|
Inner alchemy archives - Tantra Yoga as AlchemyBack to alchemy forum page . Back to Inner alchemy archive.From: Steve Kalec Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 20:09:41 -0500 To Richard Roberts, You wrote , >The tableau depicts my >secret theory that alchemy is in reality Tantra Yoga, or rather the form >it took when reaching the West in order to prevent its practioners from >persecution at the hands of the Judeo-Christian religion, which despised >the body and sexuality as invitations to damnation. However, the >crowned couple on my cover are in Tantric embrace. I am really excited hearing you say this because I fully agree. I have always believed that the union of the great opposites, Sun and Moon is truly the mysterium coniunctionis of our Royal Queen, the Divine Goddess Shakti with our Royal King, the Hindu God Shiva . Both of which are aspects of Brahman, who is the one God, the absolute, the ultimate reality, or pure consciousness.The Eastern method of Tantra Yoga shares the same common problem with Western Alchemy. Union with the Brahman ( to achieve the STONE ) cannot be so long as Shiva and Shakti, King and Queen , Sun and Moon are separated. They need each other in order to be activated, quickened and become the One Brahman again. The whole man, masculine and feminine energies , conscious and unconscious selves united in Oneness of consciousness. To me, the western methods of raising the inner Secret Fire is the very pranayama method along with visualization and concentration method of the raising of the inner divine psychic and cosmic energies of the Kundalini Serpent. Which salamanders , serpents or dragons are very often seen as the vital mercurial forces in Western Alchemy.I have often dared to state this to Western Alchemists and I have very often received the cold shoulder for it. So I was very glad to see your statement. Thank you. Best Regards, Steve Kalec From: Steve Kalec Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 From : Steve Kalec I was once very much struck by what my alchemy teacher told me. He said that for the alchemists to succeed in the art they must be able to find within themselves the subtle, passive, feminine,nurturing creative energies. He said that many alchemists were aided in finding this goddess within by working with a female companion in very close and intimate relationship. The principle behind the technique is the projection of one's anima on the lady alchemist. We know that Nicholas Flamel had Pernell and if we look at the Mutus Liber we see the alchemist working in conjunction with his lady friend or soror mystica. We know how powerful this projection of one's soul on one's wife or partner is. It has been seen many a times over that when one's other half has died the other one very soon follows for he or she has literally lost a part of himself that he cannot live without. Especially if they had lived a close, loving , harmonious long life together. To me the Tantric embrace depicted in many of the beautiful statues, plates, and other Buddhist and Hindu art works reveal this same very principle. Union with the Goddess anima within. Although some Tantric practice actually involves sexual rituals with one's Tantric lady, there are Tantric practices that don't necessitate this and are strictly of the practice of the inner nature, very much like our western alchemy. This union sought after with our inner queen is seen everywhere in our alchemy.We see the king and queen naked in flasks and baths dissolving together. We even see this Tantric embrace by the king and queen in sexual coupling in the famous Rosarium of the Philosophers as can be seen at http://www.levity.com/alchemy/rosary2.html . The caption reads O Luna, by means of my embracing and sweet kisses, Thou art made beautiful, strong and mighty like as I am. O Sol, thou art to be preferred before all light, But yet thou needest me, as the cock does the hen. To me, we should very much be able to see the similarities between Alchemy and Tantra yoga. In fact they are both alchemy.They both seek transmutation of consciousness and union with the divine within.I have always believed that the union of the great opposites, Sun and Moon is truly the mysterium coniunctionis of our Royal Queen, the Divine Goddess Shakti with our Royal King, the Hindu God Shiva . The Eastern method of Tantra Yoga shares the same common problem with Western Alchemy. Union with the Brahman ( to achieve the STONE ) cannot be so long as Shiva and Shakti, King and Queen , Sun and Moon are separated. They need each other in order to be activated, quickened and become the One Brahman again. The whole man, masculine and feminine energies , conscious and unconscious selves united in Oneness of consciousness. To me, the western methods of raising the inner Secret Fire along with visualization and concentration techniques is very similar to the raising of the inner divine psychic and cosmic energies of the Kundalini Serpent. Which salamanders, serpents or dragons are very often seen as the vital mercurial energies in Western Alchemy. Date: Sun, 13 Apr 97 From: MIKE DICKMAN Steve and Dimitris Hi! If I can be permitted to blather on yet further, I'd just like to come back to this if I may, my recent offerings having been that touch dogmatic and heavy (for which I humbly beg pardon of both those at whom they were directed and the entire group) (or those of you who bother to read this kind of nonsense anyway)... Alors... The fact that union-practices as a valid path of yoga and alchemy do in fact exist (although, as pointed out before, only for certain types of practitioner, and only to redress certain tendencies toward extreme views, either pro or anti) is not in question. They do, and they are valid, and they do work. What's bothering me, however, is their susceptibility to an ascription of 'quasi-concrete reality' when, in fact, they are rather extremely subtle, and finally totally non-existent, processes... I'm very clear on the fact that I'm not - by a long chalk! - speaking to fools. I really love this forum, and all that it stands for... So let me try again... ... The strange presence of an apparent body-mind and context seems to be continually organising itself into ongoing (though often on/off) and ever-changing structures... These - at least in the unenlightened - tend to seem to centre on an any given 'here', generally referred to as 'me' although the vastness encompassed by this somewhat global - and finally unrootable - term is fairly mind-boggling. It also doesn't seem to split off all that well from its opposite pole, the 'there and that', with which it seems to continually be confounding itself and to be pervaded, right down to the point where this 'me', itself, is often dealt with as if it were a 'something', a 'something else than what is knowing it', an ob-ject, or - if you prefer - an hors sujet... Not only that. This 'hereness' is also infinitely divisible, its right, left and centre also having a front, back, upper an lower, within and without, as does every particle of all of these, sujet ET hors sujet, ad infinitum. There is absolutely nothing in it that one could finally and ultimately point to and say 'this is real it'. Yes, but it apparently persists in time, you may object. However, time,too, is equally sucsceptible to exactly the same analysis: If time past is what is gone and time future what has not yet come, no matter what their apparent resonance on the instant of change that is their interface (and, let's face it, nobody lives there, but ONLY in the interference-pattern that is their resonance), when would any of this ever be able to come into existence? And yet, here their existence is - totally undeniable... But what is it the existence of? Further... it is not the structure itself that is important to us as lived-through beings, or, rather, shall we say 'not the structure as and in itself - in vacuo'? Rather, it is the fact of the movement and change of this 'spatial structure' (the left/right axis, if you will) along the forward/backward axis of time that is vital to us - that is vital in us. This movement - this 'motility' - is what animates and renders 'real' the deadness of the mere fact of extension in the more or less vastness of space... So let's go further still... Any and all of the above are useless to us - in fact totally non-existent for us - unless we are aware of them. They do not come into being in any way at all without there being a concomitant awareness, in fact, and awareness itself is equally interesting to examine... Let's at least have a bash at it, because - if there is a root to all there is - it's probably somewhere in awareness that it's actually residing... But where? In which aspect of awareness? Awareness, as we know, is a term even broader than references to what one inuits as being the 'owner of awareness and the situation in which it finds itself', inasmuch as it ranges from total blank indifference and profound ignorance on the one hand, all the way to perfect and unobstructable (not to mention only vaguely guess-at-able) omniscience, on the other... It seems, in fact, when one really goes into it, to actually 'precede' and to comprehend (in the sense of 'contain' rather than 'understand') all of the rest of it. And yet... when one looks into it... into trying to lay hold of some essence to it... what is it? It would seem that - if it does have an essence at all - that this essence must in fact be its very ungraspable 'emptiness' inasmuch as it can never be established, lain hold of, or actually demonstrated as a 'this' or a 'that'... It seems to have no other fundamental characteristic. And yet, that it is (a) 'illumining' - voir meme 'creative' - seems to go without saying. Awareness DOES exist, as do its objects - at any rate 'apparently'... And there does not seem to be (b) any point in the universe or even out of it where it does not or cannot exist, to the very point where it could be claimed to be absolutely all-embracing... relatively... So there seem to be two truths, or two levels on which truth appears to be operating: an 'absolute' one where nothing exists as such, and a 'relative' one on which everything does exist in all-embracing interplay, ad infinitum, each thing containing all other things, and all of them reflecting all of everything else unto eternity... And neither of these poles is any 'better' than the other... As the Prajñaparamitahridayasutra - the famous 'Heart Sutra' - says in the well-known (but infamously misconstrued) quote: 'Form is void Void is form Form is in no wise different from void Nor void in any way separate from form...' (my own transl. from the Tibetan) This, at any rate, is how it seems to me, and it is probably the basis from which I'm arguing, because it is this - in my (very) humble opinion - that is the universe referred to in the Lao-tse lines from Tao Te Ching, 29, quoted in one of my recent postings... I just want to cite one or two texts from some pretty profound systems and I'll then shut up: The first is Chang Po-tuan and Liu I-ming's Chin tan ssu pai tzu chieh, 'The Four Hundred Words on the Golden Elixir', translated by Cleary as 'The Inner Teachings of Taoism' (Shambhala, 1986), the text by Chang and a fairly enlightened commentary on it by Liu (these two were highly important in 'Complete Reality School' Taoism, Chang being founder of its southern branch, and Liu, member of its more austere northern branch, one of Taoist alchemy's foremost interpreters)... "... Although... annotated and explained many times... these interpretations are either in terms of material alchemy or in terms of psychosomatic exercises; it is impossible to find a single text that conveys the reality, expresses the spirit, and reveals the hidden dimension... "I could not bear to let this precious work... be buried away, so I have made a detailed explanation... clearly pointing out what the 'crucible', 'furnace', 'medicines', 'firing', 'doing' and 'nondoing' are..." (Cleary op. cit., pp. xv-xvi) "People of later times... just stuck on the symbols: Confucians took them as superstitious nonsense, while Taoists took them in a superficial manner... and arbitrarily invented all sorts of practices, getting caught up in side-tracks... and (harming) themselves mentally and physically... Surely this was not the intent of the ancients when they evoked images in symbolic language." (op. cit., p. xviii) "The other is not a person; If you mistake it for another, you are already way off. Your child has wandered outside - Give it a call; when it sees your face it will follow its parent." "The classics speak of other and self to distinguish yin and yang; This is the realm of purity, neither material nor void. Those who practise deviant techniques of sexual alchemy Destroy their natural innocence in the brothels" "Doing is not manipulation of the physical body; Forced gymnastics all result in injury. How can you understand the true secret mentally transmitted? Unfathomable by ghosts and spirits, one resolves yin and yang." "Nondoing is not sticking to indifferent emptiness; When you are able to avoid negligence and obssession both, Rooting out the seeds of repeated birth and death, Right in the centre there is just one spiritual youth." (op. cit., pp 110 and 115) Actually, for all the fact that Cleary's stuff has been criticised for being lightly interprative, I cannot too strongly recommend a reading of this text and of his translation of Chang and Liu's Wu chen p'ien, or 'Understanding Reality', (University of Hawaii Press, 1987)... Inasmuch as they cut through screeds of 'misplaced materialism', both occidental and oriental, they are invaluable to the serious practitioner of both operational and internal alchemy, and will also go a long way to destroying the myth of the fundamental difference in goal between the alchemeys of east and west. As Goethe so rightly said Orient und Occident Sind nicht mehr zu trennen. ('East and West Can no longer be held apart.') I think I'm actually going to leave it at that. My love, m Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 From: Michal Pober mike: ki/chi. best, michal From: Marcella Gillick Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 > From : Steve Kalec > I was once very much struck by what my alchemy > teacher told me. He said that for the alchemists to succeed > in the art they must be able to find within themselves the > subtle, passive, feminine,nurturing creative energies. He said > that many alchemists were aided in finding this goddess > within by working with a female companion in very close > and intimate relationship. The principle behind the technique > is the projection of one's anima on the lady alchemist. This is something that has been puzzling me for the last couple of months. I'm picking bits and pieces from different places, different angles etc, which have rankled or irritated me, even making allowances for 'generics', vis where women really fit into the picture - not alchemical stuff, but along the same lines as the above. I would be interested in others' views. (I don't have any books here to quote from, so am going by memory). For example:- - G Gurdjieff is quoted as saying, in Fritz Peter's biography, something to the effect that men must aspire and strive for knowledge and self discovery whereas women don't need to strive because they already have the knowledge, but that it is useless to them and they cannot use it..... He also implied that it was possible for women to achieve self development, but only alongside a man, whereas a man could achieve this on his own..... - In the Gospel of Thomas there is a scenario where Mary Magdelene enters a room full of men. On hearing one of the apostles complaining that a woman should not be party to their conversations, Jesus replied that he would 'make of her a man'..... - In the White Goddess, Robert Graves argues that women cannot be true poets or artists by virtue of the fact that the muse, being a feminine principle, cannot inspire them. - And then, biologically, men have the XY chromosome, and women have the XX chromosome, so going back to Steve's comments above, I suppose it would be possible for a man to find his feminine 'X' side, whereas women don't have a masculine 'Y' side to find? Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 From: George Leake >From: MIKE DICKMAN [heavily edited for brevity] >What's bothering me, however, is their susceptibility to an >ascription of 'quasi-concrete reality' when, in fact, they are rather >extremely subtle, and finally totally non-existent, processes... True nuff but you know what some skeptics say--why bother with all that lab equipment? >Not only that. This 'hereness' is also infinitely divisible, its right, left >and centre also having a front, back, upper an lower, within and without, as >does every particle of all of these, sujet ET hors sujet, ad infinitum. In other words our imaginations can manifest three dimensional images? Perhaps its the sheer length of the posting or its seeming off the cuff nature of that narrative, but frankly I'm not sure what the point is of the rest of the posting. A summary of some aspects of Eastern thought but to what purpose? George Leake Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 From Bernard Bovasso Steve Kalec writes: > I was once very much struck by what my alchemy >teacher told me. He said that for the alchemists to succeed >in the art they must be able to find within themselves the >subtle, passive, feminine,nurturing creative energies. He said >that many alchemists were aided in finding this goddess >within by working with a female companion in very close >and intimate relationship. The principle behind the technique >is the projection of one's anima on the lady alchemist. We >know that Nicholas Flamel had Pernell and if we look at the >Mutus Liber we see the alchemist working in conjunction >with his lady friend or soror mystica. We know how powerful >this projection of one's soul on one's wife or partner is. It >has been seen many a times over that when one's other >half has died the other one very soon follows for he or she >has literally lost a part of himself that he cannot live without. >Especially if they had lived a close, loving , harmonious long >life together. Steve: Be that as it may, the possibility of the anima projection conjoined as an actual sexual partner runs the risk of dissipating both the meaning and intention of the opus. There are psychological as well as alchemical misgivings in this or their would have been no need to refer to such an anima as both *soror* and *mystica,* and by which notice such a feminine image is defined in its relation to the worker. Sexual lover she cannot be and maintain the integrity of the process. Bernard (BXBovasso) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 From: George Matchette Marcella writes: >This is something that has been puzzling me for the last couple of months. >I'm picking bits and pieces from different places, different angles etc, which >have rankled or irritated me, even making allowances for 'generics', vis where >women really fit into the picture - not alchemical stuff, but along the same >lines as the above. I would be interested in others' views. As a rule, I think it's a mistake to confuse literal gender which consciousness; i.e., I just don't buy that your biology determines to that large an extent how you think and feel. Conditioning does, but that's another issue. I'm not fond of generalization anyway, but I've met plenty of women with more masculine principle than I, etc., etc., I know we live in a microscopic era where all differences between genders are duly noted, but experientially I think we're tons more alike than different and I can think of no thought or emotion that is not experienced by both genders. Respecfully, George From: Steve Kalec Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 Dear Bernard Bovasso >Be that as it may, the possibility of the anima projection conjoined >as an actual sexual partner runs the risk of dissipating both the >meaning and intention of the opus. There are psychological as well as >alchemical misgivings in this or their would have been no need to refer >to such an anima as both *soror* and *mystica,* and by which >notice such a feminine image is defined in its relation to >the worker. Sexual lover she cannot be and maintain the integrity of the >process. I don't disagree with you but on the other hand sex regarded in a higher attitude as a beautiful and blessed sacred union cannot hurt the process. I myself never have been involved in sexual Tantric practice , my practice is strictly of mystical inner nature. If anything I can attest that serious inner practice involving the true raising of the subtle yet very vital and powerful mercurial forces is sexual in nature because these forces are allied with the sexual. I am not alone saying this.This is well proved and accepted. I say I can attest because I have found that these inner excersises truly diminish my outer sex urge. The awesome vital nature of this energy gets translated and transmuted into the higher aspects, chakras, or psychic centers till it expresses itself at the top of one's head in true spiritual splendor. It receives power from above, from the higher spiritual SELF . Then descends back down with its alchemical tincturing effect, rejuvenating, healing, purifying one's being. This ascending and descending gradually transmutes one's darkness to light ( lead to gold ), unconscious with conscious. What I meant by, some alchemists were aided by projecting their anima on a lady partner I didn't mean it that this must be in sexual acts. Although if one has a partner this can happen in a healthy way. I meant it truly as a projection. I work with men, lots of men , airplane mechanics. When there are no women around they can be very vulgar, crude, impolite ect . It always amazes me how when a woman comes down to the hangar floors for something, how the men change from beasts to princes. They stop all four letter words, they stop all vulgarities and indecencies all because a woman walked in. This is true projection. Their best is brought out of them in an instant transformation. There are a many times, especially during the full moon cycles that I can feel a woman's aura so powerfully and magnetically that I get enchanted in a wonderful way. This I know is a projection of something that is so enchanting within me. I know this to be the power of the all embracing and nurturing archetype of my beloved Sophia. This projection is eventually recognized and assimilated into consciousness through the inner wedding to be afterwards always there felt within as a true realized aspect of one's self. As Richard has said " I think the projection has to be withdrawn long before the *hierosgamos* can be attained ". What I meant by the Tantric embrace, I meant that as a symbol of inner union. But I would like to say that my mind is very open to the fact that there is such a thing as sacred outer sex. By this I don't mean an unhealthy abuse of sex. I mean a true spiritual kind of as much as possible total union with a partner at the level where their individualities disappear into a bliss of oneness. Even Ouspenski in Tertium Organum speaks of a true sexual act with true love behind it as a powerful spiritual close encounters. Remember that spirit and mater are one, heaven is on and in earth. Accepted or not, during sex we are very much projecting our anima. It involves the uniting of one's inner female divine Shakti with one's inner male divine Shiva to become the one Brahma in consciousness. I know that such practice exists and it is not easy because it is a kind of sex that is using the vital forces that are allied with sex as I stated before. I say hard because the animal sex drive will want to take over and we know how strong that is. But I do get your drift and I understand what you are saying. There are many practices and one of them is the complete opposite as is celibacy. In any case be it outer practical laboratory practice or inner spiritual introversion and meditation, or sacred sex , or devotional celibacy and prayer, they all ignite the Secret Fire. " Above all, seek ye the secret fire, for without it nothing can be attained in our art. " Best Regards Steve Kalec Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 From: Deanna Herrera To: Steve Kalec Hi Steve, Here are some not so well thought out lunch hour random thoughts. I have been reading some of your replies and so forth and we may be looking in the same direction. One thing that strikes me from the recent conversation about the feminine or feminine principle is that we presently live in a male/animus dominated world and women have internalized this perspective to the extent that some aspects of the anima have been repressed or become part of the collective shadow of both men and women. The intuitive has been lost for many women. It is not, in my opinion necessary to find an "object" to project the shadow/anima (in the tantric sense) onto. Gay men project the anima onto their own lovers because it is the spiritual union of love that invokes the feminine principle. There are many other ways to invoke the projection of the anima other than sexual union. Any mindful spiritual practice can bring one closer to the "sacred marriage". For me it is being in nature. When I rock climb I am hugging the earth and that awakens my own intuitive aspect where my thoughts, emotions and body become integrated. And at the same time I am taking a small princely journey that rekindles the energy of the animus. And I agree with George Leake (was it George?) when he stated that men and women share similar emotional experiences. I am not refuting the spiritual practice of tantra for the purposes of self development. I simply believe that there is a lot to be said for sublimation and conscious redirection of sexual energy and that for gay, lesbian and bi folks their tantric experiences are not limited by the gender of their partners. Having a hard time being articulate here so I hope you get the gyst of what I am attempting to communicate here. Dr. Deanna Herrera (Counseling Psychologist, Stevenson College, UCSC) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 97 From: MIKE DICKMAN In response to George Leake's posting of 14th April. >From: MIKE DICKMAN [heavily edited for brevity] Thank you for this kindness, I'm sure I don't know what I'd do without you... You might try not to totally misrepresent, though... It does help. >some skeptics say--why bother with all that lab equipment? One bothers with the practice so as not to become too absorbed with one's own interpretations based on total lack of experience surely? It's a good way of spotting where the idiot actually is. >>Not only that. This 'hereness' is also infinitely divisible, its right, left >>and centre also having a front, back, upper an lower, within and without, as >>does every particle of all of these, sujet ET hors sujet, ad infinitum. >In other words our imaginations can manifest three dimensional images? Oh yes, surely - Pity you managed to edit this down only to what you finally managed to get out of it, though. Try turning your hearing-aid up a bit. >Perhaps its the sheer length of the posting or its seeming off the cuff >nature of that narrative, but frankly I'm not sure what the point is of the >rest of the posting. Well, one might equally well say, instead of telling us all what you don't like about the way we go about it (which seems to be your chosen technique, echoed here by way of illustration), why don't you come out of the closet and give us your version? We're here to share...aren't we?... Cutting off other peoples' heads so as to remain the tallest in the room strikes me as a trifle Napoleonic. It's easy to show up other people as fools. The point - in words of as few syllables as possible - is to show that, no matter what one's grasp, since one's capacities for understanding are more or less limited, but limited all the same, perhaps 'reality' (with the appropriate quotation marks) is a little less so ... Perhaps it goes just a little beyond one's ability to spot the loopholes in others' arguments... >A summary of some aspects of Eastern thought but to what purpose? Gosh! The profundity of this observation really floors one!... And to think I thought I'd finally and painstakingly worked it all out myself. I guess one of us is going to have to change his guide-dog. Love 'n' all m Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 From: Bernard Bovasso Steve Kalec, I appreciate and agree with most of what you posted. As a small boy I read in one of my mother's collection of books on psychology that a man falls in love with love before he falls in love with a woman. This impressed me enormously, autoerotic little devil that I was. As I matured, I realized that to remain in love with love to the preclusion of a woman endures a man in autoerotic exclusivity and absorbed thereby in a state of mystical participation. Such uroboric participation may be the necessity of a small boy or an old man for whom the necessity of the woman as sovereign *other* may be either premature to experience or no longer relevant. Short of that the anima, as endopsychic soul image, remains the mistress of *participation mistique* and all libidinal necessities. But since we cannot remain little boys and do not endure forever as old men the proscription for an adult male is to cease and desist in the love of love and self love, especially where the juices are concerned. In this way you may keep your mystical house in order and yet indulge your mate as something more than a spectre. Sincerely, Bernard BXBovasso Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 From: Hil Cato Deanna, I am a woman dealing with my image of animus attached to a man... I do believe that the spiritual union of love invokes the anima, but what invokes the animus? My loneliness grows greater when attached to him, but in meditation I seem to find reflections of tender space, and I cannot seem to manifest animus within that space. Anima on its own, cares not what happens, anima will dare anything, will eat, will die, but will not choose or decide. My initial thought is simply that it is the eternal tension between dragon and lion, between what must be and what one wills to be, and of course I find myself deficient in the area of will. Thoughts please on animus/will/whatever. Hil From: B X Bovasso Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 > One thing that strikes me from the > recent conversation about the feminine or feminine principle is > that we presently live in a male/animus dominated world and > women have internalized this perspective to the extent that some > aspects of the anima have been repressed or become part of the > collective shadow of both men and women. Dear Dr. Herrera : If I read you right, are you saying that the *animus of the anima* has become the major predicate of the contemporary *zeitgeist?* This would infer that women, because intrinsiclly a passive victim, have become the recipients of a split off aspect of the masculine psychology. That is an overdrawn conclusion. Otherwise, I have missed your point. It is not possible for both the male and the animus to dominate (anything) at the same time unless it is a case of the the male dominating the animus. Would that be another way of saying that the male identified in the animus is the dominating factor of womankind? Or is the woman self-dominated by an animus that is only nominally male! Such a tautological, *circulus in probando* manner of self relation is imaginable only in uroboric, or what I otherwise call "matricentric consciousness." In that case it would follow: >The intuitive has been lost for many women. It is not, in my > opinion necessary to find an "object" to project the shadow/anima >(in the tantric sense) onto. Gay men project the anima onto their >own lovers because it is the spiritual union of love that invokes the >feminine principle. Then what you have described indicates the object as no less an object but an inner object since the terms shadow or anima are non-sequitor outside the agency of (unconscious) projection. The "inner object" projected onto, in this case, would be the animus as the endopsyhic complement to both the shadow and the anima. As you note "Gay men project the anima onto their own lovers" and which amounts to saying they project it onto themselves (since their love object is in the gender image of themselves). In this way, such Gay men become the anima of the animus. The next question would then be; "Whose animus? At that point the object-person as external object looms apparent. >There are many other ways to invoke the >projection of the anima other than sexual union. Any mindful spiritual >practice can bring one closer to the "sacred marriage". For me it is >being in nature. When I > rock climb I am hugging the earth and that awakens my own intuitive >aspect where my thoughts, emotions and body become integrated. >And at the same time I am taking a small princely journey that rekindles >the energy of the animus. But in this case the external object required was the earth. Without this external object to receive the projection would not the integration be foreclosed in a tautological conundrum, and thus uroborically self-consummed? > I am not refuting the spiritual practice of tantra for the purposes > of self development. I simply believe that there is a lot to be said for >sublimation and conscious redirection of sexual energy and that >for gay, lesbian and bi folks their tantric experiences are not limited >by the gender of their partners. Yet however sublimated, redirected or channeled, the sexual energy objectified is still retained in the heterosexual paradigm (e.g., "because it is the spiritual union of love that invokes the feminine principle). That leaves us with an "as if" feminine principle suggesting that a same sex love is not something in its own right and qualified only as if something else. But here we must fall back on the relation of the *soror mystica* where there is absolutely no *as if* feminine principle involved but the nature of gender unconditionally qualified as that which is interior (in distinction to the exteriority of maleness). The factor of interiority and its esoteric reality is what qualifies "feminine principle" and quite divested of all distraction in secondary sexual characteristics. In other words, the archetype of "feminine principle" is not imagically a person adorned with a vagina but symbolically in fact THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERIORITY and by which alchemy takes its meaning of the *vas* and alembic, or the cucurbita in which the sacred maraige takes place. Sincerely, Bernard (BXBovasso) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 From: Deanna Herrera >Hi Hill I got your posting. Going out of town, when I return I will reply sometime next week. I am just unclear about a one thing... Please be patient. I have a concrete mind. >I am a woman dealing with my image of animus attached to a man... Do you mean a real man, the breathing kind? or is this a metaphorical reference? >believe that the spiritual union of love invokes the anima, but what >invokes the animus? My loneliness grows greater when attached to him, >but in meditation I seem to find reflections of tender space, and I >cannot seem to manifest animus within that space. Anima on its own, >cares not what happens, anima will dare anything, will eat, will die, >but will not choose or decide. My initial thought is simply that it is >the eternal tension between dragon and lion, between what must be and >what one wills to be, and of course I find myself deficient in the area >of will. Thoughts please on animus/will/whatever. This part I understand and will give it some thought while I am away. I have lots of ideas on this. Have a wonderful weekend!! Deanna Dr. Deanna Herrera (Counseling Psychologist, Stevenson College, UCSC) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 From: Hil Cato Hey Deanna, (>I am a woman dealing with my image of animus attached to a man... >Do you mean a real man, the breathing kind? or is this a metaphorical reference? A real man. but here is a pre-dream i had the other nite: i am sliding thru a clear tunnel or tube in space. it is deep blue all around the tube, but i'm moving horizontallyand very quickly, a door opens at the end of the tube and shows light blue sky , green grass and a tree. the tree is very large but very sick. i think it is an oak tree. i land on the grass and begin to chant sounds and stomp my feet. i stomp in a circle around the tree, i can feel the tree getting well. a root from it rises out of the earth and i make love to it and come ecstatically while holding on to the sides of the tree. a rainbow is emanating from the tree all around. hear from you soon, hil. Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 From: Jeff Dear Hill: Anima and animus are very misunderstood concepts today. The animus is not so much about will and strength in the world-this actually in the Jungian system belongs to the notion of ego strength. Animus is actually conceived as a bridge that connects the woman to her own inner world in such a way that she is able to access that inner world easily and profoundly. It is also serves as a bridge to the outer world as inner sense of center and power that allows the woman to express herself and her own creativity in form. The equation of the animus with supposedly masculine forms of power such as will and decisiveness misses the profound inner meaning of the archetype, and its true role in formation of creative and spiritual processes. Jeff From: Steve Kalec Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 To : Bernard Bovasso Thank you for your response. I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist. I am however a student of mysticism, alchemy and I dabble a bit in Jungian psychology. I would like to express that when the divine fire of this love burns within the heart and soul of the alchemist it is more than just a small boy's love of love. It is much more than just the love of self. It is the love of the higher Self within, to which he is aspiring to become one with, being whole and integrated. It is love of what is divine within him. It is the love of the divine presence of the angelic within. The love of God and the love of the world. This is not a one way affair, it is a harmonious relationship and attunement with what is of the cosmic within. This love is reciprocal and a communication channel is established. As one attunes and gives attention and becomes aware of these higher more noble forces, likewise this higher gives to the lower. Every step man makes towards the divine the divine makes a step towards man. I am in love with the world, and I am thankful for this great gift of God called Life and Consciousness. My love for this endopsychic image of the soul, as you call it, ( I like the word very much ), is also the fire of the alchemists and I shall tend to this fire always that its flames not die out. I will keep its heat just right and even that my baser metals stay molten for the alchemical process. Rightly you say that this love is uroboric. This fire is Eros and Desire. It is the very life force in man, the divine consciousness in every human being. It is the cosmic energy of life that in its ceaseless striving and effort to be is the very source of being itself with all its consciousness unfolding itself into infinite levels of being. It belongs to everyone and yet so few know it. It is life's desire for itself. Allegorically, it is this eternal life itself that tempted Eve to indulge in the forbidden fruit of the fullness of the Self. The alchemist's relationship with his anima leads him to the chemical wedding. This marriage is to be consummated .On the archetypal and universal level this eternal feminine is the reproductive power of the world, She is Eve or the celestial Isis. Through their perfect union, the Father and the ineffable Mother form the Son, the Living Word which creates the universe. There is a secret here that is revealed to those who truly seek. Through union with his unconscious the alchemist magician knows how to impregnate the cosmic mind with his visualized seed thought. Through the esoteric technique of the release, the seed is accepted and conception is had. When all conditions meet and time is at hand, mind stuff manifests on the material plane. Man becomes a co-creator with God . I have had many wonderful events and effects happen this way, some of them of the miraculous. I will conclude here Bernard and say again that to me this desire and love for the divine within is a little more than just a little boys love of love , or self love. It is a limitless longing of the heart for the Beloved. Best Regards, Steve Kalec From: Steve Kalec Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 To: Deanna Herrera, > .. men and women share similar emotional experiences . Absolutely ! we are all humans, no one here in this forum doubts that. I hope that my posts did not allude to the contrary. Women have a soul too < smile >. > I simply believe that there is a lot to be said for sublimation >and conscious redirection of sexual energy and that for gay, >lesbian and bi folks their tantric experiences are not limited >by the gender of their partners. I don't doubt that, we all have our active and passive natures and we each have our way of seeing them reflected in others. > It is not, in my opinion necessary to find an "object" to project >the shadow/anima (in the tantric sense) onto. I agree with you. As I say many times, ( each his own way and in his own time ). But let us not deny that there are very serious and advanced proven methods that are sometimes exactly what one is in need of for his next quantum leap. Of course knowledge and teachings must be well grasped and one needs to dare to do, to change and to die ( to the old self ). This is not for everyone. I really do hope that I am not being misunderstood by this tantra stuff and the sexual energy thing. I have said that there are many tantric concentration and visualization exercises involving pranajamic methods that raise and transmute this vital energy ( Kundalini ) or call it whatever into higher, finer and purer energies that are needed for the art of transformation. These exercises are called tantric because they involve the sexual energy or energies that are allied with the sexual. Not all tantric practices are involving a partner. As I said my method is inner and not involving a outside partner. I have found my inner partner through mystical inner alchemical exercises. I am not a psychologist, I am an alchemist and a mystic. I know it that there is more to all these energies within than just a psychological awareness. They are real powerful and conscious energies that can move mountains. Scientifically all is Energy and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Energy can only be transformed from one state to an other. Nothing is ever lost and all is preserved and contained. "As above so below, as below so above ". An alchemist seeks to find , master and transmute these energies within himself. An example of transmutation of these energies are in creativity. We all have within us this primordial energy we call sex energy. We should really call it life energy, it would get greater respect. It has to do with consciousness wanting to become. In man this energy can manifests itself in several different stratas or levels of expressions. The lowest of these is that of the animal sexual drive which expresses itself in the striving for self preservation. As man looks higher and becomes more consciousness of his spiritual nature this energy is transmuted and it finds expression of itself in the creative aspects of man, as in the arts, literature, architecture, music ect.The fires of our higher aspirations and creativity feed upon our lower fires. It is proven that a man , woman, or gay or whatever, when on a creative endeavor and is pouring the creative energies of his soul into his creation his animal sex drive is diminished in direct proportion. It is also proven that one who is over indulging in the pleasures of sex, his creative energies diminish in direct proportions. This is an automatic example of vital inner energies being transmuted. As man's being evolves yet higher on the rungs of the ladder of consciousness he begins to get glimmers of the Light of his Cosmic Self. He slowly becomes aware of the All within him. The higher fires within his soul become an all consuming fire in which his whole being is burning with an all powerful desire greater than any sexual desire. The energies are now energies of the Heart. You know what the next eventual step is, I'm sure. The union in the Anja Chakra, harmonious interplay between the Pituitary and the Pineal gland. The appearance of the diamond Light, a most beautiful sight. But what is most beautiful is the ecstatic feelings of unconditional love generated by this union of the inner and the outer, the conscious and the unconscious. Of course there are still other steps as the appearance of the spiritual Sun above one's head radiating down its soothing beneficial rays, manna, the fat of the land, generating the living blessed heavenly regenerating and rejuvenating dew. These mystical and spiritual exercise when mastered can be done in an hour 's sitting. With the grace of God and with such daily inner attunements wonders and miracles will be produced in one's life and are sure to lead to the Stone . As Jung has said, " Our highest spiritual understandings are rooted in that which is the lowest in us ". With this understanding in mind maybe this sexual energy thing can be seen in a higher light. Best Regards Steve Kalec Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 From: Bernard Bovasso > I will conclude here Bernard and say again that to me this > desire and love for the divine within is a little more than just a > little boys love of love , or self love. It is a limitless longing of > the heart for the Beloved. Dear Steve: Your post was extremely illuminating with regard to process and the symbolical reality. I enjoyed it very much. I cannot, however, hold incomparable the limitless longing of the heart and a little boy's love of love. That self-predicating love I cherish from my boyhood just as I enjoy it now in my old age. In either case we are talking about an abstraction that dwells in tautological self-predication. It is the fundament of Being from which we begin and to which we arrive at again toward the end of life. My concern was for the *inbetween* which traffics in the medium of the object, in this case the anima which remains still-born if not met in the actual woman. I find it difficult to read the material plane as a mere epiphenomenon of inner and spiritual process. That would diminish the meaning of the Incarnation and its necessities if not subsume the Body of Christ. It would also preclude all necessity the alchemist had for dirtying his hands in actual and material substances. You see, Steve, I am not a psychologist but a painter for whom objectification through pigment and canvas provide the object-reality by which the symbolical reality may unfold. Without this object reality and participation of the senses much is lost or abrogated since in the creative traffic with the material object come those "accidents" of events that may be unmet if the closed circuit of spiritual process is not opened to the world. Because of this, it is my view-- and if only my view-- that the anima experience, *sans* the actual woman, denies the potential of experience. Indeed, the (unconscious) projection without its recipient object remains unconscious. Sincerely, Bernard From: Steve Kalec Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 Dear Bernard : It is always a pleasure hearing from you . > I cannot, however, hold incomparable the limitless longing >of the heart and a little boy's love of love. I agree, very comparable and more. That is why I said, " It is much more than just the love of self. It is the love of the higher Self within. " Forgive my mysticism, I only meant to elevate the love of your little boy as being rooted in something higher. I remember when I was in grade four in school at the age ten, my heart was beating for a most beautiful little girl. I was shy and never dared to talk to her. One day we were exiting the classroom row by row. When I was passing her at her desk, unconsciously I gently placed my hand on her's as she had her palm down resting on her desk.We were both shocked. I couldn't believe I did that. I mean, I had to reach out to her desk .It seemed as if something had forced my hand. Something did, it was something deeper than just a ten year old boy's love of Love. I wasn't even in my puberty yet, but a flame inside me was burning. I suppose today that would be considered sexual harassment. >Because of this, it is my view-- and if only my view-- that >the anima experience, *sans* the actual woman, denies the >potential of experience. Indeed, the (unconscious) projection >without its recipient object remains unconscious. I believe, Bernard, that we are really saying the same things. In one of my posts I said " This projection is eventually recognized and assimilated into consciousness through the inner wedding to be afterwards always there felt within as a true realized aspect of one's self ". That is why my alchemy teacher said that those who do not recognize the feminine within, should practice with a soror alchemist. >It would also preclude all necessity the alchemist had for dirtying >his hands in actual and material substances. I remember calcining the residue of the Melissa plant to obtain the salts. The heat that was being collected inside the formed bunch was revealing itself in red hot fire. A glow was forming in the center of the bunch and it was shining through layers of the salts though cracks and openings to its center. For some reason this became a most beautiful sight. I could have stared a very long time.It attracted me very much,and I realized that there was something within me that was in harmonious attunement with what was happening outside.I realized that an inner fire and heat was being manifested within the center of my being. This has never faded and it is still with me always. I often see this same picture appearing to me at certain points of my inner meditations and its always a most beautiful attracting sight. It is always immediately followed by an elevating and ecstatic feeling. If when I am able to hold and concentrate on this calcination scene , the whole picture develops into an awesome scene of infinite power and energy. This in reality was an alchemical transmutation of energies. So I share with you when you say ... " Without this object reality and participation of the senses much is lost or abrogated since in the creative traffic with the material object come those "accidents" of events that may be unmet if the closed circuit of spiritual process is not opened to the world ".. Very well said ! I cannot resist posting a Sufi saying here that fits in well with the love of love of the small boy and the self - predicating love you so cherish since your boyhood. " I am He whom I love, and He whom I love is I We are two spirits dwelling in one body, If thou seest me, thou seest Him ; And if thou seest Him, thou seest us both. " Best Regards, Steve Kalec |