that pluralism was maintained by standing armies of enormous size and policies of occupation of enormous cruelty. Because of our relationship to the Christian tradition we're aware of such things as the Zealot revolt of 69 and the reign of Herod Antiochus in Jerusalem, but that was just one little corner of the empire and in Armenia, in Gaul, in Spain, in North Africa, military governments were carrying out outrageous suppressions of native populations, it was not a pretty time to be alive. And what comes down to us then is the yearning to escape. No wonder these people saw the earth as a cesspool and a trap because that's what it was for them. Our own age is very similar. We do not have slavery but we suffer under propaganda -mass manipulation of ideas and the degradation of exploitation of the third world on a scale the Roman Empire couldn't even dream of. So, there is a great affinity.
If any of you are interested in this kind of thing, I highly recommend a book by Hans Jonas called The Phenomenon of Life. It's a book of philosophical essays but there's one essay called "Gnosticism and the Modern Temper" in which he shows that once you take Gnosticism and dump all the angels and all the star demons and all the colorful bricabrac of late Roman thinking what you have is a thorough going existentialism completely compatible with Jean Paul Sartre, Jean Genet, and the kind of intellectual despair that characterized the post WWII generation in Europe. Heidegger is thorough goingly Gnostic in his intentionality, it's just that the language is modern and stripped of this magical thinking and by being stripped of this magical thinking in a way modern, the modern resention of that state of mind is even more hopeless and dis-empowering.
Fortunately, I think we're moving out of the shadow of that, but I'm 44 years old, I grew up reading those people and it made my adolescence much harder than it needed to be. I mean, my god, there wasn't an iota of hope to be found anywhere. That's why, for me, psychedelics broke over that intellectual world like a tidal wave of revelation. I quoted to you last night Jean Paul Sartre's statement that nature is mute. Now I see this as an obscenity almost, an intellectual crime against reason and intuition. It's the absolute antithesis of the logos and much of our world is ruled by men, older than I am, who are fully connected into that without any question and they just think that the rest of this is just namby pamby ecological soft heartedness of some sort. There is no openness to the power of Bios, to the fact of a living cosmos. This is what Rupert Sheldrake is always trying to say. The re-investiture of spirit into matter, the rebirth of the world soul is a necessary concomitant to what we understand about the real nature of the world. In a way, the theory of evolution, which was born in the 1850s, was the beginning of the turning of the tide because even though the first 100 years of evolutionary theory was fantastically concerned to eliminate teleology, eliminate purpose, nevertheless nobody ever understood that except the hardcore evolutionists. To everyone else, evolution meant ascent to higher form. I once heard someone say "if it doesn't have to do with genes, it ain't evolution." Well, that's a tremendously limited view of what evolution is. The inorganic world is evolving, the organic world is evolving and there the currency is genes but also the social and intellectual world of human beings is evolving and there the currency is not genes but means so that idea carries with it the implication of ascent to higher form and correctly broadened and understood becomes permission to optimism and to the kind of hope that these folks were trying to articulate.
Q: The concept of mind as something that is attainable and not necessary is a separation and therefore for me it's a lie and so I want ...I don't know, I assume there are many different definitions of mind, I don't mean functions of mind, I mean definitions of mind, and I'm toying now with the notion of meshing of the notion of mind and the notion of logos. For logos is, and it seems to me that mind is, if it is available through trial then we're back in a separation...and this is to me a false separation
TM: Yes, you're right, but it's a separation necessary for philosophical discourse, that's why philosophical discourse is not the top of the mountain. Language itself is the process of making distinctions that are false. This is why all language is a lie. This is why the ultimate truth lies in something unspeakable but the ascent to the philosophical is through this kind of philosophical analysis.
Q: Language is only the vehicle.
TM: Well it's the vehicle but eventually there's no road and you have to park the vehicle and get out and walk, and that's the journey. Plotinous, the great Neo Platonist has this wonderful phrase. He calls the mystical experience "the flight of the alone to the alone." I love this image. It's so uncompromising and it's about as true as something can be and still move in the realm of language, because it's saying: finally words fall away and finally there is only that which cannot be said. Many of you who've stuck with me know that I love to quote this poem by this obscure poet who died in the trenches in France in the first World War, Trumble Stickney, and he wrote a poem called "Meaning's Edge" and the punch line goes like this "I look over meaning's edge and feel the dizziness of the things you have not said," and I think that every one of these weekends, this is the effort to carry you to the edge of an abyss and then push you over into the dizziness of the things unsaid and they will always be unsaid.
Wittgenstein, God bless him, had the concept of the unspeakable. He said "philosophy operates in the realm of the unspeakable but eventually we must confront that which cannot be said." The dizziness of things unsaid, and there's where real authenticity then flows back into the world of community and speech but it comes from a place of utter silence and unsay-ability. How could it be otherwise? What hubris would it be to expect that the small-mouthed noises of English could encompass being. That's a primary error that all philosophy chooses to make at the beginning of it's enterprise in order to set up shop at all. No, these are lower-dimensional slices of a reality that is ultimately unitary, ineffable, unspeakable, and dazzling.
Q: Philosophical discourse is verbal and mental masturbation?
TM: Absolutely. Masturbation, because it's, there's a pun here, it's auto-poetic, it is completely out of yourself, there is no union with the other and the other is what you're always trying to get to. The other is a common term in these literatures. The other is that which cannot be fully known. I always like to quote the British enzymologist JBS Haldane, who made a wonderful statement. He said, "the universe is not only stranger than we suppose, it is stranger than we can suppose." That's a dizzying perception. It's one thing to think it's very strange. It's another thing to think it's stranger than you can suppose. You may suppose and suppose and suppose and you'll fall so short of the mark that it's absurd. That's what it means to be in the presence of a mystery. The modern word mystery translates out to unsolved problem. That's not what a mystery is. A mystery is not an unsolved problem. A mystery is a mystery and raciocination(sp?) can exhaust itself and make no progress with it and that's what's at the core of our being and that was what was at the core of this ancient perception. These were thoroughly modern people. They were shoved up against the same things that tug at our hearts and our minds and our souls and beyond that there's not a whole hell of a lot that you can say about it.
I just wanted to add that the idea of the earth as a living organism makes an appearance in psychology at the end of the last century with Gustave Fechner who survives in footnotes of textbooks as the father of experimental psychology. I read a book about the soul life of plants also and that whole part of his work is utterly ignored influenced anybody but William Jameson.
This is an idea that will not die but it's practitioners end up in footnotes. They do not have a happy fate. Certainly Henri Birkson, with his idea of the elan vital, this is an effort to preserve the idea of a world soul and yet the fate of Birkson, his influence on modern philosophy is certainly minimal. Alfred North Whitehead is my great favorite. I think that he's the cat's pajamas and he has this idea of the living cosmos - that life and vitality extend right down to the electron yet in spite of his mathematical contributions, the fact that he wrote Principia Mathematica with Bertrand Russell, Whitehead is not taught. I think there's one university in this country where they take him seriously. Modern philosophy is a desert for my money. Who cares about it? Nobody cares about it. Who's living their life according to the perceptions of modern philosophy. Nobody, as far as I can see. But yes, vitalism was this impulse in biology that persisted right up to the 1920s with embryologists like Dreche and his school and mechanical biology has been at great pains to suppress that. That's why Rupert Sheldrake is such a breath of fresh air, because he can be seen as a person carrying the vitalist message back into science. His new book on the greening of science and nature is nothing more than a manifesto for the re-recognition of the presence of the world soul.
Q: What about the Native Americans, their philosophy?
TM: Yes, well, Aboriginal people, not only the Native Americans but the tribes of the Amazon, if you live next to nature this is such an overwhelming perception that it's never called into question. But you see we, most of us, trace our civilization to desert dwellers who invented agriculture which lead to surpluses so then we had to build walled enclosures to defend our surpluses from starving neighbors and we're talking 6,000 BC at Jericho for this kind of stuff. So,we have been cut off from the natural mind longer than any other group of people on earth. This is how we're able to carry out the demonic, in the negative sense, reconstruction of the world that we have. If there is a sin then we have sinned. Robert Oppenheimer said beyond all rational argument the physicists have known sin and it's because they reached into the heart of matter without reverence and their greatest trick was to call down the light that burns at the center of stars and they call it down to the test centers of the deserts and onto the heads of our enemies, if necessary. But this is a cosmic sin, it's an abomination. It's the story of Western Civilization.
The first great error was the urbanization, well, I don't know, the first great error, the invention of agriculture was a pretty staggering bad turn, then urbanization and then a piece of bad luck which we didn't need to befall us was the invention of the phonetic alphabet. And with the invention of the phonetic alphabet we moved away from symbolism and lost even the symbolic connection to the world and that happened with the evolution of Demotic Greek and even earlier languages - linear A and B and that kind of stuff. McLuhan talks a lot about this. We live in a universe so alienated that we can barely conceive of the way back but hopefully. Archeology is a wonderful thing. We are actually digging into the stratigraphic layers of our past and reconstructing these ancient intellectual machines and setting their gears going and seeing how it works and hopefully when we recover, we're like amnesiacs, people who don't remember who they are or where they came from, we just wander mumbling through the streets of our cities foraging through garbage cans and frightening other people and yet if we could wake up, and archeology and the rebirth of an awareness of the Goddess and the pushing of science to the point where it's irrational foundations become clear - this is all part of an awakening, an archaic revival which will then make us part of the living world and not a disease, a parasitic force upon it.
It struck me that one comment you read there talked about the creation of the world. It said the elements were brought forth and at first I was thinking earth, air, fire, and water but I was thinking in relationship to some other...of life that...being, life, and intellect and being, life, and intellect are what that come into manifestation from the one who pours forth the world and creates the world and those are the first elements that come into existence - being, life, and intellect. Life itself is an element of the cosmos as it were. It's an irreducible aspect of things and you're paying respect to the fact that life is an omnipresent thing in the foundation of things. It's one of the elements.
Q: I think that in one of the other things I read it said that everything that exists, that ever has been, that ever will be, is alive.
TM: I'll read a bit more of this. This refers to the theme I touched on a little bit last night of the importance of the imagination and how I think that our destiny lies in the imagination. "God is ever existent and makes manifest all else. But he himself is hidden because he is ever existent. He manifests all things but is not manifested. He is not himself brought into being in images presented through our senses but he presents all things to us in such images. It is only things which are brought into being that are presented through sense. Coming into being is nothing else than presentation through sense." This is so thoroughly modern, it's staggering. For 1,500 years people couldn't say anything that clearly. "It is evident then that he who alone has not come into being cannot be presented through sense and that being so he is hidden from our sight. But he presents all things to us through our senses and thereby manifests himself through all things and in all things and especially to those to whom he wills to manifest himself. For though thought alone can see that which is hidden inasmuch as thought itself is hidden from sight and if even the thought which is within you is hidden from your sight, how can he, being in himself, be manifested to you through your bodily eyes. But if you have power to see with the eyes of the mind then, my son, he will manifest himself to you, for the Lord manifests himself un-grudgingly throughout all the universe and you can behold God's image with your eyes and lay hold on it with your hands."
To my mind, this is permission for the psychedelic experience. We lay hold of the ineffable through the eyes. "If you wish to see him, think on the sun, think on the course of the moon, think on the order of the stars. The sun is the greatest of the gods in heaven. To him as to their king and overlord, all the gods in heaven yield place and yet this mighty god, greater than earth and sea, submits to have smaller stars circling above him. Who is it then, my son, that he obeys with reverence and awe. Each of these stars too is confined by measured limits and has an appointed space to range in. Why do not all the stars in heaven run like and equal courses? Who is it that has assigned to each its place and marked out each for the extent of its course." And then it goes on and on. And then here is an amazing modern anticipation of modernity. "Would that it were possible for you to grow wings and soar into the air. Poised between earth and heaven you might see the solid earth and the fluid sea and the streaming rivers, the wandering air, the penetrating fire, the courses of the stars and the swiftness of the movement with which heaven encompasses all. What happiness were that, my son, to see all these borne along with one impulse and to behold Him who is unmoved moving all that moves and Him who is hidden made manifest through his works." This is an image of the planets seen from space. It's absolutely the unified image of our planet. It is, I think, the central image in this early hermetic thing. This is the unifying, this is as close to an image of what godhead is that they were able to reach.
This is a shamanic flight that delivers a scientific description of the earth moving in space. This is written AD150. This is book five. Nobody had that in sight until we reach Giordano Bruno and if you read Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition you know that Bruno was burned at the stake and the reason that he was burned at the stake is because he looked up at the sky and did not see the stellar shells and the angelic hierarchies. Bruno had a mystical experience and when it was over he said, "the universe is infinite. The stars go on forever." That single statement was the intellectual dynamite that destroyed the whole Medieval, Hellenistic, the entire previous cosmological vision was left behind with that single statement. It was such a powerful statement that he had to go to the stake for that. And we have never recovered from that perception. It was a fundamental perception and it occurred because he looked without preconception into the night sky and did not see wheels and demons and angels and shells of cosmic fate and necessity and he just said, that's bullshit, what is there is infinite space, infinite time, the stars are hung like lamps onto the utmost regions of infinity. This, then, inaugurates the beginning of modernity and it's a perception that arose on the foundation of all this earlier thinking.
Here's another passage on the imagination. Yes? Is the implication that there's a meditation that one does where one tries to go inside and see this universe on a cosmic scale. Is the implication that their practice was somehow...
Well, the practice, we know a lot less about that because there was much secrecy around this. What we have is the philosophical discourses. When we talk about alchemy this afternoon you'll see that there the technique becomes projection onto matter. That you enter into a kind of self hypnosis wher, by having what we call naive ontological categories, in other words, not being sure exactly how much of mind is in matter or how much matter is in mind, you can erase the boundary between self and world and project the contents of the unconscious onto chemical processes. What went on in the early stages we don't know. The Trismegistic Hymns are largely as you see them here, philosophical discourses. There was stress on diet and purity. Asceticism was typical of the hermetic approach. In Gnosticism it went one of several ways. There were schools of Gnosticism which were vegetarian and puristic and then, because they felt that man was no part of the universe, that man was somehow hermetically sealed, if you will, hermetically sealed against contamination from the universe, some Gnostic schools said you can do anything you want. You can have any kind of sexual arrangement you want, you can do anything you want. Do not think that you are part of the universe. And so you had Gnostic schools side by side, some orgiastic and quasi-tantric and some ascetic. There were Gnostic sects that, you see because the idea was that light was trapped in matter by the act of procreation, there were Gnostic sects that only practiced forms of sexual union that couldn't lead to union. So there were presumably exclusively homosexual sects. There were sects that only practiced anal intercourse. For them, that was the same as celibacy because the real concern was not to trap any of the light. And I don't seriously advocate this but I think that in our current situation of overpopulation a little dose of this kind of thinking wouldn't be a bad thing. Too much light is trapped in the organic matrix.
And so these Gnostic sects that were, for instance, exclusively homosexual or exclusively practiced anal intercourse, of course they were suicide sects. They disappeared very quickly because they could only make converts by a missionary conversion. You didn't have children, you couldn't hand it off. It shows how thorough going their rejection of the world was, how contaminated they felt themselves to be by the material world. But you also had, as I mentioned, optimistic schools that saw nature as something to be perfected and said, "man has been set on the earth not to reject it but to perfect it" and utopianism, the belief that one can create a perfect society, it goes back into these hermetic ideals. Because the idea was that a perfect society could be the goal of the alchemical work.
Let me read you a passage from Giordano Bruno. This is a wonderful passage from the Picatrix. This was the book of 12th century magical texts that began to introduce these hermetic ideas and this passage is the core passage that inspired the Rosacrucians and numerous other utopian movements. Here is Frances Yeats, "Hermes Trismegistus is often mentioned as the source for some talismanic images and in other connections but there is in particular one very striking passage in the fourth book of Picatrix in which Hermes is stated to have been the first to use magical images and is credited with having founded a marvelous city in Egypt." And here is the passage from the Picatrix, "There are among the Caldeans very perfect masters in this art and they affirm that Hermes was the first to construct images by means of which he knew how to regulate the Nile against the motion of the moon. This man also built a temple to the sun and he knew how to hide himself from all so that no one could see him although he was within it." Those of you who are scholars in Rosicrucianism know that one of the things that was always said of Rosicrucians was that they were invisible. This was how Robert Fludd proved to people he wasn't a Rosicrucian, he'd say "you're looking at me so how could I be one?" So, he's in the temple but he could not be seen within it. "It was he, Hermes Trismegistus, too, who, in the East of Egypt constructed a city, 12 miles long, within which he constructed a castle which had four gates within each of its four parts. On the Eastern gate he placed the form of an eagle. On the Western gate, the form of a bull, on the Southern gate, the form of a lion, and on the Northern gate he constructed the form of a dog. Into these images he introduced spirits which spoke with voices. Nor could anyone enter the gates of the city except by their permission. There he planted trees in the midst of which was a great tree which bore the fruits of all generations. On the summit of the castle he caused to be raised a tower 30 cubits high on the top of which he ordered to be put a lighthouse the color of which changed every day until the seventh day, after which it returned to the first color. And so the city was illuminated with these colors. Near the city there was abundance of waters in which dwelt many kinds of fish. Around the circumference of the city he placed engraved images and ordered them in such a manner that by their virtue, the inhabitants were made virtuous and withdrawn from all wickedness and harm. The name of the city was Adocetine(sp?)."
Now, what we're familiar with from the Platonic literature is a quasi-rational, largely rational approach to utopian thinking that you get in the Republic. However, the students of the Republic will recall that, is it the fifth or tenth book, contains the myth of Ur, which we went over in detail in the section I did on Neo Platonism. The myth of Er is one of the most bizarre and puzzling passages in the entire ancient literature. You remember Er was a soldier who died, he was killed in battle but after eight days he returned to life and then he told a story that is the absolute puzzlement of ancient scholars. It's highly mathematical, it has to with the spindle of necessity and the description of some kind of cosmic machine and all the ratios of the gears of this machine are given and nobody knows what is being talked about. But here we have a different thrust. A magical utopianism and the idea of a perfected human society using magic because these engraved images that he ordered in such a manner that by their virtue the inhabitants were made virtuous, that means he was able to deflect the energies of cosmic fate. The city was immune to astrological, malefic influence. It was protected and when we talk later about the alchemical aspirations of the Rosicrucians and John Dee and Frederick the Elector Palatine of Bohemia, we'll see that this impulse toward an alchemical kingdom returns again and again. In a way, utopianism is, the four-gated city of utopian magical dreaming is one version of the Philosopher's magical stone. It's a kind of diffuse idea of the philosopher's stone, but it's a society in perfect harmony with fully realized beings living within it practicing a cosmic religion that frees them from the impulses of cosmic fate. The other thing that is going on in some of this alchemical imagery is a kind of subtext of late alchemy, is what's called the Ars Memoria, the art of memory, and in fact, Frances Yates has a book called The Art of Memory and this is a lost art, literally.
It begins with the Roman orator Cicero and was practiced up until the early 17th century and what it consisted of was people, orators, it was considered very bad form to read your speech if you were an orator and so you had to memorize your speech and there were tricks of memory. The commonest mnemonic trick was to think of a building, it was called the memory palace, a building that is familiar to you, I've done this myself with the University of California because it's an area that I'm very familiar with because I was a student there, there are many buildings and many hallways and many floors and what you do is when you make your speech in your mind you are moving through the memory palace and at various points you construct what are called emblemata and the idea of these emblemata is that they be as unusual, shocking, and unexpected as possible in order to be memorable to you. So, say you're giving a speech about the seven deadly sins. So then luxuria might be for you a nun copulating with a dog and you'll set the nun and the dog in a little niche in the hallway of the memory palace. When you reach that place in your imaginary journey all these associations will spring to mind and you'll be able to give you speech flawlessly. To us, this sounds tortured and particular but it works quite well. One of the practitioners of the Ars Memoria was Giordano Bruno and he wrote a book called Spaccio Della Bestia Trionfante, the expulsion of the triumphant beast, and my god, Max Ernst, eat your heart out, this is a surreal epic read as straight plain text because that's not how it's supposed to be read. It's a conglomeration of these mnemonic emblemata that led him on to probably give a fairly conventional disputation on one subject or another but there are even old books of these emblemata that are before surrealism. These were some of the wildest images that the Western mind would tolerate.
The one thing that we didn't get into this morning was talking about the astrological side of it. The role of the Decans. The Decans are these demons, three to a sign, so there are 36 of them, and this was thought to be an astrological conceit that went back to Egypt as opposed to the ordinary zodiacal significators which go back to Huran in what is now modern Iraq. These Decans were the demons that were summoned by these Renaissance Magi in an effort to control and manipulate fate. You may, if you were paying attention this morning, have noticed that in all the reading I did from the Corpus Hermeticum, there was really nothing explicitly magical about it. It was philosophical. There was one mention, I think, of animating statues in the description of the four-gated city. But it was those magical animation passages that really captured the imagination of the Renaissance and they built on that and the idea, simply put, is that these Decans and zodiacal signs are at the center of associative schemata which include plants, minerals, odors, certain flowers, certain animals, everything had its decanic assignation and so if you were involved with promoting an affair with a woman or something like that then you would do an invocation to Venus and you would gather the associated minerals and stones and animals and you would put them in a room and then certain tonal modes were also associated with these things and so you would play the music, have the flowers present, the minerals present, the invocations and what you were trying to do was create a microcosm of the macrocosm to draw down this stellar energy. It wasn't about the classical Hollywood appearance of demons in a circle, that's the stuff of Picatrix, the earlier somewhat less refined style of magic.
I wanted to read you one passage from Frances Yates' Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition because this describes this change of status of the magician that we're interested in. And also what we didn't talk about this morning was the importance of the Kabbalah, which came in quite late, that was then worked out in great detail. This was originally the idea, it was the Jewish contribution to this kind of magic, it was, the idea was that since the world had been made by Jehovah, by the speaking of words, In Principio erat verbum et verbo caro factum est(?), in other words the speaking of Hebrew was thought to be a primary linguistic tool for the purposes of creation. The problem for these Italians was that very few of them spoke Hebrew so it was sometimes practiced silently, the mere constructing of these Hebrew letters and the setting out of messages in Hebrew was deemed efficacious as well. And then a further declenched(?) for people who were even frustrated with that was to channel magical languages which were pseudo-Hebraic in structure. This is a whole branch of research, much too arcane for us to go into here. The only non-Hebraic magical language that I may mention here will be Enochian and Enochian was an angelic language channeled by John Dee and used by him in his magical evocations and later it was taken up by Aleister Crowley and the folks of the Golden Dawn. But there were many, many of these magical languages. The Voynich manuscript is written in one of them. But I want to read you this passage about how the Renaissance changed the status of the magician. "We begin to perceive here an extraordinary change in the status of the magician. The necromancer concocting his filthy mixtures, the conjurer making his frightening invocations were both outcasts from society, regarded as dangers to religion and forced into plying their trades in secrecy. These old-fashioned characters are hardly recognizable in the philosophical and pious magi of the Renaissance. There is a change in status almost comparable to the change of status of the artist from the mere mechanic of the Middle Ages to the refined companion of princes of the Renaissance. And the magics themselves are changed almost out of recognition. Who could recognize the necromancer studying his Picatrix in secret in the elegant Ficino, in his infinitely refined use of sympathies, his classical incantations, his elaborately Neo Platonized talismans. Who could recognize the conjurer using the barbarous techniques of some Clavis Solomonus in the mystical Pico lost in the religious ecstasies of Kabbalah drawing archangels to his side. And yet there is a kind of continuity because the techniques are at bottom based on the same principles. Ficino's magic is an infinitely refined and reformed version of neumatic necromancy. Pico's practical Kabbalah is an intensely religious and mystical version of conjuring."
So now we move in this realm, these were the companions of princes and there was in that 120 years, from about 1500 to the beginning of the 30 year's war, a constant effort in various parts of Europe to try and turn parts of European society toward a kind of magical revolution. The Europe of the 11th and 12th century was entirely ruled by scholastic rationalism. Witchcraft was virtually unknown and very curious. It's the 15th and 16th centuries where you get this tremendous proliferation of magical systems, magical ideas and social hysterias related to witchcraft, alchemy, conjuring and magic. Those are the centuries when these things really broke out into the open. And alchemy in that period is basically a story of personalities, wonderful personalities, too many for us to really talk about in detail. We have Nicholas and Pernelle Flamel who sought and found the philosopher's stone, according to legend and according to legend are living to this day somewhere in central Asia in perfect happiness having achieved not only the chemical wedding but the water stone of the wise. And then we have Basil Valentine who refined red wine and distilled it in distillation apparati until he got essentially pure alcohol and upon drinking this was so sure that he had found the philosopher's stone that he announced the eminent approach of the end of the world based on his discovery and he was not secretive at all. He propagated his recipes and in fact sampled the distillates of some of his brother alchemists and popularized this very widely. To this day the reason certain cognacs are in the hands of monastic orders and no one else can make these things is because they were originally alchemical secrets and many of these early alchemists were men of the cloth, quite a number of them.
So what I thought I would do is, in a highly chaotic fashion, read you some of this alchemical literature. The big bring down about alchemical literature is that apparently the muse didn't always smile on the alchemist and some of this poetry is pretty tormented stuff. Why this is, who can say, but let's try one here and see if you can bear with it. Also, my Middle English is not as good as it might be. This is a short one, and typical, and you will see why the alchemists were charged with unbearable obscurity and prolex prose. This poem is called "A Description of the Stone:"
Though Daphne fly from Phobeus bright yet shall they both be one
And if you understand this rite you have our hidden stone
For Daphne is fair and white but volatile is she
Phobeus a fixed god of might and red as blood is he
Daphne is a water nymph and hath of moisture store
Which Phobeus doth confine and heat and dries her very shore
They being dried into one a crystal flood must drink
Till they be brought to a white stone which washed with with virgin's milk
So long until they flow as wax and no fume you can see then have you all you need to ask. Praise God and thankful be.
This is a recipe for the production of the philosopher's stone and the author, I'm sure, felt that he'd spoken as clearly as he dare speak. And yet making something of this is no easy task. This is from the Teatrium Chemicum Britannicum and the late phase of alchemy. Here's another one:
The world is a maze and what you why
For sooth of late a great man did die
And as he lay a-dying in his bed
These words in secret to his son he said
'My son' quoth he, 'tis good for thee
I die for thou shall much the better be
Thereby and when thou seest that life hath me bereft
Take what thou findest and where I have it left
Thou dost not know, nor what my riches be
All which I will declare give ear to me
An earth I had all venom to expel
And that I cast into a mighty well
A water wick to cleanse what was amiss
I threw into the earth, and there it is
My silver all into the sea I cast
My gold into the air and, at the last
Into the fire, for fear it should be found
I threw a stone worth forty thousand pound
Which stone was given me by a mighty king
Who bade me wear it in a fourfold ring.'
Quoth he, ' this stone is by that ring found out
If wisely thou cans't turn this ring about
For every hope contrary is to other
Yet all agree and of the stone is mother
So now, my son, I will declare a wonder
That when I die this ring must break asunder
The king said so, but when he said with all
Although the ring be broke in pieces small
An easy fire shall soon it close again
Who this can do he need not work in vain
Till this my hidden treasure be found out
When I am dead, my spirit shall walk about
Make him to bring your fire from the grave
And stay with him till you my riches have.'
These words a worldly man did chance to hear
Who daily watched the spirit but nay though near
And yet it meets with him and everyone
Yet tells him not where is the hidden stone.
This stuff is obscure, it's deliberately obscure, it was obscure to its contemporaries and the whole effort became one of collecting this kind of material and finding it out. And you have to understand this was all circulating in manuscript, very little of this was printed. The Teatrium Chemicum Britannicum was not printed until 1652 so this was a world without vehicular transportation other than the horse and carriage and these people were paranoid of being discovered and persecuted for wizardry and witchcraft by the church. So, each alchemist working in secret, with a limited number of texts, with a local control language, created this vast conceptual patchwork of ideas and this is in large measure responsible for the obscurity of what is said.
Then another factor which impinges on this and further complicates the matter is that the name of the game was projection of the contents of the imagination onto physical processes, so taking red cinnabar and heating it in a furnace until it sweats mercury, for one alchemist this is the incineration of the red salamander and the collection of aurmercurius in the great pelican. They named their chemical apparati after animals and gods and so the pelican is a standard distillation apparatus, basically a condenser on top of something which is boiled and then these materials would be collected, ground, powdered, re-fired, mixed with other materials, re-fired again and in the process these people were, we call it, and it's such a weak term, the projection of the intellect into this dimension, they were living in a waking dream and many of the recipes are designed to wipe out the boundaries between waking and sleeping.
Remember I talked about the river of mercury that runs between the yin and yang? Many of the alchemical processes were of 40 days duration. Well you can imagine a hermit fearing discovery by the church, trying to keep his fires not too hot, not too cold, working day after day, night after night, eventually all boundaries dissolve and you're just living in a pure world of intellectual projection and then in the swirling of the alembic, in the chemical processes going on in the retort, you begin to be able to project your consciousness onto this. It's what we call visualization but for us it's a kind of a weak term because we are never really able to accept in the psychedelic state to transcend the belief in the inner world and the outer world being somehow separate so for us it's always separate. But they were able to wipe out that boundary. Well then, what they saw in their swirling retorts and alembics was not carbonization, calcination, condensation of various molecular weights of liquids and oils out, but rather the birth of the red lion, the coming of the eagle, the appearance of the [inaudible] stone. They had hundreds and hundreds of these words. I didn't bring any with me, but much alchemical literature is dictionaries. Martinus Rulando's Alchemical Dictionary is a huge book of words with special meanings in the alchemical context.
So, why, why do this and what happens when you do it. Well, no matter what alchemist you're reading, there's always an agreement that there are stages in the great work. Stages in the opus, as they called it. You can't get any agreement on in what order these stages come, but roughly it's something like this: most agree that it begins in the nigredo, the blackening, Arcro(?), the Saturnine world of what we would call manic depression, despair, and that our chaos, a chaotic near psychotic state of unbounded hopelessness and that is the precondition, then, for the alchemical work though the stages of the opus never occur in order.
I had a dream last night that was, I think, triggered by an illustration in Fabricious(?) that I'll show you tonight but it was a classical alchemical dream. It was that I was at a country fair and its antiquity was indicated by the fact that it was happening in the school yard of my childhood and as I moved among the participants of this country fair I began to notice that they were freaky. There were people with withered arms and one side of their face slid down and so forth and so on. The whole thing began to drift toward nightmare and Richard Hermes Bird appeared in my dream as my alchemical compadre and at one point a black woman, perfect symbolism for the nigredo, a black woman with three withered arms and six or seven breasts, slid herself sideways in front of me and it was at that point that I went and found Richard and said, "I think we'd better get out of here."
Now, an alchemist would greet a dream like this with great anticipation and joy and would understand that this sets the stage now for the next movement forward. Well, then accounts differ. Those of you who really want to get into this, I recommend you read Mysterium Cunjunctiones by Jung, the Mysterious Conjunction. He discusses the nigredo in great detail. Another symbol for the nigredo is the Senax(?), the old man, because the old man is just short of death and that's the state that the nigredo makes you feel. Then you must take this raw, chaotic, unformed material, often compared to feces, compared to corruption, compared to the contents of an opened grave, and you must cook it in the alchemical fires of contemplation, prayer, and ascetic self control and then you will move through a series of stages that are associated with colors. There is the rubado, the reddening, there is the citronitas, the yellowing, there is the veriditas, the greening, and the order in which this occurs differs according to who you follow but then there is closure at the end of the process. Most alchemists, although certainly not all, agreed that the higher state is the albedo, the whitening, the purificacio. At each stage there are sub-stages of dissolution, dissulutio et coagulacio. There's one alchemical aphorism that says "dissolutio et coagulacio, know this and this is all you need to know." And so it's a melting and a recasting and a purifying of psychic content. So finally you reach the albedo, the whitening, the highest stage, the stage of great purity.
But remember how I said last night that mercury was always the metaphor for mind in alchemy, or one of the metaphors for mind in alchemy, and I talked about its mutability and its ability to take the shape of its container and when you shatter it it then splits into many reflections. So, once you move into the domain of the albedo, the whitening, then a whole new problem arises for the alchemist. This is the problem of the fixing of the stone. Somehow the mutability of mercury must be overcome and it must be crystallized, it must be fixed so that it doesn't get away from you, so that it doesn't slip through your fingers. To achieve aurmercury is nothing unless you have the secret of the coagulacio. So then, there is a huge amount of effort devoted to this.
What is being described is what Jungians call the individuation process. A dissolving of the boundaries of the ego, an allowing of the chaotic material of the unconscious to pour forth where it can be inspected by consciousness, and we'll see tonight when we look at this art, these images are full of ravening beasts, incestuous mother/son pairs, incestuous brother/sister pairs, hermaphrodites, all taboos are broken, this stuff just boils up from the unconscious then is sublimed through these processes and then is somehow fixed and this fixing is the culmination of alchemy and if you can bring off this trick then you possess our stone, the philosopher's stone, the lapis, the Sophic Hydrolith of the Wise, Aranius Philalith calls it. There were hundreds of control words for naming the secret, difficult to attain.
Alchemical gold, in short this is what we're after. If you possess it, nothing else is worth anything because it is psychic completion, peace of mind, Jung called it the self. It's the self that we are trying to recover and remember we talked about the Gnostic myth of the light trapped in matter. Well this is the luminae de luminae, the light of light, the lux natura, the light drawn out of nature and condensed into a fixed form which then becomes the universal panacea. And I'm using as many of these alchemical terms as I can draw out of my memory to give you a feeling for it. This is the universal medicine. It cures all ills, you know, it brings you riches, fame, wealth, self-respect. It's the answer, it's what everyone is looking for and no one can find.
So this just became a consuming passion of the 15th and 16th century mind. They thought they were on the brink of it. Along the way they were discovering stuff like distilled alcohol, phosphorous, gun powder, all of these things were coming out of the alchemical laboratories but that was not it. They kept driving themselves onward because they knew that this was not the real thing and they were pursuing the real thing. Then for some people it became reassociated with this notion of the utopia that I mentioned this morning in the passage that I read about the city of Hermes Trismegistus, they began to see, it's almost like the crisis which overcame Buddhism, it must be an archetypal, and notice how rarely we've used that word here, it must be almost an archetypal stage in human thought. Theravadin Buddhism stressed individual thought, and individual redemption through meditation on emptiness, and then with the great reforms of Nagurdjuda(sp?), the idea of Bodhisattvic compassion was introduced and there carries with it political freight. An obligation to society and mankind. So, as the 15th and 16th century progressed there began to be this awareness that what was wanted was not for an alchemist to break through, to his own personal salvation, but somehow to create an alchemical world. You get then the notion of the multiplacio, the idea that the stone, once created, will replicate itself and be able to change base matter into itself almost like a virus spreading through the ontological structure of matter itself and the world will be reborn and this idea then, what was happening was that these alchemists were getting bolder and printing was invented in Meins, near Frankfurt, in 1540, the distribution of alchemical books was changing the character of alchemy, it was no more the solitary hermit working away in his cave or mountaintop, far away from the minions of the church. These alchemists began to dream of banding together, of forming societies, of creating brotherhoods that were united in the sharing of their knowledge and their purpose.
This brings us to the curious episode in history called the Rosicrucian enlightenment. Dame Frances Yates, once again, got there first and she wrote a book called the Rosicrucian Enlightenment which traces the history of these alchemical brotherhoods and reveals to us what they were really about and what they were about was this dream of somehow taking the philosopher's stone, and the power, the immortality, the insight that it would bring and making it a general utility of mankind and in the, one way of looking at modernity, I have one friend who claims that the summoning of the Holy Spirit into matter can be seen as the creation of the modern world of electricity. That people like Helmholz(sp?) and Farraday were completing the alchemical work. It's very hard for us to realize how mysterious the electromagnetic field seemed to the 19th century. The 19th century had entirely imbued itself with the spirit of democratian atomism translated through Newtonian physics and they believed that everything was little balls of hard matter winging through space. When Helmholz and Farraday and these people began to talk about action at a distance and generating the electromagnetic field and trapping lightning and light in jars and running it through wires, what could this be but the trapping of spiritus. What could it be but the literal descent of the Holy Ghost into history and, you know, give it a moment's thought. For thousands of years, electricity was something that you saw when you took an amber rod and a piece of cat fur and went into a darkened room and stroked the cat fur and then when you would bring the amber rod close to the cat fur you would see the crackle of static electricity through the cat fur. For thousands of years that's what electricity was. Who would dream that you could light cities, that you could smelt metals, that you could illuminate the earth with this energy and yet from the 1850s to the present, this was done. It's almost the final literalizing of the alchemical dream.
But to go back now, I digress, I fear, let's go back to the climate of the 1580s and the central culprit here, and to my mind a giant figure casting an enormous shadow over the landscape of alchemy and of modern science, is the Englishman John Dee. John Dee united in himself the complete spirit of the Medieval Magus and the complete spirit of the modern scientist. He invented the navigational instruments that allowed the conquest of the round earth. When Frances Drake sailed up the coast of California he had navigational instruments that were top secret. The French, the Spanish, must be kept away from this stuff and these were navigational instruments created by John Dee that allowed him to locate himself anywhere on the globe. But John Dee was a man who, on a late summer evening in Mortlag, his house in Mortlag outside of London, the angel Gabriel descended into his garden and gave him what he called the shewstone, shew being show in Old English, and the shewstone exists to this day, you can see it in the British Museum and what's amazing about it is it's a piece of polished absidion, it's an Aztec mirror, is what it is. There was a ruler of the Aztecs called smoky mirror. How John Dee got this thing, we cannot even imagine. He says he got it from an angel, nobody can really nay say that, however I suspect that Cortez, on his first return to Spain from the new world, he brought a number of objects with him that he had collected in Central Mexico and somehow John Dee got his hands on this thing and it was for him a television screen into the logos and he used it over a number of years to direct the foreign policy of England.
He was the confidante of Queen Elizabeth the First and he also was the most accomplished astrologer in Europe and he used his ability to cast horoscopes as an entre into all the great houses of Europe, the kings and nobles of Europe. He was functioning as an intelligence agent, he was a spy for the British crown insinuating himself into these various courtly scenes and then writing back to Elizabeth in cyphers, cyphers that had previously only been used for magical purposes. He was sending back data on the strengths of military garrisons and the placement of fortifications and this sort of thing. This is what he was doing in the 1580s, he kept the shewstone for a number of years and he didn't seem to be able to make much progress with it. He had other methods too, he had wax tables and sigils but finally into his life came a very mysterious character named Edward Kelly and some accounts say that Edward Kelly had no ears. That indicates that he had had his ears removed for being a charlatan and a montebank. This was a common punishment in the provinces of England. So Edward Kelly was a very dubious character, I think. One strong piece of evidence that he was a shady character was, John Dee was married to a much younger woman named Ann Dee who by all accounts was quite a beauty and after gaining Dee's confidence as a scryer, the person who could look into the shewstone and lay out these scenarios that the angels and the entities coming and going in the shewstone were putting forth, Kelly revealed to Dee that the angels had instructed him to hit the hay with Ann. This was a great crisis in their relationship. However, according to Dee's diary "and so it was done," we read. So, hanky panky didn't begin with the Golden Dawn, believe me. In 1582 Ann Dee, John Dee, and Edward Kelly set out for Bohemia and Rudolph, the mad king of Bohemia held sway at that time. This is another one of those bizarre figures in the whole story of this...[Tape cuts out]
...a wonder cabinet, you see, before Linaius, before modern scientific classification these great patrons of the arts and natural sciences, they would just collect weird stuff. And that was all you could say about it. I mean, it was rhinoceros horns, fossil amenities, broken pieces of statues from antiquity, giant insects from Southern India, seashells, all this stuff would just be thrown together in these wundercabina, these wonder cabinets. Rudolph was a great patron of the arts. Well, Kelly sent the word that he and Dee had perfected the alchemical process and Rudolph immediately paid their way to Prague and patronized them very lavishly over a number of months but then they didn't seem to be coming through and he rented, he ordered a castle put to their disposal, in Bohemia and they still weren't able to come through. The Voynitch manuscript figures in here too because Kelly's entre to Dee was that he had a manuscript in an unknown language and I believe that this probably was the Voynitch manuscript. The Voynitch manuscript turns up in the estate of Rudolph and the very month that he paid 14,000 gold ducats for it to persons unknown, Dee, who was always writing back to the Elizabethan court hounding them to send money, entered into his account book that they received 14,000 ducats from an unknown source.
Dee was able to talk himself out of this alchemical imprisonment but not before he had written a book called the Hieroglyphic Monad. You have to understand the importance of this. As late as the 1920s in England in the better schools of England, like Eton, when you studied geometry, you studied Euclid's works and Euclid's geometry was always preceded by Dee's preface to Euclid. Until the 1920s every English school child studied this. He was a master mathematician as well as these other things. This was how he was able to produce these navigation instruments. So Dee, while imprisoned in Bohemia, wrote a book called the Hieroglyphic Monad in which he proposed to prove, through a series of occult theorems, that a certain diagram, unfortunately I didn't bring the hieroglyphic monad, but it's basically the symbol of, you know the symbol for mercury which looks like the symbol for female but you put horns on it and then there were some adumbrations to that. By a series of theorems he worked up this hieroglyphic monad and he initiated a couple of young men named Johan Anreae and Michael Maier into the mysteries of the hieroglyphic monad. Then he was able to get out of Bohemia and he went back to England.
Kelly, who had made much more extravagant claims, Rudolph kept at work on the alchemical opus and Kelly became more and more desperate to escape and one night in 1587 he crept out on the parapet of this Bohemian castle and a roof tile slipped beneath his feet and he fell to his death and became, as far as I can tell, alchemy's only true martyr. Dee returned to England, he was now very old, he died at Mortlake in 1606.
Well, Elizabeth died in 1604, Shakespeare was happening, Sir Philip Sidney was happening through this period. John Dee reputedly had over 6,000 books in his library. He had more books than any man in England. He had books, we have a partial catalog of his library, he had books that do not exist now. He had Roger Bacon manuscripts because when Henry the eighth kicked the Catholic Church out of England, the Northumberian monasteries were looted by the Earl of Northumberland and basically Dee was allowed to pick over the loot from these monasteries and there were Roger Bacon manuscripts which perished when Dee's library was burned by an angry mob while he was on the continent because he was suspected of being a wizard. He was the model for Faust in the later resingence of Faust and whenever you see an old man with a white beard and a pointed cap, this image is a referent to Dee. Well, Elizabeth died in 1604, I believe, and James the first became king of England. James was a peculiar character. The wags of the time liked to say "Elizabeth was king and now James is queen!" Not only that, he hated occultism, he had no patience with the whole magical court that Elizabeth had assembled around herself. Meanwhile, in 1606, a very mysterious document began to circulate in Europe and in England called the Fama, this is the first word in a string of Latin words, Fama, and two years later the confessio. What these were were announcements that an alchemical brotherhood was seeking recruits. These are the primary documents of Rosicrucianism. Rosicrucianism was based on a fiction and a fictional person, Christian Rosencrentz, who was imagined to have lived almost 200 years earlier, in the 1540s, and to have been a great alchemist. It was claimed that his tomb had been recently opened and that there were books inside it which set the stage for the alchemical revolution of the world. Notice how this occult world always tries to reach back in time to give itself validity. Christian Rosencrentz was claimed to be the author of a series of books, the chief of which is called The Chemical Wedding. What this was all about, I believe, and the Rosacrucian enlightenment makes it fairly clear, was that Dee, during the period that he had been in Bohemia, had set out to lay the groundwork for an alchemical revolution in Central Europe and he had made Johan Andreae and Michael Maier his agents in this plot. And it was a plot, a plot to meddle in European history and to turn the Protestant reformation toward an alchemical completion. They felt that Luther and Has(sp?) and these people had only gone so far and that the culmination of throwing off the yoke of the church would be the establishment of an alchemical kingdom in central Europe. The target, then, of the attention of Michael Maier and Johan Andreae and a number of these alchemists became the young Frederick, he's called Frederick the Elector Palatine. He was a prince of the Northern League in Germany, he ruled in Heidleberg, and Heidleberg, as you know, is a thousand-year-old university city and I believe I mentioned that the alchemical press of Theodore Debry(sp?) was operating out of Heidleberg. Heidleberg became a magnet for all the occult thinking going on in Europe and all the Puffers and alchemists, the gold-makers, the philosophers, the charlatans, they all converged on Heidleberg and Andreae and Maier were advisors of the young Frederick and they steered him, by a series of political manipulations too complex to tell, toward a marriage with the daughter of James the first of England, who was named Elizabeth, interestingly enough. So, Frederick the Elector made Elizabeth, the daughter of James of England, his wife. Frederick here made a serious miscalculation because he thought that if James would give the hand of his daughter in marriage that this was his way of blessing this alchemical conspiracy. Actually, what was on James' mind is that he was about to give his son, in marriage, to a Spanish princess of the Hapsburg line, a Catholic. In other words he was playing both sides against each other. He was not giving the green light to an alchemical revolution at all. But, it was assumed so. Then, in 1617, 1618, Rudolph, remember Rudolph, the emperor, he finally dies at a very ripe old age. And at that time, the Protestant league, which was made up of these princes of these small principalities scattered across Germany and Poland, they actually elected the emperor, it was not by right of primogenitor, but by election by what was called the Northern League, this league of princes. Frederick and his alchemical cohorts had done their alchemical groundwork very skillfully and they were able to engineer the election of Frederick to emperor of the empire and he became Frederick the Elector Palatine of Bohemia and this set the stage for an episode called the episode of the Winter King and Queen. One of the great, after Nicholas and Pernelle Flamel, this is one of the great romantic stories of alchemy. They moved their court from Heidleberg to Prague and all the alchemists went with and they assumed that English armies would support them if there was any squak from the Hapsburgs and in the Winter of 1618 they ruled there and began to lay the groundwork for the transformation of Northern Europe into an alchemical kingdom. The problem was, as I said, the faithlessness and duplicity of James the first of England. He did not support them, in spite of the fact that the fate of his daughter hung in the balance and by May of 1619 the local Bishop of the Catholic church was fully aroused and word had been sent to Madrid and the Hapsburgs raised an army and laid siege to Prague. In the late Summer, the Mid Summer of 1619, the Winter King and Queen were driven from Prague, the city fell to Catholic forces, the alchemical presses were smashed and Michael Maier, who was like the prime minister of this scene, was murdered in an alley in Prague and the entire alchemical dream went down the drain. Frederick was killed in the siege of the city and Elizabeth escaped to the Hague where she lived in exile for many years. -mckenna
https://terencemckenna.wikispaces.com/Hermetic+Corpus+And+Alchemy
