What is Spiritual Alchemy - The Historical Unification of Mysticism, the Philosophers Stone & Heresy

What is Spiritual alchemy? Emerging from the early 20th century quasi-vitalist, mystical interpretation of Mircea Eliade and the psychologizing interpretation of Carl Jung - both marked by a profoundly ahistorical approach - a position now known as the “new historiography” has attempted to re-locate alchemical theory and practice precisely as a historically developing theory of nature and the transformation of nature. However, many on the channel ask the same resounding question: “But what about the spiritual aspect of alchemy? Isn’t alchemy really about inner or spiritual transformation and not changing lead into gold?” In this episode, the first of several in a series, I’m going to explore just that question - the origins and development of spiritual alchemy in the European alchemical tradition. From radical mysticism of salvation, the alchemy of Paracelsus and heretical Protestants will emerge a theory of alchemical salvation with Christ as the philosophers' stone and will lay the groundwork for Theosophy and Occult spirituality for centuries to come.

Consider Supporting Esoterica!

#occult #theosophy #alchemy #philosopherstone #mysticism

Recommended Readings:

Zuber - Spiritual Alchemy: From Jacob Boehme to Mary Anne Atwood - 978-0190073046

Other Readings:

Linden, Stanton J. (ed.) The Alchemy Reader: From Hermes Trismegistus to Isaac Newton. 978-0521796620. Nicely edited collection of alchemical primary texts.
Principe, Lawrence. The Secrets of Alchemy. 978-0226103792. An up-to-date history of alchemy.
Newman, William. Newton the Alchemist: Science, Enigma, and the Quest for Nature's "Secret Fire" 978-0691174877. Cutting edge research on alchemy in the 17th century.
Roob, Alexander(ed.) Alchemy & Mysticism. 978-3836549363. A collection of alchemical imagery and symbolism, also a nice coffee table book!

Spiritual / Psychology School of Interpretation

Atwood, Mary Anne. A Suggestive Inquiry into the Hermetic Mystery….(many re-print editions). The first text to introduce the ‘spiritual interpretation” of alchemy.
Eliade, Mircea. The Forge and the Crucible: The Origins and Structure of Alchemy. 978-0226203904. Religious-philosophical interpretation of alchemy.
von Franz, Marie-Louise. Alchemy: An Introduction to the Symbolism and the Psychology. 978-0919123045. An introduction to the Jungian psychological interpretation of alchemy.

[Cesaryeyo]

My man Justin throwing thinly veiled shade at Jordan Peterson, I love this channel's mix of serious academic teachings and absolutely deadpan jokes 😂❤

[nelle]

I can’t wait till 500 years from now when society is having debates about crypto bros in the same way

[fraterzigmund]

I think this might be the most important video you've made since the Satanic Panic one. Honestly, it should be required viewing for everyone in the esoteric tradition. There's so much misinformation out there which leads to outrageous claims, which are pretty much always a gateway to abusive and destructive behavior. Education shining a light on the darkness. Thank you so much for all you do, and I've already shared this one far and wide.

[TheModernHermeticist]

"One part of the science of magic is practical, on account of how it works by operating with *spirit on spirit, * making those things similar that are not so by their essence. However, working with images involves *spirit on matter, * and alchemical work involves *matter on matter* "

- Author of the Ghāyāt al-Hakim (an alchemist, also author of the Rutbat al-Hakim)

[Binarokaro]

If I have to be honest, coming from an East Asian background (Taiwanese specifically), I've never actually been exposed to spiritual alchemy before, and I've always understood alchemy as purely just "Medieval science", so this was actually a really interesting exploration into an entirely different interpretation of alchemy that I had simply never known before.

[TheModernHermeticist]

Nooo bro, you don't understand, alchemy is really about making mad gains at the gym

[zacharywhitney]

As a moderate fan of that “Jungian guru”, I have to say I felt similarly about his interpretation of the bible. How one can interpret something like that without taking into account the esoteric, multicultural, multi-linguistic origins makes no sense to me. This channel has been so incredibly eye-opening for that very reason!

[SepulvedaBoulevard]

So, kinda like tarot, which originated in the Italian renaissance as a card game, but has morphed into an ancient spiritual tradition reaching back into Egyptian prehistory. Doesn't invalidate the evolved tradition, but shows it to be just that. We humans will gladly build elaborate belief structures on a crumbling cliff if we like the view.

[silviodiciccio]

Dr. Sledge, every time I see your videos about Alchemy and citing Jung I am perplexed…

Because, having read a good deal of Jung and Von Franz in the past, I don’t perceive an enormous difference between your and their understanding of Alchemy…

From my reading of what they wrote, my general understanding is they also saw alchemy as proto-science and proto-chemistry: they knew the old alchemists, in general, where primarly interested in working with chemical substances. Von Franz seems explicit about that in her book on Alchemy.
But then, there is the plethora of fantasies, images, errors in understanding of physical reality… and also the religious and mystical ideas associated with the work.
And THIS was what really caught Jung interest: the images, fantasies, ideas, errors of perceptions and explanations etc.
Because they where similar to fantasies, dream images etc. he had registered before while working with patients, in particular the psychotic ones: he was interested in a COMPARATIVE work between the material produced by the minds of the alchemists along the centuries, and that produced by the minds of 20th century patients.
This to try to understand the mechanisms at work in the mind of the patients.
And, of consequence, he did make some hypothesis about what was going on in the minds of some of the alchemists; for example what may have happened to the ones who REALLY felt they where doing some kind of “spiritual” work (like, maybe, Dorn)... or about how their errors came to be.
To really understand Jung reasoning on the matter, in my opinion, one needs to start from the experience with the patients, with people, NOT with Alchemy.
My own personal interest in the matter was born examining the experience of a person who was having many strange ideas born in his mind: among that, ideas about the “union of the opposites” or “union of the four elements” etc. etc.

This, I think, is the problem many people interested in Jung and Alchemy have: they don’t start with the practical experience with peoples fantasies, on the field.
Or they don’t keep it in mind while proceeding.
Oh yeah, they are really fascinated by the matter, by the images, by the mystery….
But, paradoxically, they don’t do the only truly Junghian thing to do: ask themselves... WHY the hell they are so fascinated by these things.
Why these things “capture” them so much?
By the way, this “fascination”, and from what it is born, is an integral part of Jung theory.

Also part of the theory, is the know tendency to get lost, to lose yourself, in this fascination.
To not really reflect about it.
A tendency I think can be seen in many “new age”, “spiritual” and pseudo-Junghian movements all around the world.
It seems also many “Junghian” therapist are affected by this.
It seems things really started to go to hell in the last years of Jung’s life, in the junghian circles: it is an interesting historical phenomenon on his own.
And Jung did NOT like what he was seeing.
For a start on the matter, I suggest reading “Jung and the making of modern psychology” by Shamdasani.

Going back to the beginning, as I said, from my experience listening to both, I don’t perceive an insurmountable difference between your position and that of Jung.
Your work is important and useful in primis from the perspective of people studying Jung:understanding what Jung was really thinking about Alchemy is not easy at all.
Trying to understand it while also trying to understand what the alchemists where exactly, practically, doing is harder.
Doing it with all the crap and misinformation that is flying around is…. a very big problem.


So, keep up the good job Dr. Sledge! I think… Jung would have liked it 😄

P.S.: Sorry for the bad english.

[TheMagicofJava]

Thank you Dr Sledge, I now appreciate your scepticism regarding Jung. I must admit he has been a great influence on me and my linking Alchemy, Neoplatonism and particularly Ibn Arabi. I must relook and reappraise my position.

[monsieurdorgat]

"The most sure way to transform lead into gold" 🤣
You're a genius, Dr. Sledge! Who knew that *the Philosopher's Stone* was _actually a bullet!_

[MichaelYoder]

24:20 You're absolutely right. Presentism is a bane to studying history, and I would think Jung did the same thing in forming his views. It's dangerous even to look back 50 years and "judge" the culture based on our current ideologies, let alone go back 600 years and say "yeah, well they were really backward people." Love your work as always!

[J_Z]

Thanks so much for diving into this, especially the first half of the video. The approaches of Eliade & Jung are interesting, but not very historical. You briefly mentioned Lawrence Principe, and I highly recommended his course on the history of science to 1700 and his interview with Earl Fontainelle of the SHWEP. Him & Matteo Martelli are doing some amazing work. Thanks Dr. Sledge! Ill definitely be coming back to this video.

Side note: I think I speak for everyone when I say that I'm excited for a potential class on Merkavah/Hekhalot literature!

[Occultcafe]

I'm so excited for this!!! I just uploaded a "my notes" on my occult blog about spiritual alchemy and I plan on doing another one after going through your videos and resources about the topic! Thanks so much <3
Edit: With credit, ofc, I'm always linking people to Esoterica <:

[alchemicmason]

You need to know that the von Hoenheim joke/easter egg did not go unnoticed. Had to literally stop the video to catch my breathe from the laughter! Thank you!

[TheModernHermeticist]

Re: the Zosimus connection, here's an excerpt from the foreword of my copy of the Rutbat al-Hakim) by Theodor Abt

"The publication of this fourth volume of the Corpus Alchemicum Arabicum (CALA IV) is a milestone in achieving our aim to make the wealth of Arabic alchemy more easily accessible for research. Maslama b. Qasim al-Qurtubi (died 353/964), the author of this Rutbat al-hakim, provides a basic teaching of alchemy, quoting extensively from Zosimos' Mushaf as-suwar. Zosimos was an alchemist who lived in the 3rd/4th century and is generally considered to be the first alchemist known to us by his true name […]. The significance of the present publication is to be seen in the relationship to the earlier volumes of this series, especially to CALA II and CALA III. The author of the Rutbat al-hakim emphasises the importance of understanding symbols (rumuz). The publication of the Rutbat al-hakim as CALA IV rounds up the first four publications in this series: They started with the Kitab hall ar-rumuz (Book of the Explanation of the Symbols), written by the Arab alchemist Muhammad ibn Umail (10th century). Then in the next volumes, in CALA II and CALA III, there came a further clarification of the symbols given by the Greek alchemist Zosimos, and now, in CALA IV, we find an overview of the knowledge and significance of the symbols (rumuz), written by another Arab alchemist.”"

[lunarchandelierpress]

So edifying. I remember my college course in alchemy that was a gentlly insistent teaching that alchemists were early chemists ONLY. I gently rejected that scholarship but your lecture encourages me to go back and reconsider the history. So relieved we don't have to throw out the baby with the - uh - bathwater! Again, a hearty thanks for a lecture in the spirit of the late, great Hans Jonas. A respectful, penetrating, look at belief and practice. ( I don't know the Jung and Eliade theories well enough to accept wholeheartedly your reading - more work to do). Glad to see Mary Anne Atwood mentioned. There's Netflix series in her story, for sure...

[mcnallyaar]

Dr. Sledge! I respect you very much. In particular, I appreciate your historical rigor balanced with an appreciation for people's own spiritual pursuits. You went out of your way to say just that about alchymy -- all the while wonderfully clarifying presentation of alchemy as legitimate proto-science simply participating in the symbolical and cultural milieu of its time. It's a treat to find scholars and thinkers like yourself, particularly on a popular platform like this.

[jordanmatt]

50 min ep on alchemy, we are not worthy! Thanks so much for your work in alchemical historiography and bringing attention to others working in the field. I’ve been on the edge of ‘practical Lab alchemy’ practice for the better part of a decade and trying to find any useful info even 5 years ago was difficult. It’s really exciting to see the development in that time and seeing academics pursue some of the work in the lab is so illuminating. Thanks for all the work Dr. Sledge ❤❤❤❤

[Peter-rgng]

The depth of content, presentation and application on spiritual alchemy is unparalleled. Thank You❤ please…more on spiritual alchemy 🙏🏻