What intrigues me enough to send out a post is something that makes us examine the water in which we swim. (As the student fish said to the philosopher fish, “Water, what water?”) So I thought it fitting to begin the year with a back story that might help us perceive what's going o­n in our bowl.

I found a piece about alchemy, authored by Zaphod II (that's all I know), when I stumbled across this person's unusually objective, perceptive report o­n the crop circle phenomenon. I clicked o­n the alchemy link and was pleased to read about what we engaged in prior to the scientific materialism that has so unfortunately separated us from sensing our souls.

The piece begins this way:

The Secret Art of Alchemy

To medieval alchemists, the world was animated. This was based o­n a belief that all objects possessed spirit and soul qualities, and there was a deep interconnectedness between all things.

This fits nicely with the HISTORY OF THE QUADRIVIUM, which you can find in Science and Spirit Smarts, a post I made about the education model pre Newton, which was based o­n that interconnectedness.

…each of the Quadrivium sciences was accompanied by its complementary metaphysical art. Each dealt not o­nly with the outer structures, but also with the inner meanings of its discipline. Thus, Arithmetic included Arithmology, the understanding that numbers were not merely quantities, but also qualities (that “two”, for instance, is also “duality, polarity”); Geometry included what is nowadays called Geomancy, the understanding (in, for example, the design of temples or cathedrals, or in the graphic arts) that the spirit and the emotions can be affected in particular ways by particular forms; Astronomy included Astrology, the divination of the meanings of cycles of time; and Music included not o­nly the study of “practical theory”, of nomenclature and technique (e.g. “this is a minor third”, “this is the Mixolydian mode”), but also the study of “speculative theory”, of the meanings and influences of tones and intervals and scales.

…in the 1600s…It was as if a heavy iron gate had abruptly slammed shut between the outer and the inner, between the left brain and the right, between the physical sciences and the metaphysical arts.

In the alchemy piece, which ends this way, I especially like the light the Jungian perspective sheds o­n what's wrong with us as perversions that were introduced when we split the material aspect of ourselves from our natural, sacred state.

The Final Curtain

In classical alchemy, empirical science and mystical philosophy worked in tandem, being more or less undifferentiated. However, the dawning age of Enlightenment in the 17th Century, followed by the advent of modern scientific pragmatism and its unyielding adherence to facts, sounded the death toll for all things considered mystical, magical and irrational. These two new intellectual forces meant the chemist and the hermetic philosopher finally parted company.

Earlier, in Western civilisation, Christianity brought with it a morality that eventually destroyed pagan practices, including nature worship and folk crafts. The alchemists fell foul of the Church because they felt it was in the power of man himself to achieve the divine condition, and therefore rejected the Christian dogma of original sin and the fallen nature of man. Alchemy, viewed as witchcraft and heresy by the patriarchal Church, threatened the vision of Christian universal harmony, and was officially denounced as a heathen, superstitious pursuit.

With classical imagination stultified, 'animism' – the attribution of a living soul to inanimate objects and natural phenomena – gave way to 'anthropomorphism' – the attribution of human form or character, or, the ascription of a human attribute of personality to anything impersonal or irrational – and humanism as the dominant worldview. As the many spirits inhabiting nature began to fade, everything became a reflection of, and message for, human affairs. The most crushing consequence of Christianity's ordering, control and defeat of nature was the loss of soul.

In a largely de-spiritualised, de-animated world, these nature spirits are said to now reside in the dark shadows of human rational consciousness. Psychologically, as Jung observed, the gods, deities and spirits have become our modern day dis-eases. Repressed, they exist in our personal lives as moods, odd fascinations, delusions, erotic fantasies and whatever else lurks in the depths of the unconscious. They are the 'chaotic' urges of nature, the irrational elements that entangle us in life. It seems as though we are trapped in the materiality of our being, with nature reduced to the human experience of it.

Alchemy, as a psychological discipline, may have ended long ago, but the alchemical processes within the psyche continue as before. If the gods have become our dis-eases, and the formal cause of our afflictions are mythical persons, then rather than having lost the alchemical model, we can see many of its processes alive today in the form of psychopathology.

I wrote to you months ago about crop circles and how puzzling it is to have folks out in the dark with boards and ropes, doing beautiful geometrical designs, and also find these intricately woven o­nes that would take a team of people months to do, o­nes where electrical gear doesn't work right near them, o­nes that show evidence of microwave radiation being employed…confusing to say the least.

Here's what we previously exhanged:

Andy to Suzanne:

Interesting site. I have taken an extremely skeptical attitude towards crop circles, because of the demonstrations people have given of how relatively easy it is to construct them with a few basic tools and a rudimentary knowledge of geometry. There are however, some crop circle formations which bear unusual features and would be impossible to duplicate with ropes and boards.

Who, might I ask, reads these comments, and how many are you getting these days? I was acquainted with McKenna, Dr. Lilly, and have had some limited interactions with Ram Dass since he has been o­n Maui, and also before, over the past 30 years. What a guy. Still such a magnificent presence; he energizes me in 5 minutes and it lasts all day!! o­nly a very few I've met can do that. I live in Texas and o­n Maui; sort of back and forth.

Suzanne to Andy:

The best book is “Vital Signs,” by Andy Thomas — get the American edition (you can order from the publisher at http://www.northatlanticbooks.com). The stunner re the geometry, which is where the awesomeness is most interesting, is still in the works from Michael Glickman. You might look at the high school math course by o­ne of the geometers, where you'd catch the drift: http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles

Have a look at something I put together: “Why Real Crop Circles Can't Be Hoaxed”:  http://theconversation.org/booklet2.html

The best overview documentary is “CROP CIRCLES: Quest for Truth.” Amazon has it. It's the o­nly o­ne that was in theatrical release, and it was made in appreciation of what's going o­n.

Look at Ralph Metzner's website www.greenearthfound.org and see his writings o­n things alchemical. Maybe you've heard of Dr. Metzner- he worked with Leary and Alpert at Harvard.

From Shari Covens [scovens@earthlink.net]

The timing of this message was uncanny for me, since o­n Sunday I was having a conversation with a few people at a New Year's Day party about the pros and cons of science — i.e. the idea that o­ne can't believe in anything unless it's scientifically proven, or the validity of scientific methods, like double blind studies, etc. I am not a fan of pure science or the thinking that adheres to it, so I especially appreciated the contents of your message.

From Michael Olson [maolson@erols.com]

You may be familiar with Cosmic Consciousness, the book by R. M. Bucke published c. 1905.  It is considered a classic o­n the topic of enlightenment.

This is his account of the experience he had which changed his life in an instant, and some related comments o­n it. He perceived the Cosmos as a Living Presence and much more too.

“Like a flash there is presented to his consciousness a clear conception (a vision) in outline of the meaning and drift of the universe…He sees and knows that the cosmos…is in fact…in very truth a living presence. He sees that instead of men being, as it were, patches of life scattered through an infinite sea of non-living substance, they are in reality specks of relative death in an infinite ocean of life. He sees that the life which is in man is as immortal as God is; that the universe is so built and ordered that without any peradventure all things work together for the good of each and all; that the foundation principle of the world is what we call love, and that the happiness of every individual is in the long run absolutely certain.”

“The person who passes through this experience will learn in the few minutes, or even moments, of its continuance more than in months or years of study, and he will learn much that no study ever taught or can teach. Especially does he obtain such a conception of *the whole.*…Along with moral elevation and intellectual illumination comes what must be called, for want of a better term, a sense of immortality.”

“I had spent the evening in a great city, with two friends, reading and discussing poetry and philosophy. We parted at midnight. I had a long drive in a hansom to my lodging. My mind, deeply under the influence of the ideas, images, and emotions called up by the reading and talk, was calm and peaceful. I was in a state of quiet, almost passive enjoyment, not actually thinking, but letting ideas, images, and emotions flow of themselves, as it were, through my mind. All at o­nce, without warning of any kind, I found myself wrapped in a flame-colored cloud. For an instant I thought of fire, an immense conflagration somewhere close by in that great city; the next, I knew that the fire was within myself. Directly afterward there came upon me a sense of exultation, of immense joyousness accompanied or immediately followed by an intellectual illumination impossible to describe. Among other things, I did not merely come to believe, but I saw that the universe is not composed of dead matter, but is, o­n the contrary, a living Presence; I became conscious in myself of eternal life. It was not a conviction that I would have eternal life, but a consciousness that I possessed eternal life then; I saw that all men are immortal; that the cosmic order is such that without any peradventure all things work together for the good of each and all; that the foundation principle of the world, of all the worlds, is what we call love, and that the happiness of each and all is in the long run absolutely certain. The vision lasted a few seconds and was gone; but the memory of it and the sense of the reality of what it taught has remained during the quarter of a century which has since elapsed. I knew that what the vision showed was true. I had attained to a point of view from which I saw that it must be true. That view, that conviction, I may say that consciousness, has never, even during periods of the deepest depression, been lost. “

Suzanne to Mike

That book was a big o­ne for me years ago. You and I always are o­n the same wavelength! Great quotes. Thanks so much for pointing me back at what had so moved me before.

From Jcorloff@aol.com [Jcorloff@aol.com]

Love this post. I've been thinking so much about alchemy lately, how that's the way I truly connect.

From Paul Von Ward [paul@vonward.com]

I really appreciate this post. I dealt with these two issues (the loss of a senses of the natural whole and the singular materialization of science) in chapters 23 and 24 of  Gods, Genes, & Consciousness, but this adds an element of pre-Industrial Age science that I did not cover. Hoping for a new year that tilts in the direction of construction instead of destruction.

From Monica Roleff [monr@smartchat.net.au]

I adore this subject. I watched your film [CROP CIRCLES: Quest for Truth] again over the holiday break and realise this is what the problem is. People are superstitious of what they don't understand, and how can they understand it when the connection is lost? A general lack of spirit meaning pervades our society, and it's imperative, indeed, scheduled, for us to get it back. Here are some links I have been working with, and also some that have been sent to me. It seems there is much to discover and we have o­nly just tipped the iceberg. It's going to be an exciting year.

http://www.outbackonline.net/Advent%20Calendar/Main%20Page/AdventCalender2005.htm – our writing group

http://www.annebaring.com/anbar14_comment.htm#elixir – I follow Anne Barings' writing and have done for years. This is her latest.

http://gate.cia.edu/cbergengren/arthistory/medieval/index1new/ – Alchemy

P.S. I have been rewatching a film based o­n an Australian novel, Picnic at Hanging Rock, by Peter Weir. It's about some early Victorian era schooled girls who have their “spirit” far removed, and who venture into an ancient rock with a magnetic power and go like innocents into the heart of it, never to be seen again. It was written by a famous woman, Joan Lindsay, who has a fair bit to say o­n the newer release DVD with lots of material that provides food for thought. I know you would find it fascinating from your standpoint re the circles and standing stones. We fear what we don't understand, and I think until people are reunited with spirit most things will seem alien. I found it fascinating for many reasons. Thanks for this post, as always 🙂

From Suzanne to Monica:

Peter Weir, before he sort of went Hollywood, was my favorite filmmaker, including “Picnic at Hanging Rock.”

From Wendy Howard [wendy@smeddum.net]

A complex subject to unravel. A few points seem worth making here before going any further.

The first is that any description of reality that’s ever been produced is just that. A description, a map, or a model of it. It’s reality *as we perceive it*, and has consensual validity o­nly insofar as others agree that it successfully models their experience of it, too, or can be persuaded to accept it as such. It’s *not* reality itself, even though we tend to live our lives for most of the time as if that's the case. That distinction needs to be kept in mind. All too often the map gets mistaken for the territory, or far worse, is given precedence over it. (Most of the unspeakable brutality of which we’re all capable arises from a desire to enforce a particular view of reality o­n those who don’t share it.)

The second is that an impartial view of the evidence would seem to suggest that reality itself doesn't appear to favour any o­ne view over any other. It cheerfully supports diametrically opposing viewpoints o­n all sorts of things to do with it, and obligingly offers up proof after proof to their proponents that enables them *all* to lay claim to validity. Every person alive has a valid view of reality. It may not be a view that’s shared by many others, but that doesn’t render it invalid or “wrong”. “Right” and “wrong” aren’t absolutes carved into the fabric of existence. They’re simply shorthand for “things that me and people who think like me agree with” and “things that me and people who think like me don’t agree with”.

The third is that it's the old story of the blind men and the elephant. So if we want to discover the whole elephant, any half-way decent attempt to construct a robust model of the nature of existence needs to accommodate as much as possible of that existence. This means encompassing the *full* range of human experience and knowledge in *every* field through *all* times, rather than flitting from o­ne limited subset of it to another, disdainfully dismissing the remainder as somehow irrelevant or inadmissible, or the product of presumed “inferior” minds in past times or technologically unsophisticated cultures. All that’s doing is perpetually moving around to different parts of the elephant with an elephantine measure of arrogance in tow.

So what we’re talking about here in the charting of the decline of animistic and alchemical beliefs is o­nly shifting perceptions, changing models, that have the appearance of being reflected in outer reality. For other societies, such as what remains of First Nation cultural viewpoints o­n all continents, the perception of the immanence of life still remains. It’s not the world that’s de-spiritualised and de-animated, it’s our *perception of it* that’s become so. Conceptual exclusion of any aspect of existence will dis-ease us when we encounter it. It doesn’t fit our idea of how things should be. In other words, the mythical gods are *not* the formal cause of our modern dis-ease. It’s our inability to recognise and integrate the spiritual dimension of existence and include it in our conceptual model of “reality” that is the cause of our dis-ease. In some ways it doesn’t much matter *how* we model it, because it will o­nly ever be an approximation, an analogy; what matters is that we do.

Then comes the question of how we relate to it – ie. whether it resides “out there” or “in here”. This comes down to what we define as “self” and what we define as “other”. If what we define as “other” is, in fact, an aspect of “self”, then it becomes part of our (Jungian) shadow to be continually reflected back to us from “out there”, possibly bringing a measure of dis-ease in the process. If, as quantum physics (not to mention various mystical traditions) seem to suggest, the entirety of existence is fundamentally correlated and the “individuality” of any part of it is o­nly relative and contingent, then the distinction between “self” and “other” is conditional, not absolute. The *real*isation of that can release us from dis-ease. “I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together” and even “I am He as you are He as you are me and we are all together”.

Blasphemy? Consider this. Jung perceived that archetypes relegated to shadow are o­nes that are unconsciously acted out. The Judaeo-Christian foundations of our society have so comprehensively severed any aspect of divinity from “self” that it becomes hopelessly inevitable that we will unconsciously act out in a god-like way. This brings our arrogance, our superiority, our conviction that our view is “right”, and tendency to imagine we have some god-given right to impose those views o­n every other culture o­n the planet into sharp relief. Cultures who recognise the spark of divinity inherent in every lifeform don’t need to act out in this way, which pretty much consigns them to being stamped out by the likes of us. As a culture we in the industrialised nations of the west have been, and continue to be, guilty of crimes against other lifeforms that make Hitler look like a pussy cat and our illusions of moral superiority quite dreadful distortions. Contrary to expectations, transcending the somewhat illusory nature of the distinction between “self” and “other” and accepting our divine attributes brings about a deep humility. It no longer becomes necessary to act out.

How “real” is any of this? Perhaps it’s like Borges said, “Let us admit what all idealists admit – the hallucinatory nature of the world. Let us do what no idealist has done – let us search for unrealities that confirm that nature. I believe we shall find them in the antinomies of Kant and in the dialectic of Zeno … 'The greatest wizard (Novalis writes memorably) would be the o­ne who bewitched himself to the point of accepting his own phantasmagorias as autonomous apparitions. Wouldn\'t that be our case.' I surmise it is so. We (that indivisible divinity that operates in us) have dreamed the world. We have dreamed it as enduring, mysterious, visible, omnipresent in space and stable in time; but we have consented to tenuous and eternal intervals of illogicalness in its architecture that we might know it is false.”

Suzanne to Wendy:

How did I get to be the recipient of all these smarts? Thought, as I was reading it, of my latest mantra: life is in the choices, not the story.

Changing our worldview is paramount. We've got to think as a planet. I dwell o­n that.

Wendy to Suzanne:

> Thought, as I was reading it, of my latest mantra: life is in the choices, not the story.

Indeed! Though I'd say it was both: often the story is what reveals the life we're unaware of, whether or not we manage to twist it in the telling! My own experiences have led me to conclude that choice is rather relative and contingent, much as our individuality is, and that expanding our definitions of “self” beyond the limited and fragmented concept of ego individuality brings a realisation that we're also part of a higher level of organisation — like cells in the body of the Earth perhaps — and that in many ways what we believe are choices of free will are really just the dance we dance, unconsciously, as part of that level of organisation. Seeing the amount of synchronicity running in people's lives it seems hard to conclude otherwise.

> Changing our worldview is paramount. We've got to think as a planet. I dwell o­n that.

Yes! I'd read a few of your posts before responding. I follow very similar thinking. It's so good to know so many of us throughout the world are coming to this same perspective from our own individual journeys of exploration, and are able to link up through the internet! I try to develop these ideas o­n my own site too whether it's just encouraging people to think outside the regular boxes or taking it into new territory to propose various ways of modelling human experience to account for a bit more of the elephant (eg the essay 'Holed in o­ne' which you'll find an introduction to at http://www.smeddum.net/content/general_essays.htm#black_hole1).

Suzanne to Wendy

Boy, Wendy, that's quite a site you have. And I'm honored to show up o­n it. Indeed, thanks to the Internet for being able to find like minds.

I'm speaking about the reality base where aliveness is in the now. The story is just the story. All you can do is operate well at choice. It's what Victor Frankl brought home so compellingly about how he survived the concentration camp. The trick is to see through the veils, which always are shrouding us in whatever belief system or personal limitation of vision we are prey to.

From: Judith Orloff [Drjorloff@aol.com]

Thanks. Great post. I've been meditating o­n it for days.

Follow