The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. I, Nos. 1-4, 1867Various
Philosophy
The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. I, Nos. 1-4, 1867
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
for it, therefore, in the air and the earth.” The author of the work
from which we quote the passage, says by way of comment: “In this
passage ‘Minerals’ and ‘our Mercury’ refer to the same thing, and it is
the subject of Alchemy, the Stone; and we may remember that Plato is
said to have defined or described _Man_ as a growth having his root in
the air, his tops in the earth. Man walks indeed upon the surface of the
earth, as if nothing impeded his vision of heaven; but he walks
nevertheless at the bottom of the atmosphere, and between these two, his
_root_ in air, he must work out his salvation.” A great number of these
“Hermetic writers” established their reputation for wit and wisdom by
discoveries in the practical world, and it is difficult to believe that
such men as Roger Bacon, Van Helmont, Ramond Lulli, Jerome Cardan,
Geber, (“The Wise”), Avicenna, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and
others not inferior, could have deceived themselves as the modern theory
implies, viz: that they were searching a chemical recipe for the
manufacture of gold. The symbolic form of statement was esteemed at that
time as the highest form of popular exposition for the Infinite and the
religious problems concerning God, the Soul and the Universe. It seems
that those writers considered such words as “God,” “Spirit,” “Heaven,”
and words of like deep import, as not signifying the thing intended only
so far as the one who used them, comprehended them. Thus, if God was
spoken of by one who sensuously imaged Him, here was idolatry, and the
second commandment was broken. To the Platonist, “God” was the name of
the Absolute Universal, and hence included _subject_ as well as _object_
in thinking. Hence if one objectified God by conceiving Him, he
necessarily limited God, or rather, had no real knowledge of Him. Said
Sextus, the Pythagorean: “Do not investigate the name of God, because
you will not find it. For everything which is called by a name, receives
its appellation from that which is more worthy than itself, so that it
is one person that calls, and another that hears. Who is it, therefore,
that has given a name to God? _God_, however, is not a name for God, but
an indication of what we conceive of him.” From such passages we can see
why the Alchemists called this “Ineffable One,” _Mercury_, _Luna_,
_Sol_, _Argent vive_, _Phœbus_, _Sulphur_, _Antimony_, _Elixir_,
_Alcahest_, _Salt_, and other whimsical names, letting the predicates
applied determine the nature of what was meant. If a writer, speaking of
“Alcahest,” should say that it is a somewhat that rises in the east, and
sets in the west, gives light to the earth, and causes the growth of
plants by its heat, &c., we should not misunderstand his meaning—it
would be giving us the nature of the thing without the common name.
Every one attaches some sort of significance to the words “Life,” “God,”
“Reason,” “Instinct,” &c., and yet who comprehends them? It is evident
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account