Alchemical Studies Carl Jung Collected Work Volume 13 by Jihad Allam

PYTHON...:... ..

The spiritus mercurialiS and his transformations represented as a monstrous dragon. It is a quaternity, in which the fourth is at the same time the unity of the three, the unity being symbolized by the mystagogue Hermes. The three (above) are (left to right): Luna, Sol, and coniunctio Solis et Lunae in Taurus, the House of Venus. Together they form ~ = Mercurius. Illuminated drawing in a German alchemical ms., c. 1600

C O P Y R IG H T ( g ) 1 9 6 7 B Y B O L L 1 N C E N F O U N D A T IO N , N E W Y O R K , N .Y . P U B L IS H E D BY P R IN C E T O N U N IV E R S IT Y P R E S S, P R IN C E T O N , N . J . A L L R IG H T S RESERVED

Second printing, 1970 Third printing, 1976 First Princeton / Bollingen Paperback printing, 1983

T H IS

E D IT IO N

IS B E IN G P U B L IS H E D

IN T H E

U N IT E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A B Y P R IN C E T O N U N IV E R S IT Y

PRESS

AND

ENGLAND

ROUTLEDGE

& KEGAN

PAUL,

A M E R IC A N

E D IT IO N ,

ALL

C O M P R IS IN G

THE

LTD.

THE

COLLECTED

THE

VOLUM ES

WORKS

CON

S T IT U T E N U M B E R X X IN B O L L IN G E N SER IE S. THE

PRESENT

VOLUM E

IS N U M B E R

T H E COLLECTED W ORKS AND WAS T H E F IF TEEN TH TO APPEAR.

L IB R A R Y

CO N G RESS

CATALOGUE

IS B N

CARD N U M B E R :

0 -6 9 1 -0 9 7 6 0 -7

IS B N 0 -6 9 1 -0 1 8 4 9 -9 p b k . M A NUFACTURED

THE

U .S .A .

7 5 -1 5 6

ED ITORIAL

NOTE

W h en we com pare the essays in the present volum e w ith J u n g ’s m onum ental M ysterium C oniunctianis, w ith Psychology and A lchem y and to a lesser ex ten t A i o n , we realize th e ir special value as an in tro d u ctio n to his researches in to alchemy. T h e three longer works, published earlier in this edition, have an im pact w hich to the u n in itia te d is w ell-nigh overw helm ing. A fter them these shorter an d m ore m anageable works w ill b e tu rn e d to, if n o t for relax atio n — th eir e ru d itio n forbids th at— at least w ith a feeling of lively interest, as p relim in ary studies for the w eightier volumes which they now appear to sum m arize. M uch of the symbolic m a tte r has been referred to in o th er earlier p u b li cations: the visions of Zosimos in “T ran sfo rm atio n Symbolism in the Mass,” and M ercurius in all the above-m entioned works b u t m ore especially in “T h e Psychology of the T ran sferen ce,” w hile “T h e Philosophical T r e e ” develops the them e of the tree symbol discussed sporadically in Symbols of Transformation. T h e “C om m entary on T h e Secret of the Golden Flower” is of considerable historical interest. J u n g says in Memories, Dreams, Reflections (ch. 7): “L ight on the n a tu re of alchem y began to come to m e only after I had read the tex t of the Golden Flower, th at specim en of Chinese alchem y w hich R ich ard W il helm sent me in 1928, I was stirred by the desire to becom e m ore closely acquainted w ith the alchem ical texts.” “Paracelsus as a Spiritual P henom enon” stands o u t as a separate study w ith a pow erful appeal, perhaps because Ju n g could identify him self ra th e r closely an d sym pathetically w ith th a t dynam ic and explo sive personage, his own countrym an. Because of its em phasis on alchem ical sources, it is included in the present volum e ra th e r th an in V olum e 15 w ith two shorter essays on Paracelsus as a personality an d physician.

T h e Editors and the translator are greatly in d eb ted to the late M r. A. S. B. G lover for the translation of the L atin , G reek, and French passages in the text, as well as for his tireless w ork in checking the references and bibliographical data, w hich c o n tin ued u n til shortly before his death in Jan u a ry 1966. F or assistance in explicating N oel P ie rre ’s poem , grateful acknow ledgm ent is m ade to Com te P ierre C rapon de C aprona (Noel Pierre), to Miss P aula Deitz, and to M r. Jackson M athews. F or help and co-operation in obtain in g the photographs for th e plates in this volum e the Editors are m uch in d eb ted to the late Mrs. M arianne N iehus-Jung, w ho m ade m aterials available from Professor J u n g ’s collection; to D r. Jo lan d e Jacobi and D r. R u d o lf M ichel, in charge of the p ictu re collection at the C. G. Ju n g In stitu te, Zurich; an d to M r. H e llm u t W ieser, of R ascher Verlag, Zurich. T h e frontispiece, an alm ost exact col oured replica of a w oodcut publish ed by the a u th o r in Paracelsica, was discovered fortuitously in a m an u scrip t in the M ellon C ollection of the A lchem ical an d O ccult. It is re p ro duced by courtesy of M r. P aul M ellon and the Yale U niversity L ibrary. T h e Editors are indebted also to M r. L aurence W itten for his advice an d assistance in regard to it.

TABLE

E D IT O R IA L L IS T

CONTENTS

NOTE

IL L U S T R A T IO N S

X lii

I Commentary on “T h e Secret of the Golden Flower”

T ra n sla te d from the “E uropaischer K o m m en ta r” to Das G eheim nis der goldenen Bliiie: E in chinesisches L e b e n sb u ch j 5th edn. (Zurich: R ascher, 1957). F orew ord to the Second G erm an E d itio n

1. Difficulties E n c o u n tere d by a E u ro p e a n in T ry in g to U n d e rsta n d the East

2. M odern Psychology Offers a Possibility of U n d e rsta n d ing

3. T h e F u n d a m e n ta l C oncepts

A. TAO B. T H E

20 C IR C U L A R

M OVEM ENT

AND

TH ECENTRE

4. P henom ena of th e W ay A. THE

D IS I N T E G R A T I O N

B . A N IM U S

AND

2 1

29 O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

A N IM A

5. T h e D etach m en t of Consciousness from the O b ject

6. T h e F ulfilm ent

7. C onclusion

E xam ples of E u ro p e an M andalas v ii

CONTENTS

II T h e Visions of Zosimos

Translated from "Die Visionen des Zosimos," Von den Wurzeln Bewusstseins (Zurich: Rascher, 1954).

des

I. T h e Texts

II. Commentary

1. GENERAL REMARKS ON THE INTERPRETATION 2 . THE SACRIFICIAL

ACT

3 . T H E PERSONIFICATIONS

4 . THE STONE SYMBOLISM

5 . T H E WATER SYMBOLISM

101

6 . T H E ORIGIN OF THE VISION

1O5

III Paracelsus as a Spiritual Phenomenon

109

Translated from "Paracelsus als geistige Erscheinung," Paracelsica: Zwei Vorlesungen iiber den Arzt und Philosophen Theophrastus (Zurich: Rascher, 1942). Foreword to Paracelsica

110

1. T h e T w o Sources of Knowledge: T h e Light of Nature and the Light of Revelation A. MAGIC

111 116

B. A L C H E M Y

122

C. T H E ARCANE TEACHING

124

D. THE PRIMORDIAL M A N

12G

2. "De vita longa": An Exposition of the Secret Doctrine A. T H E ILIASTER

133 134

B. THE AQUASTER C. ARES

140

D. MELUSINA

142

E. T H E

FILIUS

REGIUS

( M I C H A E L MAIER)

THE

ARCANE

SUBSTANCE 145

viii

CONTENTS F . T H E P R O D U C T I O N O F T H E O N E , OR C E N T R E , B Y DISTILLATION G. T H E

148

CONIUNCTIO

IN T H E

SPRING

152

3. T h e Natural Transformation Mystery A. THE

LIGHT

OF THE

B. T H E

UNION

OF MAN'S TWO NATURES

C. T H E

QUATERNITY

157

DARKNESS

OF T H E H O M O

D. T H E R A P P R O C H E M E N T

WITH THE

l6o 163

MAXIMUS

167

UNCONSCIOUS

170

4. T h e Commentary of Gerard Dorn A. MELUSINA

A N D T H E PROCESS

B. T H E H I E R O S G A M O S

173 INDIVIDUATION

O F T H E EVERLASTING

MAN

C. S P I R I T A N D N A T U R E D. T H E

ECCLESIASTICAL

176 180 183

SACRAMENT

AND

ALCHYMICUM

THE

OPUS 185

5. Epilogue

189

IV 191

T h e Spirit Mercurius Translated from "Der Geist Mercurius," Symbolik rich: Rascher, 1948).

des Geistes (Zu-

Part I 1. T h e Spirit in the Bottle

193

2. T h e Connection between Spirit and Tree

199

3. T h e Problem of Freeing Mercurius

202

Part

1. Introductory

204

2. Mercurius as Quicksilver and/or Water

207

3. Mercurius as Fire

209

CONTENTS

4. Mercurius as Spirit and Soul A. MERCURIUS AS AN AERIAL SPIRIT B. MERCURIUS AS SOUL

211 212 2I3

C. MERCURIUS AS SPIRIT IN THE INCORPOREAL, METAPHYSICAL SENSE

215

5. T h e Dual Nature of Mercurius

217

6. T h e Unity and Trinity of Mercurius

221

7. T h e Relation of Mercurius to Astrology and the Doctrine of the Archons

225

8. Mercurius and Hermes

230

9. Mercurius as the Arcane Substance

235

10. Summary

237

V T h e Philosophical Tree

251

Translated from "Der philosophische Baum," Von den Wurzeln Bewusstseins (Zurich: Rascher, 1954).

des

I. Individual Representations of the Tree Symbol 11. On the History and Interpretation of the Tree Symbol 1 . THE TREE AS AN ARCHETYPAL IMAGE

253 272 272

2 . THE TREE IN THE TREATISE OF JODOCUS GREVERUS

274

3 . THE TETRASOMIA

278

4 . THE IMAGE OF WHOLENESS

283

5 . T H E NATURE AND ORIGIN OF T H E PHILOSOPHICAL TREE

286

6 . DORN'S INTERPRETATION OF THE TREE

289

7 . THE ROSE-COLOURED BLOOD AND THE ROSE

292

8 . THE ALCHEMICAL M I N D

297

9 . VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE TREE

302

1 0 . THE H A B I T A T OF T H E TREE

308

1 1 . THE INVERTED TREE

311

1 2 . BIRD AND SNAKE

315 X

CONTENTS 13. THE F E M I N I N E TREE-NUMEN 1 4 . THE TREE AS THE LAPIS

317 319

1 5 . THE DANGERS OF THE ART

322

1 6 . UNDERSTANDING AS A MEANS OF DEFENCE

327

1 7 . THE MOTIF OF TORTURE

328

1 8 . THE RELATION OF SUFFERING TO THE CONIUNCTIO

334

1 9 . THE TREE AS M A N

337

20.

THE INTERPRETATION AND INTEGRATION OF THE UNCONSCIOUS

341

BIBLIOGRAPHY

351

INDEX

381

LIST

ILLUSTRATIONS

For “C om m entary on T h e Secret of th e G o ld e n F lo w e r ” Four stages o f m ed itation

3 0 -3 3

D raw ings from th e H u i M in g C hing, as re p ro d u ce d in the o rig in al Swiss ed itio n of Das G eheim nis der g o ld en e n B liite ( ! 9 2 9 )At-a

10. E xam ples of E uropean mandalas

D raw ings o r p a in tin g s by p a tie n ts in analysis. A u th o r’s collec tio n , except A4: C. G. J u n g In stitu te . all fo llo w in g page g g

For “Paracelsus as a Spiritual P h en o m en o n ” T h e s p iritu s m ercurialis represented as a m onstrous dragon frontispiece Illu m in a te d d raw in g fro m a G erm an alchem ical ms., c. 1600, in the collection o f P a u l M ellon (now In th e Yale U niversity L i brary). I t replaces an alm ost id en tical w oodcut from N azari, D ella tra m u ta tio n e m etallica sogni tre (Brescia, 1599), re p ro d u ced in Paracelsica. p : Yale U niv. L ib rary . Bi.

A fish m eal, w ith statue of the herm aphrodite M in ia tu re from “L e livre des ansienes estoires,” in B ritish M useum MS. A dd. 1 5 2 6 8 (13th cent.), fol. 2 4 2 v. p : B ritish M u seum.

B2 -

T h e filius or rex in the form of a herm aphrodite W o o d cu t from R o sa riu m p h ilo so p h o ru m (second p a rt of D e alchim ia, 1550), fol. X , iiiv (copy in a u th o r’s collection).

B3. T h e R eb is P a in tin g from “Das B uch d e r hi. D re ifa ltig k eit . . . u n d Besch reib u n g d e r H eim lic h k e it v o n V e ra n d eru n g d er M etalle n ”

x iii

(1420), in th e C odex G erm anicus 5g8, S taatsbibliothek, M u nich. p: S taatsb ib lio th ek .

B4. M elusina as the aqua perm anens W oodcut in R e u sn e r1 P andora (1588), p. 24g (copy in a u th o r’s collection).

B5. T h e anima as M elusina D raw ing from a v a ria n t of th e R ip ley Scrowle (1588), B ritish M useum MS. Sloane 5025. f : B ritish M useum . b6.

T h e K ing’s Son and Hermes on a m ountain E n g rav in g from L am b sp rin g k 1 “De Iapide philosophico," fig. X II, in M u sa eu m h erm eticu m (1678), p. 365. p : C. G . J u n g In stitu te.

B7. T h e Pelican, in which the distillation takes place Page from R h e n a n u s, Solis e p u te o (1613), as re p ro d u c e d in Paracelsica. all fo llo w in g page 1 ^ 2

For “T h e Philosophical T r e e ” Figs. 1-32. Drawings, paintings, etc., by patients in analysis A u th o r’s collection, except Fig. g: from G e rh a rd A dler, Studies in A n a ly tic a l Psychology, pi. 12, re p ro d u c e d by courtesy o f D r. A d ler; Figs. 22, 25, 27, 30, a n d 31 (a design in em broidery): C. G. J u n g In stitu te . all fo llo w in g page

X lV

I COMMENTARY ON “T H E SECRET OF T H E GOLDEN FLOWER”

[In late 1929, in M u n ich , J u n g a n d the sinologist R ic h a rd W ilh elm p u b lished Das G eheim nis der gold enen Bliite: E in chinesisches L e b e n sb u c h i con sisting o f W ilh e lm ’s tra n sla tio n o f an a n c ie n t Chinese text, T 'a i I Chin H u a T s u n g Chih (Secret of th e G olden Flower), w ith his notes a n d discussion of the text, a n d a “E u ro p e a n com m en tary ” by Ju n g . E arlier the same year, the two a u th o rs h a d p u b lish e d in th e Europdische R e v u e (B erlin), V: 2 /8 (Nov.), 530—42, a m uch ab b rev iated version e n title d “T sch an g Scheng Schu; D ie K u n st das m enschliche L eb en zu v e rla n g e rn ” (i.e., “C h ’ang Sheng Shu; T h e A rt of P ro lo n g in g L ife”), a n alte rn a tiv e title of th e "G o ld en Flow er.” [In 1931, J u n g ’s an d W ilh e lm ’s jo in t w ork a p p e are d in E nglish as T h e Se cret of the G olden Flower: A Chinese B o o k of L ife , tran sla ted by C ary F. Baynes (L o n d o n an d New York), c o n ta in in g as an a p p e n d ix J u n g ’s m em o ria l address fo r W ilhelm , w ho h a d d ied in 1930. (For " In M em ory of R ic h a rd W ilh elm ,” see Vol. 15 of th e Collected Works.) [A second, revised ed itio n of th e G erm an o rig in al was p u b lish ed in 1938 (Zurich), w ith a special forew ord by J u n g a n d his W ilh e lm m em orial a d dress. T w o m ore (essentially u n a lte re d ) editio ns follow ed, a n d in 1957 a p p ea re d a fifth, entirely reset e d itio n (Zurich), w hich a d d ed a rela ted text, the H u i M i n g Ching, a n d a new forew ord by Salome W ilhelm , the tra n sla to r’s widow. [Mrs. Baynes p re p a re d a revision of h e r tra n slatio n , a n d this a p p e a re d in 1962 (N ew York a n d L on d o n ), in c lu d in g J u n g ’s forew ord a n d the ad d itio n a l W ilh elm m aterial. (H er revised tra n sla tio n of J u n g ’s com m entary alone h a d ap p e a re d in a n anthology, Psyche a n d Sym bol, ed ited by V iolet S. de Laszlo, A n ch o r Books, N ew York, 1958.) [T h e follow ing tra n sla tio n of J u n g ’s com m entary a n d his forew ord is based closely o n Mrs. B aynes’ version, from w hich some o f th e ed ito rial

notes have also been tak en over. F o u r pictu res of the stages of m ed ita tio n , from th e H u i M in g Cking, w hich accom panied the “G o ld en F low er” text, have b een re p ro d u c e d because of th e ir p e rtin en c e to J u n g ’s com m entary; a n d the exam ples of E u ro p e a n m an d alas have been retain ed , th o u g h m ost of th em w ere p u b lish ed , in a d ifferen t context, in “C o n cern in g M an d ala Sym bolism ,” Vol. g, p a rt i, of th e Collected Works. T h e chapters have been given num bers. — E d i t o r s .]

F O R E W O R D T O T H E SECO ND G E R M A N E D IT IO N M y deceased frien d , R ic h a rd W ilh e lm , co -au th o r of this book, sen t m e the te x t of T h e Secret of the G o ld en F low er a t a tim e th a t was cru cial fo r m y ow n w ork. T h is was in 1928. I h a d b een in v e stig atin g th e processes of th e collective u n co n scio u s since th e year 1913, an d h a d o b ta in e d resu lts th a t seem ed to m e q u es tio n a b le in m o re th a n o n e respect. T h e y n o t o n ly lay fa r b ey o n d ev ery th in g kn o w n to “acad em ic” psychology, b u t they also over step p ed th e b o u n d s o f any m ed ical, p u re ly p ersonal, psychology. T h e y c o n fro n te d m e w ith a n extensive p h en o m en o lo g y to w h ich h ith e rto k n o w n categories a n d m e th o d s co u ld n o lo n g er be a p p lied . My results, based o n fifteen years o f effort, seem ed inconclusive, because n o possib ility of co m p ariso n offered itself. I knew of n o re a lm of h u m a n ex p erien ce w ith w h ich I m ig h t have backed u p m y findings w ith som e degree of assurance. T h e on ly analogies— a n d these, I m u st say, w ere far rem o v ed in tim e — I fo u n d scattered am o n g th e re p o rts of th e heresiologists. T h is co n n ec tio n d id n o t in an y way ease m y task; o n th e co n trary , it m ad e it m o re difficult, because th e G nostic systems consist on ly in sm all p a rt of im m e d ia te psychic experiences, th e g re a te r p a rt b e in g speculative a n d system atizing recensions. Since we possess o n ly very few co m p lete texts, an d since m ost of w h at is k n o w n com es fro m th e re p o rts o f C h ristia n o p p o n en ts, we have, to say th e least, a n in a d e q u a te know ledge of th e h isto ry as w ell as th e c o n te n t of this strange an d co n fu sed lite ra tu re , w h ich is so diffi c u lt to evaluate. M oreover, co n sid erin g th e fact th a t a p e rio d of n o t less th a n seventeen to e ig h teen h u n d re d years separates us fro m th a t age, s u p p o rt fro m th a t q u a r te r seem ed to m e e x tra o r d in a rily risky. A g ain , th e co n n ectio n s w ere fo r th e m ost p a r t of a su b sid iary n a tu re a n d le ft gaps at ju s t th e m ost im p o rta n t poin ts, so th a t I fo u n d it im p o ssib le to m ak e use of th e G nostic m aterial.

T h e text th a t W ilhelm sent me helped me o u t of this diffi culty. It contained exactly those items I had long sought for in vain am ong the Gnostics. T h u s the tex t afforded m e a welcome o p p o rtu n ity to publish, at least in provisional form , some of the essential results of my investigations. A t that tim e it seemed to me a m atter of no im portance th at T h e Secret Qf the Golden Flower is n o t only a T ao ist text con cerned w ith Chinese yoga, b u t is also an alchem ical treatise. A deeper study of the L atin treatises has tau g h t m e b etter and has shown me th at the alchem ical character of the text is of prim e significance, though I shall n o t go into this p o in t m ore closely here. I w ould only like to emphasize th a t it was th e tex t of the Golden Flower th at first p u t m e on the rig h t track. For in m edi eval alchem y we have the long-sought connecting lin k betw een Gnosis and the processes of the collective unconscious th at can be observed in m odern m an .1 I w ould like to take this o p p o rtu n ity to draw atten tio n to certain m isunderstandings to w hich even w ell-inform ed readers of this book have succum bed. N ot infreq u en tly people th o u g h t th a t my purpose in publishing it was to p u t in to the hands of the public a recipe for achieving happiness. In total m isapprehen sion of all th at I say in my com m entary, these readers tried to im itate the “m eth o d ” described in the Chinese text. L et us hope these representatives of spiritual p ro fu n d ity were few in n u m ber! A n o th er m isunderstanding gave rise to the o p in io n that, in my com m entary, I was to some extent describing my own th era peutic m ethod, w hich, it was said, consisted in my instilling Eastern ideas in to m y patients for therapeutic purposes. I do n o t believe there is anything in my com m entary th at lends itself to th a t sort of superstition. In any case such an o p in io n is alto gether erroneous, an d is based on the w idespread view th at psy chology was invented for a specific purpose and is n o t an em p iri cal science. T o this category belongs th e superficial as well as u n in te llig e n t op in io n th a t the idea of the collective unconscious is “m etaphysical.” O n the contrary, it is an empirical concept to I T h e reader w ill find more about this in two essays published by me in the Eranos Jahrbuch 1936 and /937. [This material is now contained in Psychology and Alchemy, Parts II and III.— E d i t o r s .]

CO M M ENTARY ON

“ THE

SEC R ET O F T H E G O LD EN

FLOW ER”

be p u t alongside the concept of instinct, as is obvious to anyone w ho will read w ith some attention. C. G. J. K usnachtJ Zurich, 1938

I. D IF F IC U L T IE S E N C O U N T E R E D BY A E U R O P E A N IN T R Y I N G T O U N D E R S T A N D T H E E A S T A th o ro u g h W e ste rn e r in feeling, I c a n n o t b u t be p ro fo u n d ly im pressed by th e strangeness of th is C h in ese tex t. I t is tru e th a t som e k n o w led g e of E astern relig io n s a n d ph ilo so p h ies helps m y in te lle c t a n d m y in tu itio n to u n d e rs ta n d these th in g s u p to a p o in t, ju s t as I can u n d e rs ta n d th e p arad o x es o f p rim i tive beliefs in term s of “ eth n o lo g y ” o r “co m p arativ e re lig io n .” T h is is of course th e W este rn way of h id in g o n e ’s h e a rt u n d e r th e cloak of so-called scientific u n d e rsta n d in g . W e do it p artly because th e m iserable va n ite des savants fears a n d rejects w ith h o rro r any sign of liv in g sym pathy, an d p a rtly because sym pa th e tic u n d e rs ta n d in g m ig h t tran sfo rm co n tact w ith an alien s p irit in to an ex p erien ce th a t has to be tak en seriously. O u r socalled scientific o b je ctiv ity w o u ld have reserved this te x t fo r th e p h ilo lo g ical acu m en of sinologists, an d w o u ld have g u a rd e d it jealously from any o th e r in te rp re ta tio n . B u t R ic h a rd W ilh e lm p e n e tra te d to o deep ly in to th e secret a n d m ysterious v itality of C h in ese w isdom to allow su ch a p earl of in tu itiv e in sig h t to d is a p p e a r in to th e pigeon-holes of specialists. I am g reatly h o n o u re d th a t his choice of a psychological c o m m e n ta to r has fallen u p o n m e. T h is, how ever, involves th e risk th a t th is p recio u s ex am p le of m ore-than-sp ecialist in sig h t w ill b e sw allow ed by still a n o th e r specialism . N ev erth eless, an yone w ho b elittles th e m e rits of W e ste rn science is u n d e rm in in g th e fo u n d a tio n s of th e W estern m in d . Science is n o t in d e e d a p erfect in s tru m e n t, b u t it is a su p e rb a n d in v a lu a b le to o l th a t w orks h a rm on ly w h en it is tak en as a n e n d in itself. Science m u st serve; it errs w h en it u su rp s th e th ro n e . I t m u st be read y to serve all its b ran ch es, fo r each, b e cause of its insufficiency, has n e e d of s u p p o rt fro m th e others. Science is th e to o l of th e W este rn m in d , an d w ith it o n e can o p e n m o re doors th a n w ith b are hands. I t is p a rt an d p arcel of 6

o u r understanding, an d it obscures o u r insight only w hen it claims th a t the u n derstanding it conveys is the only k in d there is. T h e East teaches us another, broader, m ore profound, and h ig h er understanding— understan d in g through life. W e know this only by hearsay, as a shadowy sentim ent expressing a vague religiosity, and we are fond of p u ttin g “O rien tal w isdom ” in q u o tatio n marks and banishing it to th e dim region of faith and superstition. B ut that is w holly to m isunderstand the realism of the East. T ex ts of this k ind do n o t consist of th e sentim ental, overw rought mystical in tu itio n s of pathological cranks an d re cluses, b u t are based on the practical insights of highly evolved Chinese m inds, w hich we have n o t the slightest justification for undervaluing. T h is assertion may seem bold, perhaps, and is likely to cause a good deal of head-shaking. N o r is th a t surprising, considering how little people know ab o u t the m aterial. Its strangeness is in deed so arresting th a t o u r puzzlem ent as to how an d w here the C hinese w orld of thought m ig h t be joined to ours is q u ite u n derstandable. T h e usual m istake of W estern m an w hen faced w ith this problem of grasping the ideas of th e East is like th at of th e stu d en t in Faust. M isled by the devil, h e contem ptuously tu rn s his back on science and, carried away by Eastern occult ism, takes over yoga practices w ord for w ord and becomes a p iti able im itator. (Theosophy is o u r best exam ple of this.) T h u s he abandons the one sure fou n d atio n of the W estern m in d and loses him self in a m ist of words and ideas th a t could never have originated in E uropean brains an d can never be profitably grafted u p o n them . A n ancient adept has said: “If the w rong m an uses the rig h t means, the rig h t m eans w ork in the w rong way.” 1 T h is Chinese saying, un fo rtu n ately only too true, stands in sharp contrast to o u r belief in the “rig h t” m ethod irrespective of the m an who applies it. In reality, everything depends on the m an an d little or n o th in g on the m ethod. T h e m ethod is m erely the path, the direction taken by a m an; the way he acts is the tru e expression of his n ature. If it ceases to be this, the m ethod is n o th in g m ore than an affectation, som ething artificially pieced on, rootless and sapless, serving only the illegitim ate goal of self-deception. I t becomes a m eans of fooling oneself and of evading w hat may I [T h e Secret o f the G olden Flower (ig 6z edn.), p. 63.]

perhaps be the im placable law of o n e’s being. T h is is far re m oved from the earthiness and self-reliance of Chinese thought. I t is a denial of one’s own n atu re, a self-betrayal to strange and unclean gods, a cowardly trick for the purpose of feigning m ental superiority, everything in fact th at is profoundly contrary to the spirit of the C hinese “m ethod.” For these insights spring from a way of life th a t is com plete, genuine, and tru e to itself; from that ancient, cultural life of C hina w hich grew logically and o r ganically from the deepest instincts, and which, for us, is forever inaccessible an d impossible to im itate. 5 W estern im itation is a tragic m isunderstanding of the psy chology of the East, every b it as sterile as the m odern escapades to New M exico, the blissful South Sea islands, and central Af rica, where “ the prim itive life” is played a t in deadly earnest w hile W estern m an secretly evades his m enacing duties, his H ic R h o d u s hie salta. I t is n o t for us to im itate w hat is foreign to o u r organism or to play the m issionary; o u r task is to b u ild u p o u r W estern civilization, which sickens w ith a thousand ills. T h is has to be done on the spot, and by the E uropean ju st as he is, w ith all his W estern ordinariness, his m arriage problem s, his neuroses, his social and political delusions, and his whole p h ilo sophical disorientation. 6 W e should do well to confess at once that, fundam entally, we do n o t u n derstand the u tte r unw orldliness of a text like this— that actually we do n o t w ant to u n d erstan d it. H ave we, perhaps, a dim suspicion th a t a m ental a ttitu d e w hich can direct the glance inw ard to th a t extent is detached from the w orld only because these people have so com pletely fulfilled the instinctive dem ands of th eir natures th at there is n o th in g to prevent them from glim psing the invisible essence of things? C an it be th a t the precondition for such a vision is lib eratio n from the am bitions and passions th a t b in d us to the visible world, and does not this liberation come from the sensible fulfilm ent of instinctive de m ands ra th e r th an from the prem atu re and fear-ridden repres sion of them? A re our eyes opened to the sp irit only w hen the laws of the earth are obeyed? A nyone who knows the history of Chinese c u ltu re and has carefully studied the I Chingj th a t book of wisdom w hich for thousands of years has perm eated all C hi nese thought, will n o t lightly wave these doubts aside. H e will be aw are th a t the views set forth in o u r text are n o th in g extraor-

d in a ry to th e C hinese, b u t are actu ally in escap ab le psychological conclusions. 7 F o r a lo n g tim e th e sp irit, a n d th e sufferings of th e sp irit, w ere positive values a n d th e th in g s m o st w o rth striv in g fo r in o u r p e c u lia r C h ristian c u ltu re . O n ly in th e course of th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry , w h en s p irit b eg an to d eg en e rate in to in tellect, d id a re a c tio n set in ag ain st th e u n b e a ra b le d o m in an ce of in tellectualism , a n d this led to th e u n p a rd o n a b le m istak e of co n fu s in g in te lle c t w ith s p irit a n d b la m in g th e la tte r fo r th e m isdeeds of th e form er. T h e in te lle c t does in d e e d do h a rm to th e soul w h en it dares to possess itself of th e h e rita g e of th e sp irit. I t is in n o way fitted to d o this, fo r s p irit is so m eth in g h ig h e r th a n in te l lect since it em braces th e la tte r a n d in clu d es th e feelings as w ell. I t is a g u id in g p rin c ip le of life th a t strives tow ards su p e rh u m a n , s h in in g heights. O p p o sed to th is ya n g p rin c ip le is th e d ark , fem in in e , e a rth b o u n d y in , w hose e m o tio n a lity an d in stin c tu a lity reach back in to th e d ep th s of tim e an d dow n in to th e la b y rin th of th e physiological c o n tin u u m . N o d o u b t these are p u re ly in tu itiv e ideas, b u t one can h a rd ly dispense w ith th e m if one is try in g to u n d e rs ta n d th e n a tu re o f th e h u m a n psyche. T h e C hinese c o u ld n o t do w ith o u t th e m because, as th e h isto ry of C hinese p h ilo so p h y shows, they n e v e r stray ed so far from th e ce n tra l psychic facts as to lose them selves in a one-sided over-devel o p m e n t a n d o v er-v alu atio n of a single psychic fu n c tio n . T h e y n ev er failed to acknow ledge th e p arad o x icality a n d p o la rity of all life. T h e opposites always b alan ced o n e a n o th e r— a sign of h ig h c u ltu re . O ne-sidedness, th o u g h it lends m o m e n tu m , is a m a rk of b arb arism . T h e re a c tio n th a t is n o w b e g in n in g in th e W est against th e in te lle c t in fav o u r of feeling, o r in fav o u r of in tu itio n , seems to m e a sign of c u ltu ra l advance, a w id e n in g of consciousness b ey o n d th e n a rro w confines of a ty ran n ical in te l lect. 8 I have n o w ish to d e p rec iate th e tre m e n d o u s d iffe re n tia tio n of th e W e ste rn in tellect; co m p ared w ith it th e E astern in tellect m u st b e describ ed as ch ild ish . (N a tu ra lly th is has n o th in g to do w ith intelligen ce.) If w e sh o u ld succeed in elev atin g a n o th e r, a n d possibly even a th ird psychic fu n c tio n to th e d ig n ified posi tio n accorded to th e in tellect, th e n th e W e st m ig h t ex p ec t to surpass th e E ast by a very g re a t m a rg in . T h e re fo re it is sad in d e e d w h en th e E u ro p e a n d ep arts fro m his ow n n a tu re a n d

im itates the East o r “affects” it in any way. T h e possibilities open to him w ould be so m uch greater if he w ould rem ain tru e to h im self and evolve o u t of his ow n n a tu re all th a t the East has b ro u g h t forth in the course of the m illennia. 9 In general, an d looked at from the in cu rab ly externalistic stan d p o in t of the intellect, it w ould seem as if the things the East values so highly w ere not w orth striving for. C ertainly the in tellect alone cannot com prehend the practical im portance Eastern ideas m ig h t have for us, an d th a t is why it can classify them as philosophical and ethnological curiosities an d n o th in g m ore. T h e lack of com prehension goes so far th at even learned sinologists have n o t understood the practical use of the I Chingj and consider the book to be no m ore th an a collection of ab struse magic spells.

2. M O D E R N PSY CH O LO G Y O FFER S A P O S S IB IL IT Y O F U N D E R S T A N D IN G O bservations m ade in my practical w ork have opened o u t to me a q u ite new and unexpected approach to E astern wisdom. In saying this I should like to em phasize th a t I d id n o t have any knowledge, however inadequate, of Chinese philosophy as a starting point. O n the contrary, w hen I began my career as a psychiatrist and psychotherapist, I was com pletely ig n o ran t of Chinese philosophy, and only later d id m y professional experi ence show m e th a t in my technique I had been unconsciously follow ing th at secret way w hich for centuries h a d been the p re occupation of the best m inds of the East. T h is could be taken for a subjective fancy— w hich was one reason for m y previous relu c tance to publish anything on the subject— b u t R ich ard W ilhelm , th a t great in te rp re te r of the soul of C hina, enthusiastically con firm ed the parallel and thus gave m e the courage to w rite ab o u t a C hinese tex t th a t belongs entirely to th e m ysterious shadowIand of the Eastern m ind. A t the same tim e— an d this is the ex traordinary th in g — its co n ten t forms a liv in g parallel to w hat takes place in the psychic developm ent of m y patients, n o n e of w hom is Chinese. In o rd er to m ake this strange fact m ore in tellig ib le to the reader, it m ust be p o in ted o u t th a t ju st as the h u m an body shows a com m on anatom y over an d above all racial differences, so, too, the h u m an psyche possesses a com m on su b stratu m tra n scending all differences in c u ltu re an d consciousness. I have called this su bstratum the collective unconscious. T h is u n co n scious psyche, com m on to all m ankind, does n o t consist m erely of contents capable of becom ing conscious, b u t of laten t predis positions towards identical reactions. T h e collective unconscious is sim ply the psychic expression of the id en tity of b ra in stru ctu re irrespective of all racial differences. T h is explains the analogy, som etim es even identity, betw een the various m yth m otifs and

symbols, and the possibility of hum an com m unication in gen eral. T h e various lines of psychic developm ent start from one com m on stock ivhose roots reach back into the most d istan t past. T h is also accounts for the psychological parallelism s w ith ani mals. In purely psychological term s this m eans th a t m an k in d has com m on instincts of ideation and action. A ll conscious ideation an d action have developed on the basis of these unconscious archetypal patterns and always rem ain d ep en d en t on them . T h is is especially the case w hen consciousness has n o t attain ed any high degree of clarity, w hen in all its functions it is m ore d e pen d en t on the instincts th an on the conscious will, m ore gov erned by affect than by ratio n al judgm ent. T h is ensures a p rim i tive state of psychic health, b u t it im m ediately becomes lack of adaptation w hen circum stances arise th a t call for a h ig h er m oral effort. Instincts suffice only for a n a tu re th a t rem ains m ore or less constant. An individual who is guided m ore by the u n con scious th an by conscious choice therefore tends tow ards m arked psychic conservatism. T h is is the reason why the prim itive does n o t change in the course of thousands of years, and also why he fears anything strange an d unusual. I t m ig h t easily lead to maladaptation, and thus to the greatest psychic dangers— to a k in d of neurosis, in fact. A higher an d w ider consciousness resulting from the assim ilation of the unfam iliar tends, o n the oth er hand, towards autonom y, and rebels against the old gods who are n o th ing o th e r than those m ighty, prim ord ial images th a t h ith e rto have held o u r consciousness in thrall. 1S T h e stronger and m ore in d ep en d en t o u r consciousness be comes, and w ith it th e conscious w ill, th e m ore th e unconscious is th ru st in to the background, and the easier it is for the evolv in g consciousness to em ancipate itself from the unconscious, archetypal p attern. G aining in freedom , it bursts the bonds of m ere instinctuality and finally reaches a condition of instinctual atrophy. T h is u p rooted consciousness can no longer appeal to the au thority of the prim ordial images; it has Prom ethean free dom , b u t it also suffers from godless hybris. I t soars above the earth an d above m ankind, b u t the danger of its sudden collapse is there, n o t of course in the case of every individual, b u t for the w eaker m em bers of the com m unity, w ho then, again like P ro m etheus, are chained to the Caucasus of the unconscious. T h e 12

wise C hinese w o u ld say in th e w ords of th e I Ching: W h e n yan g has reach ed its g reatest stren g th , th e d a rk pow er of y in is b o rn w ith in its d ep th s, fo r n ig h t begins a t m id d ay w h en yang b reaks u p a n d begins to change in to yin. 14 T h e d o cto r is in a p o sitio n to see th is cycle of changes tra n s la ted lite ra lly in to life. H e sees, for instance, a successful b u si nessm an a tta in in g all his desires regardless o f d e a th a n d th e devil, a n d th en , h av in g re tire d at th e h eig h t of his success, speed ily fallin g in to a neurosis, w h ich tu rn s h im in to a q u e ru lo u s old w om an, fastens h im to his bed, a n d finally destroys h im . T h e p ic tu re is co m p lete even to th e change fro m m ascu lin e to fem i n in e . A n exact p arallel to this is th e story of N eb u ch ad n ezzar in th e B ook of D an iel, an d C aesarean m adness in gen eral. S im ilar cases of one-sided ex ag g eratio n o f th e conscious s ta n d p o in t, an d th e re s u lta n t y in -reactio n fro m th e unconscious, fo rm n o sm all p a rt of th e p sy ch iatrist’s c lien te le in o u r tim e, w hich so overval ues th e conscious w ill as to believe th a t “ w h ere th e re ’s a w ill th e re ’s a w ay.” N o t th a t I w ish to d e tra c t in th e least fro m th e h ig h m o ral v alu e of th e w ill. C onsciousness a n d th e w ill m ay w ell c o n tin u e to b e co n sid ered th e h ig h e st c u ltu ra l achieve m en ts of h u m a n ity . B u t of w h at use is a m o ra lity th a t destroys th e m an? T o b rin g th e w ill a n d th e capacity to achieve it in to h a rm o n y seems to m e to re q u ire m o re th a n m o rality . M o rality a to u t p r ix can be a sign of b a rb a rism — m o re o ften w isdom is b e t ter. B u t perh ap s I look a t th is w ith th e eyes of a p hysician w7ho has to m e n d th e ills fo llow ing in th e w ake of one-sided c u ltu ra l achievem ents. *5 Be th a t as it m ay, th e fact rem a in s th a t a consciousness h e ig h te n e d by an in e v ita b le one-sidedness gets so fa r o u t of to u c h w ith th e p rim o rd ia l im ages th a t a b reak d o w n ensues. L o n g before th e actu al catastro p h e, th e signs of e rro r an n o u n c e them selves in atro p h y of in stin ct, nervousness, d iso rie n ta tio n , e n ta n g le m e n t in im possible situ a tio n s a n d p ro b lem s. M edical in v estig atio n th e n discovers an u n co n scio u s th a t is in fu ll rev o lt against th e conscious values, a n d th a t th e re fo re ca n n o t possibly be assim ilated to consciousness, w h ile th e reverse is a lto g eth e r o u t of th e q u estio n . W e are c o n fro n te d w ith an a p p a re n tly ir reco n c ilab le conflict befo re w h ich h u m a n reaso n stands helpless, w ith n o th in g to offer ex cep t sham so lu tio n s o r d u b io u s co m prom ises. If these evasions are rejected , we are faced w ith th e

question as to what has become of the much needed unity of the personality, and w ith the necessity of seeking it. A t this point begins the path travelled by the East since the beginning of things. Q uite obviously, the Chinese were able to follow this path because they never succeeded in forcing the opposites in m an’s nature so far apart that all conscious connection between them was lost. T h e Chinese owe this all-inclusive consciousness to the fact that, as in the case of the prim itive mentality, the yea and the nay have rem ained in their original proximity. None theless, it was impossible not to feel the clash of opposites, so they sought a way of life in which they would be what the In dians call nirdvandva, free of opposites. 16 O ur text is concerned w ith this way, and the same problem comes up with my patients also. T h ere could be no greater mis take than for a W esterner to take u p the direct practice of Chi nese yoga, for that would merely strengthen his will and con sciousness against the unconscious and bring about the very effect to be avoided. T h e neurosis would then simply be inten sified. It cannot be emphasized enough that we are n o t Orientals, and that we have an entirely different point of departure in these matters. It would also be a great mistake to suppose that this is the path every neurotic m ust travel, or that it is the solu tion at every stage of the neurotic problem. It is appropriate only in those cases where consciousness has reached an abnorm al degree of development and has diverged too far from the uncon scious. T his is the sine qua non of the process. N othing would be more wrong than to open this way to neurotics who are ill on account of an excessive predom inance of the unconscious. For the same reason, this way of development has scarcely any mean ing before the m iddle of life (normally between the ages of thirty-five and forty), and if entered upon too soon can be de cidedly injurious. *7 As I have said, the essential reason which prom pted me to look for a new way was the fact that the fundam ental problem of the patient seemed to me insoluble unless violence was done to one or the other side of his nature. I had always worked with the tem peram ental conviction that at bottom there are no insoluble problems, and experience justified me in so far as I have often seen patients simply outgrow a problem that had destroyed others. T h is “outgrowing,” as I formerly called it, proved on 14

fu rth e r investigation to be a new level of consciousness. Some higher o r w ider interest appeared on the p a tie n t’s horizon, and th ro u g h this broadening of his outlook the insoluble problem lost its urgency. I t was n o t solved logically in its own term s, b u t faded o u t w hen confronted w ith a new and stronger life urge. It was n o t repressed and m ade unconscious, b u t m erely appeared in a different light, an d so really d id becom e different. W hat, on a low er level, had led to the wildest conflicts an d to panicky o u t bursts of em otion, from the higher level of personality now looked like a storm in the valley seen from the m o u n tain top. T h is does n o t m ean th a t the storm is ro b b ed of its reality, b u t instead of being in it one is above it. B ut since, in a psychic sense, we are b oth valley and m o u n tain , it m ig h t seem a vain illusion to deem oneself beyond w hat is hum an. O ne certainly does feel the affect an d is shaken and to rm en ted by it, yet at the same tim e one is aware of a higher consciousness looking on w hich prevents one from becom ing identical w ith the affect, a consciousness which regards the affect as an object, and can say, “I know th at I suffer.” W h at o u r tex t says of indolence, “ In d o lence of w hich a m an is conscious, an d indolence of w hich he is unconscious, are a thousand m iles a p a rt,” 1 holds tru e in the highest degree of affect. N ow an d then it happened in my practice th at a p atien t grew beyond him self because of un k n o w n potentialities, and this becam e an experience of p rim e im portance to me. In the m eantim e, I had learned th a t all the greatest an d m ost im p o r ta n t problem s of life are fundam entally insoluble. T h e y m ust be so, for they express the necessary polarity in h e re n t in every self regu latin g system. T h ey can never be solved, b u t only o u t grow n. I therefore asked myself w hether this outgrow ing, this possibility of fu rth e r psychic developm ent, was n o t the n orm al thing, and w hether getting stuck in a conflict was pathological. Everyone m ust possess th a t h ig h er level, at least in em bryonic form , an d m ust u n d e r favourable circum stances be able to de velop this potentiality. W h en I exam ined the course of develop m en t in patients who quietly, an d as if unconsciously, outgrew themselves, I saw th a t th e ir fates h ad som ething in com m on. T h e new th in g came to them from obscure possibilities eith er outside o r inside themselves; they accepted it an d grew w ith its I [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (1962 e d n .), p . 42.]

help. It seemed to m e typical th a t some took the new th in g from outside themselves, others from inside; or rath er, th a t it grew in to some persons from w ithout, and in to others from w ithin. B ut the new th in g never came exclusively eith er from w ith in or from w ithout. If it came from outside, it became a pro fo u n d in n e r experience; if it came from inside, it becam e an o u te r happening. In no case was it conjured in to existence in te n tio n ally or by conscious w illing, b u t ra th e r seemed to be b o rn e along on the stream of tim e. »9 W e are so greatly tem pted to tu rn everything in to a purpose and a m ethod th a t I deliberately express myself in very abstract term s in order to avoid p rejudicing the read er in one way o r the other. T h e new th in g m ust n o t be pigeon-holed u n d e r any head ing, for then it becomes a recipe to be used m echanically, and it w ould again be a case of the “rig h t m eans in the hands of the w rong m an .” I have been deeply im pressed by th e fact th at the new th in g prepared by fate seldom o r never comes u p to con scious expectations. A nd still m ore rem arkable, though the new th in g goes against deeply rooted instincts as we have know n them , it is a strangely appropriate expression of the total person ality, an expression which one could n o t im agine in a m ore com plete form . s° W h at did these people do in order to b rin g ab o u t the devel opm ent th at set them free? As far as I could see they did n o th in g (wu wei2) b u t let things happen. As M aster Lii-tsu teaches in o u r text, the light circulates according to its own law if one does n o t give u p one’s ordinary occupation. T h e a rt of lettin g things happen, action through non-action, lettin g go of oneself as tau g h t by M eister Eckhart, became for m e the key th a t opens the door to the way. W e m ust be able to let things h ap p en in the psyche. For us, this is an a rt of w hich m ost people know nothing. Consciousness is forever interfering, helping, correcting, and negating, never leaving the psychic processes to grow in peace. I t w ould be sim ple enough, if only sim plicity were n o t th e m ost difficult of all things. T o begin w ith, the task consists solely in observing objectively how a fragm ent of fantasy develops. N o th in g could be sim pler, an d yet rig h t h ere the difficulties begin. A pparently one has no fantasy fragm ents— or yes, th e re ’s one, b u t it is too stupid! Dozens of good reasons are b ro u g h t against 2 [The Taoist idea of action through non-action.— C.F.B.]

it. O ne c a n n o t c o n cen trate on it— it is too b o rin g — w h at w o u ld com e o£ it anyw ay— it is “n o th in g b u t” this o r th at, a n d so on. T h e conscious m in d raises in n u m e ra b le objections, in fact it often seems b e n t on b lo ttin g o u t th e spon tan eo u s fantasy activ ity in spite of real in sig h t a n d in spite of the firm d e te rm in a tio n to allow the psychic process to go forw ard w ith o u t in te rfe re n c e. O ccasionally th ere is a v e rita b le cram p of consciousness. 21 If one is successful in overcom ing th e in itia l difficulties, c riti cism is still likely to sta rt in afterw ards in the a tte m p t to in te r p re t th e fantasy, to classify it, to aestheticize it, o r to devalue it. T h e te m p ta tio n to do this is alm ost irresistible. A fte r it has been fa ith fu lly observed, free re in can be given to th e im p atien ce of the conscious m in d ; in fact it m u st be given, o r o b stru ctiv e re sistances w ill develop. B u t each tim e th e fantasy m a te ria l is to be p ro d u ced , th e activity of consciousness m u st be sw itched off again. 22 In m ost cases th e results of these efforts are n o t very e n co u r aging a t first. U sually they consist of te n u o u s webs of fantasy th a t give n o clear in d ic a tio n of th e ir o rig in o r th e ir goal. Also, th e way of g e ttin g a t th e fantasies varies w ith in d iv id u als. F o r m an y people, it is easiest to w rite th em dow n; others visualize them , an d o thers again d raw or p a in t th e m w ith o r w ith o u t vis u alizatio n . I f th e re is a h ig h degree of conscious cram p, often o nly th e h ands are capable of fantasy; th ey m o d el o r draw fig ures th a t are som etim es q u ite foreign to the conscious m in d . 23 T h e se exercises m u st be c o n tin u e d u n til th e cram p in th e conscious m in d is relax ed , in o th e r w ords, u n til one can le t th ings h ap p en , w hich is th e n e x t goal of th e exercise. I n this way a new a ttitu d e is created, an a ttitu d e th a t accepts the irra tio n a l a n d th e in co m p reh en sib le sim ply because it is h a p p en in g . T h is a ttitu d e w o uld be poison fo r a person w ho is alread y over w h elm ed by th e things th a t h a p p e n to him , b u t it is of th e g re a t est value for one w ho selects, from am o n g th e th in g s th a t h a p p en , o n ly those th a t are acceptable to his conscious ju d g m e n t, a n d is g rad u ally d raw n o u t of the stream of life in to a stag n an t backw ater. 24 A t this p o in t, th e way trav elled by the tw o types m en tio n e d e a rlie r seems to divide. B o th have le arn ed to accept w h a t comes to them . (As M aster L ii-tsu teaches: “W h e n o ccu p atio n s com e to us, we m u st accept them ; w h en th ing s com e to us, w e m u st un-

derstand them from th e g ro u n d u p .” 3) O n e m an w ill now take chiefly w hat comes to h im from outside, a n d the o th e r w hat comes from inside. M oreover, th e law of life dem ands th a t w hat they take from o utside an d inside w ill be th e very things th a t w ere always excluded before. T h is reversal of o n e ’s n a tu re brings an enlargem ent, a h eig h te n in g a n d e n ric h m e n t of the personality, if th e previous values are re ta in e d alongside the change— p ro v id ed th a t these values are n o t m ere illusions. If they are n o t h e ld fast, the in d iv id u a l w ill sw ing too fa r to the o th e r side, slip p in g from fitness in to unfitness, fro m adaptedness in to unadaptedness, an d even from ra tio n a lity in to insanity. T h e way is n o t w ith o u t danger. E v ery th in g good is costly, an d the d ev elopm ent of personality is one of th e m ost costly of all things. I t is a m a tte r of saying yea to oneself, of tak in g oneself as th e m ost serious of tasks, of bein g conscious of ev ery th in g one does, a n d keeping it constantly before o n e ’s eyes in all its d u b i ous aspects— tru ly a task th a t taxes us to th e utm ost. 25 A C hinese can always fall back on th e a u th o rity of his w hole civilization. If he starts o n th e long way, he is d o in g w h a t is rec ognized as b ein g th e best th in g he co u ld possibly do. B u t th e W estern er w ho wishes to set o u t o n this way, if h e is really seri ous a b o u t it, has all a u th o rity against h im — in tellectu al, m oral, a n d religious. T h a t is w hy it is infinitely easier fo r h im to im i ta te th e C hinese way a n d leave the tro u b leso m e E u ro p ea n b e h in d him , o r else to seek the way back to th e m edievalism of the C h ristian C h u rch an d barricad e him self b e h in d th e w all separat in g tru e C hristians from th e p o o r h e a th e n an d o th e r e th n o g rap h ic curiosities encam ped outside. A esthetic o r in telle ctu al flirtations w ith life a n d fate com e to an a b ru p t h a lt here: the step to h ig h e r consciousness leaves us w ith o u t a re a rg u a rd a n d w ith o u t shelter. T h e in d iv id u a l m u st devote him self to th e way w ith all his energy, for it is only by m eans of his in te g rity th a t he can go fu rth e r, a n d his in te g rity alone can g u aran tee th a t his way w ill n o t tu rn o u t to be an ab su rd m isad v en tu re. 26 W h e th e r his fate comes to h im from w ith o u t o r fro m w ith in , the experiences a n d h a p p en in g s on th e way re m a in th e same. T h e re fo re I n e ed say n o th in g a b o u t th e m an ifo ld o u te r a n d in n e r events, th e endless variety o f w hich I co u ld n ev er ex h au st in an y case. N o r w o uld this be re le v a n t to th e te x t u n d e r discus3

[T h e G olden Flower (1962 edn.), p. 51.]

C O M M E N T A R Y O N â&#x20AC;&#x153; T H E SECRET O F T H E GOLDEN F L O W E R â&#x20AC;?

sion. O n th e o th e r h a n d , th e re is m u ch to be said a b o u t th e psychic states th a t accom pany th e process of d ev elo p m en t. T h e se states are expressed sym bolically in o u r tex t, a n d in th e very same sym bols th a t fo r m any years have b een fa m ilia r to m e fro m m y practice.

g. T H E F U N D A M E N T A L C O N C E P T S A . TAO

T h e great difficulty in in te rp re tin g this an d sim ilar texts1 for the E u ro p ean is th a t th e a u th o r always starts from the central p o in t, from th e p o in t we w ould call the goal, the highest and u ltim a te insight he has attained. T h u s o u r C hinese a u th o r b e gins w ith ideas th a t d em an d such a com prehensive u n d e rsta n d in g th at a person of d iscrim in atin g m in d has th e feeling he w ould be guilty of rid icu lo u s preten sio n , o r even of talk in g u tte r nonsense, if he should em bark on a n in telle ctu al discourse on the sub tle psychic experiences of th e greatest m inds of the East. O u r text, for exam ple, begins: “T h a t w hich exists th ro u g h itself is called the W ay.” T h e H u i M i n g Ch ing begins w ith the w ords: “T h e subtlest secret of the T a o is h u m a n n a tu re and life.” 28 I t is characteristic of th e W estern m in d th a t it has n o w ord for T a o . T h e C hinese character is m ade u p of the sign for “h e a d ” an d the sign for “going.” W ilh e lm translates T a o by Sinn (M eaning). O thers translate it as “ way,” “p ro v id en ce,” o r even as “ G od,” as the Jesuits do. T h is illustrates o u r difficulty. “ H e ad ” can be taken as consciousness,2 a n d “go in g ” as trav ellin g a way, an d the idea w ould th e n be: to go consciously, o r the conscious way. T h is is b o rn e o u t by the fact th a t th e “lig h t of h eaven” w hich “dwells betw een the eyes” as th e “ h e art of h eaven” is used synonym ously w ith T a o . H u m a n n a tu re a n d life are c o n tain ed in th e “lig h t of heaven” and, according to the H u i M i n g Ching, are the m ost im p o rta n t secrets of th e T a o . “ L ig h t” is th e sym bolical e q u iv alen t of consciousness, an d th e n a tu re of consciousness is expressed by analogies w ith light. T h e H u i M i n g Ch ing is in tro d u ce d w ith the verses: 1 Cf. th e H u i M i n g C h in g (B ook o f C onsciousness a n d L ife) in T h e Secret o f th e G o ld e n F lo w e r (1962 e d n .), p p . 6gff. 2 T h e h e a d is also th e “s e a t o f h e a v e n ly lig h t.”

If thou wouldst complete the diam ond body with no outflowing, Diligently heat the roots of consciousness3 and life. Kindle light in the blessed country ever close at hand, A nd there hidden, let thy true self always dwell. T h e se verses c o n tain a sort of alchem ical in stru c tio n as to th e m e th o d o r way of p ro d u c in g the ‘‘d ia m o n d body,” w hich is also m e n tio n e d in o u r text. “ H e a tin g ” is necessary; th a t is, th e re m u st be an in ten sificatio n of consciousness in o rd e r th a t lig h t m ay be k in d le d in the d w elling place of th e tru e self. N o t only consciousness, b u t life itself m u st be in tensified: the u n io n of these tw o produces conscious life. A cco rd in g to th e H u i M in g Ching, the an cie n t sages knew how to b rid g e th e gap betw een consciousness an d life because they cu ltiv a ted b o th . In this way th e sheli, th e im m o rtal body, is “ m e lted o u t” a n d the “g reat T a o is co m p leted .” 4 3° If we take th e T a o to be th e m e th o d o r conscious way by w hich to u n ite w h at is separated, we have p ro b a b ly com e close to th e psychological m e an in g of th e concept. A t all events, th e sep aratio n of consciousness a n d life c an n o t very w ell be u n d e r stood as a n y th in g else th a n w h at I describ ed e a rlie r as an a b e rra tio n or u p ro o tin g of consciousness. T h e re can be n o d o u b t, eith er, th a t th e realizatio n of th e oppo site h id d e n in th e u n c o n scious— the process of “ reversal”— signifies re u n io n w ith th e u n conscious laws of o u r being, an d the p u rp o se of this re u n io n is the a tta in m e n t of conscious life or, expressed, in C hinese term s, th e realizatio n of th e T a o .

B. TH E

C IR C U L A R

M OVEM ENT

AND

THE

CENTRE

As I have p o in te d out, th e u n io n of opposites5 o n a h ig h e r level of consciousness is n o t a ra tio n a l th in g , n o r is it a m a tte r of w ill; it is a process of psychic d ev elo p m en t th a t expresses itself in symbols. H istorically, th is process has always b e en re p re se n te d in sym bols, an d today th e d e v elo p m en t of p erso n ality is still d e p icted in sym bolic form . I discovered this fact in th e follow ing way. T h e spontaneous fantasy p ro d u cts I discussed earlier 3 In th e H u i M i n g C h i n g , " h u m a n n a t u r e ” {h s in g ) a n d " c o n s c io u s n e ss” (h u t) are u s e d in te r c h a n g e a b ly . 4 T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (ig 6 2 e d n .), p . 70. e C f. P s y c h o l o g i c a l T y p e s , ch . V .

becom e m ore p ro fo u n d a n d gradually co n cen trate in to abstract structures th a t a p p aren tly re p re se n t “ p rin cip les” in th e sense of G nostic archai. W h e n th e fantasies take th e fo rm chiefly of thoughts, in tu itiv e fo rm u latio n s of dim ly felt laws o r principles em erge, w hich a t first te n d to be d ram atized o r personified. (W e shall com e back to these again later.) If the fantasies are draw n, sym bols a p p ea r th a t are chiefly of the m andala6 type. M andala m eans “circle,” m ore especially a m agic circle. M andalas are fo u n d n o t only th ro u g h o u t th e E ast b u t also am ong us. T h e early M iddle Ages are especially ric h in C h ristian m andalas; m ost of th em show C hrist in th e centre, w ith the fo u r evangel ists, o r th e ir symbols, at th e card in al points. T h is conception m u st be a very an cie n t one, because H o ru s a n d his fo u r sons w ere rep resen ted in the same way by th e E gyptians.7 It is know n th a t H o ru s w ith his fo u r sons has close connections w ith C hrist a n d the fo u r evangelists. A n u n m istak ab le a n d very in terestin g m a n d ala can be fo u n d in Ja k o b B oh m e’s book X L Q uestions concerning the S o u le.8 I t is clear th a t this m an d ala represents a psychocosmic system strongly co lo u red by C h ristian ideas. B ohm e calls it th e “ Philosophical Eye” 9 o r th e “ M irro r of W is d o m ,” by w hich is obviously m e a n t a su m m a of secret know l edge. M ost m andalas take th e form of a flower, cross, o r wheel, a n d show a d istin ct tendency tow ards a q u a te rn a ry stru ctu re re m in isc en t of th e P ythagorean tetraktys, th e basic n u m b er. M andalas of this so rt also occur as sand p ain tin g s in th e religious cerem onies of th e P u eb lo a n d N avaho In d ia n s.10 B u t the m ost b e a u tifu l m andalas are, of course, those of the East, especially th e ones fo u n d in T ib e ta n B uddhism , w hich also co n tain th e sym bols m e n tio n e d in o u r text. M andala draw ings are often p ro d u ced by th e m en tally ill, am ong th em persons w ho certainly e [For a fu ller discussion o f th e m a n d a la , see “A Study in th e Process o f In d iv id u a tio n ” and "C oncerning M andala Sym bolism ” in T h e A rc h e ty p e s a n d th e C o l le ctive U nconscious. For exam p les o f E u rop ean m andalas, see b elow , after p .

56 .—

E d i t o r s .]

7 Cf. W allis B u d ge, T h e G o d s o f th e E g yp tia n s. 8 [T h e m an d ala is reprod u ced in “A Study in th e Process o f In d ivid u ation ," P- 297-3 8 Cf. the C hinese con cep t o f the h eaven ly lig h t b etw een th e eyes. 10 M atthew s, " T h e M ou n tain C hant: A N avajo C erem ony” (1887), and Stevenson, “C erem on ial o f H a sjelti D a iljis” (i8 g i).

d id n o t have the least idea of any of th e co n n ectio n s we have discussed.11 32 A m o n g m y p atien ts I have com e across cases of w om en w ho d id n o t draw m andalas b u t danced them instead. In In d ia th e re is a special n am e for this: m andala nrithya, th e m a n d ala dance. T h e dance figures express th e sam e m eanings as the draw ings. M y p a tien ts can say very little a b o u t th e m e an in g of th e sym bols b u t are fascinated by th e m an d find th a t they som ehow express a n d have an effect on th e ir subjective psychic state. 33 O u r te x t prom ises to “reveal th e secret of th e G o ld en F low er o f th e great O n e .’1 T h e golden flower is the lig h t, a n d th e lig h t of heaven is the T a o . T h e golden flow er is a m a n d ala sym bol I have o ften m e t w ith in th e m a te ria l b ro u g h t m e by m y p a tie n ts. I t is d raw n e ith e r seen from above as a re g u la r g eom etric p a t tern , o r in profile as a blossom grow ing fro m a p lan t. T h e p la n t is fre q u e n tly a stru c tu re in b rillia n t fiery colours g ro w in g o u t of a b e d of darkness, an d carry in g th e blossom of lig h t a t th e top, a sym bol recallin g th e C hristm as tree. Such draw ings also suggest th e o rig in of the g olden flower, fo r acco rd in g to th e H u i M in g C hing th e “germ in al vesicle” is the “d rag o n castle a t th e b o tto m of th e sea.” 12 O th e r synonym s are th e “ yellow castle,” th e “ heavenly h e a rt,” th e “ terrace of liv in g ,” the “sq u are in ch field o f the sq u are foot h o u se,” th e “p u rp le h all of th e city of ja d e ,” th e “ d a rk pass,” the “space of fo rm er h eav en .” 13 I t is also called th e “b o u n d a ry reg io n of th e snow m o u n ta in s,” th e “p rim o rd ia l pass,” th e “k in g d o m of greatest joy,” th e “ b o u n d less c o u n try ,” th e “a lta r u p o n w hich consciousness an d life are m a d e.” “ If a d y in g m an does n o t k n o w this g erm in al vesicle,” says th e H u i M in g C hingj “ he w ill n o t find th e u n ity of consciousness a n d life in a th o u san d b irth s, n o r in te n th o u san d aeons.” 14 34 T h e b eg in n in g , w here ev erything is still one, a n d w hich th erefore appears as th e h ighest goal, lies a t th e b o tto m of th e sea, in th e darkness o f th e unconscious. I n th e g e rm in a l vesicle, consciousness a n d life (or h u m a n n a tu re a n d life, hsing-m ing) are still a “u n ity, in sep arab ly m ix ed lik e th e sparks in th e 11 T h e m an d ala o f a so m n a m b u list is rep rod u ced in P sych ia tric Stu dies, p . 40. 12 T h e G o ld e n F lo w e r (1962 edn.), p. 70. 13 [Ibid., p. 22.] H [Ibid., p. 70.]

3®

refin in g fu rn ace.” “W ith in th e germ in al vesicle is th e fire of the ru le r.” “AU th e sages began th e ir w ork a t th e g erm in al vesi cle.” 15 N ote the fire analogies. I know a series of E u ro p ea n m andala draw ings in w hich som ething lik e a p la n t seed su rro u n d e d by m em branes is show n floating in the w ater. T h e n , from th e d epths below , fire p enetrates the seed an d m akes it grow, causing a great golden flower to u n fo ld from th e g erm in al vesicle. T h is sym bolism refers to a quasi-alchem ical process of refin ing an d ennobling. D arkness gives b irth to lig h t; o u t of the “ lead of th e w ater re g io n ” grows th e n o b le gold; w h at is u n c o n scious becom es conscious in the form of a liv in g process of grow th. (In d ian K u n d a lin i yoga offers a p erfect analogy.16) In this way th e u n io n of consciousness a n d life takes place. W h e n my p atients produce these m an d ala pictures, it is n a t u rally n o t the resu lt of suggestion; sim ilar p ictu res w ere b ein g m ade lo n g before I knew th e ir m e an in g o r th e ir co n n ectio n w ith the practices of th e East, w hich, at th a t tim e, w ere w holly u n k n o w n to m e. T h e pictures arise q u ite spontaneously, an d from two sources. O ne source is the unconscious, w hich sponta neously produces fantasies of this k in d ; th e o th e r is life, w hich, if lived w ith u tte r devotion, brings an in tu itio n of th e self, of o n e ’s ow n in d iv id u a l being. W h e n th e self finds expression in such draw ings, th e unconscious reacts by en fo rcin g an a ttitu d e of devotion to life. F o r in com plete ag reem en t w ith th e E astern view, the m an d ala is n o t only a m eans of expression b u t also produces an effect. I t reacts u p o n its m aker. Age-old m agical ef fects lie h id d e n in this sym bol, fo r it is deriv ed fro m th e “p ro tec tive circle” o r “ charm ed circle,” whose m agic has been preserved in countless folk custom s.17 I t has the obvious purpose of draw ing a sulcus p rim ig en iu s, a m agical fu rro w a ro u n d th e centre, th e tem ple or tem enos (sacred precinct), of th e in n erm o st p e r sonality, in o rd e r to p rev en t an "outflow ing” o r to g u a rd by apotropaic m eans against d istractin g influences from outside. M agical practices are n o th in g b u t projections of psychic events, w hich th e n ex ert a counter-influence o n th e psyche a n d p u t a 15 [Ibid., p . 7 1 .] ! 6 Cf. A valon, T h e S e rp en t P ow er. 17 Cf. th e ex cellen t co llectio n in K nuchel, D ie U m w a n d lu n g in K u lt, M a g ie u n d R ech tsb ra u ch .

k in d of spell u p o n th e personality. T h ro u g h th e ritu a l action, a tte n tio n an d in te re st are led back to th e in n e r, sacred p recinct, w hich is the source a n d goal of th e psyche an d co n tain s th e u n ity of life an d consciousness. T h e u n ity once possessed has b een lost, an d m ust now be fo u n d again. 37 T h e u n ity of th e two, life an d consciousness, is the T a o , whose sym bol w ould be th e c en tral w hite light, also m e n tio n e d in the Bardo T h o d o L is T h is lig h t dw ells in th e “sq u are in c h ” o r in the “face,” th a t is, betw een the eyes. I t is a visualization of th e “creative p o in t,” of th a t w hich has in ten sity w ith o u t e x te n sion, in co n ju n ctio n w ith th e “ field of th e sq u are in c h ,” th e sym bol for th a t w hich has extension. T h e two to g eth er m ake the T a o . H u m a n n a tu re (hsing) an d consciousness (hui) are ex pressed in lig h t sym bolism , a n d therefo re have th e q u a lity of in tensity, w hile life (m in g ) w o uld coincide w ith extensity. T h e one is yang-like, the o th e r yin-like. T h e afo re-m en tio n ed m andala of a so m n am b u list girl, aged fifteen an d a half, w hom I h ad u n d e r observation some th irty years ago, shows in its cen tre a sprin g of “ P rim ary Force,” o r life energy w ith o u t extension, whose em an atio n s clash w ith a c o n trary spatial p rin c ip le — in com plete analogy w ith the basic idea of o u r C hinese text. 38 T h e “enclosure,” o r c irc u m a m bu latio, is expressed in o u r te x t by th e idea of “c irc u latio n .” T h e circ u latio n is n o t m erely m ovem ent in a circle, b u t m eans, on the one hand, th e m a rk ing off of the sacred p re c in ct a n d , o n th e o th e r, fixation an d con cen tratio n . T h e sun-w heel begins to tu rn ; the sun is activated an d begins its course— in o th e r words, th e T a o begins to w ork an d takes the lead. A ction is reversed in to non-action; every th in g p e rip h e ra l is su b o rd in a ted to th e com m and of the centre. T h e re fo re it is said: “ M ovem ent is only a n o th e r nam e fo r m as tery .” Psychologically, this c ircu latio n w o u ld be the “m ovem ent in a circle a ro u n d oneself,” so th a t all sides of th e personality becom e involved. “T h e poles of lig h t an d darkness are m ade to ro ta te ,” th a t is, th e re is an a lte rn a tio n of day a n d n ig h t, 39 T h e circu lar m o vem ent thus has th e m o ral significance of ac tiv atin g the lig h t a n d d ark forces of h u m a n n a tu re , an d to g eth er w ith th em all psychological opposites of w hatever k in d they m ay be. I t is n o th in g less th a n self-know ledge by m eans of self18 Evans-W entz, T h e T i b e t a n B o o k of the D ead .

b rood in g (Sanskrit tapas). A sim ilar archetypal con cep t o f a perfect b ein g is that o f the P latonic m an, ro u n d on all sides and u n itin g w ith in h im self the tw o sexes. 4° O n e o f the best m odern parallels is the description which Edward M aitland, the biographer o f A n n a K ingsford,19 gave o f his central exp erien ce. H e had discovered that w h en reflecting qn an idea, related ideas becam e visib le, so to speak, in a lo n g series apparently reachin g back to th eir source, w hich to him was the d iv in e spirit. By con cen trating o n this series, he tried to penetrate to th eir origin . H e writes: I was absolutely w ith ou t know ledge or expectation w hen I yielded to the im pulse to make the attem pt. I sim ply experim ented on a faculty . . . b eing seated at my w riting-table the w h ile in order to record the results as they came, and resolved to retain m y hold on my outer and circum ferential consciousness, n o m atter how far to wards my inner and central consciousness I m ight go. For I knew n ot w hether I should be able to regain the former if I once quitted m y h old of it, or to recollect the facts of the experience. A t length I achieved my object, though only by a strong effort, the tension occasioned by the endeavour to keep both extrem es of the conscious ness in view at once being very great. O nce w ell started on my quest, I found m yself traversing a suc cession of spheres or belts . . . the im pression produced being that o f m ou n tin g a vast ladder stretching from the circum ference to wards the centre of a system, w h ich was at once m y ow n system, the solar system, the universal system, the three systems b eing at once diverse and identical. . . , Presently, by a supreme, and w hat I felt m ust be a final effort . . . I succeeded in polarizing the whole of the convergent rays of m y consciousness in to the desired focus. A nd at the same instant, as if through the sudden ig n itio n of the rays thus fused in to a unity, I found m yself confronted w ith a glory of unspeakable w hiteness and brightness, and of a lustre so intense as w ell-nigh to beat m e back. . . . B ut though feelin g that I had to explore further, I resolved to m ake assurance doubly sure by pierc in g if I could the alm ost b lin d in g lustre, and seeing w hat it en shrined. W ith a great effort I succeeded, and the glance revealed to m e that w hich I had felt m ust be there. . . . It was the dual form of the Son . . . the unm anifest m ade m anifest, the unform ulate form ulate, the unindividuate individuate, G od as the Lord, proving through H is duality that G od is Substance as w ell as Force, Love re A n n a K in g sfo rd , H e r L ife, L e tte rs, D ia ry , a n d W o r k , pp. i2gf. I am indebted for this reference to my colleague, Dr. Beatrice Hinkle, N ew York.

as well as W ill, F em inine as well as M asculine, M o th er as w ell as Father. 41

H e fo u n d th a t G o d is tw o in o n e, lik e m a n . B esides th is h e n o tic e d so m e th in g th a t o u r te x t also em p h asizes, n a m e ly ‘‘su s p e n sio n of b r e a th in g .” H e says o r d in a r y b r e a th in g s to p p e d a n d was re p la c e d b y a n in te r n a l re s p ira tio n , ‘‘as if by b r e a th in g o f a d is tin c t p e rs o n a lity w ith in a n d o th e r th a n th e p h y sical o r g a n ism .” H e to o k th is b e in g to b e th e “ e n te le c h y ” o f A ris to tle a n d th e ‘‘in n e r C h r is t” o f th e ap o stle P a u l, th e ‘‘s p ir itu a l a n d s u b s ta n tia l in d iv id u a lity e n g e n d e re d w ith in th e p h y sical a n d p h e n o m e n a l p e rs o n a lity , a n d re p re s e n tin g , th e re fo re , th e r e b ir t h o f m a n o n a p la n e tra n s c e n d in g th e m a te r ia l.” 42 T h i s g e n u in e 20 e x p e rie n c e c o n ta in s all th e essen tial sym bols o f o u r te x t. T h e p h e n o m e n o n itself, th e v isio n of lig h t, is a n e x p e rie n c e c o m m o n to m a n y m ystics, a n d o n e th a t is u n d o u b t ed ly o f th e g re a te s t sig n ifican ce, b eca u se a t all tim e s a n d places it p ro v es to b e s o m e th in g u n c o n d itio n e d a n d a b so lu te , a c o m b in a tio n o f s u p re m e p o w e r a n d p r o f o u n d m e a n in g . H ild e g a r d o f B in g e n , a n o u ts ta n d in g p e rs o n a lity q u ite a p a r t fro m h e r m y sti cism , w rites in m u c h th e sam e w ay a b o u t h e r c e n tr a l v isio n : Since my childhood I have always seen a lig h t in my soul, b u t n o t w ith the o u te r eyes, n o r th ro u g h the th oughts of my h eart; n e ith e r do the five o u te r senses take p a rt in this vision. . . . T h e lig h t I perceive is n o t of a local k ind, b u t is m uch b rig h ter th a n the cloud w hich supports the sun. I can n o t d istinguish height, b read th , o r length in it. . . . W h a t I see or learn in such a vision stays long in my m em ory. I see, hear, an d know in the same m om ent. . . . I can n o t recognize any sort of form in this light, alth o u g h I som etim es see in it an o th er lig h t th a t is know n to m e as the living light. . . . W hile I am enjoying the spectacle of this light, all sadness an d sor row vanish from my m em ory.21 43

I m y self k n o w a few in d iv id u a ls w h o h a v e h a d p e rs o n a l e x p e rie n c e o f th is p h e n o m e n o n . So fa r as I h av e b e e n a b le to u n d e rs ta n d it, it seem s to h a v e to d o w ith a n a c u te sta te o f c o n sciousness, as in te n s e as it is a b s tra c t, a ‘‘d e ta c h e d ” co n scio u sn ess so Such experiences are g e n u in e , b u t th e ir g en u in en ess does n o t p rove th a t a ll th e conclusions or co n v ictio n s form in g th eir c o n ten t are necessarily so u n d . E ven in cases of lu n acy o n e com es across p erfectly v a lid p sychic ex p eriences. [A u th o r’s n o te added in th e first (1931) E n g lish ed itio n .] 2 1 [Acta S. H ild e g a r d is , in M ig n e, P .L., v o l. 197, col. 18.]

(se e i n f r a , p a r s . 646?.), w h i c h , as H i l d e g a r d i m p li e s , b r i n g s i n t o a w a r e n e s s a r e a s o f p s y c h ic h a p p e n i n g s o r d i n a r i l y c o v e r e d i n d a r k n e s s . T h e fa c t t h a t t h e g e n e r a l b o d i l y s e n s a tio n s d i s a p p e a r d u r i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e s u g g e s ts t h a t t h e i r s p e c if ic e n e r g y h a s b e e n w ith d ra w n a n d h a s a p p a r e n tly g o n e to w a rd s h e ig h te n in g t h e c l a r i t y o f c o n s c io u s n e s s . A s a r u l e , t h e p h e n o m e n o n is s p o n ta n e o u s , c o m i n g a n d g o i n g o n its o w n i n i t i a t i v e . I t s e ffe c t is a s t o n i s h i n g i n t h a t i t a l m o s t a lw a y s b r i n g s a b o u t a s o l u t i o n o f p s y c h ic c o m p l i c a t i o n s a n d fre e s t h e i n n e r p e r s o n a l i t y f r o m e m o tio n a l a n d in te lle c tu a l e n ta n g le m e n ts , th u s c r e a tin g a u n ity o f b e i n g w h ic h is u n i v e r s a l l y f e l t as “ l i b e r a t i o n . ” 44 S u c h a s y m b o lic u n i t y c a n n o t b e a t t a i n e d b y t h e c o n s c io u s w ill b e c a u s e c o n s c io u s n e s s is a lw a y s p a r t i s a n . I ts o p p o n e n t is t h e c o lle c tiv e u n c o n s c io u s , w h i c h d o e s n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e c o n s c io u s m i n d . T h e r e f o r e i t is n e c e s s a r y to h a v e t h e m a g ic o f t h e s y m b o l w h i c h c o n t a i n s t h o s e p r i m i t i v e a n a lo g ie s t h a t s p e a k to t h e u n c o n s c io u s . T h e u n c o n s c io u s c a n b e r e a c h e d a n d e x p r e s s e d o n l y b y s y m b o ls , a n d f o r th is r e a s o n t h e p ro c e s s o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n c a n n e v e r d o w i t h o u t t h e s y m b o l. T h e s y m b o l is t h e p r i m i t i v e e x p o n e n t o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s , b u t a t t h e s a m e t i m e a n id e a t h a t c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e h i g h e s t i n t u i t i o n s o f t h e c o n s c io u s m i n d . 45 T h e o l d e s t m a n d a l a d r a w i n g k n o w n to m e is a p a l a e o l i t h i c “ s u n - w h e e l ,” r e c e n t l y d is c o v e r e d i n R h o d e s i a . I t , to o , is b a s e d o n t h e q u a t e r n a r y p r i n c i p l e . T h i n g s r e a c h i n g so f a r b a c k i n t o h u m a n h i s t o r y n a t u r a l l y t o u c h u p o n t h e d e e p e s t la y e r s o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s , a n d c a n h a v e a p o w e r f u l e ffe c t o n i t e v e n w h e n o u r c o n s c io u s l a n g u a g e p r o v e s its e lf t o b e q u i t e i m p o t e n t . S u c h t h i n g s c a n n o t b e t h o u g h t u p b u t m u s t g r o w a g a in f r o m t h e f o r g o t t e n d e p t h s if th e y a r e to e x p r e s s t h e s u p r e m e i n s ig h ts o f c o n s c io u s n e s s a n d t h e l o f t i e s t i n t u i t i o n s o f t h e s p i r i t , a n d i n t h i s w a y f u s e t h e u n i q u e n e s s o f p r e s e n t - d a y c o n s c io u s n e s s w i t h t h e ag eo l d p a s t o f life .

4- PH EN O M EN A OF T H E WAY A.

THE

D IS IN T E G R A T IO N

O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

T h e m eetin g betw een the n arrow ly d e lim ite d , b u t in ten sely clear, in d iv id u a l consciousness an d th e vast expanse of th e col lective unconscious is dangerous, because th e unconscious has a decidedly d isin te g ra tin g effect on consciousness. A cco rd in g to th e H u i M i n g C h in g j this effect belongs to th e p e c u lia r p h e n o m e n a of C hinese yoga. I t says: “ Every separate th o u g h t takes shape an d becom es visible in c o lo u r a n d form . T h e to tal s p irit u al pow er unfolds its traces. . . 1 T h e re le v a n t illu stra tio n in th e te x t [stage 4] shows a sage su n k in c o n tem p latio n , his h ead s u rro u n d e d by tongues of fire, o u t of w hich five h u m a n figures em erge; these five again sp lit u p in to tw enty-five sm aller figures.2 T h is w ould b e a schizophrenic process if it w ere to becom e a p e rm a n e n t state. T h e re fo re th e H u i M i n g C hi ng j as th o u g h w a rn in g th e ad ep t, con tin u es: “T h e shapes fo rm ed by th e sp iritfire are only em pty colours a n d form s. T h e lig h t of h u m a n n a tu re (hsing) shines back on the p rim o rd ia l, th e tru e .” 47 So we can u n d e rs ta n d w hy th e figure of th e p ro te c tin g circle was seized u p on. I t is in te n d e d to p re v e n t th e “ o u tflo w in g ” a n d to p ro tect the u n ity of consciousness fro m b e in g b u rst a su n d e r by the unconscious. T h e te x t seeks to m itig ate th e d isin te g ra tin g effect of th e unconscious by d escrib in g th e thought-figures as “em pty colours an d form s,” th u s d e p o te n tia tin g th e m as m u ch as possible. T h is idea ru n s th ro u g h th e w hole of B u d d h ism (es pecially the M ahayana form ) and, in th e in stru ctio n s to th e d ead in T h e T i b e t a n B o o k o f the D e ad , it is even p u sh ed to th e p o in t of e x p lain in g th e fav o u rab le as w ell as th e u n fa v o u ra b le gods as illusions still to be overcom e. I t is certain ly n o t w ith in th e com·

1 The

G o l d e n Fl ower (1962 edn.), p p . 76f. [For elu cid a tio n o f th e fo u r p ictu res from the H u i M i n g C h i n g reprod u ced h e r e , see ib id ., p p . 75 -7 7 .— E d i t o r s .] 2 T h e se are recollection s o f earlier in carn ation s th at arise d u r in g co n tem p la tio n .

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

S t a g e 1: G a t h e r i n g t h e l i g h t

Pages 30-33: F o u r stages of m e d i t a t i o n , w i t h i n s p i r a t i o n a l texts, f r o m t h e Hui Ming Ching

COMMENTARY

"THE

SECRET O F T H E

GOLDEN

Stage a: O r i g i n of a n e w b e i n g i n t h e p l a c e of p o w e r

FLOWER"

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

Stage 3: S e p a r a t i o n of t h e s p i r i t - b o d y f o r i n d e p e n d e n t existence

COM M ENTARY

"T H E

SECRET

OF THE

GOLDEN

S ta g e 4: T h e c e n t r e i n t h e m id s t o f c o n d it i o n s

FLOW ER”

p eten ce of th e psychologist to estab lish th e m e tap h y sica l tr u th o r u n tr u th of th is id ea; h e m u s t b e c o n te n t to d e te rm in e so fa r as possible its psychic effect. H e n e e d n o t b o th e r h im se lf w h e th e r th e shape in q u e s tio n is a tra n s c e n d e n ta l illu sio n o r n o t, since faith , n o t science, has to d ecid e th is p o in t. I n a n y case w e are m o v in g o n g r o u n d th a t fo r a lo n g tim e has seem ed to b e o u tsid e th e d o m a in of science a n d was lo o k e d u p o n as w h o lly illusory. B u t th e re is n o scien tific ju stific a tio n fo r su ch a n a ssu m p tio n ; th e s u b s ta n tia lity o f these th in g s is n o t a scientific p ro b le m since it lies b e y o n d th e ra n g e o f h u m a n p e rc e p tio n a n d ju d g m e n t a n d th u s b e y o n d an y p o ssib ility o f p ro o f. T h e p sy ch o lo g ist is co n c e rn e d n o t w ith th e s u b s ta n tia lity o f these co m p lex es b u t w ith psychic ex p e rie n c e . W ith o u t a d o u b t th e y a re psychic co n ten ts th a t can b e e x p e rie n c e d , a n d th e ir a u to n o m y is e q u a lly in d u b it able. T h e y a re fra g m e n ta ry psychic system s th a t e ith e r a p p e a r s p o n ta n e o u sly in ecstatic states a n d evoke p o w e rfu l im p ressio n s a n d effects, o r else, in m e n ta l d istu rb a n c e s, b eco m e fixed in th e fo rm of d e lu sio n s a n d h a llu c in a tio n s a n d c o n s e q u e n tly d estro y th e u n ity of th e p erso n ality . 48 P sy ch iatrists are alw ays read y to b eliev e in to x in s a n d th e like, a n d even to e x p la in s c h iz o p h re n ia in th ese term s, p u ttin g n e x t to n o em p h asis o n th e psychic c o n te n ts as such. O n th e o th e r h a n d , in psych o g en ic d istu rb a n c e s (hysteria, obsessio n al n e u r o sis, etc.), w h ere to x ic effects a n d cell d e g e n e ra tio n a re o u t of th e q u e s tio n , split-off co m p lex es a re to b e fo u n d s im ila r to th o se oc c u rr in g in so m n a m b u lis tic states. F re u d w o u ld lik e to e x p la in th ese sp o n ta n e o u s split-offs as d u e to u n co n scio u s re p re ssio n of sex u ality , b u t th is e x p la n a tio n is by n o m ean s v alid in all cases, b ecau se c o n te n ts th a t th e conscious m in d c a n n o t assim ilate can e m e rg e ju s t as sp o n ta n e o u sly o u t o f th e u n co n scio u s, a n d in th ese cases th e re p re ssio n th e o ry is in a d e q u a te . M o reo v er, th e ir a u to n o m y can b e o b serv ed in d a ily life, in affects th a t o b sti n a te ly o b tru d e th em selv es a g a in st o u r w ill a n d , in sp ite of th e m o st s tre n u o u s efforts to rep ress th e m , o v erw h elm th e ego an d fo rce it u n d e r th e ir c o n tro l. N o w o n d e r th e p rim itiv e sees in th ese m oods a sta te of possession o r sets th e m d o w n to a loss of soul. O u r c o llo q u ia l speech reflects th e sam e th in g w h e n w e say: “ I d o n ’t k n o w w h a t has g o t in to h im to d a y ,” “ h e is possessed of th e d e v il,” ‘‘h e is b esid e h im se lf,” etc. E v e n leg al p ra c tic e reco g nizes a d eg ree o f d im in is h e d re s p o n s ib ility in a state o f affect.

A u to n o m o u s psychic co n ten ts are thus q u ite co m m o n e x p e ri ences for us. Such contents have a d isin te g ra tin g effect u p o n consciousness. 49 B u t besides th e o rd in ary , fa m ilia r affects th e re are su b tle r, m ore com plex em o tio n al states th a t can n o lo n g e r be d escrib ed as affects p u re a n d sim ple b u t are frag m en tary psychic systems. T h e m ore com plicated they are, the m ore they have th e charac te r of personalities. As co n stitu en ts of th e psychic personality, they necessarily have the c h arac te r of “persons.” Such frag m e n tary systems are to be fo u n d especially in m e n ta l diseases, in cases of psychogenic sp littin g of the perso n ality (d o u b le p erso n ality), a n d of course in m e d iu m istic p h en o m en a. T h e y are also e n co u n te re d in th e pheno m en o lo g y of relig io n . M any of th e e a r lie r gods developed from “ persons” in to personified ideas, an d finally in to ab stract ideas. A ctivated unconscious co n ten ts always a p p e a r at first as p rojections u p o n th e o u tsid e w orld, b u t in the course of m e n ta l d e v elo p m en t they are g rad u ally assim ilated by consciousness a n d reshaped in to conscious ideas th a t th e n fo r feit th e ir orig in ally a u to n o m o u s an d personal ch aracter. As we know , som e of the old gods have becom e, via astrology, n o th in g m o re th a n descriptive a ttrib u te s (m artial, jovial, sa tu rn in e , erotic, logical, lu n atic, a n d so on). 5° T h e in stru ctio n s of T h e T ibetan B o o k of the D ead in p a rtic u la r h e lp us to see how g reat is th e d an g er th a t consciousness w ill be d isin te g ra ted by these figures. A gain an d again th e d ead are in stru c te d n o t to take these shapes fo r tru th , n o t to confuse th e ir m u rk y ap p earan ce w ith th e p u re w h ite lig h t of D harm akaya (the d iv in e body of tru th ). T h a t is to say, they are n o t to p ro ject th e one lig h t of h ighest consciousness in to co ncretized figures an d dissolve it in to a p lu ra lity of a u to n o m o u s frag m en tary systems. If th e re w ere no d an g er of this, a n d if these systems d id n o t re p re se n t m enacingly au to n o m o u s a n d d isin teg rativ e tendencies, such u rg e n t in stru c tio n s w o u ld n o t be necessary. A l low ing for the sim pler, polytheistic a ttitu d e o f th e E astern m in d , these in stru c tio n s w o u ld be alm ost th e e q u iv a le n t of w arn in g a C h ristian n o t to le t him self be b lin d e d b y th e illu sio n of a personal G od, le t alone by th e T r in ity a n d th e host of angels a n d saints. 51 If tendencies tow ards dissociation w ere n o t in h e re n t in th e h u m a n psyche, frag m en tary psychic systems w o u ld n e v er have

been sp lit off; in o th e r words, n e ith e r spirits n o r gods w ould ever have com e in to existence. T h a t is also the reason w hy o u r tim e has becom e so u tte rly godless an d profane: we lack all know ledge of th e unconscious psyche an d p u rsu e th e cu lt of con sciousness to the exclusion of all else. O u r tru e relig io n is a m on otheism of consciousness, a possession by it, coupled w ith a fanatical d en ial of th e existence of frag m en tary au to n o m o u s sys tems. B u t we differ from the B u d d h ist yoga do ctrin es in th a t we even deny th a t these systems are experienceable. T h is entails a great psychic danger, because the au to n o m o u s systems th e n b e have like any o th e r repressed contents: they necessarily induce w rong attitu d e s since the repressed m aterial reap p ears in con sciousness in a spurious form . T h is is strik in g ly ev id en t in every case of neurosis an d also holds tru e fo r th e collective psychic phenom ena. O u r tim e has co m m itted a fatal e rro r; we believe we can criticize the facts of relig io n in tellectu ally . L ik e Laplace, we th in k G od is a hypothesis th a t can be su b jected to intellec tu al tre a tm e n t, to be affirmed o r denied. W e co m pletely forget th a t th e reason m a n k in d believes in th e “d a e m o n ” has n o th in g tvhatever to do w ith ex tern al factors, b u t is sim ply d u e to a naive aw areness of the trem en d o u s in n e r effect of au tonom ous frag m en tary systems. T h is effect is n o t abo lish ed by criticizing it— or ra th e r, the nam e we have given it— o r by d escribing th e n am e as false. T h e effect is collectively p resen t all th e tim e; th e au to n o m o u s systems are always at w ork, fo r the fu n d am en tal stru c tu re o f the unconscious is n o t affected by the deviations of o u r ephem eral consciousness. 52 If we deny the existence of the auto n o m o u s systems, im agin in g th a t we have got rid of them by a m ere c ritiq u e of th e nam e, th e n the effect w hich they still co n tin u e to ex ert can n o longer be u n d erstood, n o r can they be assim ilated to consciousness. T h e y becom e an inexplicable source of d istu rb a n ce w hich we finally assum e m u st exist som ew here outside ourselves. T h e re su lta n t p ro jectio n creates a dangerous situ a tio n in th a t the dis tu rb in g effects are now a ttrib u te d to a w icked w ill outside o u r selves, w hich is n a tu ra lly n o t to be fo u n d anyw here b u t w ith o u r n e ig h b o u r de Vautre cote de la riviere. T h is leads to collective delusions, “in cid en ts,” revolutions, w ar— in a w ord, to destruc tive mass psychoses. 53 In sa n ity is possession by an unconscious c o n ten t that, as

such, is n o t assim ilated to consciousness, n o r can it be assim i lated since the very existence of such co n ten ts is d en ied . T h is a ttitu d e is e q u iv alen t to saying: “W e n o lo n g er have any fear of G od a n d believe th a t ev ery th in g is to be ju d g e d by h u m a n stan d ard s.” T h is hyb ris o r narrow ness of consciousness is always th e shortest way to th e insane asylum . I re c o m m en d th e excel le n t a cco u n t of this p ro b le m in H . G. W ells’s novel Christina A lb erta ’s Father, a n d S c h re b e r’s M e m o irs of M y N erv o u s Illness. 54 I t m u st stir a sym pathetic c h o rd in th e e n lig h te n e d E u ro pean w hen it is said in the H u i M in g C hing th a t th e “ shapes form ed by th e spirit-fire are only em p ty colours a n d fo rm s.” T h a t sounds th o ro u g h ly E u ro p ea n a n d seems to s u it o u r reason to a T . W e th in k we can co n g ra tu late ourselves o n h av in g al ready reach ed such a p in n acle of clarity, im ag in in g th a t we have left all these p h an tasm al gods far b e h in d . B u t w h at we have left b e h in d are only v e rb a l spectres, n o t th e psychic facts th a t w ere responsible fo r th e b irth of th e gods. W e are still as m u ch pos sessed by a u to n o m o u s psychic conten ts as if they w ere O lym pians. T o d a y they are called phobias, obsessions, an d so fo rth ; in a w ord, n e u ro tic sym ptom s. T h e gods have becom e diseases; Zeus no longer rules O lym pus b u t ra th e r th e solar plexus, an d produces curious specim ens for the d o c to r’s co n su ltin g room , o r disorders the b ra in s of politician s a n d jo u rn a lists w ho u n w it tingly le t loose psychic epidem ics on the w orld. 55 So it is b e tte r for W estern m a n if he does n o t know too m u ch a b o u t the secret insights o f the O rie n ta l sages to b eg in w ith, for, as I have said, it w o u ld be a case of th e “rig h t m eans in th e h ands of th e w rong m a n .” In stead of allow in g him self to be convinced once m o re th a t th e d aem o n is an illu sio n , h e o u g h t to e x p eri ence once m ore th e re a lity of this illu sio n . H e sh o u ld le a rn to acknow ledge these psychic forces anew , a n d n o t w ait u n til his m oods, nervous states, a n d delusions m ake it clear in th e m ost p a in fu l way th a t he is n o t the only m aster in his house. H is dis sociative tendencies are actual psychic p erso n alities possessing a d ifferen tial reality. T h e y are “re a l” w h en they are n o t recog nized as real a n d co n seq u en tly projected ; they are relativ ely real w hen they are b ro u g h t in to re la tio n sh ip w ith consciousness (in religious term s, w hen a c u lt exists); b u t they are u n re a l to the e x te n t th a t consciousness detaches itself fro m its co n ten ts. T h is last stage, how ever, is re a ch e d on ly w h en life has b e en lived so

exhaustively a n d w ith such d ev otion th a t n o obligations rem ain unfulfilled, w hen no desires th a t can n o t safely be sacrificed stand in the way of in n e r d etach m en t from the w orld. I t is fu tile to lie to ourselves a b o u t this. W h erev er we are still attached, we are still possessed; an d w hen we are possessed, th e re is one stronger th a n us w ho possesses us. (“Verily I say u n to thee, th o u shalt by no m eans com e o u t thence, u n til th o u hast p a id th e u tterm o st fa rth in g .”) I t is n o t a m a tte r of indifference w h eth er one calls som ething a “m a n ia ” o r a “god.” T o serve a m an ia is detestable an d undignified, b u t to serve a god is fu ll of m ean in g and prom ise because it is an act of subm ission to a h ig h er, invisible, an d sp iritu a l being. T h e personification enables us to see the relative reality of the au tonom ous system, an d n o t only makes its assim ilation possible b u t also d epoten tiates th e daem onic forces of life. W h e n th e god is n o t acknow ledged, egom ania develops, a n d o u t of this m an ia comes sickness. 56 Yoga takes acknow ledgm ent of the gods as so m eth in g selfevident. Its secret in stru c tio n is in te n d e d only for those whose consciousness is strug g lin g to disentan g le itself from th e dae m onic forces of life in o rd e r to e n te r in to the u ltim a te u n d iv id ed u nity, th e “ centre of em ptiness,” w here “ dw ells th e god of u t m ost em ptiness an d life,” as o u r te x t says.3 “T o h e a r such a teaching is difficult to a tta in in thousands of aeons.” E vidently th e veil of M aya c an n o t be lifted by a m erely ra tio n a l resolve; it re q u ire s a m ost tho ro u g h g o in g an d persevering p re p a ratio n consisting in th e full p ay m en t of all d eb ts to life. F o r as long as u n c o n d itio n a l atta ch m e n t th ro u g h cupiditas exists, the veil is n o t lifted an d the heights of a consciousness free of contents and free of illusion are n o t atta in ed ; n o r can any trick n o r any deceit b rin g this a b o u t. I t is a n ideal th a t can u ltim a te ly be realized only in death. U n til th e n th e re are th e real an d relativ ely real figures of the unconscious. B . A N IM U S A N D A N IM A

A ccording to o u r text, am ong th e figures of th e unconscious th e re are n o t only the gods b u t also th e an im u s an d an im a. T h e w ord h u n is tran slated by W ilh elm as anim us. A n d indeed, the te rm “an im u s” seems a p p ro p ria te fo r h u n , th e ch aracter for 3 [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r , p . 22.]

w hich is m ade u p of the sign fo r “clouds” an d th a t fo r “d e m o n .” T h u s h u n m eans “clo u d -d em o n ,” a h ig h e r b reath -so u l b elo n g in g to th e yang p rin c ip le a n d th erefo re m asculine. A fte r d eath , h u n rises u p w ard a n d becom es shen, the “e x p a n d in g a n d selfrev ealin g ” s p irit o r god. “A n im a ,” called p ’o, an d w ritte n w ith th e characters for “w h ite ” an d “ d e m o n ,” th a t is, “w h ite g h o st,” belongs to th e low er, e a rth b o u n d , bodily soul, th e y in p rin c ip le , an d is th erefo re fem in in e. A fter death , it sinks d o w n w ard a n d becom es k u e i (dem on), often ex p lain ed as “ th e one w ho r e tu rn s ” (i.e., to earth ), a rev en an t, a ghost. T h e fact th a t th e anim us an d an im a p a rt a fte r d e ath a n d go th e ir ways in d e p e n d ently shows th a t, fo r the C hinese consciousness, they are d is tin guishable psychic factors; o rig in ally they w ere u n ite d in “ th e one effective, tru e h u m a n n a tu re ,” b u t in th e “ house of th e C re ativ e” they are two. “T h e an im u s is in the heavenly h e a rt.” “ By day it lives in th e eyes [i.e., in consciousness]; a t n ig h t it houses in the liv er.” I t is “ th a t w hich we have received from th e g reat em ptiness, th a t w hich is id en tical in fo rm w ith th e p rim a l b e g in n in g .” T h e anim a, on th e o th e r h an d , is th e “ energy of the heavy a n d th e tu r b id ” ; it clings to th e bodily, fleshly h e art. Its effects are “sensuous desires an d im pulses to a n g er.” “W h o ev er is som bre a n d m oody on w aking . . . is fe tte re d to th e a n im a .” 4 58 M any years ago, before W ilh e lm a c q u a in te d m e w ith this text, I used the te rm “a n im a ” 5 in a w ay q u ite analogous to th e C hinese d efin itio n of p ’o, a n d of course e n tire ly a p a rt from any m etaphysical prem ise. T o the psychologist, th e a n im a is n o t a tran scen d en tal b e in g b u t so m eth in g q u ite w ith in th e ran g e of experience, as th e C hinese d e fin itio n m akes clear: affective states are im m ediate experiences. W hy, th en , speak of th e an im a an d n o t sim ply of moods? T h e reason is th a t affects have a n a u to n o m ous character, a n d th e re fo re m ost people are u n d e r th e ir pow er. B u t affects are d e lim ita b le co n ten ts o f consciousness, parts of the personality. As such, they p artak e of its ch aracter a n d can easily be personified— a process th a t still co n tin u e s to day, as I have shown. T h e personification is n o t a n id le in v e n tion, since a person ro u sed by affect does n o t show a n e u tra l character b u t a q u ite d istin c t one, e n tire ly d ifferen t fro m his o rd in a ry character. C areful in vestigatio n has show n th a t th e 4 [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r , p p . 26 a n d 28.] 5 Cf. T w o E ssays o n A n a l y t i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , p ars. 2g6ff.

affective character of a m an has fem in in e traits. F ro m this psy chological fact derives th e C hinese d o ctrin e of th e p ’o soul as well as my own concept of the anim a. D eep er in tro sp ectio n or ecstatic experience reveals the existence of a fem in in e figure in the unconscious, hence th e fem inin e nam e: anim a, psyche, Seele. T h e anim a can be defined as th e im age or archetype or deposit of all the experiences of m an w ith w om an. As we know, the poets have often sung th e a n im a ’s praises.6 T h e co n n ectio n of anim a w ith ghost in the C hinese concept is of in terest to para psychologists inasm uch as m edium istic “co n tro ls” are very often of the opposite sex. 59 A lth o u g h W ilh e lm ’s tra n slatio n of hun as “an im u s” seems justified to me, nonetheless I had im p o rta n t reasons for choosing th e te rm “ Logos” for a m a n ’s “s p irit,” for his clarity of con sciousness a n d his ratio n ality , ra th e r th an the otherw ise ap p ro p ria te expression “an im u s.” C hinese philosophers are spared certain difficulties th a t aggravate th e task of th e W estern psy chologist. L ike all m e n tal an d sp iritu a l activity in a n cien t tim es, C hinese philosophy was exclusively a co m p o n en t of the m ascu lin e w orld. Its concepts w ere never un d ersto o d psychologically, an d therefore were never exam ined as to how far they also apply to the fem in in e psyche. B u t th e psychologist c an n o t possibly ig n o re the existence of w om an an d h e r special psychology. For these reasons I w ou ld p refer to tran slate hun as it appears in m an by “Logos.” W ilh elm in his tran slatio n uses Logos for hsing, w hich can also be tran slated as “essence of h u m a n n a tu re ” o r “creative consciousness.” A fter death, hun becomes shen, “sp irit,” w hich is very close, in the philosophical sense, to hsing. Since th e C hinese concepts are n o t logical in o u r sense of the w ord, b u t are in tu itiv e ideas, th e ir m eanings can only be elicited fro m the ways in w hich they are used an d fro m the co n stitu tio n of the w ritte n characters, o r from such relatio n sh ip s as o b tain betw een hun a n d shen. H u n , then, w o u ld be th e lig h t of con sciousness an d reason in m an, o riginally com ing from the logos spermatikos of hsing, a n d re tu rn in g a fte r d e ath th ro u g h shen to th e T a o . U sed in this sense th e expression “Logos” w ould be especially a p p ro p riate, since it includes th e idea of a universal being, an d thus covers the fact th a t m a n ’s clarity o f conscious ness an d ra tio n a lity are som ething universal ra th e r th a n indiβ Cf. P sych ological T y p e s, ch. V.

v idually u n iq u e . T h e Logos p rin c ip le is n o th in g personal, b u t is in the deepest sense im personal, a n d th u s in sh arp c o n tra st to the anim a, w hich is a personal d em o n expressing itself in th o r oughly personal m oods (“anim o sity ” !). 60 In view of these psychological facts, I have reserved th e te rm “a n im u s” strictly for w om en, because, to answ er a fam ous q u e s tion, m u lie r n o n habet anim arn} sed a n im u m . F e m in in e psy chology e x h ib its an e lem en t th a t is th e c o u n te rp a rt of a m a n ’s anim a. P rim arily , it is n o t of an affective n a tu re b u t is a q u a si in te lle ctu al facto r best described by th e w ord “ p re ju d ic e .” T h e conscious side of w om an corresponds to th e e m o tio n al side of m an, n o t to his “m in d .” M in d m akes u p th e “so u l,” o r b e tte r, the “an im u s” of w om an, an d ju st as th e an im a of a m a n consists of in fe rio r relatedness, fu ll of affect, so th e an im u s of w om an consists of in fe rio r ju d g m en ts, o r b e tte r, o p in io n s. As it is m ade u p of a p lu ra lity of preconceived opin io n s, th e an im u s is far less susceptible of personification by a single figure, b u t appears m ore o ften as a g ro u p o r crow d. (A good ex am p le of this from parapsychology is th e “ Im p e ra to r” g ro u p in the case of M rs. P ip e r.7) O n a low level th e an im u s is an in fe rio r Logos, a c ari catu re of th e d ifferen tia te d m asculine m in d , ju s t as o n a low level th e a n im a is a carica tu re of the fem in in e Eros. T o p u rsu e the parallel fu rth e r, we co u ld say th a t ju s t as h u n corresponds to hsing, tran slated by W ilh e lm as Logos, so th e Eros of w om an corresponds to m ing, “ fate” o r “d estin y ,” in te rp re te d by W il h elm as Eros. Eros is an in terw eaving ; Logos is d ifferen tia tin g know ledge, clarifying lig h t. Eros is relatedness, Logos is d iscrim in a tio n an d d etach m en t. H en ce th e in fe rio r Logos of w o m an ’s anim us appears as so m eth in g q u ite u n re la te d , as an inaccessible p rejudice, o r as a n o p in io n w hich, irrita tin g ly en ough, has n o th in g to do w ith th e essential n a tu re of th e object. 61 I have often b een accused of perso n ify in g th e an im a an d an im u s as m ythology does, b u t this accusation w o u ld be ju stified only if it co u ld be p roved th a t I concretize these concepts in a m ythological m a n n e r fo r psychological use. I m u st d eclare once a n d for all th a t th e personification is n o t a n in v e n tio n of m in e, 7 Cf. H y s lo p , S c ien ce a n d a F u tu r e L if e , p p . ii3fE . [M rs. L e o n o r a P ip e r , a n A m e r ica n p sy c h ic m e d iu m a c tiv e a b o u t 1890—1910 in th e U .S . a n d E n g la n d , w a s s tu d ie d b y W illia m J a m e s, M rs. H e n r y S id g w ick , H y s lo p , a n d o th e r s. A g r o u p o f fiv e o f h e r p s y c h ic c o n tr o ls h a d th e c o lle c tiv e n a m e “ I m p e r a to r .”— E d i t o r s .]

b u t is in h e re n t in the n a tu re of the ph en o m en a. I t w o u ld be unscientific to overlook th e fact th a t the an im a is a psychic, and th erefore a personal, au to n o m o u s system. N o n e of th e people w ho m ake the charge against m e w ould hesitate for a second to say, “ I d ream ed of M r. X ,” w hereas, strictly speaking, he d ream ed only of a re p re se n ta tio n of M r. X . T h e a n im a is n o th in g b u t a re p re se n ta tio n of the personal n a tu re of th e a u to n o m ous system in question. W h at the n a tu re of this system is in a tran scen d en tal sense, th a t is, beyond th e b o u n d s of experience, we c an n o t know. 62 I have defined th e an im a as a personification of th e u n co n scious in general, a n d have taken it as a b rid g e to the u n conscious, in o th e r words, as a fu n ctio n of re la tio n sh ip to the unconscious. T h e re is an in terestin g p o in t in o u r tex t in this connection. T h e te x t says th a t consciousness (th at is, the personal consciousness) comes from th e anim a. Since th e W estern m in d is based w holly on the stan d p o in t of consciousness, it m u st de fine the anim a in the way I have done. B u t th e East, based as it is on the stan d p o in t of the unconscious, sees consciousness as a n ef fect of the anim a. A nd there can be n o d o u b t th a t consciousness does o rig in ate in the unconscious. T h is is so m eth in g we are apt to forget, an d th erefo re we are always a tte m p tin g to id en tify the psyche w ith consciousness, o r at least to re p re se n t th e u n c o n scious as a derivative o r an effect of consciousness (as in the F re u d ia n repression theory). B ut, for th e reasons given above, it is essential th a t we do n o t d e tract from th e reality of th e u n co n scious, an d th a t th e figures of the unconscious be u n d ersto o d as re a l a n d effective factors. T h e person w ho has u n d e rsto o d w hat is m e an t by psychic reality n eed have n o fe a r th a t h e has fallen back in to p rim itiv e dem onology. If the unconscious figures are n o t acknow ledged as spontaneous agents, we becom e victim s of a one-sided b elief in the pow er of consciousness, lead in g finally to acute tension. A catastrophe is th e n b o u n d to h ap p en because, for all o u r consciousness, the d ark pow ers of th e psyche have been overlooked. I t is n o t we w ho personify them ; they have a personal n a tu re from the very b egin n in g . O n ly w hen this is th oroughly recognized can we th in k of depersonalizing them , of “su b ju g atin g the an im a,” as o u r tex t expresses it. 63 H e re again we find an enorm ous difference betw een B u d d hism an d th e W estern a ttitu d e of m in d , a n d again th e re is a 42

dangerous sem blance of agreem ent. Yoga teac h in g rejects all fantasy p roducts a n d we do th e same, b u t th e E ast does so fo r en tirely differen t reasons. In th e East th ere is an a b u n d a n c e of conceptions an d teachings th a t give fu ll expression to th e crea tive fantasy; in fact, p ro te c tio n is need ed against a n excess of it. W e, on the o th e r h an d , re g a rd fantasy as w orthless subjective day-dream ing. N a tu ra lly th e figures of th e unconscious do n o t appear in the form of abstractions strip p e d of all im ag in ativ e trappings; on the contrary, they are em b ed d ed in a w eb of fa n ta sies o f e x tra o rd in a ry variety a n d b ew ild erin g p ro fu sio n . T h e East can re je ct these fantasies because it has lo n g since e x tra cte d th e ir essence a n d condensed it in p ro fo u n d teachings. B u t we have n ev er even ex p erien ced these fantasies, m u ch less e x tra cte d th e ir quintessence. W e still have a large stretch of ex p erien ce to catch u p w ith, an d o nly w hen we have fo u n d th e sense in a p p a r e n t nonsense can we separate th e v alu ab le from th e w orthless. W e can be sure th a t the essence we e x tract fro m o u r ex p erien ce w ill be q u ite d ifferen t from w hat th e East offers us today. T h e E ast cam e to its know ledge of in n e r things in ch ild lik e ig n o rance of th e e x te rn a l w orld. W e, on the o th e r h a n d , shall ex p lo re th e psyche an d its d epths su p p o rte d by a n im m ense k n o w l edge of history a n d science. A t p resen t o u r know ledge of th e e x tern al w orld is th e greatest obstacle to in tro sp ectio n , b u t the psychological n e ed w ill overcom e all ob stru ctio n s. W e are al ready b u ild in g u p a psychology, a science th a t gives us th e key to th e very things th a t the East discovered— a n d discovered only th ro u g h ab n o rm a l psychic states.

5 - T H E D E T A C H M E N T O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

F R O M T H E O B JE C T 64

By u n d e rs ta n d in g th e u n co n scio u s w e fre e o u rselv es fro m its d o m in a tio n . T h a t is re a lly also th e p u rp o s e of th e in s tru c tio n s in o u r text. T h e p u p il is ta u g h t to c o n c e n tra te o n th e lig h t of th e in n e rm o s t re g io n a n d , a t th e sam e tim e, to free h im se lf from all o u te r a n d in n e r e n ta n g le m e n ts . H is v ita l im p u lses are g u id e d tow ards a consciousness v o id of c o n te n t, w h ich n ev erth eless p e r足 m its all c o n te n ts to exist. T h e H u i M i n g C h in g 1 says of this d e ta c h m e n t: A halo of light surrounds the w orld of the law. W e forget one another, q u ie t an d pure, all-pow erful an d empty. T h e em ptiness is irrad iated by the lig h t of the h eart of heaven. T h e w ater of the sea is sm ooth an d m irrors the m oon in its surface. T h e clouds disappear in blue space; the m ou n tain s shine clear. Consciousness reverts to contem plation; the moon-disk rests alone.

T h i s d e s c rip tio n of fu lfilm e n t d ep icts a psychic state th a t can b est be ch a ra c te riz e d as a d e ta c h m e n t o f consciousness fro m th e w o rld a n d a w ith d ra w a l to a p o in t o u ts id e it, so to speak. T h u s consciousness is a t th e sam e tim e e m p ty a n d n o t e m p ty . I t is n o lo n g e r p re o c c u p ie d w ith th e im ages of th in g s b u t m e re ly c o n ta in s th e m . T h e fu lln ess of th e w o rld w h ich h ith e r to p ressed u p o n it has lo st n o n e o f its rich n ess a n d b eau ty , b u t it n o lo n g e r d o m in a te s. T h e m ag ical c la im of th in g s has ceased becau se th e in te rw e a v in g o f consciousness w ith w o rld has co m e to a n e n d . T h e u n co n scio u s is n o t p ro je c te d an y m o re, a n d so th e p r im o r 足 d ia l p a r tic ip a tio n m y s tiq u e w ith th in g s is ab o lish ed . C o n scio u s足 ness is n o lo n g e r p re o c c u p ie d w ith co m p u lsiv e p lan s b u t d is足 solves in c o n te m p la tiv e v isio n . 66 H o w d id th is effect co m e ab o u t? (W e assum e, of course, th a t th e C h in e se a u th o r was first o f all n o t a lia r; secondly, th a t h e w as o f so u n d m in d ; a n d th ird ly , th a t h e was a n u n u s u a lly in te l-

1 [T h e Golden Flower (196a edn.), pp. 77f.]

lig e n t m an.) T o u n d e rsta n d an d ex p lain this d e tac h m e n t, we m ust proceed by a ro u n d a b o u t way. I t is an effect th a t c a n n o t be sim u lated ; n o th in g w o uld be m ore childish th a n to m ake such a psychic state a n o b je ct of aesthetic e x p erim en t. I know this effect very well from m y practice; it is the th e ra p e u tic effect par excel lence, tor w hich I la b o u r w ith m y stu d en ts a n d p atien ts, a n d it consists in th e disso lu tio n of participation m ystiq ue. By a stro k e of genius, Levy-B ruhl singled o u t w h at he called participation m y stiq u e as b ein g th e h a llm a rk of th e p rim itiv e m e n ta lity .2 W h a t he m e a n t by it is sim ply th e ind efin itely large re m n a n t of n o n -d ifferen tiatio n betw een subject an d object, w h ich is still so g reat am ong p rim itives th a t it c an n o t fail to strik e o u r E u ro pean consciousness very forcibly. W h e n th e re is no consciousness of the difference betw een subject an d object, an unconscious id e n tity prevails. T h e unconscious is th e n p ro je c ted in to th e o b ject, an d the o b ject is in tro je c te d in to the subject, b eco m in g p a rt of his psychology. T h e n plan ts an d anim als b ehave like h u m a n beings, h u m a n beings are a t th e sam e tim e anim als, a n d every th in g is alive w ith ghosts an d gods. C ivilized m an n a tu ra lly thinks he is m iles above these things. In stead of th a t, h e is o ften id en tified w ith his p aren ts th ro u g h o u t his life, o r w ith his affects a n d prejudices, an d sham elessly accuses o th ers of th e things he w ill n o t see in him self. H e too has a re m n a n t of p rim itiv e u n consciousness, of n o n -d ifferen tiatio n b etw een su b ject an d o b ject. B ecause of this, he is m agically affected by all m a n n e r of people, things, an d circum stances, he is beset by d is tu rb in g in fluences n early as m uch as the p rim itiv e an d th e re fo re needs ju s t as m any a p o tro p a ic charm s. H e no lo n g e r w orks m agic w ith m ed icin e bags, am ulets, a n d a n im al sacrifices, b u t w ith tra n q u il lizers, neuroses, ratio n alism , c u lt of th e w ill, etc. 67 B u t if th e unconscious can be recognized as a co -d eterm in in g factor alo n g w ith consciousness, a n d if we can live in such a way th a t conscious a n d unconscious dem an d s are ta k en in to acco u n t as far as possible, th e n th e cen tre of gravity of th e to ta l p erso n al ity shifts its position. I t is th e n no lo n g e r in th e ego, w h ich is m erely th e cen tre of consciousness, b u t in th e h y p o th e tic al p o in t b etw een conscious an d unconscious. T h is new c en tre m ig h t be called the self. If th e tra n sp o sitio n is successful, it does aw ay w ith th e participation m y stiq u e a n d resu lts in a p erso n ality th a t 2 L evy-B ruhl, P r i m i t i v e M e n t a li ty .

suffers only in the low er storeys, as it w ere, b u t in its u p p e r storeys is singularly detached from p a in fu l as w ell as from joyful happenings. 68 T h e p ro d u c tio n a n d b irth of this su p erio r personality is w hat is m ean t w hen o u r tex t speaks of th e “holy fru it,” the “ dia m o n d body,” o r any o th e r k in d of in c o rru p tib le body. Psycho logically, these expressions symbolize an a ttitu d e th a t is beyond the reach of em o tio n al entanglem ents an d v io len t shocks— a con sciousness detached from th e w orld. I have reasons for believing th a t this a ttitu d e sets in after m id d le life an d is a n a tu ra l p rep a ra tio n for death. D eath is psychologically as im p o rta n t as b irth and, like it, is an in teg ral p art of life. W h a t h ap p en s to th e de tached consciousness in the en d is a q u estio n the psychologist can n o t be expected to answ er. W h atev er his th eo retical position h e w ould hopelessly overstep the boun d s of his scientific com pe tence. H e can only p o in t o u t th a t the views of o u r tex t in regard to th e timelessness of th e detached consciousness are in h arm o n y w ith the religious th o u g h t of all ages a n d w ith th a t of th e over w helm ing m ajo rity of m an k in d . A nyone w ho th o u g h t differently w ould be stan d in g outside the h u m a n o rd e r an d w ould, th e re fore, be suffering from a d istu rb e d psychic e q u ilib riu m . As a doctor, I m ake every effort to stre n g th en the b elief in im m o rtal ity, especially w ith o ld e r p atients w hen such questions com e th re a ten in g ly close. For, seen in co rrect psychological perspec tive, d eath is n o t an en d b u t a goal, an d life’s in c lin a tio n tow ards d e ath begins as soon as th e m e rid ia n is passed. 69 C hinese yoga philosophy is based u p o n this in stin ctiv e p re p a ra tio n fo r death as a goal. In analogy w ith th e goal of th e first h alf of life— p ro creatio n an d re p ro d u c tio n , th e m eans of p e rp e t u a tin g o n e ’s physical existence— it takes as the goal of sp iritu al existence the sym bolic b e g ettin g an d b irth of a “ spirit-body,” o r “ breath-body,” w hich ensures the c o n tin u ity of d etach ed con sciousness. I t is th e b irth of th e p n eu m atic m an , k now n to the E u ro p ea n from a n tiq u ity , b u t w hich h e seeks to p ro d u ce by q u ite o th e r symbols an d m agical practices, b y faith an d a C h ris tia n way of life. H e re again w e stan d on a fo u n d a tio n q u ite d ifferen t from th a t of th e East. A gain th e te x t sounds as th o u g h it w ere n o t so very far from C hristian ascetic m orality, b u t n o th in g could be m ore m istaken th a n to assum e th a t it actually m eans the same thing. B eh in d o u r te x t is a civilization th o u 46

sands of years old, one w hich is b u ilt u p organically o n p rim itiv e instincts a n d knows n o th in g of th a t b ru ta l m o rality so su ited to us as recen tly civilized T e u to n ic b a rb a ria n s. F o r this reaso n th e C hinese are w ith o u t th e im pulse tow ards v io le n t rep ressio n of the instincts th a t poisons o u r sp iritu a lity an d m akes it h y steri cally exaggerated. T h e m an w ho lives w ith his in stin cts can also detach from them , a n d in ju s t as n a tu ra l a way as h e liv ed w ith them . A ny idea of heroic self-conquest w o u ld be e n tire ly fo reig n to the sp irit of o u r text, b u t th a t is w h at it w o u ld in fallib ly a m o u n t to if we follow ed th e in stru c tio n s literally . 70 W e m u st n e v er forget o u r historical antecedents. O n ly a lit tle m ore th a n a th o u san d years ago we stu m b le d o u t of th e c ru d est b eg innings of polytheism in to a hig h ly d eveloped O rie n ta l relig io n w hich lifted the im aginative m in d s of half-savages to a h e ig h t th a t in no way co rresp o n d ed to th e ir s p iritu a l develop m ent. In o rd e r to keep to this h e ig h t in som e fashion o r o th e r, it was in ev itab le th a t th e in stin c tu a l sphere sh o u ld be largely re pressed. T h u s religious practice an d m o rality took o n a d ecid edly b ru ta l, alm ost m a lig n a n t, character. T h e repressed ele m ents n a tu ra lly d id n o t develop, b u t w en t o n v eg etatin g in the unconscious, in th e ir o rig in al b arb arism . W e w o u ld like to scale th e heights of a p h ilosophical relig io n , b u t in fact are in cap ab le of it. To grow u p to it is the m ost we can h o p e for. T h e Amfortas w o u n d a n d th e F a u stia n sp lit in th e G e rm a n ic m a n are still n o t healed; his unconscious is still lo ad ed w ith co n ten ts th a t m u st first be m ade conscious before he can be free of them . R ecently I received a le tte r from a fo rm er p a tie n t w hich d e scribes th e necessary tra n sfo rm a tio n in sim ple b u t tre n c h a n t words. She w rites: O ut of evil, m uch good has come to me. By keeping quiet, repress ing nothing, rem aining attentive, and by accepting reality— taking things as they are, and not as I wanted them to be—by doing all this, unusual knowledge has come to me, and unusual powers as well, such as I could never have imagined before. I always thought that when we accepted things they overpowered us in some way or other. T his turns out not to be true at all, and it is only by accept ing them that one can assume an attitude towards them .3 So now I intend to play the game of life, being receptive to whatever comes to me, good and bad, sun and shadow forever alternating, and, in 3 D issolu tion o f p a r tic ip a tio n m y s tiq u e .

this way, also accepting my ow n n atu re w ith its positive an d nega tive sides. T h u s everything becomes m ore alive to me. W h at a fool I was! H ow I tried to force everything to go according to the way I th o u g h t it ou g h t to! 71

O n ly o n th e basis o f su ch a n a ttitu d e , w h ich re n o u n c e s n o n e of th e C h ris tia n v alu es w o n in th e co u rse of C h ris tia n d e v e lo p m e n t, b u t w h ich , o n th e c o n tra ry , trie s w ith C h ris tia n c h a rity a n d fo rb e a ra n c e to acc ep t ev en th e h u m b le s t th in g s in o n e ’s o w n n a tu re , w ill a h ig h e r lev el o f consciousness a n d c u ltu r e b eco m e possible. T h is a ttitu d e is re lig io u s in th e tr u e s t sense, a n d th e re fo re th e ra p e u tic , fo r a ll re lig io n s a re th e ra p ie s fo r th e sorrow s a n d d iso rd ers of th e soul. T h e d e v e lo p m e n t of th e W e s te rn in te lle c t a n d w ill has g iv en us a n alm o st fien d ish cap a city fo r a p in g such a n a ttitu d e , w ith a p p a r e n t success, d e sp ite th e p ro tests of th e u n co n scio u s. B u t it is o n ly a m a tte r of tim e b e fo re th e q o u n te rp o s itio n asserts itse lf all th e m o re h arsh ly . A p in g a n a tti tu d e alw ays p ro d u c e s a n u n s ta b le s itu a tio n th a t can b e o v e r th ro w n by th e u n co n scio u s a t an y tim e. A safe f o u n d a tio n is fo u n d o n ly w h en th e in s tin c tiv e p rem ises o f th e u n co n scio u s w in th e sam e re sp e c t as th e view s o f th e co n scio u s m in d . N o o n e s h o u ld b lin d h im se lf to th e fact th a t th is necessity of g iv in g d u e c o n s id e ra tio n to th e u n co n scio u s ru n s v io le n tly c o u n te r to o u r W e s te rn , a n d in p a r tic u la r th e P ro te s ta n t, c u lt o f consciousness. Y et, th o u g h th e n e w alw ays seem s to b e th e en e m y of th e o ld , an y o n e w ith a m o re th a n su p erficial d esire to u n d e r s ta n d c a n n o t fa il to d isco v er th a t w ith o u t th e m o st serio u s a p p lic a tio n o f th e C h ris tia n v alu es w e h av e a c q u ire d , th e n ew in te g ra tio n can n e v e r ta k e place.

6. T H E FULFILM ENT A grow ing fa m ilia rity w ith the sp irit of th e E ast sh o u ld be taken m erely as a sign th a t we are b e g in n in g to re la te to th e alien elem ents w ith in ourselves. D en ial of o u r historical fo u n d a tions w o u ld be sheer folly an d w ould be th e best way to b rin g a b o u t a n o th e r u p ro o tin g of consciousness. O n ly by sta n d in g firm ly on o u r ow n soil can we assim ilate th e sp irit of the East. 73 S peaking of those w ho do n o t know w here th e tru e springs of secret pow er lie, an a n c ie n t a d ep t says, “ W o rld ly p eo p le lose th e ir roots a n d cling to the tre e to p s.’’ T h e s p irit of th e East has grow n o u t of th e yellow e arth , an d o u r sp irit can, a n d sho u ld , grow only o u t of o u r ow n e arth . T h a t is w hy I ap p ro ach these p roblem s in a way th a t has o ften been charged w ith “ psycholo gism .” If “ psychology” w ere m ean t, I sh o u ld in d e ed b e flattered, fo r m y aim as a psychologist is to dism iss w ith o u t m ercy th e m e t aphysical claim s of all esoteric teachings. T h e unavow ed p u r pose of g a in in g pow er th ro u g h w ords, in h e re n t in all secret doc trines, ill accords w ith o u r p ro fo u n d ignorance, w hich we sh o u ld have th e m odesty to adm it. I q u ite d e lib e rately b rin g ev ery th in g th a t p u rp o rts to be m etaphysical in to th e d ay lig h t of psycho logical u n d e rsta n d in g , an d do m y best to p re v e n t p eo p le from b elieving in n e b u lo u s pow er-w ords. L e t th e convinced C h ristia n believe, by all m eans, fo r th a t is th e d u ty h e has ta k en u p o n him self; b u t w hoever is n o t a C h ristia n has fo rfeited th e cha rism a of faith. (P erhaps he was cursed from b irth w ith n o t b e in g able to believe, b u t m erely to know .) T h e re fo re , h e has n o rig h t to p u t his faith elsew here. O n e c an n o t grasp a n y th in g m etap h y s ically, o n e on ly can do so psychologically. T h e re fo re I strip things of th e ir m etaphysical w rappings in o rd e r to m ake th e m objects of psychology. In th a t way I can at least e x tra ct som e th in g u n d e rsta n d a b le from th em a n d avail m yself of it, a n d I also discover psychological facts a n d processes th a t b efo re w ere v eiled in sym bols an d beyond m y com p reh en sio n . I n d o in g so I

m a y p e rh a p s b e fo llo w in g in th e fo o tstep s of th e fa ith fu l, an d m ay possibly h av e s im ila r ex p e rie n c e s; a n d if in th e e n d th e re s h o u ld be s o m e th in g in effab ly m e ta p h y sic a l b e h in d it all, it w o u ld th e n h av e th e b e st o p p o r tu n ity of sh o w in g itself. 74 M y a d m ir a tio n fo r th e g re a t p h ilo so p h e rs o f th e E ast is as g e n u in e as m y a ttitu d e to w a rd s th e ir m e tap h y sics is ir r e v e r e n t.1 I su sp ect th e m of b e in g sy m b o lical psychologists, to w h o m no g re a te r w ro n g c o u ld b e d o n e th a n to ta k e th e m lite ra lly . I f it w ere re a lly m e tap h y sics th a t th e y m e a n , it w o u ld be useless to try to u n d e rs ta n d th e m . B u t if it is psychology, we can n o t on ly u n d e rs ta n d th e m b u t can p ro fit g re a tly by th e m , fo r th e n th e soc a lle d “ m e ta p h y s ic a l” com es w ith in th e ra n g e of e x p e rie n c e . If I assum e th a t G o d is a b s o lu te a n d b e y o n d all h u m a n e x p e rie n c e , h e leaves m e co ld . I d o n o t afEect h im , n o r does h e affect m e. B u t if I k n o w th a t h e is a p o w e rfu l im p u ls e of m y so u l, a t o n ce I m u s t c o n c e rn m y self w ith h im , fo r th e n h e can b e c o m e im p o r ta n t, ev en u n p le a s a n tly so, a n d c a n affect m e in p ra c tic a l ways— w h ic h so u n d s h o r r ib ly b a n a l, lik e e v e ry th in g else th a t is re a l. 75 T h e e p ith e t “ p sy ch o lo g ism ” a p p lie s o n ly to a fo o l w ho th in k s he has his so u l in h is p o ck et. T h e r e a re c e rta in ly m o re th a n e n o u g h su ch fools, fo r a lth o u g h w e k n o w h o w to ta lk b ig a b o u t th e “s o u l,” th e d e p re c ia tio n o f e v e ry th in g p sy ch ic is a ty p ically W e s te rn p re ju d ic e . I f I m a k e u se o f th e c o n c e p t “ a u to n o m o u s psychic c o m p le x ,” m y r e a d e r im m e d ia te ly com es u p w ith th e re a d y -m ad e p re ju d ic e th a t it is “ n o th in g b u t a psychic c o m p le x .” H o w c a n w e b e so s u re th a t th e so u l is “n o th in g b u t ” ? I t is as if w e d id n o t k n o w , o r else c o n tin u a lly fo rg o t, th a t ev ery th in g o f w h ic h w e a re co n scio u s is a n im ag e, a n d th a t im ag e is psyche. T h e sam e p e o p le w h o th in k th a t G o d is d e p re c ia te d if h e is u n d e rs to o d as s o m e th in g m o v e d in th e psyche, as w ell as th e m o v in g fo rce o f th e psyche— i.e., as a n a u to n o m o u s co m p le x — can b e so p la g u e d b y u n c o n tro lla b le affects a n d n e u r o tic states th a t th e ir w ills a n d th e ir w h o le p h ilo so p h y o f life fail th e m m is e rab ly . Is th a t a p ro o f o f th e im p o te n c e o f th e psyche? S h o u ld M e iste r E c k h a rt b e accu sed o f “ p sy ch o lo g ism ” w h e n h e says, “ G o d m u s t b e b o r n in th e so u l a g a in a n d a g a in ” ? I th in k th e a c c u sa tio n o f "p sy c h o lo g ism ” c a n b e le v e lle d o n ly a t a n in te lle c t I T h e C hin ese p h ilo so p h ers— in contrast to the d ogm atists o f the W est— are on ly gratefu l for such an a ttitu d e , because they also are m asters o f th eir gods. [N ote by R ich ard W ilh elm in o rig in a l edn.]

that denies the genuine nature of the autonom ous com plex and seeks to explain it rationalistically as the consequence of known causes, i.e., as som ething secondary and unreal. T h is is just as arrogant as the metaphysical assertion that seeks to make a God outside the range of our experience responsible for our psychic states. Psychologism is sim ply the counterpart of this m etaphysi cal presumption, and is just as childish. T herefore it seems to m e far more reasonable to accord the psyche the same validity as the empirical world, and to adm it that the former has just as m uch “reality” as the latter. As I see it, the psyche is a world in w hich the ego is contained. Maybe there are fishes who believe that they contain the sea. W e must rid ourselves of this habitual illu sion of ours if we wish to consider metaphysical assertions from the standpoint of psychology. 76 A metaphysical assertion of this kind is the idea of the “dia m ond body,” the incorruptible breath-body w hich grows in the golden flower or in the “held of the square in ch .” 2 T h is body is 2 O u r te x t is so m e w h a t u n c le a r as to w h e th e r by ‘‘c o n tin u a tio n o f life ” a su rv iv a l a fte r d e a th o r a p ro lo n g a tio n of p h y sic al e x iste n c e is m e a n t. E x p re ssio n s su c h as ‘‘e lix ir o f life ” a n d th e lik e a re e x c e e d in g ly a m b ig u o u s . In th e la te r a d d itio n s to th e te x t i t is e v id e n t t h a t th e y oga in s tru c tio n s w ere also u n d e rs to o d in a p u re ly p h y sic a l sense. T o a p rim itiv e m in d , th e r e is n o th in g d is tu r b in g in th is o d d m ix tu r e o f th e p h y sic a l a n d th e s p iritu a l, b ecau se life a n d d e a th a re by n o m e a n s th e c o m p le te o p p o site s th e y a re fcrr us. (P a r tic u la rly in te re s tin g in th is c o n n e c tio n , a p a r t fro m th e e th n o lo g ic a l m a te ria l, a re th e c o m m u n ic a tio n s o f th e E n g lish “rescu e circles” w ith th e ir th o ro u g h ly a rc h a ic ideas.) T h e sa m e a m b ig u ity w ith re g a rd to su rv iv a l a fte r d e a th is fo u n d in e a rly C h ris tia n ity , w h e re im m o r ta lity d e p e n d s o n v ery s im ila r a ss u m p tio n s, i.e., o n th e id e a o f a b re a th -b o d y as th e c a rr ie r of life. (G eley ’s p a ra p h y s io lo g ic a l th e o ry w o u ld b e th e la te s t in c a r n a tio n o f th is a n c ie n t idea.) B u t sin ce in o u r te x t th e r e a re w a rn in g s a b o u t th e s u p e r s titio u s use of it— w a rn in g s , fo r e x a m p le , a g a in s t th e m a k in g of g o ld — we can safely in sist o n th e s p ir itu a l p u r p o r t o f th e in s tru c tio n s w ith o u t c o n tr a d ic tin g th e ir m e a n in g . In th e sta te s w h ic h th e in s tru c tio n s seek to in d u c e th e p h y sic a l b o d y p la y s a n in c re a sin g ly u n im p o r t a n t p a r t an y w ay , sin ce it is re p la c e d by th e b re a th -b o d y (h en c e th e im p o rta n c e of b r e a th c o n tro l in all yoga exercises). T h e b re a th -b o d y is n o t s o m e th in g “ s p i r it u a l” in o u r sense o f th e w o rd . I t is c h a r a c te r istic o f W e ste rn m a n t h a t h e h a s s p lit a p a r t th e p h y sic a l a n d th e s p i r it u a l fo r e p istem o lo g ical p u rp o se s. B u t th ese o p p o site s ex ist to g e th e r in th e p sy c h e a n d psychology m u s t reco g n ize th is fact. “ P sy ch ic” m e a n s p h y sic a l a n d s p ir itu a l. T h e id eas in o u r te x t all d e a l w ith th is “ in te r m e d ia te ” w o rld w h ic h seem s u n c le a r a n d co n fu sed b eca u se th e c o n c e p t o f p sy c h ic re a lity is n o t y et c u r r e n t a m o n g us, a lth o u g h it expresses life as i t a c tu a lly is. W ith o u t so u l, s p ir it is as d e a d as m a t te r, b ecau se b o th a re a rtific ia l a b stra c tio n s; w h e re a s m a n o rig in a lly re g a r d e d s p ir it as a v o la tile b o d y , a n d m a tte r as n o t la c k in g in so u l.

a sym bol for a re m a rk a b le psychological fact w hich, precisely be cause it is objective, first appears in form s d ic ta ted by th e expe rien ce o f biological life— th a t is, as fru it, em bryo, child, living body, an d so on. T h is fact co u ld be best expressed by th e words “I t is n o t I w ho live, it lives m e.” T h e illu sio n of th e suprem acy o f consciousness m akes us say, “I live.” O nce this illu sio n is shat te re d by a re c o g n itio n of the unconscious, the unconscious will a p p ea r as so m eth in g objective in w hich th e ego is in clu d ed . T h e a ttitu d e tow ards the unconscious is th e n an alogous to the feeling of th e p rim itiv e to w hom th e existence of a son g u a ra n tees c o n tin u a tio n of life— a feeling th a t can assum e g ro tesq u e form s, as w hen the old N egro, an g ered at his so n ’s disobedience, cried out, “T h e re he stands w ith my body, b u t does n o t even obey m e!” It is, in fact, a change of feeling sim ila r to th a t ex p erien ced by a fath er to w hom a son has been bo rn , a change k now n to us from th e testim ony of St, P au l: “ Yet n o t I, b u t C h rist liv eth in m e.” T h e sym bol “C h rist” as “son of m a n ” is an analogous psychic experience of a h ig h e r sp iritu a l b ein g w ho is invisibly b o rn in the in d iv id u a l, a p n e u m a tic body w hich is to serve us as a fu tu re dw elling, a body w hich, as P au l says, is p u t o n like a g a rm e n t (“ F o r as m an y of you as have b een b a p tized in to C hrist have p u t on C h rist”). I t is always a difficult th in g to express, in in te lle c tu a l term s, su b tle feelings th a t are nevertheless infinitely im p o rta n t for th e in d iv id u a l’s life an d w ell-being. I t is, in a sense, the feeling th a t we have b e en “re p la ce d ,” b u t w ith o u t th e c o n n o tatio n of h aving b e en “ deposed.” I t is as if th e g u id a n ce of life h ad passed over to an invisible cen tre. N ietzsche’s m etap h o r, “ in m ost lo v in g bondage, free,” w o u ld be a p p ro p ria te here. R e ligious language is fu ll of im agery d e p ic tin g this feelin g of free d ep en d en ce, of calm acceptance. T h is re m a rk a b le ex p erien ce seems to m e a consequence of th e d e tac h m e n t of consciousness, thank s to w hich the su b jectiv e “I liv e” becom es th e ob jectiv e “ I t lives m e .” T h is state is felt to be h ig h e r th a n th e previous one; it is really like a sort of re lease from th e co m pulsion a n d im possible resp o n sib ility th a t are th e in e v ita b le results of particip a tio n m ystiq u e. T h is feelin g of lib e ra tio n fills P a u l com pletely; th e consciousness of b e in g a ch ild o f G od delivers one from th e bondage of the b lo o d . I t is also a feelin g of re c o n ciliatio n w ith all th a t h ap p en s, fo r w hich

reason, a c c o rd in g to th e H u i M i n g C h i n g , th e gaze of o n e w h o has a t ta in e d f u lfilm e n t tu r n s back to th e b e a u ty of n a t u r e . 79 I n th e P a u li n e C h r is t sym bol th e s u p r e m e relig io u s e x p e r i ences of W e s t a n d E ast c o n f r o n t o n e a n o th e r : C h ris t th e s o rro w la d e n h e ro , a n d th e G o ld e n F lo w e r th a t b lo o m s in th e p u r p l e hall of th e city o f jade. W h a t a contrast, w h a t a n u n f a th o m a b le difference, w h a t an abyss of history! A p r o b le m fit fo r th e c r o w n in g w ork of a f u t u r e psychologist! 80 A m o n g th e g re a t relig io u s p r o b le m s o f th e p r e s e n t is o n e w h ich has rece iv ed scant a t te n ti o n , b u t w h ic h is in fact th e m a in p r o b le m of o u r day: th e e v o lu tio n of th e re lig io u s sp irit. I f we are to discuss it, we m u s t em phasize th e difference b e tw e e n E ast a n d W e s t in th e ir t r e a tm e n t of th e “je w el,” th e c e n tra l sym bol. T h e W est lays stress o n the h u m a n in c a r n a tio n , a n d even o n th e p erso n ality a n d h isto ricity of C h rist, w h ereas th e E ast says: “ W i t h o u t b e g in n in g , w i th o u t en d , w i t h o u t past, w i t h o u t f u t u r e . ” 3 T h e C h r is tia n s u b o r d in a te s h im se lf to th e s u p e r io r d i v in e p e rs o n in e x p e c ta tio n of his grace; b u t th e O r ie n ta l k no w s th a t r e d e m p tio n d e p e n d s o n th e w o rk h e does o n him self. T h e T a o grows o u t of th e in d iv id u a l. T h e im it a ti o Christi has this d isad van tage: in th e lo n g r u n we w o rsh ip as a d iv in e e x a m p le a m a n w h o e m b o d ie d th e d eep e st m e a n in g of life, a n d th e n , o u t of s h e e r im ita tio n , we fo rg et to m a k e re a l o u r ow n d e e p e st m e a n in g — self-realization. As a m a tte r of fact, it is n o t a lto g e th e r in c o n v e n ie n t to r e n o u n c e o n e ’s o w n m e a n in g . H a d Jesu s d o n e so, h e w o u ld p r o b a b ly h av e b eco m e a re s p e c ta b le c a r p e n te r a n d n o t a relig io u s r e b e l to w h o m th e sam e t h i n g w o u ld n a t u r a l l y h a p p e n to d a y as h a p p e n e d th e n . 81 T h e im ita tio n of C h ris t m i g h t w ell b e u n d e r s to o d in a d e e p e r sense. I t c o u ld b e ta k e n as th e d u ty to realize o n e ’s d e e p est co n v ictio n w ith the sam e co u ra g e a n d th e sam e self-sacrifice show n b y Jesus. H a p p il y n o t e v e ry o n e has th e task of b e in g a le a d e r of h u m a n ity , o r a g reat re b e l; a n d so, a fte r all, it m i g h t b e possible for each to realize h im se lf in his ow n \vay. T h i s h o n e s ty m ig h t even b e c o m e a n ideal. Since g r e a t in n o v a tio n s always b e gin in th e m o st u n lik e ly places, th e fact th a t p e o p le to day a re n o t n e a rly as ash am e d of th e ir n a k ed n e ss as they used to be m ig h t b e th e b e g i n n in g of a r e c o g n itio n of them selves as th e y really are. H a r d u p o n this w ill follow a n in c re a s in g re c o g n itio n 3 T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (1962 e d n .), p . 77.

of m any things th a t fo rm erly w ere strictly taboo, fo r th e reality of th e e a rth w ill n o t fo rev er re m a in v eiled lik e th e virgines velandae of T e rtu llia n . M oral u n m a sk in g is b u t a step fu rth e r in th e sam e d ire c tio n , a n d b eh o ld , th e re stands m an as he is, and ad m its to him self th a t he is as he is. If he does th is in a m e an in g less way he is ju s t a m u d d le d fool; b u t if h e know s th e signifi cance of w hat he is d o in g he co u ld b e lo n g to a h ig h e r o rd e r of m an w ho m akes re a l the C h rist sym bol, regardless of th e suffering involved. It has o ften been observed th a t p u re ly co n crete taboos o r m agical rites in a n early stage of a re lig io n becom e in the n e x t stage so m eth in g psychic, o r even p u re ly sp iritu a l symbols. A n o u tw a rd law becom es in th e course of tim e an in w a rd convic tio n . T h u s it m ig h t easily h a p p e n to co n tem p o rary m an , espe cially P rotestants, th a t th e person Jesus, n o w e x istin g o u tsid e in th e re a lm of history, m ig h t becom e th e h ig h e r m a n w ith in h im self. T h e n we w o u ld have a tta in e d , in a E u ro p e a n way, th e psy chological state co rre sp o n d in g to E astern e n lig h te n m e n t. A ll this is a step in th e e v o lu tio n of a h ig h e r consciousness o n its way to u n k n o w n goals, a n d is n o t m etaphysics as o rd in a rily u n d ersto o d . T o th a t e x te n t it is o n ly “ psychology,” b u t to th at ex ten t, too, it is ex p erien ceab le, u n d e rsta n d a b le a n d — th a n k G od— real, a re a lity we can do so m eth in g w ith, a liv in g re a lity fu ll of possibilities. T h e fact th a t I am c o n te n t w ith w h at can be ex p erien ced psychically, an d re je ct the m etaphysical, does n o t a m o u n t, as any in te llig e n t person can see, to a gestu re of scep ti cism o r agnosticism aim ed at fa ith a n d tru s t in h ig h e r pow ers, b u t m eans a p p ro x im a te ly th e sam e as w h at K an t m e a n t w hen h e called th e thing-in-itself a “ m erely n eg ativ e b o rd e rlin e co n c ep t.” Every sta te m e n t a b o u t th e tra n sce n d e n tal is to b e avoided because it is only a la u g h ab le p re su m p tio n o n th e p a rt of a h u m a n m in d unconscious of its lim itatio n s. T h e re fo re , w h en G o d o r th e T a o is n a m e d a n im p u lse of th e soul, o r a psychic state, so m eth in g has b een said a b o u t th e kn o w ab le only, b u t n o th in g a b o u t th e u n k n o w ab le, a b o u t w hich n o th in g can be d e te r m in ed .

η. C O N C L U S IO N 83

T h e p u rp o s e o£ m y c o m m e n ta ry is to a tte m p t to b u ild a b rid g e o f p sy ch o lo g ical u n d e r s ta n d in g b e tw e e n E ast a n d W est. T h e basis o f ev ery r e a l u n d e r s ta n d in g is m a n , a n d th e re fo re I h a d to sp eak of h u m a n b ein g s. T h is m u s t b e m y ex cu se fo r h a v in g d e a lt o n ly w ith g e n e ra l aspects, a n d fo r n o t h a v in g e n te r e d in to te c h n ic a l d e ta ils. T e c h n ic a l d ire c tio n s a re v a lu a b le fo r those w h o k n o w , fo r e x a m p le , w h a t a c a m e ra is, o r a c o m b u stio n e n g in e, b u t th e y a re useless fo r a n y o n e w h o has n o id e a o f su ch a p p a ra tu s . W e s te rn m a n fo r w h o m I w rite is in a n an alo g o u s p o sitio n . T h e r e f o r e it seem e d to m e im p o r ta n t ab o v e all to e m phasize th e a g re e m e n t b e tw e e n th e psychic states a n d sy m b o l ism s o f E ast a n d W est. T h e s e an a lo g ie s o p e n a w ay to th e in n e r c h a m b e rs o f th e E a s te rn m in d , a w ay th a t does n o t r e q u ir e th e sacrih ce o f o u r o w n n a tu r e a n d does n o t c o n f r o n t us w ith th e th re a t of b e in g to r n fro m o u r ro o ts. N o r is it a n in te lle c tu a l te le scope o r m icro sco p e o ffe rin g a view o f n o fu n d a m e n ta l c o n c e rn to us b ecau se it does n o t to u c h us. I t is th e w ay o f su fferin g , seek in g , a n d s triv in g c o m m o n to all civ ilized p eo p les; it is th e tre m e n d o u s e x p e r im e n t o f b e c o m in g co n scio u s, w h ic h n a tu r e has la id u p o n m a n k in d , a n d w h ic h u n ite s th e m o st d iv e rse c u l tu re s in a c o m m o n task. W e s te rn con scio u sn ess is b y n o m e a n s th e o n ly k in d o f c o n sciousness th e re is; it is h isto ric a lly c o n d itio n e d a n d g e o g ra p h i cally lim ite d , a n d re p re s e n ta tiv e of o n ly o n e p a r t of m a n k in d . T h e w id e n in g o f o u r con scio u sn ess o u g h t n o t to p ro c e e d a t th e ex p en se o f o th e r k in d s o f consciousness; it s h o u ld co m e a b o u t th ro u g h th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f th o se e le m e n ts of o u r psyche w h ic h a re a n alo g o u s to th o se o f th e a lie n psyche, ju s t as th e E ast c a n n o t do w ith o u t o u r te ch n o lo g y , science, a n d in d u s try . T h e E u r o p ean in v a sio n o f th e E ast was a n act of v io le n c e o n a g ra n d scale, a n d it has le ft us w ith th e d u ty — n oblesse o b lig e— o f u n d e r s ta n d in g th e m in d o f th e E ast. T h is is p e rh a p s m o re n ecessary th a n we realize a t p re se n t.

EX A M PLES O F E U R O PE A N M ANDALAS T h e p ictu res th a t now follow w ere p ro d u c e d in th e way de scribed in th e text, by p a tie n ts d u rin g th e course of tre a t m e n t.1 T h e e arliest p ic tu re dates from 1916. A ll th e pictures w ere done in d e p e n d e n tly of any E astern influence. T h e I Ching hexagram s in p ic tu re N o. 4 com e from L egge’s tra n sla tio n in the Sacred Books of th e E ast series, b u t they w ere p u t in to th e pic tu re only because th e ir c o n te n t seem ed, to th e u n iv ersity -train ed p a tie n t, especially m e a n in g fu l for h e r life. N o E u ro p e a n m andalas k now n to m e (I have a fairly large collection) achieve the co n v en tio n ally a n d tra d itio n a lly established h a rm o n y an d p er fection of th e E astern m an d ala. I have m ad e a choice of ten pic tu res from am o n g an in fin ite variety of E u ro p e a n m andalas, and th ey o u g h t, as a w hole, to illu stra te clearly th e p arallelism be tw een E astern philo so p h y a n d th e unconscious m e n ta l processes in the W est. I [ T h e fo llo w in g m a n d a la s a re a lso p u b lis h e d , w ith m o re d e ta ile d c o m m e n ts, in “ C o n c e rn in g M a n d a la S y m b o lism ” : A i (fig. 9), Ag (fig. 6), A5 (fig. 25), AG (fig. 28), A 7 (fig. 38), A 8 (fig. 37), A g (fig. 26), A io (fig. 36); in “ A S tu d y o f th e P ro cess of I n d i v id u a t io n ” : A 4 (P ic tu re 9). A2 is n o t re p u b lis h e d . I n M e m o r ie s , D re a m s, R e fle c tio n s, J u n g tells o f p a in t in g th e p ic tu re s r e p r o d u c e d in A 3 a n d A io (see th e N .Y . e d n ., p. 197 a n d P I. X I; L o n d o n e d n ., p p . i8 8 f. a n d fa c in g p . 241). C ross re f e re n c e in “ C o n c e rn in g M a n d a la S y m b o lism ” in d ic a te s t h a t h e also p a in te d th e p ic tu r e in A 6.— E d i t o r s .]

~ The Golden Flower represented as the most splendid of all flowers

I n t h e c e n t r e , t h e G o l d e n F l o w e r ; r a d i a t i n g o u t f r o m it, fishes as f e r t i l i t y symbols ( c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e t h u n d e r b o l t s of L a m a i c m a n d a l a s )

$ A lum inous flower in the centre, w ith stars ro ta tin g ab o u t it. A ro u n d th e flower, walls w ith eig h t gates. T h e w hole conceived as a tra n sp a re n t w indow

Separation of the air-world and the earth-world. (Birds and serpents.) In tbe centre, a Hower with a golden star

5 S e p a ra tio n of th e lig h t fro m th e d a r k w o rld ; th e h e a v e n ly fro m th e e a rth ly so u l. I n th e c e n tre , a r e p r e s e n ta tio n o f c o n te m p la tio n

I n t h e c e n t r e , t h e w h i t e l i g h t , s h i n i n g in t h e f i r m a m e n t ; i n t h e first circle, protop l a s m i c life-seeds; in t h e second, r o t a t i n g cosmic p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h c o n t a i n t h e four p r i m a r y colours; i n t h e t h i r d a n d f o u r t h , creative forces w o r k i n g i n w a r d a n d outw a r d . A t t h e c a r d i n a l p o i n t s , t h e m a s c u l i n e a n d f e m i n i n e souls, b o t h a g a i n divided into light and d a r k

9 R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e te tr a k ty s in c ir c u la r m o v e m e n t

A c h i l d in t h e g e r m i n a l vesicle w i t h t h e f o u r p r i m a r y c o l o u r s i n c l u d e d in the circular movement

A12

9 In th e centre, th e germ in al vesicle w ith a h u m a n figure n o u rish ed by b lo o d vessels w hich have th e ir origin in th e cosmos. T h e cosmos ro tates aro u n d th e cen tre, w hich a ttra c ts its em anations. A ro u n d th e o utside is spread nerve tissue in d ic atin g th a t th e process takes place in th e solar plexus

$ A m an d ala as a fortified city w ith w all an d m oat. W ith in , a b ro ad m oat s u rro u n d in g a w all fortified w ith sixteen tow ers an d w ith a n o th e r in n e r m oat. T h is m oat encloses a ce n tral castle w ith golden roofs w hose cen tre is a golden tem ple

A lO

II T H E VISIONS OF ZOSIMOS

[O rig in ally g iv en as a le c tu re to th e E ra n o s C o n fe re n ce a t A scona, Sw itzer land, in A u g u st 1937, a n d p u b lis h e d u n d e r th e title “ E in ig e B em erk u n g e n zu d e n V isio n en des Z osim os," E ranos-Ja h rb uch 193J (Z urich, 1938). R e vised a n d c o n sid e ra b ly e x p a n d e d , as “D ie V isio n en des Zosim os,” in V on den W u rze ln des B e w u sstse in s: S tu d ie n ilb er d e n A rc h e ty p u s (Psychologische A b h a n d lu n g e n , V ol. IX ; Z u rich , 1954), w h ich v ersio n is tra n s la te d h ere.— E d i t o r s ,]

TH E TEXTS I m u st m ake clear at o n ce that the fo llo w in g observations on the vision s o f Z osim os o f P an op olis, an im p ortan t alch em ist and G nostic o f the th ird cen tu ry a .d ., are n o t in ten d ed as a final e x p lan ation o f this extraord in arily difficult m aterial. M y psycho logical co n trib u tio n is n o m ore than an attem p t to shed a little ligh t on it an d to answ er som e o f the q u estion s raised by th e visions. 86 T h e first v isio n occurs at the b eg in n in g o f “T h e T rea tise o f Zosimos th e D iv in e co n cern in g th e A rt.” 1 Zosim os in trod u ces the treatise w ith som e general rem arks on the processes o f n atu re and, in particular, o n th e “co m p o sitio n o f th e w aters” (d ea ts νδάτω ν ) and various oth er op erations, and closes w ith the words: “. . . an d u p o n this sim p le system of m any colours is based the m an ifold and in fin itely varied in v estig a tio n o f a ll th in g s.” T h e r e upon th e tex t b e g in s :2 85

(III, I, 2.) And as I spoke thus I fell asleep, and I saw a sacrificer3 standing before me, high up on an altar, which was in the shape of a bowl. There were fifteen steps leading up to the altar. And the priest stood there, and I heard a voice from above saying to me: “I have performed the act of descending the fifteen steps into the darkness, and of ascending the steps into the light. And he who re news me is the sacrificer, by casting away the grossness of the body; 1 "Ζωσίμου τοϋ Oeiov Trepl bperijs.” ’Αρετή h e re sh o u ld n o t be tran slate d as “v irtu e ” or “pow er” ("v e rtu ” in B erthelot) b u t as “ th e A rt,” co rresp o n d in g to th e L a tin ars nostra. T h e treatise has n o th in g w hatever to do w ith v irtu e. 2 B e rth elo t, C ollection des anciens alchim istes grecs, w ith tran slatio n s in to F ren ch by C. E. R u elle. [T h e p rese n t tra n sla tio n is by A. S. B. G lover from th e G reek te x t in B erth elo t, w ith reference also to R u e lle ’s F ren ch a n d J u n g ’s G erm an . T h e section n u m e ra tio n is B e rth e lo t’s.— E d i t o r s .] 3 T h e Upovpybs is th e sacrificial p riest w ho p erfo rm s th e cerem onies. T h e Upeis is r a th e r th e Upo<f>irn)s, th e p ro p h e t a n d revealer of th e m ysteries. N o diS eren ce is m ade betw een th e m in th e text.

a n d by co m p e llin g necessity I am sanctified as a p rie s t a n d now s ta n d in p e rfe c tio n as a s p irit.” A n d o n h e a rin g th e voice o f h im w h o sto o d u p o n th e a lta r, I in q u ire d of h im w ho he was. A n d he answ ered m e in a fine voice, saying: “ I am Io n ,4 th e p rie s t of th e in n e r san ctu aries, a n d I su b m it m yself to a n u n e n d u ra b le to rm e n t.6 F o r th e re cam e o n e in h aste a t early m o rn in g , w ho o v erp o w ered me, a n d p ie rc e d m e th ro u g h w ith th e sw ord, a n d d ism e m b e red m e in acco rd an ce w ith th e ru le of h a rm o n y .6 A n d h e d re w off th e skin of m y h e a d w ith th e sw ord, w h ic h h e w ie ld e d w ith s tre n g th , a n d m in g le d th e bones w ith th e pieces o f flesh, a n d caused th e m to be b u r n e d u p o n th e fire o f th e a rt, till I perceiv ed by th e tra n s fo rm a tio n of th e b o d y th a t I h a d becom e sp irit. A n d th a t is m y u n e n d u r a b le to rm e n t.” A n d even as he spoke thus, a n d I h e ld h im by force to converse w ith m e, his eyes becam e as b lo o d . A n d h e spew ed fo rth a ll h is ow n flesh. A n d I saw h o w h e ch an g ed in to the o p p o site of him self, in to a m u tila te d a n th r o p a rio n ,7 a n d h e to re his flesh w ith his ow n tee th , a n d sank in to him self. ( I l l , i, 3.) F u ll of fe a r I aw oke fro m sleep, a n d I th o u g h t to m y self: “ Is n o t th is th e c o m p o sitio n of th e w aters?” A n d I w as assu red th a t I h a d w ell u n d e rsto o d , a n d a g a in I fell asleep. I saw th e sam e b ow l-sh ap ed a lta r a n d , o n th e u p p e r p a rt, b o ilin g w a te r, a n d a n u m b erless m u ltitu d e of p e o p le in it. A n d th e re w as n o o n e n e a r th e a lta r w h o m I c o u ld q u e stio n . T h e n I w e n t u p to th e a lta r to see th is sight. A n d I perceiv ed a n a n th r o p a rio n , a b a rb e r 8 g ro w n grey 4 I o n o c cu rs in th e S a b a e a n tr a d itio n as J u n a n b e n M e rq tiliu s (son o f M e rc u ry ), th e a n c e sto r o f th e I o n ia n s (e l-Jd n d n ifin ). [Cf. E u ty c h iu s , A n n a le s , in M ig ne, P .G ., v o l. 111, co l. 922.] T h e S a b a e a n s c o n sid e r h im th e f o u n d e r o f th e ir r e lig io n . C f. C h w o lso h n , D ie S sa b ier u n d d e r S sa b ism u sj I, p p . 205, 796, a n d II, p . 509. H e rm e s , to o , w as c o n sid e re d a f o u n d e r (I, p . 521). 5 Κ ό λα σ « , lite r a lly ‘p u n is h m e n t.’ H e r e i t m e a n s th e to r m e n t w h ic h th e p r im a m a te r ia h a s to u n d e rg o in o r d e r to b e tr a n s fo r m e d . T h is p ro c e d u r e is c a lle d m o r tific a tio . [F o r a n e x a m p le , see th e m o rtific a tio o f th e " E t h io p ia n ” in P sy c h o l ogy a n d A lc h e m y j p a r . 484. A lso in f ra , “T h e P h ilo s o p h ic a l T r e e ,” c h . 17.— E d i t o r s .]

6 Διασττάσας

κατά σύσ τα σιν αρμονίαs. B e rth e lo t h a s “ d e m e m b ra n t, s u iv a n t Ies reg ies d e la c o m b in a is o n .” I t re fe rs to th e d iv isio n in to f o u r b o d ies, n a tu r e s , o r e le m e n ts. C f. B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I , iii, 11 a n d C h im ie a u n io y e n age, I I I , p . 92. A lso “ V isio A ris le i,” A r tis a u rife ra e , I, p . 151, a n d " E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u r b a m I X ,” ib id ., p . 170. ‘ 7 tZSov αύτάν i s roivavriov άνθρωπάριον κολοβόν. If I a m n o t m is ta k e n , th e c o n c e p t of t h e h o m u n c u lu s a p p e a rs h e r e fo r th e first tim e in a lc h e m ic a l lite r a tu r e . 81 re a d £vpovpy 6 s in s te a d o f th e m e a n in g le ss frp o v p y is in th e te x t. C f. I l l , v, 1, w h e re t h e b a r b e r d o es in fa c t a p p e a r as a n a n th r o p a r io n . (O r s h o u ld i t b e ta k e n a d je c tiv a lly : ζνρουργύν άνθρωττάριρν?) T h e a n th r o p a r io n is g re y b ec a u se , as w e s h a ll see, h e re p r e s e n ts th e le a d .

T H E VISIONS O F ZOSIMOS

w ith age, w h o said to m e: “W h a t are you lo o k in g at?” I re p lie d th a t I was a sto n ish e d to see th e se eth in g o f the w ater, a n d th e m e n b u rn in g a n d yet alive. H e a n sw ered m e thus: “T h e sig h t th a t you see is th e e n tra n c e , a n d th e e x it, a n d th e tra n s fo rm a tio n .” I asked him : “W h a t tra n s fo rm a tio n ? ” a n d he answ ered: “T h is is th e place of th e o p e ra tio n c a lled e m b a lm in g . T h o se w ho seek to o b ta in th e a rt9 e n te r h ere, a n d b ecom e sp irits by escaping fro m th e b o d y .” T h e n I said to h im : “A n d you, are you a sp irit? ” A n d he answ ered: "Yes, a s p irit a n d a g u a rd ia n o f s p irits .” As we spoke, w h ile th e b o ilin g c o n tin u e d a n d th e p e o p le u tte r e d distressful cries, I saw a brazen m a n h o ld in g a le a d e n ta b le t in his h a n d . A n d he spoke w ith a lo u d voice, lo o k in g u p o n th e tab le t: “I co m m an d all those w ho are u n d e rg o in g th e p u n is h m e n t to be calm , to take each of th e m a leaden ta b le t, to w rite w ith th e ir ow n h a n d , a n d to keep th e ir eyes u p ra is e d in th e a ir a n d th e ir m o u th s o pen, u n til th e ir u v u la sw ell.” 10 T h e d e e d fo llo w ed the w ord, a n d th e m a ste r o f th e h ouse said to m e: “ Y ou have b e h e ld , you have stre tc h e d y o u r neck u p w a rd a n d have seen w h a t is d o n e .” I re p lie d th a t I h a d seen, a n d he con tin u ed : “ T h is b ra z e n m a n w h o m you see is th e p rie st w ho sacrifices a n d is sacrificed, a n d spews fo rth his ow n flesh. P o w er is given h im over th is w a te r a n d over th e p e o p le w ho are p u n is h e d .” 11 ( III, v, i.) A t last I was overcom e w ith the desire to m o u n t th e seven steps a n d to see th e seven p u n ish m e n ts, a n d , as was su ita b le , » O r “m oral p erfec tio n .” 10E vidently a p a rtic u la rly convulsive o p en in g of th e m o u th is m ean t, coupled w ith a v iolent co n tra ctio n of th e p h ary n x . T h is co n tractio n was a k in d of re tc h ing m ovem ent fo r b rin g in g u p th e in n e r contents. T h ese h a d to be W'ritten dow n on th e tablets. T h e y w ere in sp ira tio n s com ing from above th a t w ere caught, as it were, by th e u p raise d eyes. T h e p ro ce d u re m ig h t b e com pared w ith th e tech nique of active im a g in a tio n . 11 [In th e Swiss e d itio n (Von den W u rzeln des Bew usstseins, p p . 141-45) th is section, th o u g h n u m b e re d III, i, 3 only, con tin u es in to III, i, 4, 5, a n d 6 w ith o u t a break, th e w hole bein g ru n to g eth er as a single section. I ll, i, r, th e n reap p ears a t th e en d of th e sequence of visions (par. 87), b u t in v a ria n t form , as a "rdsum e,” a n d th e reasons for its p lacem ent th e re are ex p lain ed in th e com m entary (pars. 93, 111, 121). As no ex p lan a tio n is given for its d u p lic atio n u n d e r III, i, 3, an d th e v aria tio n s are in th e m ain m erely stylistic, we have o m itte d it a t this p o in t a n d rec o n stitu ted III, i. 4-G at the end of th e sequence. T h e w o rd ing of J u n g ’s in te rp o la tio n a t p a r. 87 has been altered to account for this change. T h e sections are p resen ted in th e o rd er III, i, 5, III, i, 4, III, i, G on th e assu m p tion th a t III, i, 4 is n o t m e a n t to form a p a rt of th e “ risu m d ” p ro p e r, b u t, as stated in th e E ranos version of “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” is ra th e r "Zosim os’ ow n com m entary on his visions” an d “a g en eral p h ilo so p h ica l conclusion” (T h e M ysteries, p p . 3 iif.).— E d i t o r s .]

i n a single day; so I w e n t b ack in o rd e r to c o m p lete th e ascent. Pass in g it several tim es, I a t le n g th cam e u p o n th e p a th . B u t as I was a b o u t to ascend, I lo st m y w ay ag ain ; greatly d isco u rag ed , a n d n o t seeing in w h ic h d ire c tio n I s h o u ld go, I fell asleep. A n d w h ile I was sleeping, I saw a n a n th ro p a rio n , a b a rb e r c la d in a ro b e o f royal p u rp le , w ho sto o d o u tsid e th e p lace of p u n ish m e n ts. H e said to m e: “ M an , w h a t a re y o u do in g ?” a n d I re p lie d : “I h a v e s to p p e d h e re because, h a v in g tu rn e d aside fro m th e ro a d , I h av e lost m y w ay.” A n d h e said: “ F ollow m e.” A n d I tu rn e d a n d follow ed h im . W h e n we cam e n e a r to th e p lace o f p u n ish m e n ts, I saw m y g u id e, this little b a rb e r, e n te r th a t p lace, a n d h is w h o le b o d y w as c o n su m ed by th e fire. ( I l l , v, 2.) O n seeing this, I s te p p e d aside, tre m b lin g w ith fear; th e n I aw oke, a n d sa id w ith in m yself: “W h a t m ean s th is vision?” A n d a g a in I clarified m y u n d e rs ta n d in g , a n d knew th a t th is b a rb e r was th e b raz e n m an , clad in a p u r p le g a rm e n t. A n d I said to m y self: “ I have w ell u n d e rs to o d , th is is th e b ra z e n m a n . I t is n e e d fu l th a t first h e m u st e n te r th e p lace of p u n ish m e n ts .” ( I l l, v, 3.) A g a in m y so u l d e sire d to m o u n t th e th ir d step also. A n d a g a in I follow ed th e ro a d alone, a n d w h e n I was n e a r th e place o f p u n ish m e n ts, I a g a in w e n t astray, n o t k n o w in g m y way, a n d I sto p p e d in d esp air. A n d ag ain , as it seem ed, I saw a n o ld m a n w h it e n e d by years, w ho h a d becom e w h o lly w h ite, w ith a b lin d in g w hiteness. H is n a m e was A g a th o d a im o n . T u r n in g h im se lf a b o u t, th e o ld m a n w ith w h ite h a ir gazed u p o n m e fo r a fu ll h o u r. A n d I u rg e d h im : “Show m e th e r ig h t w ay.” H e d id n o t com e tow ard s m e, b u t h a ste n e d on h is way. B u t I, r u n n in g h ith e r a n d th ith e r, a t le n g th cam e to th e a lta r. A n d w h e n I sto o d a t th e to p of th e a lta r, I saw th e w h ite -h a ire d o ld m a n e n te r th e p lace o f p u n ish m e n ts. O ye d e m iu rg es of celestial n a tu re ! Im m e d ia te ly he was tra n sfo rm e d by th e flam e in to a p illa r o f fire. W h a t a te rrib le story, m y b re th re n ! F or, o n a c c o u n t of th e vio len ce o f th e p u n is h m e n t, his eyes filled w ith b lo o d . I spoke to h im , a n d asked: “W h y a re you s tre tc h e d o u t th ere ? ” B u t h e c o u ld b a re ly o p e n h is m o u th , a n d g ro a n e d : “ I am th e le a d e n m a n , a n d I s u b m it m yself to a n u n e n d u ra b le to rm e n t.” T h e r e u p o n , seized w ith g re a t fear, I aw oke a n d so u g h t w ith in m y self th e rea so n fo r w h a t I h a d seen. A n d a g a in I c o n sid e red a n d said to m yself: “I have w ell u n d e rsto o d , fo r it m ean s th a t th e lea d is to b e re je cte d , a n d in tr u th th e v isio n refers to th e co m p o sitio n o f the liq u id s .”

(III, vblB.) A gain I beheld the divine and holy bow l-shaped altar, and I saw a priest clothed in a w hite robe reaching to his feet, w ho was celebrating these terrible m ysteries, and I said: “W h o is this?” And the answer came: “T h is is the priest of the inner sanctuaries. It is he w ho changes the bodies in to blood, makes the eyes clairvoy ant, and raises the dead." T h en , fallin g again to earth, I again fell asleep. A nd as I was ascending the fourth step, I saw, to the east, one approaching, h old in g a sword in his hand. A nd another [came] behind him , b ringin g on e adorned round about w ith signs, clad in white and com ely to see, w ho was nam ed the M eridian o f the S u n .12 And as they drew near to the place o f punishm ents, he w ho held the sword in his hand [said]: “Cut off his head, im m olate his body, and cut his flesh in to pieces, that it may first be b oiled according to the m ethod,13 and then delivered to the place o f pun ishm ents.” T h ereupon I awoke and said; "I have w ell understood, this con cerns the liquids in the art of the m etals.” A nd he wTho bore the sword in his hand said again: “You have com pleted the descent o f the seven steps.” A nd the other answered, as he caused the waters to gush forth from all the m oist places: “T h e procedure is com pleted.” ( I ll, vi, i.) A nd I saw an altar w hich was in the shape of a bow l, and a fiery spirit stood upon the altar, and tended the fire for the seething and the b o ilin g and the burning o f the m en w ho rose up from it. A nd I inquired about the p eople w h o stood there, and I said: “I see w ith astonishm ent the seething and the b o ilin g of the water, and the m en burning and yet alivei” A nd he answered m e, saying: “T h is b o ilin g that you see is the place o f the operation 12 K ai aXXos ότίΐσω αύτοϋ φίρων TrepepKovισμίνον τινά. λευκοφόρο» καί ώραϊον τήν 5φιν, otj τό 5νομα Εκαλείτο μ^σουράνισμα ή\ίον. B erth eiot: “ U n autre, derriere lu i, p ortait un objet circulaire, d ’u n e b lan ch eu r ic la ta n te , et trfes beau 4 Voir appeld M 0ridien du C innabre." It is n o t clea r w h y μεσονράνισμα ηκίου is translated as “m erid ian of the cin n ab ar,” th u s m ak in g it a ch em ical analogy, ττεριρκοησμίνον τινά m ust refer to a person and n o t to a th in g . D r. M .-L . von Franz has draw n m y a tten tio n to the fo llo w in g pa ra llels in A p u leiu s. H e calls th e sto la o ly m p ia c a w ith w h ich the in itia te was clad a “ p recious scarf w ith sacred anim als worked in colou r on every part o f it; for instan ce, In d ia n serpents an d H yperborean griffins.” "I . . . wore a w h ite p alm -tree ch a p let w ith its leaves stick in g o u t all rou n d lik e rays of Kght.'' T h e in itia te w as show n to the p eo p le “ as w h en a sta tu e is u n veiled , dressed lik e th e su n .” T h e sun, w h ich h e now was, h e h ad seen th e previous night, after h is figurative d eath . “A t m id n ig h t I saw th e su n sh in in g as if it w ere n oon .” (T h e G o ld en Ass, trans. Graves, p . 2 8 6 .) 13 L iterally, opyavncSts·

c a lle d e m b a lm in g . T h o s e w h o se e k to o b t a i n th e a r t e n t e r h e r e , a n d th e y c a st th e ir b o d ie s fro m th e m a n d b e c o m e s p irits . T h e p r a c tic e [ o f t h e a r t ] is e x p l a i n e d b y t h i s p r o c e d u r e ; f o r w h a t e v e r c a s ts o ff th e g ro ssn ess o f th e b o d y b ec o m e s s p ir it.” 87

T h e Z o s i m o s t e x t s a r e i n a d i s o r d e r e d s t a t e . A t I I I , i, 5 t h e r e is a m is p l a c e d b u t o b v io u s l y a u t h e n t i c r e s u m e o r a m p l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e v is i o n s , a n d a t I I I , i, 4 a p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e m . Z o s im o s c a lls th is w h o le p a s s a g e a n “ i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e d i s c o u r s e t h a t is t o f o l l o w ” ( I I I , i, 6 ) . ( I l l , i, 5 .) I n s h o r t , m y f r i e n d , b u i l d a t e m p l e f r o m a s i n g l e s t o n e , l i k e t o w h i t e l e a d , t o a l a b a s t e r , t o P r o c o n n e s i a n m a r b l e , 14 w i t h n e i t h e r e n d n o r b e g i n n i n g i n i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n . 15 L e t i t h a v e w i t h i n i t a s p r in g o f th e p u r e s t w a te r, s p a rk lin g lik e th e s u n . N o te c a re f u l l y o n w h a t s i d e is t h e e n t r a n c e t o t h e t e m p l e , a n d t a k e a s w o r d i n y o u r h a n d ; t h e n s e e k t h e e n t r a n c e , f o r n a r r o w is t h e p l a c e w h e r e t h e o p e n i n g is. A d r a g o n lie s a t t h e e n t r a n c e , g u a r d i n g t h e t e m p l e . L a y h o l d u p o n h i m ; i m m o l a t e h i m f ir s t; s t r i p h i m o f h i s s k i n , a n d t a k i n g h i s f le s h w i t h t h e b o n e s , s e p a r a t e t h e l i m b s ; t h e n , l a y i n g [ t h e f le s h o f ] t h e l i m b s 16 t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e b o n e s a t t h e e n t r a n c e o f t h e te m p le , m a k e a s te p o f th e m , m o u n t th e re o n , a n d e n te r , a n d y o u w i l l f i n d w h a t y o u s e e k .17 T h e p r i e s t , t h a t b r a z e n m a n , w h o m y o u se e s e a t e d i n t h e s p r i n g a n d c o m p o s i n g t h e s u b s t a n c e , [ l o o k o n ] h i m n o t as th e b r a z e n m a n , f o r h e h a s c h a n g e d th e c o lo u r o f h is n a t u r e a n d h a s b e c o m e th e s ilv e r m a n ; a n d if y o u w ill, y o u w ill s o o n h a v e h i m [a s] t h e g o l d e n m a n . ( I l l , i, 4 .) A n d a f t e r I h a d s e e n t h i s a p p a r i t i o n , I a w o k e , a n d I s a i d t o m y s e lf : “ W h a t is t h e c a u s e o f t h i s v is i o n ? I s n o t t h a t b o i l i n g w h ite a n d y e llo w w a te r th e d iv in e w a te r ? ” A n d I f o u n d t h a t I h a d w e l l u n d e r s t o o d . A n d I s a i d : “ B e a u t i f u l i t is t o s p e a k a n d b e a u t i f u l t o h e a r , b e a u t i f u l t o g iv e a n d b e a u t i f u l t o r e c e i v e , b e a u t i f u l t o b e p o o r a n d b e a u tif u l to b e r ic h . H o w d o e s n a t u r e te a c h g iv in g a n d r e c e i v i n g ? T h e b r a z e n m a n g iv e s a n d t h e h y d r o l i t h r e c e iv e s ; t h e m e t a l g iv e s a n d t h e p l a n t r e c e iv e s ; t h e s t a r s g i v e a n d t h e f lo w e r s r e c e i v e ; t h e h e a v e n s g iv e a n d t h e e a r t h r e c e iv e s ; t h e t h u n d e r c l a p s g iv e f o r t h d a r t i n g f ire . A n d a l l t h i n g s a r e w o v e n t o g e t h e r a n d a ll th in g s a re u n d o n e a g a in ; a ll th in g s a r e m in g le d to g e th e r a n d a ll 14 T h e island of Prokonnesos was the site of the famous Greek m arble quarry, now called Marmara (Turkey), i s T h at is, circular. 1 6 T h e Greek has only μέλοϊ. I follow the reading of codex Gr. 225a (Paris). i t T h e res quaesita or quaerenda is a standing expression in Latin alchemy. 64

things com b in e; a n d a ll th in g s u n ite a n d all things se p ara te ; all things a re m o iste n e d a n d a ll th in g s are d rie d ; a n d a ll th in g s flourish and all th in g s fad e in th e bow l o f th e alta r. F or each th in g comes to pass w ith m e th o d a n d in fixed m easu re a n d by e x act18 w eig h in g of the fo u r elem ents. T h e w eaving to g eth e r of all th in g s a n d the u n d o in g of a ll th in g s a n d th e w hole fab ric of things c a n n o t com e to pass w ith o u t m e th o d . T h e m e th o d is a n a tu ra l one, p rese rv in g due o rd e r in its in h a lin g a n d its ex h alin g ; it b rin g s increase a n d it brings decrease. A n d to sum u p : th ro u g h th e h arm o n ies of sepa ra tin g a n d c o m b in in g , a n d if n o th in g of th e m e th o d be neglected, all th in g s b rin g fo rth n a tu re . F o r n a tu re a p p lie d to n a tu re tra n s form s n a tu re . Such is th e o rd e r of n a tu ra l law th ro u g h o u t th e w hole cosmos, a n d th u s a ll th in g s h a n g to g eth e r.” ( I ll, i, 6.) T h is in tro d u c tio n is th e key w hich sh all o p e n to you the flowers of th e discourse th a t is to follow , nam ely, th e in v estig atio n of the a rts, of w isdom , of reason a n d u n d e rsta n d in g , th e efficacious m ethods a n d rev e latio n s w hich th ro w lig h t u p o n th e secret words. 18 O i y Ύ ία σ μ ψ .

COM M ENTARY I . G EN ERA L REM ARKS ON T H E

IN T E R P R E T A T IO N

A lth o u g h it looks as if this w ere a series of visions follow ing one a fte r th e o th e r, th e fre q u e n t re p e titio n s an d strik in g sim i larities suggest ra th e r th a t it was essentially a single vision w hich is p resen ted as a set of variations on the them es it contains. Psy chologically a t least, th e re is n o g ro u n d fo r su p p o sin g th a t it is an allegorical in v en tio n . Its salient featu res seem to in d icate th a t fo r Zosimos it was a hig h ly significant ex p erien ce w hich he w ished to co m m u n icate to others. A lth o u g h alchem ical lite ra tu re contains a n u m b e r of allegories w hich w ith o u t d o u b t are m erely d idactic fables a n d are n o t based o n d ire c t e x p erien ce,1 th e vision of Zosimos m ay w ell have b een a n actu al h a p p en in g . T h is seems to be b o rn e o u t by the m a n n e r in w hich Zosimos him self in te rp re ts it as a co n firm ation of his ow n p reo ccu p atio n : “ Is n o t this th e com position of th e w aters?” Such a n in te rp re ta tio n seems— to us a t any ra te — to leave o u t of acco u n t th e m ost im pressive im ages in th e vision, a n d to re d u c e a fa r m o re signifi c an t com plex of facts to an all too sim ple com m on d e n o m in a to r. If th e vision w ere an allegory, th e m ost conspicuous images w o u ld also be the ones th a t have th e greatest significance. B u t it is characteristic of any subjective d ream in te rp re ta tio n th a t it is satisfied w ith p o in tin g o u t superficial relatio n sh ip s w hich take n o acco u n t of th e essentials. A n o th e r th in g to b e considered is th a t th e alchem ists them selves testify to th e o ccu rren ce of dream s a n d visions d u rin g th e o p u s.2 I am in c lin e d to th in k th a t th e vision o r visions of Zosimos w ere experiences of this k in d , 1 F o r e x a m p le , th e “V isio A ris le i” (A r t . a u rif., I, p p . 1 46ft) a n d th e v isio n s in th e “ B o o k o f K ra te s ” (B e rth e lo t, C h im ie a u m o y e n dge, I I I , p p . 4 4-75). 2 C f. P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a rs . 347ff.

w hich took place d u rin g th e w ork and revealed the n atu re o f the psychic processes in th e back grou n d.3 In these vision s all those contents em erge w h ich the alchem ists u n con sciou sly p rojected in to the ch em ical process and w hich w ere then p erceived there, as th ou gh they w ere q u a lities of m atter. T h e ex ten t to w h ich this p rojection was fostered by the conscious a ttitu d e is sh ow n by the som ew hat overhasty in terp retation g iv en by Z osim os him self. 89 E ven th ou g h his in terp retation strikes us at first as som ew hat forced, in d eed as far-fetched and arbitrary, w e sh o u ld n ev erth e less n ot forget that w h ile the co n cep tio n o f the “w aters” is a strange on e to us, for Z osim os and for th e alchem ists in gen eral it had a significance w e w o u ld never suspect. It is also p ossible that th e m e n t io n o f the “w a te r ” o p e n e d o u t perspectives in w hich the ideas o f d ism em b erm en t, k illin g , torture, an d trans form ation all had th eir place. For, b eg in n in g w ith the treatises o f D em ocritu s and K om arios, w h ich are assigned to the first cen tury a . d ., alchem y, u n til w ell in to the eig h teen th century, was very largely con cern ed w ith the m iraculou s water, the aqu a div in a or perm a n en s, w h ich was extracted from the lapis, or prim a m ateria, th rough th e torm en t of the fire. T h e w ater was the h u m id u m radicale (radical m oisture), w hich stood for the anima m e d ia n atu ra or a n im a m u n d i im p rison ed in m atter,4 the 3 T h e o p u s e x te n d e d o v e r a p e r io d w ith n o fix e d lim its . D u r in g

th is tim e th e a r tife x h a d to d e v o te h im s e lf “r e lig io u s ly ” to th e p r o c ess o f tr a n sfo r m a tio n . S in ce th e p r o c ess w a s s u b je c tiv e as w e ll as o b je c tiv e , i t is n o t s u r p r isin g th a t it in c lu d e d d r e a m -e x p e r ie n c e s . G . B a ttista N a z a r i (D e l l a t r a m u t a t i o n e m e t a l l i c a s o g n i t r e , 1599) a c tu a lly r e p r e se n te d th e o p u s in th e fo r m o f (a lle g o r ic a l) d rea m s. “T h e p h ilo s o p h ic w a te r is s o m e tim e s m a n ife s te d to th e e in s le e p ,” says th e " P a r a b o la ” o f S e n d iv o g iu s (B i b l i o t h e c a c h e m i c a , I I , p . 47 5 ). W e c a n n o t s u p p o se th a t th e a u th o r h a d a n y k n o w le d g e o f th e v is io n s o f Z osim os; th e r e fe r e n c e is p r o b a b ly t o t h e “V isio A r is le i,” as su g g e s te d b y th e fo llo w in g (p. 475 b): " S o lu m fr u c tu m a r b o r is S o la r is v id i in s o m n iis S a tu r n u m M e r c u r io n o s tr o im p o n e r e ” (I sa w in d r e a m s t h e s o le fr u it o f t h e tr ee o f th e su n im p o s e S a tu r n o n o u r M er cu riu s). C f. th e e n d o f th e “V is io A r is le i” : “V id im u s te m a g istr u m in so m n iis. P e tiim u s u t n o b is su b s id iu m H o r f o lto d is c ip u lo tu o offeras, q u i n u t r i m e n t! a u c to r e s t” (W e sa w th e e , th e m a ste r, in d r e a m s. W e b e s o u g h t th a t th o u w o u ld st o ffer u s fo r o u r h e lp th y d is c ip le H o r fo ltu s , w h o is th e a u th o r o f n o u r ish m e n t).— C o d e x Q . 584 (B e r lin ), fo l 2 i T. R u sk a , e d ., T u r b a P h i l o s o p h o r u m , p p . 387f. T h e b e g in n in g o f th e “ V is io ” sh o w s h o w th e fr u it o f " th a t im m o r ta l tr e e ” m a y b e g a th e r e d . 4 I n o u r t e x t (II I, v . 3) i t is th e A g a th o d a im o n it s e lf th a t su ffers tr a n sfo r m a tio n .

soul of the stone or m etal, also called th e a n im a aquina. T h is an im a was set free n o t only by m eans of the “co o k in g ,” b u t also by the sw ord d iv id in g th e “ egg,” o r by th e separatio, o r by disso lu tio n in to th e fo u r “ro o ts” o r elem ents.5 T h e separatio was of te n re p re se n te d as th e d ism e m b erm en t of a h u m a n b ody.6 O f th e aqua p e rm a n e n s it was said th a t it dissolved th e bodies in to th e fo u r elem ents. A lto g eth er, th e d iv in e w ater possessed th e p ow er of tra n sfo rm a tio n . I t tran sfo rm ed th e nigredo in to th e albedo th ro u g h th e m iracu lo u s “w ashing” (a b lu tio ); it a n i m a te d in e rt m a tte r, m ade th e d ead to rise ag ain ,7 an d th erefo re possessed th e v irtu e of th e b aptism al w ater in th e ecclesiastical rite .8 J u st as, in th e benedictio fontis, th e p riest m akes th e sign of th e cross over th e w ater a n d so divides it in to fo u r p arts,0 so th e m e rc u ria l serpent, sym bolizing th e aqua perm anens, u n d e r goes d ism e m b erm en t, a n o th e r p a ra llel to th e div isio n of the body.10 9° I shall n o t elab o rate any fu rth e r this w eb of in te rc o n n ec te d m eanings in w hich alchem y is so rich . W h a t I have said m ay suffice to show th a t the idea of th e “w a ter” a n d th e o p eratio n s connected w ith it co u ld easily open o u t to th e alch em ist a vista in w hich p ractically all th e them es of th e vision fall in to place. F ro m the s ta n d p o in t of Zosim os’ conscious psychology, thereD iv isio n in to fo u r e le m e n ts a f te r th e m o rtific a tio o ccu rs in “ E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u r b a m I C ” (A r t . a u r if., I, p . 170), also in " A e n ig m a ” V I (ib id ., p . 151). F o r d iv i sion o f th e egg in to fo u r, see th e B o o k o f E l-H a b ib (B e rth e lo t, M o y e n dge, III, p . 92). T h e d iv isio n in to f o u r w as k n o w n as τετρ α μ ΐρ έϊν τη ν φιλοσοφίαν (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I I , x liv , 5). β F o r e x a m p le , in T ris m o s in , S p le n d o r solis (A u r e u m v e llu s, p . 27). T h e sam e in S p le n d o r Solis (L o n d o n , 1920, re p r.), P I. X , a n d L a c in iu s , P retio sa m a rg a rita n o v e lla (V enice, 1546), fo l. * * * x ii. 7 " I t is th e w a te r th a t k ills a n d vivifies” (R o s a r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , in A r l . a u rif., II, p . 2 J 4 ) . S J u s t as b a p tis m is a p re - C h r is tia n rite , a c c o rd in g to th e te s tim o n y o f th e gospels, so, to o , th e d iv in e w a te r is o f p a g a n a n d p re - C h r is tia n o rig in . T h e P ra e f a tio o f th e B e n e d ic tio F o n tis o n E a s te r E ve says: “ M ay th is w a te r, p re p a r e d fo r th e r e b i r t h o f m e n , b e r e n d e r e d f r u itf u l b y th e se c re t in p o u r in g o f h is d iv in e p o w e r; m a y a h e a v e n ly o ffe rin g , c o n ce iv e d in h o lin e ss a n d re b o r n in t o a n e w c re a tio n , co m e f o r th fro m th e sta in le ss w o m b o f th is d iv in e fo n t; a n d m ay a ll, h o w e v e r d is tin g u is h e d b y ag e in tim e o r sex in b o d y , b e b r o u g h t fo r th in to o n e in fa n c y by th e m o th e rh o o d o f g ra c e ” (T h e M issa l in L a ti n a n d E n g lish , 5

P- 429)·

“T h e p rie s t d iv id e s th e w a te r crossw ise w ith h is h a n d ” (ib id .). 10 Cf. P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y ; p a rs . 354, 530.

fore, his in te rp re ta tio n seems ra th e r less forced an d a rb itra ry . A L a tin p ro v e rb says: canis p a n e m som niat, piscator pisces (the dog dream s of bread, th e fisherm an of fish). T h e alchem ist, too, dream s in his ow n specific language. T h is enjoins u p o n us th e greatest circu m sp ectio n , all th e m ore so as th a t language is ex ceedingly obscure. I n o rd e r to u n d e rsta n d it, we have to le arn the psychological secrets of alchem y. I t is p ro b a b ly tru e w h at th e old M asters said, th a t only he w ho knows the secret of th e stone u n d erstan d s th e ir w ords.11 I t has lo n g b een asserted th a t this secret is sh eer nonsense, a n d n o t w o rth the tro u b le of in v estig at in g seriously. B u t this frivolous a ttitu d e ill befits th e psycholo gist, for any “n o n sen se” th a t fascinated m e n ’s m inds for close on two th o u sa n d years— am ong th em som e of th e greatest, e.g., N ew ton a n d G o e th e 12— m u st have som eth in g a b o u t it w hich it w ould be u seful for th e psychologist to know . M oreover, th e sym bolism of alchem y has a great deal to do w ith th e s tru c tu re of the unconscious, as I have show n in m y book Psychology and A lch e m y. T h e se things are n o t ju s t ra re curiosities, a n d anyone w ho wishes to u n d e rs ta n d th e sym bolism of dream s c an n o t close his eyes to th e fact th a t th e dream s of m o d e m m en a n d w om en often c o n ta in th e very im ages an d m etap h o rs th a t we find in the m edieval treatises.13 A n d since an u n d e rsta n d in g of the b io lo g i cal com pensation p ro d u c e d by dream s is of im p o rtan c e in the tre a tm e n t of neurosis as w ell as in th e d ev elo p m en t of conscious ness, a know ledge of these facts has also a p ractical v alu e w hich should n o t be u n d erestim ated . 11 Cf. “H o rtu la n u s su p e r E pisto lu m H erm e tis” in R o sa riu m , A rt. a u rif., II, p. 270. A urora C onsurgens (ed. von Franz), p p . 39-41: “F o r she [this science] is clear to them th a t have u n d e rsta n d in g . . . she seem eth easy to th e m th a t have know ledge of h e r.” M aier, Sym bola aureae m ensae, p. 146: “ . . . th a t they sh o u ld n o t u n d e rsta n d h is w ords, save those w ho are ju d g e d w o rth y of th is very g rea t m agistery.” 12 Cf. G ray, G oethe th e A lc h em ist. is i t has often been objected th a t symbols of this sort do n o t occur in dream s at all. N a tu ra lly they do n o t occur in all dream s o r in ju st any dream s, b u t only in special ones. T h e differences betw een dream s are as g rea t as those betw een in dividuals. A p a rtic u la r constellation of th e unconscious is n eed ed to p ro d u ce such dream s, i.e., arch ety p al dream s co n tain in g m ythological m otifs. (Exam ples in Psychology and A lch em y, P a rt II.) B u t they ca n n o t be recognized w ith o u t a know ledge of m ythology, w hich n o t a ll psychologists possess.

2 . T H E SA C R IFIC IA L A CT

T h e c e n tra l im ag e in o u r d ream -v isio n show s u s a k in d of sacrificial a c t u n d e r ta k e n fo r th e p u rp o s e of a lc h e m ic a l tr a n s fo rm a tio n . I t is c h a ra c te ristic o f th is r ite th a t th e p rie s t is a t o n ce th e sacrificer a n d th e sacrificed. T h is im p o r ta n t id e a re a c h e d Zosim os in th e fo rm o f th e te a c h in g s o f th e “ H e b re w s ” (i.e., C h ris tia n s ).1 C h ris t w as a g o d w h o sacrificed h im self. A n .essen tia l p a r t o f th e sacrificial a c t is d is m e m b e rm e n t. Z osim os m u s t h av e b e e n fa m ilia r w ith th is m o tif fro m th e D io n y s ia n m ysterytr a d itio n . T h e r e , to o , th e g o d is th e v ic tim , w h o was t o m to pieces b y th e T ita n s a n d th ro w n in to a co o k in g p o t,2 b u t w hose h e a rt w as saved a t th e la st m o m e n t b y H e ra . O u r te x t show s th a t th e b o w l-sh ap ed a lta r w as a c o o k in g vessel in w h ic h a m u ltitu d e o f p e o p le w ere b o ile d a n d b u r n e d . As w e k n o w fro m th e le g e n d a n d fro m a fra g m e n t o f E u r ip id e s ,3 a n o u tb u r s t of b e s tia l g re e d a n d th e te a rin g o f liv in g a n im a ls w ith th e te e th w ere p a r t of th e D io n y s ia n o rg y .4 D io n y siu s w as a c tu a lly c a lle d ό αμέριστοχ καί μεμ ερισ μ έζΌ ϊ νόϋs (th e u n d iv id e d a n d d iv id e d s p ir it).5 92 Z osim os m u s t also h av e b e e n f a m ilia r w ith th e flay in g m o tif. A w ell-k n o w n p a ra lle l o f th e d y in g a n d r e s u r g e n t g o d A ttis e is th e flayed a n d h a n g e d M arsyas. A lso, le g e n d a ttr ib u te s d e a th b y flaying to th e re lig io u s te a c h e r M a n i, w h o was a n e a r-c o n te m p o ra r y o f Z o sim o s.7 T h e s u b s e q u e n t stuffing o f th e sk in w ith straw is a r e m in d e r o f th e A ttic f e r tility a n d r e b ir t h c ere m o n ies. E v ery y e a r in A th e n s a n o x was s la u g h te re d a n d s k in n e d , a n d its p e lt 91

1 P rovided, of course, th a t th e passages in q u e s tio n are n o t in te rp o la tio n s by copyists, w ho w ere m ostly m onks. 2 P re lle r, G riechische M yth o lo g iej I, p . 437. 3 F rag m en t 472 N2, “T h e C retans.” C ited in D ieterich , M ith ra slitu rg ie, p . 105. 4 Cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” p p . 23 if. F or dism em b erm en t, tran sfo rm atio n , a n d recom position in a case of schizophrenia, see S pielrein, “ U eber d en psychologischen I n h a lt eines Falles von S chizophrenic,” p p . 358ff. D ism em b erm en t is a practically univ ersal m o tif of p rim itiv e sh am an istic psy chology. I t form s th e m a in experience in th e in itia tio n of a sh am an . Cf. E liade, S ham anism , p p . 53!?. 5 F irm icus M aternus, L ib e r de errore p ro fa n a ru m re lig io n u m (ed. H alm ), ch. 7, p . 89. e A ttis has close affinities w ith C hrist. A ccording to tra d itio n , th e b irth p la c e at B eth leh em was once an A ttis sanctuary. T h is tra d itio n h as been confirm ed by rec en t excavations. I F razer, T h e G olden B o u g h , P a r t IV : A d o n is, A ttis , Osiris, p p . 242s.

stuffed w ith straw . T h e stuffed d um m y was th e n fasten ed to a plough, obviously fo r th e p u rp o se of resto rin g th e fe rtility of the lan d .8 S im ilar flaying cerem onies are re p o rte d of th e Aztecs, Scythians, C hinese, a n d P atag o n ian s.9 In th e vision, th e sk in n in g is confined to the head. I t is a scalping as d istin c t fro m th e total άποδερμ,άτω σ is (skinning) d e scribed in I I I , i, 5. I t is one of th e actions w hich d istin g u ish th e o rig in al vision from th e d escrip tio n of th e process given in this resum e. J u s t as c u ttin g o u t a n d eatin g th e h e a rt o r b ra in of an enem y is supposed to endow one w ith his vital pow ers o r v irtu es, so scalping is a pars pro toto in c o rp o ra tio n of the life p rin c ip le or soul.10 F laying is a tra n sfo rm a tio n sym bol w hich I have dis cussed at g re a te r le n g th in m y essay “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass.” H e re I n e ed only m e n tio n th e special m o tif of to rtu re o r p u n is h m e n t (κόλασή), w hich is p a rtic u la rly ev id en t in the d escrip tio n of th e d ism e m b erm en t a n d scalping. F o r th is th ere is a re m a rk a b le p ara llel in th e A k h m im m a n u sc rip t of the A pocalypse of E lijah , p u b lish e d by G eorg Steindorff.11 In the vision it is said of th e lead en h o m u n c u lu s th a t “his eyes filled w ith b lo o d ” as a re su lt of th e to rtu re . T h e A pocalypse of E lijah says of those w ho are cast “in to e te rn a l p u n is h m e n t” : “ th e ir eyes are m ix e d w ith b lo o d ” ;12 a n d of th e saints w ho w ere persecuted by th e A nti-M essiah: “h e w ill draw off th e ir skins fro m th e ir heads.” 13 T h e se p arallels suggest th a t th e κόλασκ is n o t ju st a p u n is h m e n t b u t th e to rm e n t of hell. A lth o u g h κ ό λ α σ ή w o u ld have to be tra n slated as poena , this w o rd now h ere occurs in th e V ulgate, for in a ll th e places w here th e to rm en ts of h ell are m e n tio n e d the w o rd u sed is cruciare o r cruciatus, as in R ev elatio n 14 : 10, “to rm e n te d w ith fire a n d b rim sto n e ,” o r R ev elatio n 9 : 5, “ th e to rm e n t of a sco rp io n .” T h e c o rresp o n d in g G reek w o rd is β α σ α ν ίζ β ιν o r β α σ α ν ισ μ ό ς , ‘to r tu r e ’. F o r th e alchem ists it h a d a 8 Ibid., p. 249. 9 Ib id ., p. 246. 19 A m ong th e T h o m p so n a n d Shusw ap In d ia n s in B ritish C o lu m b ia th e scalp signifies a h e lp fu l g u a rd ia n sp irit. Frazer, T o te m ism and E xo g a m y, III, p p . 417, 427. u D ie A poka lyp se des Elias. ! 2 Ibid., p. 43, 5, lin e 1. 18 P. 95, 36, lin e 8.

d o u b le m e a n in g : β α σ α ν ίζω iv also m e a n t ‘te stin g o n th e to u c h s to n e ’ (β ά σ α ν ο ή . T h e lapis L y d i a s (to u c h sto n e ) was u se d as a sy n o n y m fo r th e lapis p h ilo s o p h o r u m . T h e g e n u in e n e s s o r in c o r r u p tib ility o f th e sto n e is p ro v e d by th e to r m e n t of fire a n d c a n n o t b e a tta in e d w ith o u t it. T h is le itm o ti v r u n s all th r o u g h alchem y. I n o u r te x t th e s k in n in g re fe rs esp ecially to th e h e a d , as th o u g h sig n ify in g a n e x tra c tio n of th e so u l (if th e p rim itiv e e q u a tio n s k in = so u l is still v a lid h ere). T h e h e a d plays a c o n s id e ra b le ro le in alch em y , a n d has d o n e so since a n c ie n t tim es. T h u s Z osim os n am es h is p h ilo so p h e rs th e “sons of th e G o ld e n H e a d .” I have d e a lt w ith th is th e m e e lse w h e re ,14 a n d n e e d n o t go in to it a g a in n o w . F o r Z osim os a n d th e la te r a lch em ists th e h e a d h a d th e m e a n in g o f th e “o m eg a e le m e n t” o r “ r o u n d e le m e n t” (σ τ ο ιχ ε ϊο ν σ τ ρ ο γ γ υ λ ό ν ) , a sy n o n y m fo r th e a rc a n e o r tra n s fo rm a tiv e su b sta n c e .15 T h e d e c a p ita tio n in sec tio n I I I , Vbis th e re fo re signifies th e o b ta in in g of th e a rc a n e su b sta n c e . A c c o rd in g to th e te x t, th e fig u re fo llo w in g b e h in d th e sacrificer is n a m e d th e “ M e rid ia n o f th e S u n ,” a n d his h e a d is to b e c u t off. T h is s trik in g off o f th e g o ld e n h e a d is also fo u n d in th e m a n u sc rip ts o f S p le n d o r solis as w ell as in th e R o rsc h a c h p r in t in g of 1 5 9 8 . T h e sacrifice in th e v isio n is o f a n in itia te w h o h as u n d e r g o n e th e e x p e rie n c e o f th e solificatio. I n alchemy;" su n is sy n o n y m o u s w ith g old . G o ld , as M ic h a e l M a ie r says, is th e “c irc u la to ry w o rk of th e s u n ,” “s h in in g clay m o u ld e d in to th e m o st b e a u te o u s su b stan ce, w h e re in th e so la r rays a re g a th e re d to g e th e r a n d sh in e f o r th .” 10 M y liu s says th a t th e “ w a te r com es fro m th e rays of th e s u n a n d m o o n .” 17 A c c o rd in g to th e “A u re lia o c c u lta ,” th e s u n ’s rays a re g a th e re d to g e th e r in th e q u ic k s ilv e r.18 D o rn d eriv e s all m e ta ls fro m th e “ in v isib le ray s” of h e a v e n ,19 w hose sp h e ric a l sh ap e is a p ro to ty p e o f th e H e rm e tic vessel. I n v iew o f all th is, w e sh all h a rd ly go w ro n g in su p p o sin g th a t th e in itia te n a m e d th e “ M e rid ia n o f th e S u n ” h im se lf re p re s e n ts th e a rc a n e s u b stance. W e sh all co m e b ack to th is id e a la ter. 14

“T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in

th e

Mass,”

pp.

24off.

15 Ib id . 16

D e circulo physico q uadrate, p p . 15L

17 P hilosophia reform ata, p. 313. 18 T h e a tru m cheinicum , IV (1659), p. 496.

ie "S peculative p h ilo so p h ia,” ibid., I {1659), p. 247.

L et us tu r n n ow to o th e r details of th e vision. T h e m ost strik ing fe a tu re is th e “bow l-shaped a lta r.” I t is u n q u e stio n a b ly re lated to th e krater o f P oim andres. T h is was the vessel w hich th e d em iu rg e sen t do w n to e a rth filled w ith N ous, so th a t those w ho w ere striv in g fo r h ig h e r consciousness co u ld bap tize them selves in it. I t is m e n tio n e d in th a t im p o rta n t passage w here Zosimos tells his frie n d a n d soror mystica, T heo seb eia: “ H asten do w n to the sh ep h e rd a n d b a th e yourself in th e krater, a n d h asten u p to your ow n k in d (yevos).” 20 She h ad to go dow n to th e place of d e ath a n d r e b irth , a n d th e n u p to h e r “ow n k in d ,” i.e., th e twiceb o rn , or, in th e language of th e gospels, th e k in g d o m of heaven. 97 T h e krater is obviously a w onder-w orking vessel, a fo n t o r piscina, in w hich th e im m ersio n takes place a n d tra n sfo rm a tio n in to a sp iritu a l b e in g is effected. I t is th e vas H e rm e tis of la te r alchem y. I do n o t th in k th e re can be any d o u b t th a t th e krater of Zosimos is closely re la te d to th e vessel of P o im an d res in the Corpus H e r m e tic u m .21 T h e H e rm e tic vessel, too, is a u te ru s of s p iritu a l ren ew al or re b irth . T h is idea corresponds exactly to the te x t of th e benedictio fontis, w hich I q u o te d e a rlie r in a fo o tn o te.22 I n “ Isis to H o ru s ,” 23 the an g el brin g s Isis a sm all vessel filled w ith tra n slu c e n t o r “sh in in g ” w ater. C o n sid erin g th e alchem ical n a tu re of th e treatise, we co u ld take this w ater as th e d iv in e w a ter of the a rt,24 since after th e p rim a m a te ria this is the real arcan u m . T h e w ater, o r w ater of the N ile, h a d a spe cial significance in a n cie n t Egypt: i t was O siris, th e dism em b ered god par e xcellence .25 A te x t from E d fu says: “ I b rin g you the vessels w ith th e go d ’s lim bs [i.e., the N ile] th a t you m ay d rin k of them ; I refresh y o u r h e a rt th a t you m ay be satisfied.” 26 T h e g o d ’s lim bs w ere the fo u rte e n p arts in to w hich O siris was

20 B erth elo t, A lch . grecs, III, li, 8. 21 Scott, H e rm e tic a j I, B ook IV , and R eitzen stein , P o im a n d re s, p p . 8ff. 22 See supra, par. 89, n. 8. 23 B erth elot, A lch . grecs, I, x iii, if . 24 T h e arcanum is h ere sym b olized by th e sow in g o f th e grain and the b eg e ttin g o f m an, lio n , an d dog. In ch em ica l u sage it refers to th e fix a tio n o f q u ick silver (ib id ., I, x iii, 6-9). Q uick silver w as o n e of th e o ld er sym bols for th e d iv in e w ater on accou n t o f its silv ery -w h ite sh een . In R o sa riu m it is ca lled “aq u a clarissim a” (A rt. au rif., II, p. 213). 2 5 B u d ge, T h e G ods o f th e E g y p tia n s, II, p p . i22ff. 26 Jacobsohn , D ie d o g m a tisc h e S te llu n g d es K o n ig s in d e r T h e o lo g ie d e r a lie n A e g y p te r, p . 50.

d ivided. T h e re are n u m e ro u s references to th e h id d e n , d iv in e n a tu re of th e arcan e substance in th e alchem ical texts.27 A c c o rd in g to th is a n c ie n t tra d itio n , th e w ater possessed th e pow er of resuscitation; for it was O siris, w ho rose fro m th e dead. In the “D ictio n ary of G o ld m a k in g ,” 28 O siris is th e nam e fo r lead a n d su lp h u r, b o th of w hich a re synonym s for th e arcan e substance. T h u s lead, w hich was th e p rin c ip a l n am e fo r th e arcane su b stance for a lo n g tim e, is called “ the sealed to m b of O siris, con ta in in g all th e lim bs of th e god.” 29 A ccording to legend, Set (T y p h o n ) covered the coffin of O siris w ith lead. Petasios tells us th a t the “sp h ere of th e fire is re stra in e d a n d enclosed by le a d .” O lym piodorus, w ho q uotes this saying, rem ark s th a t Petasios a d d e d by way of e x p lan a tio n : “T h e lead is th e w ater w hich is sues fro m th e m ascu lin e e lem en t.” 30 B u t th e m ascu lin e ele m e n t, he said, is th e “sphere of fire.” 98 T h is tra in of th o u g h t indicates th a t th e s p irit w hich is a w ater, o r th e w ater w hich is a sp irit, is essentially a p aradox, a p a ir of opposites lik e w ater a n d fire. I n th e aqua nostra of the alchem ists, th e concepts of w ater, fire, a n d sp irit coalesce as they do in relig io u s usage.31 99 Besides th e m o tif of w ater, th e story th a t form s th e settin g of th e Isis treatise also contains th e m o tif of v io latio n . T h e te x t says:32 Isis the Prophetess to her son Horus: My child, you should go forth to battle against the faithless T yphon for the sake of your father’s kingdom, while I retire to H orm anuthi, Egypt’s [city] of the sacred art, where I sojourned for a while. According to the circumstances of the tim e and the necessary consequences of the movement of the 27 Cf. the id en tifica tio n o f th e A g a th o d a im o n w ith th e tran sform ative substance, supra, II I, v, 3 . 28 B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I, ii. 29 Ώ σιρίϊ ίσ τιν ή ταφή ίσφί-γμένη, κρύπτουσα πάντα τά ’iltripiSos μίΧη: T rea tise of O lym p iod oru s o f A lex a n d ria (ib id ., II, iv, 4 2 ). H ere O siris is the “ p rin c ip le o f a ll m o istu re” in agreem en t w ith P lu ta rch . T h is refers to th e relatively lo w m e ltin g p o in t o f lead. so Ib id., II, iv, 4 3 . 31 Cf. th e h ym n o f St. R o m a n u s on th e th eop h an y: “ . . . h im w h o w as seen o f o ld in th e m id st o f th ree c h ild ren as d ew in th e fire, n o w a fire flick erin g and sh in in g in th e Jord an , h im se lf th e lig h t in a ccessib le” (P itra, A n a le c ta sacra, I, 21 ).

32 B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I , x iii, 1 - 4 .

spheres,33 it cam e to pass th a t a certain one am ong th e angels, dw ell ing in the first firm am ent, w atched m e from above and w ished to have intercourse w ith me. Q uickly he determ ined to b rin g this about. I d id n o t yield, as I w ished to in q u ire in to the p rep aratio n of the gold an d silver. B u t w hen I dem anded it of him , he to ld me he was n o t p e rm itted to speak of it, on account of th e suprem e im portance of the mysteries; b u t on the follow ing day an angel, A m nael, greater th a n he, w ould come, and he could give m e the solution of the problem . H e also spoke of the sign of this angel— he bore it on his head an d w ould show me a small, u n p itch ed vessel filled w ith a tran slu cen t w ater. H e w ould tell m e the tru th . O n th e follow ing day, as the sun was crossing th e m id p o in t of its course, A m nael appeared, w ho was g reater th a n the first angel, and, seized w ith the same desire, he d id n o t hesitate, b u t hastened to w here I was. B ut I was n o less d eterm in ed to in q u ire in to the m a tte r.34 IOO

101

She d id n o t y ie ld to h im , a n d th e an g el re v e a le d th e secret, w h ich she m ig h t pass o n ly to h e r so n H o ru s. T h e n fo llo w a n u m b e r o f re c ip e s w h ic h are o f n o in te re s t h ere. T h e an g el, as a w in g e d o r s p ir itu a l b e in g , re p re s e n ts, lik e M e rc u riu s , th e v o la tile su b stan ce, th e p n e u m a , th e ά σ ώ μ α τ ο ν (dis e m b o d ie d ). S p irit in a lch em y a lm o st in v a ria b ly has a r e la tio n to w a te r o r to th e ra d ic a l m o istu re , a fact th a t m ay b e e x p la in e d sim p ly b y th e e m p iric a l n a t u r e o f th e o ld e st fo rm o f “c h e m is try ,” n a m e ly th e a r t of co o k in g . T h e ste a m a ris in g fro m b o ilin g w a te r conveys th e first v iv id im p re ssio n of “ m e ta so m a to sis,” th e tr a n s fo rm a tio n o f th e c o rp o re a l in to th e in c o rp o re a l, in to s p ir it o r p n e u m a . T h e r e la tio n o f s p ir it to w a te r resid es in th e fa c t th a t th e s p ir it is h id d e n in th e w ater, lik e a fish. I n th e “A lle g o ria e s u p e r lib r u m T u r b a e ” 35 th is fish is d e s c rib e d as “ r o u n d ” a n d e n d o w e d w ith “ a w o n d e r-w o rk in g v ir tu e .” As is e v id e n t fro m th e te x t,36 it re p re s e n ts th e a rc a n e su b stan ce. F ro m th e alc h e m ic a l tra n s fo rm a tio n , th e te x t says, is p ro d u c e d a c o lly riu m (eyew ash) 33 Instead o f φΐυρίκής in th e text. 34 T h e secrets o f th e art. 33 A r t. au rif., I, p p . 14if. 36 “T h ere is in the sea a ro u n d fish, la ck in g b on es an d scales [?], an d it h as in itself a fatness, a w on d er-w ork in g virtu e, w h ich i f it b e choked on a slow fire u n til its fatness an d m oistu re h a v e w h o lly disap p eared , and th en be th o ro u g h ly cleansed, is steep ed in sea w ater u n til it b eg in s to sh in e. . . .” T h is is a d escrip tion o f the transform ation process. [Cf. A io n , pars. 195S.]

w h ic h w ill e n a b le th e p h ilo s o p h e r to see th e secrets b e t te r .37 T h e “ r o u n d fish” seem s to b e a re la tiv e o f th e “ r o u n d w h ite s to n e ” m e n tio n e d in th e T u r b a .38 O f th is it is said: “I t has w ith in itself th e th re e co lo u rs a n d th e f o u r n a tu re s a n d is b o r n of a liv in g _ th in g .” T h e “ r o u n d ” th in g o r e le m e n t is a w ell-k n o w n c o n c e p t in alch em y . I n th e T u r b a w e e n c o u n te r th e r o tu n d u m : “ F o r th e sake o f p o s te rity I call a tte n tio n to th e r o tu n d u m , w h ic h ch an g es th e m e ta l in to f o u r .” 89 As is c le a r fro m th e c o n te x t, th e r o tu n d u m is id e n tic a l w ith th e a qu a perm an en s. W e m e e t th e sam e tr a in o f th o u g h t in Zosim os. H e says o f th e r o u n d o r o m eg a ele m e n t: “ I t consists o f tw o p a rts. I t b elo n g s to th e s e v e n th zone, th a t o f K ro n o s,40 in th e la n g u a g e of th e c o rp o re a l ( κατά την ΐνσωμον φράσιν) ; b u t in th e la n g u a g e o f th e in c o rp o re a l it is s o m e th in g d iffe re n t, th a t m a y n o t b e re v e a le d . O n ly N ik o th e o s k n o w s it, a n d h e is n o t to b e f o u n d .41 I n th e la n g u a g e o f th e c o rp o re a l it is n a m e d O k ean o s, th e o rig in a n d seed, so th e y say, of all th e g o d s.” 42 H e n c e th e r o tu n d u m is o u tw a rd ly w a te r, b u t in w a rd ly th e a rc a n u m . F o r th e P eratics, K ro n o s was a “ p o w e r h a v in g th e c o lo u r of w a te r,” 43 “ fo r th e w a te r, th e y say, is d e s tr u c tio n .” W a te r a n d s p ir it a re o fte n id e n tic a l. T h u s H e rm o la u s B arb a r u s 44 says: “ T h e r e is also a h e a v e n ly o r d iv in e w a te r o f th e a lch em ists, w h ic h was k n o w n b o th to D e m o c ritu s a n d to H e r m es T rism e g is tu s . S o m etim e s th e y call it th e d iv in e w a te r, a n d so m etim es th e S cy th ian ju ic e , so m etim e s p n e u m a , th a t is s p irit, o f th e n a tu r e o f a e th e r, a n d th e q u in te s se n c e o f th in g s .” 45 R u Ia n d calls th e w a te r th e “s p ir itu a l p o w er, a s p ir it o f h ea v e n ly n a tu r e .” 46 C h ris to p h e r S teeb gives a n in te r e s tin g e x p la n a tio n o f th e o rig in o f th is id e a: “ T h e b ro o d in g of th e H o ly S p irit 37 “ · . . w hose a n o in te d eyes could easily look u p o n th e secrets o f th e p h ilo so p h e rs.” 38 Codex V adiensis 390 (St. G all), 15th cent, (m en tio n ed by R uska, T u rb a , p . 93). C o ncerning th e fish, see A io n , ch. X. 38 Serm o X L I. 40 T h a t is, S atu rn , w ho was reg a rd e d as th e d a rk “co u n ter-su n .” M ercu riu s is th e ch ild of S atu rn , an d also of th e sun a n d m oon. 41 Cf. P sychology a nd A lc h em y, p ar. 456, §6. 42 B e rth elo t, A lc h . grecs, III, xix, 1. 43 Α ύν α μ ις y&p φ η σ ίν ύδα τό χρο υ I , η ρ τίνα δϋναμιν, φ η σ ί, T o v r ia n τ&ρ Kpivov. H i p p o l y t U S ,

E lenchos, V, 16, 2 (trans. Legge, P h ilo so p h u m e n a , I, ρ . 1 5 4 )· 44 ΐ 4 5 4 - Ι 4 9 3 · C a rd in al arch b ish o p o f A quileia, a n d a g re a t h u m a n ist. 43 C orollarium in D ioscoridem . C ited in M aier, S ym b . a u r. m ens., p . 174. 43 L exico n alchem iae, p p . 46f.

u p o n th e w aters above th e firm am en t b ro u g h t fo rth a p o w er w hich perm eates all things in th e m ost su b tle way, w arm s th em , and, in c o n ju n c tio n w ith th e light, generates in th e m in e ra l k ingdom of th e low er w o rld th e m e rc u ria l serp en t, in the p la n t k ingdom the blessed greenness, an d in the an im al k in g d o m th e form ative pow er; so th a t th e supracelestial sp irit of th e w aters, u n ite d w ith th e lig h t, m ay fitly be called th e soul of th e w o rld .” 47 Steeb goes on to say th a t w hen th e celestial w aters w ere a n im a ted by th e sp irit, they im m ed iately fell in to a c irc u la r m o tio n , from w hich arose the perfect spherical form of th e anim a m u n d i. T h e r o tu n d u m is th erefo re a b it of th e w o rld soul, an d this m ay w ell have been the secret th a t was g u ard ed by Zosimos. AU these ideas re fe r expressly to P la to ’s T im aeus. In th e T u r b a , P arm en id es praises the w ater as follows: “O ye celes tial n atures, w ho at a sign from G od m u ltip ly the n a tu re s of the tru th ! O m ighty n a tu re , w ho conquers the n a tu re s an d causes the n a tu re s to rejoice an d be glad! 48 F o r she it is in p a rtic u la r, w hom G od has endow ed w ith a pow er w hich th e fire does n o t possess. . . . She is herself th e tru th , all ye seekers of w isdom , for, liquefied w ith h e r substances, she brings a b o u t the highest of w orks.” 49 103 Socrates in th e T u r b a says m uch th e same: “O how this n a tu re changes body in to spirit! . . . She is the sharpest vinegar, w hich causes gold to becom e p u re s p irit.” 50 “V in e g ar” is syn onym ous w ith “w a ter,” as th e te x t shows, an d also w ith th e “red sp irit.” 51 T h e T u r b a says o f the la tte r: “ From th e co m p o u n d th a t is tran sfo rm ed in to re d sp irit arises th e p rin c ip le of th e w o rld ,” w hich again m eans the w orld soul.52 A u ro ra consurgens C o e lu m S e p h ir o tic u m , p . 33. 48 A n a llu s io n to th e a x io m o f p se u d o -D e m o c ritu s. 49 R u sk a , p . 1go. 59 P. 197. 5 1 P p . 2oof. A q u a n o stra is “ fire, b e cau se it b u rn s all th in g s a n d re d u c e s th e m to p o w d e r; q u ic k s ilv e r is v in e g a r" (Q u o ta tio n fro m C a lid in R o s a r iu m , p . 218). " O u r w a te r is m ig h tie r th a n fire. . . . A n d fire in re sp e c t th e r e to is lik e w a te r in re s p e c t to co m m o n fire. T h e r e f o r e th e p h ilo s o p h e rs say: B u rn o u r m e ta l in th e m ig h tie s t fire ” (ib id ., p . 250). H e n c e th e “ w a te r ” is a k in d o f su p e rfire , a n ig n is coelestis. 52 C o n tra ry to R u s k a ( T u r b a , p . 201, n . 3), I a d h e re to th e re a d in g in th e MSS. b ecau se it is sim p ly a sy n o n y m fo r th e m o ist so u l o f th e p rim a m a te ria , th e r a d i cal m o is tu re . A n o th e r sy n o n y m fo r th e w a te r is " s p ir itu a l b lo o d ” (ib id ., p . 129), w h ich R u s k a r ig h tly c o lla te s w ith irvpphv α ϊμ α (fire-co lo u red b lo o d ) in th e G reek

says: “ S en d fo r th th y S p irit, th a t is w a te r . . . a n d th o u w ilt re n e w th e face of th e e a r th .” A n d ag ain : “ T h e r a in of th e H o ly S p irit m e lte th . H e sh a ll sen d o u t his w o rd . . . his w in d sh all b lo w a n d th e w aters sh all r u n . ” 53 A rn a ld u s d e V illa n o v a (1235—1313) says in h is “ F los F lo r u m ” : “T h e y h av e c a lle d w a te r s p irit, a n d i t is in t r u t h s p ir it.” 54 T h e R o s a r iu m philosop h o r u m says categ o rica lly : “ W a te r is s p ir it.” 55 I n th e tre a tis e of K o m ario s (1st c en t. a .D .), th e w a te r is d e s c rib e d as a n e lix ir of life w h ic h w ak en s th e d e a d sle e p in g in H a d e s to a n e w s p r in g tim e .56 A p o llo n iu s says in th e T u r b a :57 “ B u t th e n , ye sons o f th e d o c trin e , th a t th in g n e e d s th e fire, u n ti l th e s p ir it o f th a t b o d y is tra n s fo rm e d a n d le ft to s ta n d th r o u g h th e n ig h ts, a n d tu r n s to d u s t lik e a m a n in h is g rav e. A fte r th is has h a p p e n e d , G o d w ill give it b ack its so u l a n d its s p irit, an d , th e in firm ity b e in g r e m o v e d , th a t th in g w ill b e s tro n g e r a n d b e tte r a fte r its d e s tru c tio n , e v e n as a m a n beco m es s tro n g e r a n d y o u n g e r a fte r th e res u r r e c tio n th a n h e w as in th e w o rld .” T h e w a te r acts u p o n th e su b stan ces as G o d acts u p o n th e b o d y . I t is c o e q u a l w ith G o d a n d is itse lf o f d iv in e n a tu re . 104 As w e h av e seen, th e s p ir itu a l n a tu r e of th e w a te r com es fro m th e “ b ro o d in g ” of th e H o ly S p irit u p o n th e chaos (G enesis 1 : 3). T h e r e is a s im ila r v iew in th e C o r p u s H e r m e t i c u m : “T h e r e w as d a rk n e ss in th e d e e p a n d w a te r w ith o u t fo rm ; a n d th e re w as a s u b tle b re a th , in te llig e n t, w h ic h p e rm e a te d th e th in g s in C h ao s w ith d iv in e p o w e r.” 58 T h is v iew is s u p p o rte d i n th e first p la ce b y th e N e w T e s ta m e n t m o tif o f b a p tis m by “ w a te r a n d s p ir it,” a n d in th e seco n d p la ce b y th e r ite of th e b e n e d ic tio fo n t is , w h ic h is p e rfo rm e d o n E a ste r E v e.59 B u t th e sources. T h e eq u a tio n fire == sp irit is co m m o n in alchem y. T h u s, as R uska h im self rem arks (p. 271), M ercurius (a freq u en t synonym fo r the a q u a p e rm a n e n s, cf. R u la n d ’s L e x i c o n ) is called φ ά ρ μ α κ ο υ π ύ ρ ιν ο υ (fiery m ed icin e). 53 Cf. A u ro ra C on su rg en s (ed. vo n Franz), p p . 85, 91. 54 A r t. a u rif.j II, p. 482. 55 Ib id ., II, p. 239. 5 6 B erth elot, A lch . grecs, IV , x x , 8: “ M ake k n ow n to us h ow th e blessed w aters com e dow n from ab ove to aw aken th e dead, w h o lie ro u n d a b o u t in th e m id st o f H ades, ch ain ed in th e darkness; h ow th e e lix ir o f life com es to th em an d aw akens th em , rou sin g th em o u t o f th eir sleep . . . .” 57 P. 1 3 9 . 5 8 Scott, H e r m e tic a , I, p . 147. 59 P raefatio: “M ay th e p ow er o f th e H o ly G host descend in to th is b rim m in g fon t, an d m ay it m ake th e w h o le substance o f th e w ater fr u itfu l in regen erative p ow er” (M issal, p . 431).

T H E V ISIO NS O F ZOSIMOS

idea o f the w ond er-w ork ing w ater derived orig in a lly from H e l len istic natu re p h ilosop h y, probably w ith an ad m ixtu re o f E gyptian influences, and n o t from C hristian or b ib lica l sources. Because o f its m ystical pow er, the w ater anim ates and fertilizes b u t also kills. 105 In the d iv in e water, w hose dyophysite natu re (τό σ το ιχ ε Ζ ο ν τ ό διμβρεs)G0 is con stantly em phasized, tw o prin ciples balan ce on e another, active and passive, m ascu lin e and fem in in e, w h ich co n stitu te the essence o f creative pow er in th e eternal cycle of b irth and d ea th .81 T h is cycle was represented in a n cien t alchem y by the sym bol o f the uroboros, the dragon that b ites its ow n ta il.82 S elf-d evou ring is the sam e as self-d estru ction ,63 b u t the u n io n o f the d ragon ’s tail and m o u th was also th ou gh t of as self-fertiliza tion. H en ce the texts say: “T h e dragon slays itself, w eds itself, im pregnates itself.” 84 I t shares th is q u a lity w ith M ercurius d u p lex . “ In th e floods of life, in th e storm of work, In eb b an d flow, In w arp an d weft, C radle an d grave, A n etern al sea, A ch an g in g patchw ork, A glow ing life, A t th e w h irrin g loom of T im e I weave T h e living clothes of th e D eity .” T h u s th e E a rth S pirit, th e sp iritu s m ercurialis, to F aust. (T ran s, by M acNeice, P- 23·) β2 In E gypt th e darkness of th e soul was rep rese n ted as a crocodile (Budge, T h e Gods o f th e E gyptians, I, p. 286). 63 In th e B ook o f O stanes (B erthelot, C him ie a u m o yen age, I II , p . 120) th e re is a descrip tio n of a m o n ster w ith w ings of a v u ltu re , an e le p h a n t’s h ead , a n d a d rag o n ’s tail. T h e se p a rts m u tu a lly devour one a n o th er. 64 O f th e quicksilver (aqua vitae, perennis) it is said: “T h is is th e se rp e n t w hich rejoices in itself, im p reg n ates itself, a n d brin g s itself fo rth in a single day: it slays all things w ith its venom , an d w ill becom e fire from th e fire (ei ab igne ignis fu e rit)." (“T ra c ta tu lu s A vicennae,” A rt. a u rif., I, p. 406.) " T h e d rag o n is born in th e nigredo an d feeds u p o n its M ercurius an d slays itself” (R o sa riu m , ibid., II, p. 230). “T h e living M ercurius is called th e scorpion, th a t is, venom ; for it slays itself an d brings itself back to life” (ibid., p p . 27if.). T h e oft-cited saying, “T h e d rag o n d ie th n o t save w ith its b ro th e r an d sister,” is ex p lain ed by M aier (S y m b . aur. m ens., p. 466) as follows: “F o r w h en ev er th e heavenly sun an d m oon m eet in co n ju n ctio n , th is m u st take place in th e h e a d an d ta il of th e dragon; in this com es a b o u t th e conju n ctio n an d u n itin g of su n an d m oon, w hen an eclipse takes place.” ei

T h i s a n c ie n t a lc h e m ic a l id e a re a p p e a r s d r a m a tic a lly in th e v is io n o f Z o sim o s, m u c h as it m ig h t in a r e a l d r e a m . I n I I I , i, 2 th e p r ie s t I o n s u b m it s h im s e lf to a n “ u n e n d u r a b le t o r m e n t .” T h e “s a c r ific e r ” p e r fo r m s th e a c t o f sa c r ific e b y p ie r c in g I o n th r o u g h w it h a s w o r d . I o n th u s fo r e sh a d o w s th a t d a z z lin g w h ite c la d fig u r e n a m e d th e “ M e r id ia n o f th e S u n ” (I I I , v bl8), w h o is d e c a p ita te d , a n d w h o m w e h a v e c o n n e c t e d w ith th e s o l i f i c a t i o o f th e in it ia t e in th e Isis m y s te r ie s. T h i s fig u r e c o r r e s p o n d s to th e k in g ly m y s ta g o g u e o r p s y c h o p o m p w h o a p p e a r s i n a v is io n r e p o r te d in a la te m e d ie v a l a lc h e m ic a l te x t, th e “ D e c la r a tio e t E x p lic a t io A d o l p h i ,” w h ic h fo r m s p a r t o f th e “ A u r e lia o c c u lt a .” 65 S o fa r as o n e c a n ju d g e , th e v is io n h as n o c o n n e c t io n w h a te v e r w it h th e Z o s im o s te x t, a n d I a lso d o u b t v e r y m u c h w h e t h e r o n e s h o u ld a t t r ib u t e to i t th e c h a r a c te r o f a m e r e p a r a b le . I t c o n ta in s c e r ta in fe a tu r e s th a t a r e n o t tr a d itio n a l b u t a re e n t ir e ly o r ig in a l, a n d fo r th is r e a so n it se e m s lik e ly th a t it w as a g e n u in e d r e a m e x p e r ie n c e . A t a ll e v e n ts , I k n o w fr o m m y p r o fe s s io n a l e x p e r i e n c e th a t s im ila r d r e a m -v is io n s o c c u r to d a y a m o n g p e o p le w h o h a v e n o k n o w le d g e o f a lc h e m ic a l s y m b o lis m . T h e v is io n is c o n c e r n e d w ith a s h in in g m a le fig u r e w e a r in g a c r o w n o f stars. H is r o b e is o f w h it e l in e n , d o t t e d w it h m a n y -c o lo u r e d flo w e r s, th o s e o f g r e e n p r e d o m in a t in g . H e a ssu a g es t h e a n x io u s d o u b ts o f th e a d e p t, sa y in g : “A d o lp h u s , f o llo w m e . I s h a ll s h o w t h e e w h a t is p r e p a r e d fo r th e e , so th a t th o u c a n s t p ass o u t o f th e d a r k n e ss i n t o th e l i g h t .” T h i s fig u r e , th e r e fo r e , is a tr u e H e r m e s P sy c h o p o m p o s a n d in it ia t o r , w h o d ir e c ts th e s p ir itu a l t r a n s i t u s o f th e a d e p t. T h i s is c o n fir m e d i n th e c o u r s e o f th e la t t e r ’s a d v e n tu r e s , w h e n h e r e c e iv e s a b o o k s h o w in g a “ p a r a b o lic fig u r e ” o f th e O ld A d a m . W e m a y ta k e th is as i n d ic a t in g th a t th e p s y c h o p o m p is t h e s e c o n d A d a m , a p a r a lle l fig u r e to C h r ist. T h e r e is n o ta lk o f s a c r ific e , b u t, i f o u r c o n je c tu r e is r ig h t, th is t h o u g h t w o u ld b e w a r r a n te d b y th e a p p e a r a n c e o f th e s e c o n d A d a m . G e n e r a lly s p e a k in g , t h e fig u r e o f th e k in g is a s s o c ia te d w it h t h e m o t if o f th e m ortifica tio . 107 T h u s in o u r te x t th e p e r s o n ific a tio n o f th e s u n o r g o ld is to b e sa c r ific e d ,66 a n d h is h e a d , w h ic h w a s c r o w n e d w it h t h e a u re-

106

T h e a t r . c h e m . , IV (1659), p p . 50gff. 66 T h e k illin g { m o r t i f ic a ti o ) o f th e k in g o c c u r s in la te r a lc h e m y (cf. P s y c h o l o g y a n d A l c h e m y , F ig . 173). T h e k in g ’s c ro w n m a k es h im a k in d o f su n . T h e m o t if b e lo n g s to th e w id e r c o n te x t o f th e sacrifice o f th e g o d , w h ic h d e v e lo p e d n o t

ole of th e sun, struck off, fo r this contains, o r is, th e a rc a n u m .67 H e re we have an in d ic a tio n of th e psychic n a tu re of th e a r canum , for the head of a m an signifies above all th e seat o f co n sciousness.68 A gain, in the vision of Isis, th e angel w ho bears th e secret is co n n ected w ith th e m e rid ia n of th e sun, for th e te x t says th a t he a p p ea re d as “ th e su n was crossing th e m id p o in t of its course.” T h e angel bears th e m ysterious e lix ir on his h ead an d , by his re la tio n sh ip to the m e rid ia n , m akes it clear th a t he is a k in d of solar genius o r m essenger of the sun w ho b rings “illu m i n a tio n ,” th a t is, a n e n h a n c e m e n t a n d expansion o f conscious ness. H is indecorous b e h a v io u r m ay be e x p lain ed by th e fact th a t angels have always enjoyed a d u b io u s re p u ta tio n as far as th e ir m orals are concerned. I t is still th e ru le for w om en to cover th e ir h a ir in church. U n til w ell in to th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry , es pecially in P ro te sta n t regions, they h ad to w ear a special h o o d 69 w hen they w e n t to c h u rc h on Sundays. T h is was n o t because of the m en in the cong reg atio n , b u t because of th e possible p res ence of angels, w ho m ig h t be th ro w n in to ra p tu re s a t th e sight of a fe m in in e coiffure. T h e ir su sceptibility in these m atters goes back to G enesis 6 : 2 , w here th e “sons of G o d ” displayed a p a rtic u la r p e n c h a n t for th e “d au g h ters of m e n ,” a n d b rid le d th e ir e n thusiasm as little as d id th e tw o angels in th e Isis treatise. T h is treatise is assigned to th e first c e n tu ry a . d . Its views reflect th e Ju d ae o -H e lle n istic angelology70 of Egypt, a n d it m ig h t easily have been k now n to Zosimos th e E gyptian. Such o p in io n s a b o u t angels fit in a d m ira b ly w ith m asculine on ly in th e W est b u t also in th e East, and p articu larly in a n cien t M exico. T h e r e the personifier o f T ezca tlip o ca ("fiery m irror”) was sacrificed ac th e festival of T o x c a tl (Spence, T h e G o d s o f M e x i c o , p p . 97ff.). T h e sam e th in g h a p p en ed in the c u lt o f U itz ilo p o ch tli, th e su n -god (ib id ., p. 73), w h o also figured in the eu ch aristic rite o f the t eoqual o, " g o d -ea tin g ” (cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in the M ass,” p p . 223L). 67 T h e solar n atu re of th e v ictim is confirm ed b y th e tra d itio n th a t th e m an d estin ed to be b eh ea d ed by th e priests o f H arran h ad to h ave fair h a ir an d b lu e eyes (ibid., p. 340). ®s Cf. m y remarks on th e H a rra n ite h ea d m ystery an d th e leg en d a ry h ea d oracle o f P op e Sylvester II (ib id ., p p . 24of.). 69 Its form can still be seen in th e d ea co n ’s h ood . 70 A ccord in g to R a b b in ic tra d itio n th e an g els (in clu d in g Satan) w ere created on the second day o f C reation (the day o f the m oon ). T h e y w ere im m ed ia tely d iv id ed on th e q u estio n of crea tin g m an . T h e r efo r e G od created A d am in secret, to avoid in cu rrin g th e d isp leasu re o f th e angels.

as w e ll as w ith fe m in in e psychology. If an g els a re a n y th in g a t all, th e y a re p e rso n ifie d tra n s m itte rs o f u n c o n sc io u s c o n te n ts th a t a re seek in g ex p ressio n . B u t if th e co n scio u s m in d is n o t re a d y to a ssim ila te th e se c o n te n ts , th e ir en erg y flows off in to th e affective a n d in s tin c tu a l sp h e re . T h is p ro d u c e s o u tb u rs ts o f affect, ir r i ta tio n , b a d m oo d s, a n d se x u a l e x c ite m e n t, as a re s u lt of w h ic h c o n sciousness gets th o ro u g h ly d is o rie n te d . I f th is c o n d itio n beco m es c h ro n ic , a d isso c ia tio n d ev elo p s, d e s c rib e d b y F r e u d as re p re s sion, w ith all its w ell-k n o w n co n seq u en c es. I t is, th e re fo re , o f th e g re a te st th e ra p e u tic im p o rta n c e to a c q u a in t o n e se lf w ith th e c o n te n ts th a t u n d e r lie th e d isso ciatio n . 109 J u s t as th e an g el A m n a e l b rin g s th e a rc a n e s u b sta n c e w ith h im , so th e " M e r id ia n o f th e S u n ” is h im se lf a re p r e s e n ta tio n of it. I n a lc h e m ic a l lite r a tu r e , th e p ro c e d u re o f tra n s fix in g o r c u t tin g u p w ith th e sw o rd takes th e sp ecial fo rm o f d iv id in g th e p h ilo so p h ic a l egg. I t, to o , is d iv id e d w ith th e sw o rd , i.e., b ro k e n d o w n in to th e f o u r n a tu re s o r ele m e n ts. As a n a rc a n u m , th e egg is a sy n o n y m fo r th e w a te r .71 I t is also a sy n o n y m fo r th e d ra g o n (m e rc u ria l s e r p e n t)72 a n d h e n c e fo r th e w a te r in th e sp ecial sense o f th e m icro co sm o r m o n a d . S ince w a te r a n d egg a re syn o n y m o u s, th e d iv isio n o f th e egg w ith th e sw o rd is also a p p lie d to th e w ater. “ T a k e th e vessel, c u t it th r o u g h w ith th e sw o rd , ta k e its so u l . . . th u s is th is w a te r o f o u rs o u r vessel.” 73 T h e vessel lik ew ise is a sy n o n y m fo r th e egg, h e n c e th e re c ip e : " P o u r in to a r o u n d glass vessel, s h a p e d lik e a p h ia l o r eg g .” 74 T h e egg is a copy o f th e W o rld -E g g , th e eg g -w h ite c o rre s p o n d in g to th e " w a te rs ab o v e th e firm a m e n t,” th e “ s h in in g liq u o r ,” a n d th e y o lk to th e p h y sical w o r ld .75 T h e egg c o n ta in s th e f o u r ele m e n ts .76 71 “T h e y com pared th e w ate r to an egg, because it su rro u n d s ev ery th in g th a t is w ith in it, a n d h as in itself a ll th a t is necessary” (“C onsilium co n iu g ii,” A rs chem ica, p. 140). “H av in g a ll th a t is necessary” is on e of th e a ttrib u te s of God. 7 2 M aier, Sym b. aur. m ens., p. 466. Cf. Senior, D e chem ia, p . 108: " T h e d rag o n is th e d ivine w ater." 7 3 U lus, herm ., p. 785. 7 4 Ib id ., p. 90. 75 Steeb, C oelum S ep h iro ticu m , p. 33. 7 β T u rb a , Serm o IV, p. 112. Cf. also th e “n o m e n cla tu re o f th e egg” in B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I, iv, an d O lym piodorus on th e egg, th e tetraso m ia, a n d th e spherical p h ia l (II, iv, 44). C oncerning th e id e n tity of uro b o ro s a n d egg, a n d th e division in to fo u r, see th e B ook o f E l-H a b ib (B erthelo t, M o yen age, I II , p p . g2, 104). T h e re is a p ic tu re of th e egg bein g divided w ith th e sw ord in E m blem V III of

110

T h e d iv id in g sw ord seems to have a special significance in a d d itio n to those we have no ted . T h e “ C onsilium c o n iu g ii” says th a t th e m a rria g e p air, su n a n d m oon , “m u st b o th b e slain by th e ir ow n sword, im b ib in g im m o rtal souls u n til th e m ost h id den in te rio r [i.e., th e previous] soul is e x tin g u ish e d .” 77 I n a poem of 1620, M ercu riu s com plains th a t he is “sore to rm e n te d w ith a fiery sw ord.” 78 A ccording to th e alchem ists, M ercurius is th e o ld se rp en t w ho already in paradise possessed “k n o w l edge,” since he was closely re la te d to th e devil. I t is the fiery sw ord b ra n d ish e d by th e angel a t th e gates of parad ise th a t to r m ents h im ,79 a n d yet he him self is this sword. T h e re is a p ic tu re in th e “ S peculum v e rita tis” 80 of M ercu riu s k illin g th e king an d th e snake w ith th e sw ord— “glad io p ro p rio se ip su m in terficiens.” S a tu rn , too, is show n p ierced by a sw ord.81 T h e sword is w ell su ite d to M ercu riu s as a v a ria n t of th e telurn passionis, C u p id ’s a rro w .82 D o rn , in his “S peculativa philosophia,” 83 gives a lo n g an d in te re stin g in te rp re ta tio n of th e sw ord: it is th e “ sw ord of G o d ’s w ra th ,” w hich, in th e fo rm of C h rist th e Logos, was h u n g u p o n th e tree o f life. T h u s th e w rath of G od was chan g ed to love, a n d “ th e w ater of G race now bathes th e w hole w o rld .” H e re again, as in Zosimos, th e w ater is co nnected w ith the sacrificial act. Since th e Logos, th e W o rd of G od, is “sh arp er th a n any tw o-edged sw ord” (H ebrew s 4 : 12), th e w ords M aier’s S c ru tin iu m c h y m ic u m (p. 22), w ith th e in scrip tion : “T a k e th e egg and pierce it w ith a fiery sw ord.’’ E m b lem X X V show s th e k illin g o f th e dragon. K illin g w ith the sw ord is also sh ow n in L am b sp rin gk ’s Sym bol II (M u saeu tn h e rm e tic u m , p . 345), title d " P u trefa ctio .’’ K illin g an d d iv isio n in to fou r go together. “ M ortificatio (scl. L ap id is) sep aratio elem en to r u m ” (“E xercit. in T u rb . I X ”). Cf. th e dram atic fights w ith th e dragon in th e visio n s o f K rates (B erth elot, M o yen dge, III, pp . 73ff.). t t A rs ch em ica, p . 359. 78 V erus H e rm e s, p. 16. [Cf. infra, par. 276.] T ST his m o tif also occurs in the A d am p arab le in "A urelia o c c u lta ” (T h e a tr . chem ., IV, 1659, PP- 5 11^)- w h ich describes h o w th e a n g el had to deal A dam sev eral b lood y w o u n d s w ith h is sw ord because h e refu sed to m ove o u t o f P aradise. A dam is th e arcane substance, w hose “e x tra ctio n fro m th e g a r d e n ” o f E ve is finally accom p lish ed by m eans o f b lo o d m agic. 80 C odex V at. L at. 7286 (17th cent.). Fig. 150 in P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y . 81 C odex V ossianus 29 (L eiden), fol, 73. 82 R ip le y ’s “C a n tilen a ,” verse 17. [Cf. M y s te riu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p . 285.— E d i t o r s .] 83 T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 254. Cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” pp. 234f. [A lso cf. infra, pars. 447L]

111

o f th e C o n s e c ra tio n in th e M ass w ere in te r p r e te d as th e sacrifi cial k n ife w ith w h ic h th e o ffe rin g is sla in .84 O n e finds in C h ristia n sy m b o lism th e sam e “c irc u la r ” G n o stic th in k in g as in a l ch em y . I n b o th th e sacrificer is th e sacrificed, a n d th e sw o rd th a t k ills is th e sam e as th a t w h ic h is k ille d . I n Zosim os th is c irc u la r th in k in g a p p e a rs in th e sacrificial p rie s t’s id e n tity w ith his v ic tim a n d in th e re m a rk a b le id e a th a t th e h o m u n c u lu s in to w h o m Io n is c h a n g e d d e v o u rs h im se lf.83 H e spew s fo rth h is o w n flesh a n d re n d s h im se lf w ith h is o w n te eth . T h e h o m u n c u lu s th e re fo re stan d s fo r th e u ro b o ro s , w h ich d ev o u rs itse lf a n d gives b ir th to itse lf (as th o u g h sp ew in g itse lf fo rth ). S in ce th e h o m u n c u lu s re p re s e n ts th e tra n s f o r m a tio n of Io n , it follow s th a t Io n , th e u ro b o ro s , a n d th e sacrificer a re es s e n tia lly th e sam e. T h e y a re th r e e d iffe re n t aspects o f th e sam e p rin c ip le . T h is e q u a tio n is c o n firm e d by th e sy m b o lism o f th a t p a r t o f th e te x t w h ic h I h av e ca lle d th e “ re s u m e ” a n d h av e p la c e d a t th e e n d o f th e visions. T h e sacrificed is in d e e d th e u ro b o ro s s e rp e n t, w hose c irc u la r fo rm is su g g ested b y th e sh ap e o f th e te m p le , w h ic h h as “ n e ith e r b e g in n in g n o r e n d in its c o n s tru c tio n .” D is m e m b e rin g th e v ic tim c o rre sp o n d s to th e id e a of d iv id in g th e ch ao s in to fo u r e le m e n ts o r th e b a p tis m a l w a te r in to fo u r p a rts. T h e p u rp o s e o f th e o p e r a tio n is to c re a te th e b e g in n in g s o f o r d e r in th e massa co n fusa, as is su g g ested in I I I , i, 2: “ in a c c o rd an ce w ith th e r u le o f h a rm o n y .” T h e p sycho lo g ical p a ra lle l to th is is th e r e d u c tio n to o rd e r, th r o u g h reflec tio n , o f a p p a r e n tly c h a o tic fra g m e n ts o f th e u n c o n sc io u s w h ic h h av e b ro k e n th r o u g h in to consciousness. W i th o u t k n o w in g an y th in g o f a lc h e m y o r its o p e ra tio n s , I w o rk e d o u t m a n y years ago a psycholo g ical ty p o lo g y b ased o n th e fo u r fu n c tio n s o f consciousness as th e o r d e r in g p rin c ip le s o f psychic processes in g e n e ra l. U n co n scio u sly , I w as m a k in g use o f th e sam e a rc h e ty p e w h ic h h a d le d S c h o p e n h a u e r to g iv e h is “ p r in c ip le o f sufficient re a s o n ” a fo u rfo ld r o o t.86 T h e te m p le b u i l t o f a “ sin g le s to n e ” is a n o b v io u s p a r a p h ra se o f th e lapis. T h e “ s p rin g o f p u re s t w a te r” in th e te m p le is a f o u n ta in o f life, a n d th is is a h in t th a t th e p r o d u c tio n o f th e 84 Ib id ., p. 215. 85 T h e p a ra llel to th is is th e o ld view th a t C hrist drank h is ow n b lo o d (ib id ., P- 21 O88 Cf. m y “A P sych ological A p p roach to th e D ogm a of the T r in ity ,” p . 167.

ro u n d w holeness, th e stone, is a g u a ra n tee of vitality. Sim ilarly, the lig h t th a t shines w ith in it can be u n d ersto o d as th e illu m in a tio n w hich w holeness b rin g s.87 E n lig h te n m e n t is a n increase of consciousness. T h e tem p le of Zosimos appears in la te r al chem y as th e d o m u s th esaurorum or gazophylacium (treasurehouse).88 us A lth o u g h th e sh in in g w h ite “m o n o lith ” u n d o u b te d ly stands for th e stone, it clearly signifies at the sam e tim e th e H e rm e tic vessel. T h e R o sa riu m says: “ O n e is th e stone, one th e m ed icin e, one the vessel, o n e th e p ro ced u re, an d one th e d isp o sitio n .” 89 T h e scholia to th e “ T ra c ta tu s au reu s H e rm e tis” p u t it even m ore p lainly: “ L e t all be one in o n e circle o r vessel.” 90 M i chael M aier ascribes to M aria th e Jewess (“sister of M oses”) th e view th a t th e w hole secret of th e a rt lay in know ledge of th e H e r m etic vessel. I t was d iv in e, a n d h a d b e e n h id d e n fro m m a n by th e w isdom of th e L o rd .91 A u ro ra consurgens I I 92 says th a t th e n a tu ra l vessel is th e aqua p erm anens a n d th e “v in eg ar of th e p hilo so p h ers,” w hich obviously m eans th a t it is th e arcan e su b stance itself. W e sh o u ld u n d e rs ta n d th e “ P ractica M a ria e ” 9S in this sense w hen it says th a t th e H e rm e tic vessel is “ th e m easu re of y o u r fire” a n d th a t it h a d b e en “h id d e n by th e Stoics” ;94 it is the “ toxic b o d y ” w hich transform s M ercu riu s a n d is th e re fo re the w ater of th e p h ilo so p h e rs.95 As th e arcan e substance th e ves sel is n o t o n ly w ater b u t also fire, as th e “A llegoriae s a p ie n tu m ” m akes clear: “T h u s o u r stone, th a t is th e flask of fire, is cre ated fro m fire.” 96 W e can th erefo re u n d e rs ta n d w hy M ylius97 calls th e vessel th e “ro o t a n d p rin c ip le of o u r a rt.” L a u re n tiu s Si T h e sh in in g o f th e vessel is o ften m en tio n ed , as in " A llegoriae su p er Iibrum T u r b a e ” (A r t . aurif., I, p. 143): “ . . . u n til y o u see th e vessel g leam a n d sh in e like a ja c in th .” 88 Ars ch em ica , p. g. 89 1550 edn., fol. A III. 90 B ibl. chem ., I, p. 442. 91 Sym b. aur. m ens., p . 63. 92 A rt. aurif., I,'p . 203. 93 Ibid., p . 323. 9^ T h e “S toics” are also m en tio n ed in “ L iber q u a rto ru m ,” T h e a t r . chem ., V (1660), p . 128. 95 H o g h ela n d e, "D e difficult, a lch .,” T h e a tr . chem ., I (1659), P- *7 7 · 0S T h e a tr , chem·,, V (1660), p . 60. 0I P h il, ref., p . 32.

V e n tu ra 98 calls it “ L u n a ,” th e fo e m in a alba a n d m o th e r of th e stone. T h e vessel th a t is “n o t dissolved by w ater a n d n o t m e lted by fire” is, according to th e “ L ib e r q u a rto ru m ,” 99 “like th e w ork of G od in the vessel of the d iv in e seed (g e rm in is divi), for it has received th e clay, m o u ld e d it, an d m ix ed it w ith w ater an d fire.” T h is is an allu sio n to the c re atio n of m an, b u t o n th e o th e r h a n d it seems to re fe r to the creatio n of souls, since im m ed iately afterw ards the te x t speaks of the p ro d u c tio n of souls from the “seeds of h eaven.” In o rd e r to catch th e soul G od created th e vas cerebri} the c ran iu m . H e re the sym bolism of th e vessel coincides w ith th a t of th e head, w hich I have discussed in my “T ra n s fo r m a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass.” 100 1J4 T h e p rim a m a te ria , as th e radical m o istu re, has to d o w ith th e soul because the la tte r is also m oist by n a tu re 101 a n d is som e tim es sym bolized by dew .102 In this way th e sym bol of th e vessel gets tra n sfe rre d to th e soul. T h e re is a n ex cellen t exam ple of this in C aesarius of H e iste rb a c h :103 th e soul is a sp iritu a l su b stance of spherical n a tu re , like th e globe of th e m oon, o r lik e a glass vessel th a t is “fu rn ish e d before an d b e h in d w ith eyes” an d “sees th e w hole u n iv erse.” T h is recalls th e m any-eyed d rag o n of alchem y a n d th e snake vision of Ig n a tiu s L oyola.104 In this con n e ctio n th e re m a rk o f M ylius105 th a t th e vessel causes “ the w hole firm am en t to ro ta te in its course” is of special in terest because, as I have show n, th e sym bolism of th e starry heaven coincides w ith the m o tif of p o ly o p h th a lm ia .106 “5 A fte r all this we sh o u ld be able to u n d e rs ta n d D o rn ’s view th a t th e vessel m u st be m ade “ by a k in d of sq u a rin g of th e c ir cle.” 107 I t is essentially a psychic o p e ra tio n , th e c re atio n of an 88 T h e a tr. ch etn ., II (1659), p. 246. Ib id ., V (1660), p . 132. 100 P p. 239!!. I O lT h e m oistu re is “reten tiv e o f sou ls” ("Lib. q u a rt.,” T h e a tr . ch em ., V , 1660, p· 139)102 Cf. the d escen t o f th e so u l in m y "Psychology o f th e T ra n sferen ce,” pars. 483 an d 497. 103 D ia lo g u s m ira c u lo ru m , D ist. IV , ch . x x x ix (Eng. ed n ., p. 42). 104 Cf. m y “O n the N a tu r e o f th e P sych e,” p . 198. 105 P h il, ref., p . 33. io e “O n th e N a tu re o f th e P sych e,” p p . 198L 107 T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), PP- 5°6f.: “ O u r vessel . . . sh o u ld b e m ad e accord in g to true geom etrical p ro p o rtio n an d m easure, and by a k in d of sq u arin g o f the circle." 98

T H E V IS IO N S O F Z O SIM O S

in n er readiness to accept th e archetype o f the self in w hatever su bjective form it appears. D orn calls the vessel the vas pellicanic u m , and says that w ith its h elp the q u in ta essentia can be e x tracted from th e prim a m ateria.108 T h e an onym ous au th or of the scholia to th e “T ractatu s aureus H erm etis” says: “T h is ves sel is th e true p h ilo so p h ica l P elican , and there is n o n e oth er to be sou gh t for in a ll the w o rld .” 109 It is the lapis itself and at the same tim e con tain s it; that is to say, the self is its ow n container. T h is fo rm u la tio n is b orn e o u t by the freq u en t com p arison of the lapis to the egg or to the dragon w hich devours itself and gives b irth to itself. u6 T h e th o u g h t and lan gu age o f alchem y lean h eavily o n m ys ticism : in th e E p istle o f Barnabas110 C hrist’s bod y is called the “vessel o f the sp irit.” C hrist h im self is th e p elica n w h o plucks o u t his breast feathers for his yo u n g .111 A ccord in g to the teach ings o f H erak leon , the d yin g m an sh o u ld address the d em iu rgic powers thus: “I am a vessel m ore precious than th e fem in in e b ein g w ho m ad e you. W hereas your m oth er k new n o t her ow n roots, I k n ow of m yself, and I k now w hence I have com e, and I call u p on the im p erish ab le w isd om w hich is in the F ather112 108 Ib id ., p . 44a. 10s Ib id ., IV (1G59), P- s 98 · [Cf. in fra , F ig. B7.] HO L ak e, A p o s to lic F a th ers, I, p . 383. i n H o n o riiis o f A u tu n , S p e c u lu m d e m y s t. eccl. (M ig n e, P .L ., v o l. 172, col. 936). C h ris t’s te a r in g of th e b re a s t, th e w o u n d in h is sid e, a n d h is m a r ty r ’s d e a th a re p a ra lle ls o f th e a lc h e m ic a l m o r tific a tio , d is m e m b e rm e n t, flay in g , etc., a n d p e rta in like th ese to th e b i r t h a n d re v e la tio n o f th e in n e r m a n . C f. th e r e p o r t in H ip p o ly tu s (E le n c h o s, V, g, 1-6) o f th e P h ry g ia n system . T h e P h ry g ia n s ta u g h t th a t th e F a th e r of a ll th in g s w as c a lle d A m y g d alo s (a lm o n d -tre e ), w as p re -e x is te n t, a n d b o re in h im s e lf th e “ p e rfe c t f r u i t p u ls a tin g a n d s tir r in g in th e d e p th s .” H e “ to re h is b re a s t a n d gave b i r t h to h is in v isib le , n a m e le ss a n d u n n a m e a b le c h ild .” T h a t w as th e “ In v isib le O n e , th r o u g h w h o m a ll th in g s w e re m a d e , a n d w ith o u t w h o m n o th in g w as m a d e ” (a n a llu s io n to J o h n 1 : 3). H e w as “ S y rik tes, th e p ip e r ,” i.e., th e w in d (p n e u m a ). H e w as " th o u s a n d -e y e d , n o t to b e c o m p re h e n d e d ,” th e W o rd (ρ ή μ α ) o f G o d , th e W o rd o f a n n u n c ia tio n a n d g re a t p o w e r.” H e w as " h id d e n in th e d w e llin g w h e re th e ro o ts o f a ll th in g s a re e s ta b lis h e d .” H e w as th e “ k in g d o m o f H e a v e n , th e g ra in o f m u s ta rd -s e e d , th e in d iv is ib le p o in t . . . w h ic h n o n e k n o w save th e s p ir itu a l a lo n e .” (Cf. L eg g e tra n s., P h ilo s o p h u m e n a , I, p p . 140L) 112 H e ra k le o n ta u g h t t h a t th e G r o u n d o f th e w o rld w as a P r im o r d ia l M a n n a m e d B y th o s (d e p th s o f th e sea), w h o w as n e ith e r m a le n o r fe m a le . F ro m th is b e in g was p ro d u c e d th e in n e r m a n , h is c o u n te r p a r t, w h o “ c a m e d o w n fro m th e P le ro m a o n h ig h .”

a n d is the M o th er of y o u r m o th er, w hich has n o m o th e r, b u t also has no m ale c o m p an io n .” 113 ”7 In the ab stru se sym bolism of alchem y we h e a r a d ista n t echo of this k in d of th in k in g , w hich, w ith o u t h o p e of fu rth e r d e v elo p m en t, was doom ed to d estru ctio n u n d e r the censorship of th e C h u rch . B u t we also find in it a g ro p in g tow ards th e fu tu re , a p re m o n itio n of th e tim e w hen th e p ro je c tio n w o u ld be tak en back in to m an , from w hom it h a d arisen in th e first place. I t is in te re stin g to see th e strangely clum sy ways in w hich this te n d ency seeks to express itself in th e ph an tasm ag o ria of alchem ical sym bolism . T h e follow ing in stru ctio n s are given in Jo h an n e s de Rupescissa: “ C ause a vessel to be m ad e in th e fashion of a C h eru b , w hich is th e face of G od, an d le t it have six wings, like to six arm s fo ld in g back u p o n them selves; a n d above, a ro u n d head. . . .” 114 F ro m this it appears th a t a lth o u g h th e ideal dis tillin g vessel sh o u ld resem ble som e m o n stro u s k in d of deity, it nevertheless h a d a n ap p ro x im a te ly h u m a n shape. R upescissa calls th e quintessence th e “ciel h u m a in ” a n d says it is “com m e Ie ciel et Ies etoiles.” T h e B ook of E l-H a b ib 115 says: “ M an ’s h ead likew ise resem bles a co n d en sin g a p p a ra tu s.” Speaking of th e fo u r keys for u n lo c k in g th e treasure-house, th e “ C o n siliu m coniu g ii” 110 explains th a t one of th e m is “ th e ascent of th e w ater th ro u g h th e neck to th e h ead of the vessel, th a t is like a liv in g m a n .” T h e re is a sim ilar idea in th e “ L ib e r q u a rto ru m ” : “T h e vessel . . . m u st be ro u n d in shape, th a t th e a rtife x m ay be the tra n sfo rm e r of th e firm am en t a n d th e b rain -p an , ju s t as th e th in g w hich we n e ed is a sim ple th in g .” 117 T h e se ideas go back to th e h ead sym bolism in Zosimos, b u t a t th e sam e tim e they are an in tim a tio n th a t th e tra n sfo rm a tio n takes place in th e h ead a n d is a psychic process. T h is realizatio n was n o t so m eth in g th a t 113 E p ip h a n iu s, P a n a riu m (ed. H oIl), II, p p . 46!:. 114 L a V ertu e t p r o p r ie te d e la q u in te essence, p . 26.

115 B erth elot, M o y e n age, III, p . 80. l i e A rs ch em ica , p . 110. 117 T h e a tr. ch em ., V (1660), p . 134. T h e res sim p le x refers, u ltim a tely , to G od. I t is “insensible." T h e so u l is sim p le, an d th e “o p u s is n o t p erfected u n less th e m atter is tu rn ed in to th e sim p le" (p. 116). “T h e u n d ersta n d in g is th e sim p le so u l,” a n d “kn ow s a lso w h at is h ig h er than it, a n d th e O ne G od su rrou n d s it, w hose natu re it ca n n o t com p reh en d " (p. 129). “T h a t fro m w h ich th in g s h ave th eir b ein g is th e in v isib le an d im m o v ea b le G od, by w h o se w ill th e u n d ersta n d in g is created" (p. 129).

was clum sily disguised afterw ards; th e lab o rio u s way in w hich it was fo rm u la te d proves h ow o b stin ately it was p ro je c ted in to m atter. Psychological know ledge th ro u g h w ith d raw al of p ro je c tions seems to have b een a n ex trem ely difficult affair fro m the very b e g in n in g . u8 T h e dragon, o r serp en t, rep resen ts the in itia l state of u n c o n sciousness, for this a n im a l loves, as the alchem ists say, to dw ell “in caverns a n d d a rk places.” U nconsciousness has to b e sacri ficed; only th e n can o n e find th e en tra n ce in to th e head, a n d the way to conscious know ledge a n d u n d e rstan d in g . O nce again the u n iv ersal struggle of th e h ero w ith th e d rag o n is enacted, arid each tim e a t its victorious conclusion the sun rises: consciousness dawns, a n d it is perceived th a t th e tra n sfo rm a tio n process is tak in g place inside th e tem ple, th a t is, in th e head. I t is in tru th the in n e r m an, p re sen te d h e re as a h o m u n cu lu s, w ho passes th ro u g h th e stages th a t tra n sfo rm th e c o p p er in to silver an d th e silver into gold, a n d w ho thus undergoes a gradual enhancem ent of value. n9 I t sounds very strange to m o d e rn ears th a t th e in n e r m an a n d his s p iritu a l grow th sh o u ld be sym bolized by m etals. B u t th e histo rical facts c a n n o t be d o u b te d , n o r is th e idea p e c u lia r to alchem y. I t is said, for instance, th a t a fte r Z a ra th u stra h a d r e ceived th e d rin k of om niscience fro m A h u ram azd a, h e b e h eld in a d ream a tre e w ith fo u r branches of gold, silver, steel, an d m ixed iro n .118 T h is tree corresponds to th e m etallic tree of al chem y, th e arbor philosophica, w hich, if it has any m e an in g at all, sym bolizes s p iritu a l g ro w th a n d th e h ighest illu m in a tio n . C old, in e rt m etal certain ly seems to b e the d ire c t op p o site of sp irit— b u t w hat if th e sp irit is as dead an d as heavy as lead? A d ream m ig h t th e n easily te ll us to loo k fo r it in lead o r q u ic k silver! I t seems th a t n a tu re is o u t to p ro d m a n ’s consciousness tow ards g re a te r expansion an d g re a te r clarity, a n d fo r this re a son c o n tin u a lly exploits his g reed fo r m etals, especially th e p re cious ones, a n d m akes h im seek th e m o u t a n d investigate th e ir pro p erties. W h ile so engaged it m ay p erh ap s daw n o n h im th a t n o t only veins of ore are to be fo u n d in th e m ines, b u t also kobolds a n d little m e ta l m en , a n d th a t th e re m ay be h id d e n in lead e ith e r a deadly dem on o r th e dove of th e H o ly G host.119 118 R e itz e n s te in a n d S c h a e d e r, S tu d ie n z u m a n tik e n S y n k r e tis m u s aus Ir a n u n d G rie c h e n la n d , p. 45. l i e [ C f . P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a r. 4 4 3 . ]

It is e v id e n t th a t som e alchem ists passed th ro u g h th is process of re a liza tio n to th e p o in t w here only a th in w all sep arated th e m from psychological self-awareness. C h ristia n R o sen creu tz is still th is side of th e d iv id in g lin e, b u t w ith Faust G o eth e cam e o u t on th e o th e r side a n d was able to describe th e psychological p ro b lem w hich arises w h en th e in n e r m an , o r g re a te r p erso n ality th a t b efore h a d la in h id d e n in th e h o m u n c u lu s, em erges in to th e lig h t of consciousness a n d co n fro n ts th e erstw h ile ego, th e a n i m al m an. M o re th a n once F au st h ad in k lin g s of th e m etallic coldness of M ep h isto p h eles, w ho h a d first circled ro u n d h im in th e shape of a dog (u ro b o ro s m otif). F au st used h im as a fa m il ia r s p irit a n d finally got r id of h im by m eans of th e m o tif of th e ch eated devil; b u t all th e sam e he claim ed th e c re d it fo r th e fam e M ephistopheles b ro u g h t h im as w ell as fo r th e p o w er to w ork m agic. G o e th e ’s so lu tio n o f th e p ro b le m was still m edieval, b u t it nevertheless reflected a psychic a ttitu d e th a t co u ld get on w ith o u t th e p ro te c tio n of th e C h u rc h . T h a t was n o t th e case w ith R o sen creu tz: he was wise en o u g h to stay o u tsid e th e m agic circle, liv in g as he d id w ith in th e confines of tra d itio n . G o eth e was m o re m o d e rn an d th e re fo re m o re in cau tio u s. H e n ev er really u n d e rsto o d how d re a d fu l was th e W a lp u rg isn a c h t of th e m in d against w hich C h ristia n dogm a offered p ro te c tio n , even th o u g h his ow n m asterpiece sp re ad o u t this u n d e rw o rld b efo re his eyes in tw o versions. B u t th en , a n e x tra o rd in a ry n u m b e r of th ings can h a p p e n to a p o et w ith o u t h a v in g serious conse quences. T h e se a p p ea re d w ith a vengeance o n ly a h u n d re d years la te r. T h e psychology of th e unconscio u s has to reck o n w ith lo n g periods of tim e lik e this, for it is c o n cern ed less w ith th e e p h em e ra l p erso n ality th a n w ith age-old processes, c o m p ared w ith w h ich th e in d iv id u a l is n o m o re th a n th e passing blossom a n d f r u it of th e rh izo m e u n d e rg ro u n d . 3.

THE

P E R SO N IF IC A T IO N S

W h a t I have ta k en as a resum e, n am ely th e piece w e have b een discussing, Zosim os calls a προοίμιον, a n in tro d u c tio n .1 I t is th e re fo re n o t a dream -vision; Zosim os is sp eak in g h e re in th e conscious language of his art, an d expresses h im self in term s th a t are obviously fa m ilia r to his re a d er. T h e d rag o n , its sacrifice 1 [S u p ra, p a r . 87 (III, i, 6).]

and d ism e m b erm en t, th e te m p le b u ilt of a single stone, th e m ir acle of gold m ak in g , th e tra n sm u ta tio n of the a n th ro p a ria , are all c u rre n t conceptions in th e alchem y of his day. T h a t is w hy this piece seem s to us a conscious allegory, co n trastin g w ith th e a u th e n tic visions, w hich tre a t the them e of tra n sm u ta tio n in an u n o rth o d o x a n d o rig in al way, ju s t as a d ream m ig h t do. T h e a b stract spirits of th e m etals are p ic tu re d h ere as suffering h u m a n beings; the w hole process becom es lik e a m ystic in itia tio n a n d has b e en very co n sid erab ly psychologized. B u t Zosim os’ co n sciousness is still so m u ch u n d e r th e spell of the p ro je c tio n th a t he can see in th e vision n o th in g m o re than the “co m p o sitio n of the w aters.” O ne sees how in those days consciousness tu rn e d away from th e m ystic process a n d fastened its a tte n tio n u p o n th e m a te ria l one, a n d how th e p ro je c tio n drew th e m in d tow ards th e physical. F o r th e physical w o rld h a d n o t yet b een discovered. H a d Zosim os recognized the p ro jectio n , h e w o u ld have fallen back in to th e fog of m ystic speculation , a n d th e d e v elo p m en t of th e scientific s p irit w o u ld have b e en delayed fo r an even lo n g e r tim e. F o r us, m a tte rs are different. I t is ju s t th e m ystic c o n te n t of his visions th a t is of special im p o rtan c e fo r us, because we are fa m ilia r e n o u g h w ith th e chem ical processes w hich Zosimos was o u t to investigate. W e are th e re fo re in a p o sitio n to separate them from th e p ro je c tio n an d to recognize th e psychic e lem en t they c o n tain . T h e resu m e also offers us a sta n d a rd of co m p ariso n w hich enables us to discern th e difference b etw een its style of ex p osition a n d th a t of th e visions. T h is difference su p p o rts o u r assu m p tio n th a t th e visions are m o re like a d ream th a n a n alle gory, th o u g h th e re is little p ossibility of o u r re c o n stru c tin g th e d ream fro m th e defective te x t th a t has com e do w n to us. T h e re p re se n ta tio n of th e ‘‘alchem ystical” process by persons needs a little ex p lan a tio n . T h e person ificatio n of lifeless things is a re m n a n t of p rim itiv e a n d archaic psychology. I t is caused by unconscious id e n tity ,2 o r w h at L evy-B ruhl called p a rticip a tio n m ystiq u e. T h e unconscious id e n tity , in tu rn , is caused by th e p ro je c tio n of unconscious co n ten ts in to an o b ject, so th a t these contents th e n becom e accessible to consciousness as q u alities a p p a re n tly b e lo n g in g to the object. A ny o b je ct th a t is a t all in te r esting provokes a co n sid erab le n u m b e r of p ro jectio n s. T h e difference betw een p rim itiv e a n d m o d e rn psychology in th is 2 C f.

P sych o lo g ica l T y p e s,

D e f. 25.

r e s p e c t is i n th e first p la c e q u a lita tiv e , a n d in th e s e c o n d p la c e o n e o f d e g re e . C o n s c io u s n e s s d e v e lo p s i n c iv iliz e d m a n b y th e ac q u i s i t io n o f k n o w le d g e a n d b y th e w ith d r a w a l o f p r o je c tio n s . T h e s e a r e r e c o g n iz e d as p sy c h ic c o n te n ts a n d a re r e i n t e g r a te d w ith th e p sy c h e. T h e a lc h e m is ts c o n c r e tiz e d o r p e r s o n if ie d p r a c tic a lly a ll t h e i r m o s t i m p o r t a n t id e a s— th e f o u r e le m e n ts , th e v es sel, th e s to n e , th e p r im a m a te r ia , th e t i n c tu r e , e tc . T h e id e a o f m a n as a m ic ro c o s m , r e p r e s e n t in g in a ll h is p a r ts th e e a r t h o r th e u n iv e r s e ,3 is a r e m n a n t o f a n o r ig in a l p sy c h ic i d e n t i t y w h ic h r e fle c te d a tw ilig h t s ta te o f c o n sc io u sn e ss. A n a lc h e m ic a l t e x t 4 e x p resse s th is as fo llo w s: M a n is to be esteem ed a little w o rld , a n d in a ll respects h e is to be c o m p a re d to a w orld. T h e bones u n d e r his sk in are lik e n e d to m o u n ta in s , for by th e m is th e body s tre n g th e n e d , even as th e e a rth is by rocks, a n d th e flesh is ta k e n fo r e a rth , a n d th e g re a t b lo o d vessels for g re a t rivers, a n d th e little ones fo r sm all stream s th a t p o u r in to th e g re a t rivers. T h e b la d d e r is th e sea, w h e re in th e g re a t as w ell as th e sm all stream s congregate. T h e h a ir is c o m p a re d to s p ro u tin g herbs, th e n ails on th e h a n d s a n d feet, a n d w h a te v er else m ay b e discovered in sid e a n d o u tsid e a m an , a ll a c co rd in g to its k in d is c o m p a re d to th e w o rld . 123

A lc h e m ic a l p r o je c tio n s a re o n ly a s p e c ia l in s ta n c e o f th e m o d e o f t h i n k i n g ty p if ie d b y t h e id e a o f th e m ic ro c o s m . H e r e is a n o t h e r e x a m p le o f p e r s o n if ic a tio n :5 N o w m a rk fu rth e r B est B eloved / how you sh o u ld do / you s h o u ld go to th e h ouse / th e re y o u w ill find tw o d o o rs / th a t a re s h u t / you s h o u ld sta n d a w hile b efo re th e m / u n til o n e com es / a n d o pens th e d o o r / a n d goes o u t to y o u / th a t w ill b e a Y ellow M a n / a n d is n o t p re tty to lo o k u p o n / b u t you s h o u ld n o t fe a r h im / because h e is u n sh a p e ly / b u t h e is sw eet o f w o rd / a n d w ill ask y o u / m y d e a r w h a t seekest th o u h ere / w h e n tru ly I h av e lo n g seen n o m a n / so n e a r th is h ouse / th e n you s h o u ld answ er h im / I h a v e com e h e re a n d seek th e L a p id e m P h ilo s o p h o ru m / th e sam e Y ellow M an w ill answ er y o u a n d speak th u s / m y d e a r frie n d since you now h av e Cf. th e m e d ie v a l m e lo th e s ia e . [F o r a d e fin itio n , n . 5 . — E d i t o r s .] 4 ‘‘G lo ria m u n d i,” M u s . h e r m ., p . 270. R “E in P h ilo so p h isc h e s W e rc k u n d G e sp ra c h , v o n R e v e re n d issim i D o m in i M e lc h io ris C a rd in a lis e t in A u r e u m v e llu s , p p . 177L A fte r th e R e d M a n fro m th is com es th e W h ite D ove. 3

see ‘‘P sy ch o lo g y a n d R e lig io n ,”

p . 67,

d e m G e lb e n u n d R o tte n M a n n E p isc o p i B rix ie n s is ,” r e p r in te d h e fin d s th e B la c k R a v e n , a n d

c o m e so f a r / I w i l l s h o w y o u f u r t h e r / y o u s h o u l d g o i n t o t h e h o u s e / u n til y o u c o m e to a r u n n i n g f o u n ta in / a n d th e n go o n a lit tle w h ile / a n d t h e r e w i l l c o m e t o y o u a R e d M a n / h e is F i e r y R e d a n d h a s R e d ey es / y o u s h o u ld n o t f e a r h im o n a c c o u n t o f h is u g l i n e s s / f o r h e is g e n t l e o f w o r d / a n d h e a l s o w i l l a s k y o u / m y d e a r f r i e n d / w h a t is y o u r d e s i r e h e r e / w h e n to m e y o u a r e a s t r a n g e g u e s t / a n d y o u s h o u ld a n s w e r h im / I se ek th e L a p id e m P h ilo s o p h o ru m . . . . 124

P e r s o n if ic a tio n s o f m e ta ls a r e e s p e c ia lly c o m m o n in th e f o lk ta l e s o f i m p s a n d g o b l i n s , w h o w e r e o f t e n s e e n i n t h e m i n e s .6 W e m e e t t h e m e t a l m e n s e v e r a l t i m e s i n Z o s i m o s ,7 a l s o a b r a z e n e a g l e .8 T h e “ w h i t e m a n ” a p p e a r s i n L a t i n a l c h e m y : “ A c c i p e i l i u m a l b u m h o m i n e m d e v a s e . ” H e is t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e c o n j u n c t i o n o f t h e b r i d e g r o o m a n d b r i d e ,9 a n d b e l o n g s t o t h e s a m e c o n te x t o f th o u g h t as th e o ft-c ite d “ w h ite w o m a n ” a n d “ r e d s la v e ,” w h o a r e s y n o n y m o u s w i t h B e y a a n d G a b r i c u s i n t h e “V is io A r i s l e i .” T h e s e tw o f ig u r e s s e e m to h a v e b e e n t a k e n o v e r b y C h a u c e r :10 T h e s ta tu e o f M a rs u p o n a c a r te s to o d , A rm e d , a n d lo o k e d g ry m as h e w e re w o o d ; A n d o v e r h i s h e e d t h e r s h y n e n tw o f ig u r e s • O f s te rre s , t h a t b e e n c le p e d in s c r ip tu r e s , T h a t o o n P u e lla , th a t o o th e r R u b e u s .

125

N o t h i n g w o u ld h a v e b e e n e a s ie r th a n to e q u a te th e lo v e s to ry o f M a r s a n d V e n u s w ith t h a t o f G a b r ic u s a n d B e y a ( w h o w e r e a l s o p e r s o n i f i e d a s d o g a n d b i t c h ) , a n d i t is l i k e l y t h a t a s tro lo g ic a l in f lu e n c e s a ls o p la y e d a p a r t. T h a n k s to h is u n c o n s c io u s i d e n t i t y w i t h it, m a n a n d c o s m o s i n t e r a c t . T h e f o l l o w i n g p a ssa g e , o f th e u tm o s t im p o r ta n c e f o r th e p s y c h o lo g y o f a lc h e m y , s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d i n t h i s s e n s e : “ A n d a s m a n is c o m p o s e d o f t h e f o u r e l e m e n t s , s o a l s o is t h e s t o n e , a n d s o i t is [ d u g ] o u t o f m a n , a n d y o u a r e i t s o r e , n a m e l y b y w o r k i n g ; a n d f r o m y o u i t is e x tra c te d , n a m e ly b y d iv is io n ; a n d in y o u it r e m a in s in s e p a ra b ly , 6 Cf. th e in te re stin g · e x a m p le s in A g rico la, D e a n im a n tib u s s u b te r r a n e is , a n d K irch er, M u n d u s s u b te r r a n e u s , lib . V III, c a p . IV . 7 A lc h . g recs, I I I , x x x v . 8 Ib id ., I l l , x x ix , i8f. 9 “A e n ig m a ” V I, in A r t. a u r if., I, p . 151. 10 T h e C a n te r b u r y T a le s (ed. R o b in so n ), p . 43 ( T h e K n ig h t’s T a le , 3041-45).

nam ely th ro u g h the science.” 11 N o t only do things a p p e a r p e r sonified as h u m a n beings, b u t the m acrocosm personifies itself as a m an too. ‘‘T h e w hole of n a tu re converges in m a n as in a cem re, an d one p articip ates in the other, a n d m an has n o t u n ju stly co n clu d ed th a t th e m a te ria l of th e p h ilo so p h ical stone m ay be fo u n d everyw here.” 12 T h e ‘‘C o n siliu m c o n iu g ii” 13 says: ‘‘F o u r are th e n a tu re s w hich com pose th e p h ilo so p h ical m a n .” ‘‘T h e elem ents of th e stone are four, w hich, w h en w ell p ro p o r tio n e d to one a n o th e r, co n stitu te the p h ilosophical m an, th a t is, the perfect h u m a n e lix ir.” “T h e y say th a t th e stone is a m an , b e cause one c an n o t a tta in to i t 14 save by reason a n d h u m a n k n o w l edge.” T h e above statem e n t “you are its o re ” has a p a ra llel in the treatise of K om arios:15 “I n thee [C leopatra] is h id d e n th e w hole te rrib le a n d m arvellous secret.” T h e same is said of th e “b odies” ( σ ώ μ α τ α , i.e., ‘substances’): “I n th em th e w hole secret is concealed.” 16 4- TH E is 6

S T O N E S Y M B O L IS M

Zosimos contrasts th e body ( σ ά ρ ξ in th e sense of ‘flesh’) w ith th e sp iritu a l m an (π ν β υ μ α τ ικ ό ς) . 1 T h e d istin g u ish in g m ark of th e sp iritu a l m an is th a t he seeks self-know ledge a n d know ledge of G o d .2 T h e earthly, fleshly m an is called T h o th o r A dam . H e b ears w ith in him th e sp iritu a l m an, w hose n am e is lig h t (<i>ws). T h is first m an, T h o th -A d am , is sym bolized by th e fo u r elem ents. T h e s p iritu a l a n d th e fleshly m a n are also n a m ed P ro m eth eu s a n d E p im eth eu s. B u t “ in allegorical lan g u ag e” they “ are b u t one m an , nam ely soul a n d b ody.” T h e sp iritu a l m an was seduced in to p u ttin g o n th e body, a n d was b o u n d to it by “P an d o ra, H “R o sin u s ad Sarrat.,” A r t. a u rif., I, p. 311. 12 “O rth elii e p ilo g u s,” T h e a tr. ch em ., V I (1661), p . 438. 13 A rs ch em ica , p p . 247, 253, 254. 14 T h e te x t has “a d D e u m ” (in stead o f “ad e u m ”), w h ich is m ea n in g less. S tate m en ts lik e “o u r b od y is our S ton e” (“A u th o ris ig n o ti o p u scu lu m ," A r t. a u rif., I, p . 392) are d o u b tfu l, because “corpus n o stru m ” can ju st as w e ll m ea n the arcane substance. 15 A lch . grecs, IV, x x , 8. ie IV , x x , 16. 1 III, x lix , 4. 2 T h e im p ortan ce o f self-k n ow led ge is stressed in th e alch em ica l texts. Cf. A io n , p p . i62ff.

»27

w hom th e H ebrew s call Eve.” 3 She played the p art, th erefo re, of the anim a, w ho functions as th e lin k betw een body an d sp irit, ju st as S hakti o r M aya entangles m a n ’s consciousness w ith the w orld. In th e "B ook of K rates” th e sp iritu a l m an says: "A re you capable of k n o w in g y o u r soul com pletely? If you knew it as you should, an d if you knew w h a t co u ld m ake it b etter, you w ould be capable of k n o w in g th a t the nam es w hich the philosophers gave it of old are n o t its tru e nam es.” 4 T h is last sentence is a stan d in g phrase w hich is a p p lie d to the nam es of th e lapis. T h e lapis signifies the in n e r m an , th e άνθρωποί πνευματικός, th e natura abscondita w hich th e alchem ists sought to set free. In this sense the A u ro ra consurgens says th a t th ro u g h b ap tism by fire “m an, who before was dead, is m ade a living soul.” 5 T h e a ttrib u te s of the stone— in c o rru p tib ility , perm anence, divinity, triu n ity , etc.— are so insistently em phasized th a t one cannot h elp ta k in g it as th e deus absconditus in m atter. T h is is p ro b ab ly the basis of th e Iapis-C hrist p arallel, w hich occurs as early as Zosimos6 (unless th e passage in q u estio n is a la te r in te r polation). Inasm uch as C h rist p u t on a "h u m a n body capable of suffering” an d clo th ed him self in m a tte r, he form s a p arallel to the lapis, the c o rp o reality of w hich is co n stan tly stressed. Its u b iq u ity corresponds to th e om nipresence of C hrist. Its "ch eap ness,” how ever, goes against th e d o ctrin al view. T h e d iv in ity of C hrist has n o th in g to do w ith m an, b u t th e h e alin g stone is “ ex tracted ” from m an, an d every m an is its p o te n tia l c arrie r an d creator. I t is n o t difficult to see w h at k in d of conscious situ a tio n the lapis philosophy com pensates: far fro m sig n ifyin g C h rist, th e lapis c o m p lem e n ts th e com m on conception of the C hrist figure a t th a t tim e.7 W h a t unconscious n a tu re was u ltim a te ly aim in g at w hen she p ro d u ced th e im age of th e lapis can be seen m ost clearly in the n o tio n th a t it o rig in ate d in m a tte r a n d in m an, th a t it was to be fo u n d everyw here, an d th a t its fab ricatio n lay at least p o ten tially w ith in m a n ’s reach. T h e se q u alities all reveal w hat w ere felt to be the defects in th e C h rist im age a t th a t tim e: an a ir too rarefied for h u m a n needs, too g reat a rem oteness, a S F or a translation o f th e en tire text, see P sych o lo g y a n d A lch em y , par. 456. 4 B erth elot, M o yen dge, III, p . 50. δ Cf. A u ro ra C onsurgens (ed. M .-L. von Franz), p . 87. e A lch . g recs, III, x lix , 4. I Cf. infra, “T h e Sp irit M ercurius,” pars. 28gff.

place left vacant in the h u m a n h e art. M en fe lt th e absence of th e “ in n e r” C hrist w ho belonged to every m an. C h rist’s s p iritu a lity was too h ig h a n d m a n ’s n atu raln ess was too low. I n th e im age of M ercu riu s a n d th e lapis th e “flesh” glorified itself in its ow n way; it w o uld n o t tran sfo rm itself in to s p irit b u t, o n th e con trary , “ fixed” the s p irit in stone, a n d endow ed th e stone w ith all the a ttrib u te s of the th re e Persons. T h e lapis m ay th e re fo re be u n d e rsto o d as a sym bol of the in n e r C hrist, of G o d in m an . I use th e expression “sym bol” o n purpose, for th o u g h th e lapis is a p ara llel of C hrist, it is n o t m e a n t to replace h im . O n th e con trary, in th e course of the cen tu ries the alchem ists te n d ed m o re a n d m o re to re g a rd th e lapis as th e c u lm in a tio n of C h rist’s w ork of re d e m p tio n . T h is was an a tte m p t to assim ilate th e C h rist fig u re in to the philo so p h y of th e “science of G o d .” I n th e six te en th c e n tu ry K h u n ra th fo rm u la te d for the first tim e th e “ th eo lo g i c a l” p o sition of th e lapis: it was the filin s m acrocosm i as opposed to th e “ son of m a n ,” w ho was th e filiu s m icrocosm i. T h is im age of the “Son of th e G re at W o rld ” tells us fro m w h a t source it was d eriv ed : it cam e n o t fro m th e conscious m in d of th e in d iv id u a l m an , b u t from those b o rd e r regions of th e psyche th a t o p e n o u t in to th e m ystery of cosm ic m a tte r. C o rrectly reco g n izin g the s p iritu a l one-sidedness of the C h rist im age, th eological specula tio n h a d b e g u n very early to concern itself w ith C h ris t’s body, th a t is, w ith his m a te riality , a n d h a d tem p o ra rily solved the p ro b le m w ith th e hypothesis of th e re su rre c te d body. B u t b e cause this was only a provisional a n d th e re fo re n o t a n en tirely satisfactory answ er, the p ro b le m logically p re sen te d itself again in th e A ssu m p tio n of th e Blessed V irg in , le ad in g first to th e d ogm a o f th e Im m ac u la te C o n cep tio n a n d finally to th a t of th e A ssum ption. T h o u g h this o n ly postpones th e re a l answ er, th e way to it is nevertheless p re p a red . T h e assu m p tio n a n d co ro n a tio n of M ary, as d ep icted in th e m edieval illu stratio n s, a d d a fo u rth , fe m in in e p rin c ip le to th e m ascu lin e T rin ity . T h e re su lt is a q u a te rn ity , w hich form s a re a l a n d n o t m erely p o stu la ted sym bol of to tality. T h e to ta lity of th e T r in ity is a m e re p o stu late, for o utside it stands th e au to n o m o u s a n d e te rn a l adversary w ith his choirs of fallen angels a n d th e denizens of h ell. N a tu ra l sym bols of to ta lity such as o ccu r in o u r dream s an d visions, an d in th e East take the fo rm of m andalas, are q u a te rn itie s o r m u lti ples of fo u r, o r else sq u ared circles.

128

,29

T h e a cc e n tu atio n of m a tte r is above all ev id en t in th e choice of th e stone as a G od-im age. W e m e et this sym bol in th e very earliest G reek alchem y, b u t th ere are good reasons fo r th in k in g th a t the stone sym bol is very m u ch o ld e r th a n its alchem ical usage. T h e stone as th e b irth p la c e of the gods (e.g., th e b irth of M ithras from a stone) is attested by p rim itiv e legends of stoneb irth s w hich go back to ideas th a t are even m o re a n c ie n t— fo r instance, th e view of th e A u stra lian aborigines th a t c h ild re n ’s souls live in a special stone called th e “child-stone.” T h e y can be m ade to m ig rate in to a u te ru s by ru b b in g the “ch ild -sto n e” w ith a churinga. C huringas m ay be boulders, o r o b lo n g stones a rtifi cially sh ap ed an d decorated, o r oblong, flattened pieces of w ood o rn a m e n te d in the sam e way. T h e y are used as c u lt in stru m e n ts. T h e A u stralian s an d the M elanesians m a in ta in th a t churingas com e from th e to tem ancestor, th a t they are relics of his body o r of his activity, an d are fu ll of a ru n q u ilth a o r m ana. T h e y are u n ite d w ith th e a n ce sto r’s soul a n d w ith th e spirits of all those w ho afterw ards possess them . T h e y are taboo, are b u rie d in caches o r h id d e n in clefts in the rocks. I n o rd e r to “ch arg e” them , they are b u rie d am o n g the graves so th a t they can soak u p the m a n a of th e dead. T h e y p ro m o te th e g ro w th of fieldproduce, increase th e fe rtility of m en an d anim als, heal w ounds, an d cu re sicknesses of the body a n d th e soul. T h u s , w hen a m a n ’s vitals are all k n o tte d u p w ith em o tio n , th e A u stralian a b origines give h im a blow in th e ab d o m en w ith a stone ch u r inga.8 T h e churingas used for cerem o n ial purposes are d a u b ed w ith re d ochre, a n o in te d w ith fat, b e d d ed o r w rap p ed in leaves, an d copiously spat on (spittle = mana).® T h e se ideas of m agic stones are fo u n d n o t only in A u stralia an d M elanesia b u t also in In d ia a n d B u rm a, a n d in E u ro p e it self. F o r exam ple, the m adness of O restes was cu red by a sto n e in L aco n ia.10 Zeus fo u n d resp ite from th e sorrow s of love by sit tin g on a stone in L eu k ad ia. In In d ia , a y o u n g m an w ill tre a d u p o n a stone in o rd e r to o b ta in firm ness of ch aracter, an d a b rid e w ill do th e sam e to en su re h e r ow n faithfulness. A ccording 8 Spencer and G illen , T h e N o r th e r n T r ib e s o f C en tra l A u str a lia , p p . 257ft. 8 H astings, E n c y clo p a ed ia of R e lig io n a n d Eth ics, X I, p . 874b, an d Frazer, M ag ic A r t , I, pp . 160ft. Sim ilar och re-p a in ted stones can still b e seen in In d ia today, tor instance in th e K aligh at at C alcutta. 1OPausanias, D e sc rip tio Graeciae (ed. Spiro), I, p. 300.

to Saxo G ram m aticu s, th e electors of th e k in g sto o d o n stones in o rd e r to give th e ir vote p e rm a n e n c e .11 T h e g reen stone of A rra n was used b o th fo r h e alin g an d for ta k in g oaths o n .12 A cache of “ soul stones,” sim ila r to churingas, was fo u n d in a cave on th e riv e r Birs n e a r Basel, a n d d u rin g re c e n t excavations of th e pole-dw ellings on th e little lake a t B urgaeschi, in C a n to n S o lo th u rn , a g ro u p of b o u ld e rs was discovered w ra p p ed in th e b ark of b irch trees. T h is very a n c ie n t c o n cep tio n of th e m agical pow er of stones led on a h ig h e r level of c u ltu re to th e sim ilar im p o rtan c e a ttach ed to gems, to w hich all k in d s of m agical a n d m ed icin al p ro p e rtie s w ere a ttrib u te d . T h e gem s th a t are the m ost fam ous in h isto ry are even supposed to have b een resp o n si ble for th e tragedies th a t befell th e ir ow ners. 1So A m yth of the N avaho In d ia n s of A rizo n a gives a p a rtic u la rly g rap h ic a cco u n t of the p rim itiv e fantasies th a t clu ster ro u n d th e sto n e .13 In th e days of th e g re a t darkness,14 th e ancestors of th e h ero saw the Sky F a th e r descending an d th e E a rth M o th er risin g u p to m eet him . T h e y u n ite d , a n d on th e to p of th e m o u n ta in w here th e u n io n took place th e ancestors fo u n d a little figure m ade of tu rq u o is e .15 T h is tu rn e d in to (or in a n o th e r version gave b irth to) E stsanatlehi, “ the w om an w ho re ju v e n ate s o r transform s herself.” She was th e m o th e r of th e tw in gods w ho slew th e p rim o rd ia l m onsters, a n d was called th e m o th e r o r g ra n d m o th e r of th e gods (yei). E stsan atleh i is th e m ost im p o r ta n t figure in th e m a tria rc h a l p a n th e o n of th e N avaho. N o t only is she th e “w om an w ho transform s herself,” b u t she also has tw o shapes, fo r h e r tw in sister, Y olkaiestsan, is en d o w ed w ith sim ilar pow ers. E stsanatlehi is im m o rtal, for th o u g h she grows in to a w ith e re d o ld w om an she rises u p again as a y o u n g g irl— a tru e D ea N a tu ra . F ro m d ifferen t p arts of h e r b o d y fo u r d au g h ters w ere b o rn to h er, a n d a fifth from h e r sp irit. T h e su n cam e from th e tu rq u o ise beads h id d e n in h e r rig h t breast, a n d fro m w h ite shell beads in h e r left b reast th e m oon. She issues re b o rn by rollSo d id th e a rc h o n s in A th e n s w h e n ta k in g th e ir o a th . 12 F ra z e r, M a g ic A r t, I, p . 161. 13 S chevill, B e a u tifu l o n th e E a r th , p p . 24ft. a n d g8ff. 14 F o r th e A u s tr a lia n a b o rig in e s, th is w o u ld b e th e p rim e v a l w h ic h m e a n s b o th th e w o rld o f th e a n c e sto rs a n d th e w o rld o f 15 C f. th e tre a tis e o f K o m ario s (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, IV , x x , 2): h ig h e s t cave o n th e th ic k -w o o d e d m o u n ta in , a n d b e h o ld th e r e m o u n ta in to p . A n d ta k e fro m th e s to n e th e m a le . . . ." 11

a lc h e rin g a tim e , d re a m s. “ G o u p in to th e a s to n e o n th e

in g a p ie ce o f sk in fro m u n d e r h e r le ft b reast. She lives in th e w est, o n a n isla n d in th e sea. H e r lo v e r is th e w ild a n d c ru e l S u n B eare r, w h o has a n o th e r w ife; b u t h e has to stay a t h o m e w ith h e r o n ly w h e n it ra in s . T h e tu rq u o is e goddess is so sacred th a t n o im ag e m a y b e m a d e o f h e r, a n d ev en th e gods m ay n o t lo o k o n h e r faqe. W h e n h e r tw in sons ask ed h e r w h o th e ir f a th e r was, she gave th e m a w ro n g an sw er, e v id e n tly to p ro te c t th e m fro m th e d a n g e ro u s fa te o f th e h e ro . 131 T h is m a tria rc h a l goddess is o b v io u sly a n a n im a fig u re w h o a t th e sam e tim e sym bolizes th e self. H e n c e h e r sto n e -n a tu re , h e r im m o rta lity , h e r fo u r d a u g h te rs b o r n fro m th e b o d y , p lu s o n e fro m th e s p irit, h e r d u a lity as s u n a n d m o o n , h e r ro le as p a ra m o u r, a n d h e r a b ility to c h a n g e h e r s h a p e .16 T h e self o f a m a n liv in g in a m a tria rc h a l so ciety is s till im m e rse d in h is u n c o n scious fe m in in ity , as can b e o b serv ed ev en to d a y in a ll cases of m a sc u lin e m o th e r-c o m p le x e s. B u t th e tu rq u o is e goddess also e x em plifies th e psychology o f th e m a tria rc h a l w o m an , w ho, as a n a n im a fig u re, a ttra c ts th e m o th e r-c o m p le x e s o f a ll th e m e n in h e r v ic in ity a n d ro b s th e m o f th e ir in d e p e n d e n c e , ju s t as O m p h a le h e ld H e ra k le s in th r a ll, o r C irc e re d u c e d h e r cap tiv es to a s ta te o f b e s tia l u n co n scio u sn ess— n o t to m e n tio n B e n o it’s A tla n tid a , w h o m a d e a c o lle c tio n o f h e r m u m m ifie d lovers. AU th is h a p p e n s b ecau se th e a n im a c o n ta in s th e se c re t o f th e p r e cious sto n e, fo r, as N ietzsc h e says, “a ll jo y w an ts e te r n ity .” T h u s th e le g e n d a ry O stan es, s p e a k in g o f th e secret o f th e “ p h ilo so p h y ,” says to h is p u p il C le o p a tra : “ I n y o u is h id d e n th e w h o le te r r ib le a n d m a rv e llo u s secret. . . . M ak e k n o w n to us h o w th e h ig h e st descen d s to th e low est, a n d h o w th e low est ascends to th e h ig h est, a n d h o w th e m id m o s t d raw s n e a r to th e h ig h e st, a n d is m a d e o n e w ith it.” 17 T h i s “m id m o s t” is th e sto n e, th e m e d ia to r w h ich u n ite s th e o p p o sites. S u ch sayings hav e n o m e a n in g u n less th e y a re u n d e rs to o d in a p ro fo u n d ly p sy ch o lo g ical sense. >32 W id e s p re a d as is th e m o tif of th e s to n e -b irth (cf. th e c re a tio n m y th of D e u c a lio n a n d P y rrh a ), th e A m e ric a n cycle o f leg ends seem s to lay sp ecial em p h asis o n th e m o tif of th e sto n ebody, o r a n im a te d s to n e .18 W e m e e t th is m o tif in th e Iro q u o is ta le o f th e tw in b ro th e rs . B e g o tte n in a m ira c u lo u s m a n n e r in !6 Cf. R id er H a g g a rd ’s She. u A lch. grecs, IV, xx, 8. !81 am in d e b ted to D r. M.-JL. von F ranz fo r this m aterial.

th e body of a v irg in , a p a ir of twins w ere b o rn , one of w hom cam e fo rth in th e n o rm a l way, w hile the o th e r so u g h t an a b n o rm a l ex it a n d em erged from th e a rm p it, th ereb y k illin g his m o th er. T h is tw in h a d a body m ade of flint. H e was w icked an d cruel, u n lik e his n o rm a lly b o rn b ro th e r.19 In th e Sioux version th e m o th e r was a tortoise. A m o n g the W ich ita, th e sav io u r was th e great star in th e south, a n d he p e rfo rm ed his w ork of salva tio n on earth as th e “flint m a n .” H is son was called th e “ y o ung flin t.” A fte r c o n jp le tin g th e ir w ork, b o th of th e m w en t back in to the sky.20 In this m yth, ju s t as in m edieval alchem y, th e saviour coincides w ith th e stone, th e star, th e “so n ,” w ho is “su p er o m nia lu m in a .” T h e c u ltu re h ero of the N atchez In d ia n s cam e dow n to e a rth from th e sun, a n d shone w ith u n e n d u ra b le brightness. H is glance was death-dealing. I n o rd e r to m itig a te this, a n d to p re v e n t his body from c o rru p tin g in th e earth , he chan g ed him self in to a stone statue, from w hich the priestly ch ieftain s of th e N atchez w ere descen d ed .21 A m o n g th e T a o s P ueblos, a virg in was m ad e p re g n a n t by b e a u tifu l stones an d b ore a h e ro son,22 w ho, ow ing to Spanish influence, assum ed the aspect of the C h rist c h ild .23 T h e stone plays a sim ilar ro le in the Aztec cycle of legends. F o r instance, th e m o th e r of Q uetzalcoatl was m ad e p re g n a n t by a precious green sto n e .24 H e h im self h a d the cognom en “ p riest of th e precious sto n e ” a n d w ore a m ask m ade of tu rq u o ise .25 T h e precious g reen stone was an a n im a t ing p rin c ip le a n d was p laced in th e m o u th of th e d e a d .26 M an ’s o rig in al hom e was th e “bow l of precious sto n e.” 27 T h e m o tif of tra n sfo rm a tio n in to stone, o r p e trifa c tio n , is co m m o n in th e P e ru v ia n a n d C o lo m b ian legends a n d is p ro b a b ly co n n ected w ith a m eg alith ic sto n e-cult,28 a n d p erh ap s also w ith th e p alaeo lith ic c u lt of churinga -like soul-stones. T h e p arallels h e re w o u ld be the m e n h irs of m eg alith ic c u ltu re , w hich reach ed as far as th e K rickeberg, In d ia n e rm a rc h e n au s N o rd a m e r ik a 1 pp. g2fi. V an D eu rsen, D e r H e ilb r in g e r, p . 227. 21 Ib id., p. 238. 22 Cf. th e fertility sign ifican ce o f th e ch u rin gas. 23 Van D eursen, p . 286. 24 K rickeberg, M a rch en d e r A zte k e n , In k a j M a y a u n d M u isk a, p. 36. 25 Ib id., p. 65. 10

26 p . 330.

27 P- 317. 28 p . 382.

IOO

133

Pacific archipelago. T h e civilization of th e N ile valley, w hich o rig in ated in m eg alith ic tim es, tu rn e d its div in e kings in to stone statues for the express purpose of m ak in g th e k in g ’s ka everlast ing. In sham anism , m u ch im p o rtan ce is attach ed to crystals, w hich play the p a rt of m in iste rin g spirits.29 T h e y com e from the crystal th ro n e of th e su p rem e b ein g o r from th e v a u lt of the sky. T h e y show w hat is going on in the w o rld an d w h at is h a p p en in g to th e souls of the sick, an d they also give m an th e pow er to fly.30 T h e c o n n ectio n of the lapis w ith im m o rtality is attested from very early tim es. O stanes (possibly 4 th cent. B .C .) speaks of “ the N ile stone th a t has a s p irit.” 31 T h e lapis is th e panacea, th e universal m edicine, the alex ip h arm ic, th e tin c tu re th a t transm utes base m etals in to gold an d gravel in to precious stones. It brings riches, pow er, a n d h ealth ; it cures m elancholy an d , as the vivu s lapis p h ilo so p h icu s, is a sym bol of th e saviour, th e Anthropos, a n d im m o rtality . Its in c o rru p tib ility is also show n in the a n c ie n t idea th a t th e body of a sain t becom es stone. T h u s the A pocalypse of E lijah says of those w ho escape p ersecu tio n by the A nti-M essiah:32 “ T h e L o rd shall take u n to h im th e ir sp irit an d th e ir souls, th e ir flesh shall be m ade stone, n o w ild b east shall d evour th em till th e last day of the g re a t ju d g m e n t.” In a Basuto legend re p o rte d by F ro b en iu s,83 th e h ero is left stra n d ed by his pursuers on th e b a n k of a river. H e changes him self in to a stone, an d his pursuers th ro w h im across to the o th e r side. T h is is the m o tif of the transitus: th e “o th e r sid e” is th e sam e as etern ity . 5.

*34

T H E W A TE R SY M BO LISM

Psychological research has show n th a t th e h isto rical o r e th nological symbols are id e n tic al w ith those spontaneously p ro duced by th e unconscious, an d th a t th e lapis rep resen ts th e idea of a tra n sce n d e n t to tality w hich coincides w ith w h at analytical psychology calls the self. F rom this p o in t of view we can u n d e r stand w ith o u t difficulty th e a p p aren tly ab su rd statem en t of th e 29 E liade, Sh am an ism , p. 5a. 30 Ibid., pp. 363(:. 31 A lch . grecs, III, vi, 5, i2ff. 32 Steindorff, A p o k a ly p se d e s E lias, 36, 17-37, *> P- 9733 D as Z e ita lte r des S o n n en g o ttesi p. 106. IOl

alchem ists that the lapis consists of body, soul, and spirit, is a liv in g b eing, a h o m u n cu lu s or “h o m o .” It sym bolizes m an, or rather, the in n er m an, and the paradoxical statem ents ab ou t it are really descrip tions and d efin ition s of this in n er m an. U p o n this con n otatio n o f th e lapis is based its p arallelism w ith Christ. B eh in d th e cou n tless ecclesiastical and alchem ical m etaphors m ay b e fo u n d th e lan gu age o f H e llen istic syncretism , w h ich was origin ally com m o n to b oth. Passages lik e the fo llo w in g o n e from P riscillian , a G n ostic-M anichaean heretic o f the fou rth century, m u st have b een ex trem ely suggestive for the alchem ists: “O neh orn ed is G od, C hrist a rock to us, Jesus a cornerstone, C hrist the m an of m e n ” 1— u nless the m atter was the oth er way round, and m etaphors taken from natural p h ilosop h y fou n d th eir way in to th e lan gu age o f the C hurch via the G ospel o f St. Joh n . *35 T h e p rin cip le that is personified in the visions o f Zosim os is the w onder-w orking water, w hich is b oth w ater and spirit, and k ills and vivifies. If Zosim os, w aking from his dream , im m ed i ately thinks o f the “co m p o sitio n o f th e w aters,” this is th e o b v i ous con clu sion from the alchem ical p o in t o f view . Since the longsou gh t w ater, as w e have sh ow n ,2 represents a cycle o f b irth and death, every process that consists o f death and reb irth is n a tu rally a sym bol o f the d iv in e water. >3 6 It is con ceivab le that w e have in Zosim os a p arallel w ith the N ico d em u s d ia lo g u e in J o h n 3. A t th e tim e w h en J o h n ’s gospel was w ritten , the idea o f th e d iv in e w ater was fam iliar to every alchem ist. W h en Jesus said: “E x cep t a m an be b orn o f w ater and o f the sp irit . . . ,” an alchem ist o f that tim e w o u ld at on ce h ave u n derstood w hat he m eant. Jesus m arvelled at the ig n o rance o f N icod em u s and asked him : “A rt th o u a m aster in Israel, an d k n ow est n o t these things?” H e o b v io u sly took it for granted th at a teach er (διδάσκαλο?) w o u ld k n ow th e secret o f w ater and spirit, that is, o f death and reb irth. W h ereu p o n h e w en t o n to u tter a saying w h ich is ech oed m any tim es in the alchem ical treatises: “W e speak that w e do k n ow , and testify that w e have seen .” N o t th at the alchem ists actu ally cited this passage, b u t they th ou gh t in a sim ilar way. T h e y talk as if they had tou ch ed th e arcanum or g ift o f th e H o ly S p irit w ith th eir ow n hands, 1 T r a c t a tu s I, C orp. S c rip t. E ccl. L a t., X V III, p . *4. See s u p r a , p a r . 105.

and seen the w orkings o f the d iv in e w ater w ith th eir ow n eyes.3 E ven th ou gh these statem ents com e from a later period, the spirit o f alchem y rem ain ed m ore or less the sam e from the earliest tim es to th e late M id d le Ages. J37 T h e co n clu d in g words o f th e N icod em u s d ialogu e, con cern in g “earthly and h eaven ly th in g s,” had likew ise b een the com m on property o f alchem y ever since D em ocritus had w ritten of the “physika and m ystika,” also called “som ata and asom ata,” “corporalia and sp iritu alia.” 4 T h ese words o f Jesus are im m ed i ately fo llo w ed by the m o tif o f th e ascent to heaven and descen t to earth.5 In alchem y this w o u ld be the ascent o f the soul from the m ortified body and its d escen t in the form of rean im atin g dew .6 A n d w hen, in the n ex t verse, Jesus speaks o f the serpent lifted u p in the w ilderness and equates it w ith his ow n selfsacrifice, a “M aster” w o u ld b e b o u n d to th in k o f th e uroboros, “ . . . w h ic h I h a v e se e n w ith m y o w n eyes a n d to u c h e d w ith m y h a n d s ” (R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u r if., II, p . 205). 4 I t m u s t b e re m e m b e re d , h o w e v e r, t h a t J o h n uses o th e r te rm s th a n th o se fo u n d in th e a lc h e m y of th e tim e : τ α kwiyeia a n d τ α kwiovpavia (te rre n a a n d co elestia in th e V u lg a te ). S T h e so u rce fo r th is is H e rm e s T ris m e g is tu s in th e “ T a b u la s m a ra g d in a ” : “ I t ascends fro m e a r t h to h e a v e n a n d d e scen d s a g a in to e a rth . . . . T h e w in d h a th b o rn e i t in h is b e lly .” T h is te x t w as alw ay s in te r p r e te d as r e f e rrin g to th e sto n e (cf. H o r tu la n u s , " C o m m e n ta r io lu m ,” A rs ch em ic a ). B u t th e sto n e com es fro m th e " w a te r.” A p e rfe c t a lc h e m ic a l p a r a lle l to th e C h ris tia n m y stery is th e fo llo w in g passage fro m th e “ C o n siliu m c o n iu g .” (ib id ., p . 128): “ A n d if I a sc en d n a k e d in to h eav en , th e n w ill I com e c lo th e d to e a r th a n d p e rfe c t a ll m in e ra ls. A n d if w e a re b a p tiz e d in th e f o u n ta in o f g o ld a n d silv er, a n d th e s p ir it o f o u r b o d y ascen d s to h e a v e n w ith th e f a th e r a n d th e son, a n d d escen d s a g a in , o u r so u ls w ill rev iv e, a n d m y a n im a l b o d y w ill re m a in w h ite .” T h e a n o n y m o u s a u th o r o f “ L ib e r d e a rte c h y m ic a ” (A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 6 i2 f.) sp eak s in th e sa m e w ay: “ I t is c e rta in th a t th e e a r th c a n n o t ascen d , e x c e p t first th e h e a v e n d e sc e n d , fo r th e e a r t h is said to b e ra is e d u p to h e a v e n , w h e n , d isso lv ed in its o w n s p irit, i t is a t la st u n ite d th e r e w ith . I w ill satisfy th e e w ith th is p a ra b le : T h e S o n o f G o d d e sc e n d in g in to th e V irg in , a n d th e r e c lo th e d w ith flesh, is b o rn as m a n , w h o h a v in g sho w n u s th e w ay o f t r u t h fo r o u r sa lv a tio n , su ffe re d a n d d ie d fo r u s, a n d a fte r h is re s u rre c tio n . re t u r n e d in to h e a v e n , w h e re th e e a r th , t h a t is m a n k in d , is e x a lte d ab ove a ll th e circles o f th e w o rld , a n d is p la c e d in th e in te lle c tu a l h e a v e n of th e m o s t h o ly T r in i ty . I n lik e m a n n e r , w h e n I d ie , m y so u l, h e lp e d b y th e g ra c e a n d th e m e rits o f C h ris t, w ill r e t u r n to th e f o u n t o f life w h e n c e i t d e scended. T h e b o d y r e tu r n s to e a r th , a n d a t th e la s t ju d g m e n t o f th e w o rld th e so u l, d e sc e n d in g fro m h e a v e n , w ill c a rry it w ith h e r, p u rifie d , to g lo ry .” 6 T h e m o tif o f a sc e n t a n d d e sc e n t is b a se d p a r tly o n th e m o tio n of w a te r a s a n a tu r a l p h e n o m e n o n (clouds, r a in , etc.). 3

103

J 38

w h ic h slays itse lf a n d b rin g s itself to life ag ain . T h i s is fo llo w ed by th e m o tif o f “ e v e rla s tin g life ” a n d th e p a n a c e a (b e lie f in C h rist). In d e e d , th e w h o le p u rp o se o f th e o p u s was to p ro d u c e th e in c o rru p tib le b o d y , “ th e th in g th a t d ie th n o t,” th e in v isib le , s p iritu a l sto n e, o r lapis a eth ereu s. I n th e verse, “ F o r G o d so lo v ed th e w o rld th a t h e gave h is o n ly b e g o tte n S on . . . ,’’ Jesu s id e n tifies h im se lf w ith th e h e a lin g sn ak e o f M oses; fo r th e M o n o g en es is sy n o n y m o u s w ith th e N o u s, a n d th is w ith th e s e rp e n ts a v io u r o r A g a th o d a im o n . T h e s e rp e n t is also a sy n o n y m fo r th e d iv in e w ater. T h e d ia lo g u e m ay b e c o m p a re d w ith J e s u s ’ w o rd s to th e w o m an o f S a m a ria in J o h n 4 : 14: “ . . . a w ell o f w a te r s p rin g in g u p in to e v e rla s tin g life .” 7 S ig n ifican tly e n o u g h , th e c o n v e rs a tio n b y th e w ell fo rm s th e c o n te x t fo r th e te a c h in g th a t “ G o d is S p irit” (J o h n 4 : 24).8 I n sp ite o f th e n o t alw ays u n in te n tio n a l o b s c u rity o f a lc h e m ical la n g u ag e, it is n o t difficu lt to see th a t th e d iv in e w a te r o r its sym bol, th e u ro b o ro s , m e an s n o th in g o th e r th a n th e d eu s abs c o n d itu s, th e g o d h id d e n in m a tte r, th e d iv in e N o u s th a t cam e d o w n to Physis a n d was lo st in h e r embrace.® T h is m y stery of th e “g o d b eco m e p h y sical” u n d e rlie s n o t o n ly classical a lc h e m y b u t also m a n y o th e r s p ir itu a l m a n ife sta tio n s o f H e lle n is tic sy n c re tis m .10 I J u s tin M a rty r says: "A s a f o u n t o f liv in g w a te r fro m G o d . . . th is C h ris t g u s h e d f o r th ” (cited in P re u s c h e n , A n tile g o m e n a , p . 129). G a u d e n tiu s (S erm o X IX ) c o m p a re s C h r is t’s h u m a n ity to w a te r (M ig n e, P .L ., vol. 20, co l. 983). E u c h e riu s o f L yon s (L ib e r fo r m u la r u m sp irita lis in te llig e n tia e ) says th a t C h ris t “c a rrie d u p to h e a v e n th e flesh h e a ssu m e d fo r u s ” (ib id ., v o l. 50, col. 734). T h is id e a c o in cid es w ith th e say in g in th e " T a b . s m a ra g ,” t h a t th e a rc a n u m " a sc e n d s fro m e a r th to h e a v e n , a n d d esce n d s a g a in to e a r th , a n d receiv es th e p o w e r of A bove a n d B elow .” 8 “S p ir it” in a lc h e m y m e a n s a n y th in g v o la tile , a ll e v a p o ra b le su b sta n c e s, o x id es, etc., b u t also, as a p ro je c te d p sy ch ic c o n te n t, a co rp u s m y s tic u m in th e sen se o f a " s u b tle b o d y .” (Cf. M e a d , T h e D o c tr in e o f th e S u b tle B o d y in W e s te rn T r a d i tio n .) I t is in th is sense th a t th e d e fin itio n o f th e la p is as a s p ir itu s h u m id u s e t a e reu s s h o u ld b e u n d e rs to o d . T h e r e a re a lso in d ic a tio n s t h a t s p ir it w as u n d e r sto o d as " m in d ,” w h ic h c o u ld b e re fin e d b y " s u b lim a tio n .” » C f. th e fa te o f th e “m a n o f li g h t” in Z osim os (P syc h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a r .

45 8 )· 10 I n th e o ld e st so u rces th is m y stery is ex p re sse d in sy m b o lic a l te rm s. B u t fro m th e 13th c e n t, o n th e r e a re m o re a n d m o re te x ts w h ic h re v e a l th e m y stica l sid e o f th e a rc a n u m . O n e o f th e b e st e x a m p le s is th e G e rm a n tr e a tis e D e r W assers te in d e r W e y se n , “ A C h y m ic a l T r a c t, w h e re in th e W a y is S h o w n , th e M a te ria N a m e d , a n d th e P ro cess D e sc rib e d .”

THE

O R IG IN

T H E V IS IO N

Since alchem y is con cern ed w ith a m ystery b o th physical a n d sp iritu al, it n eed com e as no surprise th a t th e “co m p o sitio n of the w aters” was revealed to Zosimos in a dream . H is sleep was the sleep of in c u b a tio n , his d ream “a d ream sent by G o d .” T h e d ivine w ater was th e a lp h a an d om ega of th e process, desperately sought fo r by th e alchem ists as th e goal of th e ir desire. T h e d ream th erefo re cam e as a d ra m a tic ex p lan a tio n of the n a tu re of this w ater. T h e d ra m a tiz atio n sets fo rth in p o w erfu l im agery th e v io len t a n d agonizing process of tran sfo rm atio n w hich is itself both th e p ro d u c e r a n d th e p ro d u c t of the w ater, an d in d e ed co n stitutes its very essence. T h e d ram a shows how th e d iv in e process of change m anifests itself to o u r h u m a n u n d e rsta n d in g a n d how m an experiences it— as p u n ish m e n t, to rm e n t,1 death, a n d tra n s figuration. T h e d re a m e r describes how a m an w o u ld act an d w hat he w o u ld have to suffer if he w ere d raw n in to the cycle of the death a n d re b irth of th e gods, an d w hat effect th e deus absconditus w o u ld have if a m o rtal m a n sh o u ld succeed by his “a rt” in settin g free the “g u a rd ia n of sp irits” fro m his d ark dw elling. T h e r e are in d icatio n s in th e lite ra tu re th a t this is n o t w ith o u t its dangers.2 *4° T h e m ystical side of alchem y, as d istin ct fro m its h isto rical aspect, is essentially a psychological p ro b lem . T o all a p p ea r ances, it is a co ncretization, in p ro jected an d sym bolic form , of the process of in d iv id u a tio n . E ven today this process produces 139

1 T h e elem en t o f tortu re, so co n sp icu o u s in Zosim os, is n o t u n co m m o n in a l chem ical literature. "Slay th e m o th er, cu ttin g off h er h ands a n d feet" (" A en igm a” VI, A r t. aurif., I, p. 151). Cf. T u r b a , Serm ones X V III, X L V II, L X IX . “T a k e a m an, shave h im , a n d d rag h im over a sto n e . . . u n til h is body d ies.” "T ak e a cock, p lu ck it alive, th e n p u t its h ea d in a glass vessel” (“A lleg . su p . lib . T u r b .,” A rt. aurif., I, p p . i3gff.), In m ed iev a l alchem y th e tortu rin g o f th e m ateria was an allegory o f C hrist’s passion (cf. D e r Wasserstein d e r W eysen , p . 97). 2 “T h e fo u n d a tio n o f th is art, for w hose sake m any have p erish e d ” ( T u r b a , Sermo X V ). Zosim os m en tio n s A n tim im o s, th e d em o n o f error (A l c h . grecs, III, x lix , 9). O lym p iod oru s q u o tes th e sayin g o f P etasios that lead (prim a m ateria) was so "sham eless an d b e d e v ille d ” th at it drove th e ad ep ts m ad (ib id ., II, iv, 43). T h e d ev il caused im p a tien ce, d o u b t, and d esp air d u r in g th e work (M u s . h e r m ., p. 461). H o g h ela n d e describes h ow th e d ev il deceived h im an d h is frien d w ith d elu sio n s (“D e difficult, alchern.,” T h e a tr . chem ., I, 1659, pp. 152!!.). T h e dangers th at th reaten ed th e alch em ists w ere o b viou sly psychic, Cf. in fra, pars. 4 2 g ff.

s y m b o ls th a t h a v e th e c lo s e s t c o n n e c t io n s w it h a lc h e m y . O n th is p o in t I m u s t r e fe r th e r e a d e r to m y e a r lie r w o r k s, w h e r e I h a v e d is c u s s e d t h e q u e s t io n f r o m a p s y c h o lo g ic a l a n g le a n d illu s t r a t e d i t w it h p r a c tic a l e x a m p le s . !41 T h e c a u se s th a t s e t s u c h a p r o c e ss in m o t io n m a y b e c e r ta in p a th o lo g ic a l sta te s (fo r th e m o s t p a r t s c h iz o p h r e n ic ) w h ic h p r o d u c e v e r y s im ila r sy m b o ls . B u t th e b e st a n d c le a r e s t m a te r ia l c o m e s fr o m p e r s o n s o f s o u n d m in d w h o , d r iv e n b y s o m e k in d o f s p ir it u a l d is tr e s s , o r f o r r e lig i o u s , p h il o s o p h ic a l , o r p s y c h o lo g ic a l r e a so n s, d e v o te p a r tic u la r a t te n t io n to th e ir u n c o n s c io u s . I n th e p e r io d e x t e n d in g fr o m th e M id d le A g e s b a c k to R o m a n tim e s , a n a tu r a l e m p h a sis w a s la id o n th e in n e r m a n , a n d s in c e p sy c h o lo g ic a l c r itic is m b e c a m e p o s s ib le o n ly w it h t h e r is e o f s c ie n c e , t h e in n e r fa c to r s w e r e a b le to r e a c h c o n s c io u s n e s s in th e fo r m o f p r o j e c tio n s m u c h m o r e e a s ily th a n th e y c a n to d a y . T h e f o llo w i n g t e x t 3 m a y s e r v e to illu s t r a t e t h e m e d ie v a l p o i n t o f v ie w : F o r a s C h r is t sa y s i n L u k e 11: T h e l i g h t o f t h e b o d y is t h e e y e , b u t i f y o u r e y e is e v i l o r b e c o m e s s o , t h e n y o u r b o d y is f u l l o f d a r k n e s s a n d t h e l i g h t w i t h i n y o u b e c o m e s d a r k n e s s . M o r e o v e r , in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c h a p t e r h e sa y s a ls o : B e h o l d , t h e k i n g d o m o f G o d is w i t h i n y o u — f r o m w h i c h i t is c le a r ly s e e n t h a t k n o w le d g e o f t h e l i g h t i n m a n m u s t e m e r g e i n t h e fir st p la c e f r o m w i t h i n a n d c a n n o t b e p la c e d t h e r e f r o m w i t h o u t , a n d m a n y p a s s a g e s i n t h e B i b l e b e a r w it n e s s t o t h is , n a m e ly , t h a t t h e e x t e r n a l o b j e c t (a s i t is u s u a l l y c a l le d ) , o r t h e s ig n w r i t t e n to h e l p u s i n o u r w e a k n e s s , is i n M a t t h e w 2 4 m e r e ly a t e s t im o n y o f t h e i n n e r l i g h t o f g r a c e p l a n t e d i n a n d im p a r t e d t o u s b y G o d . S o , t o o , t h e s p o k e n w o r d is to b e h e e d e d a n d c o n s id e r e d o n l y a s a n i n d i c a t i o n , a n a id a n d a g u i d e t o th is . T o t a k e a n e x a m p le : a w h i t e a n d a b la c k b o a r d a r e p la c e d i n f r o n t o f y o u a n d y o u a r e a s k e d w h i c h is b la c k a n d w h i c h is w h i t e . I f t h e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e t w o d if f e r e n t c o l o u r s w e r e n o t p r e v i o u s l y w i t h i n y o u , y o u w o u l d n e v e r b e a b le t o a n s w e r f r o m t h e s e m e r e m u t e o b j e c t s o r b o a r d s t h e q u e s t i o n p u t to y o u , s in c e t h is k n o w le d g e d o e s n o t c o m e f r o m t h e b o a r d s t h e m s e lv e s ( f o r t h e y a r e m u t e a n d i n a n im a t e ) , b u t o r i g in a t e s i n a n d f lo w s f o r t h f r o m y o u r i n n a t e f a c u l t ie s w h i c h y o u e x e r c is e d a ily . T h e o b j e c t s (a s s t a t e d e a r lie r ) i n d e e d s tim u la te th e sen se s a n d ca u se th e m to a p p r e h e n d , b u t in n o w a y d o t h e y g iv e k n o w le d g e . T h i s m u s t c o m e f r o m w i t h i n , f r o m t h e a p p r e h e n d e r , a n d t h e k n o w l e d g e o f s u c h c o lo u r s m u s t e m e r g e i n 3 D e r W asserstein d e r W eysen, p p . 73ft. [For th is tra n sla tio n I am in d e b te d to D r. R . T . Llew ellyn.— T r a n s l a t o r .]

an act of apprehension. Sim ilarly, w hen someone asks you for a m aterial and external fire or lig h t from a Hint (in w hich the fire or light is hidden) you cannot p u t this hidden and secret lig h t in to the stone, b u t ra th e r you m ust arouse, awaken, and draw fo rth the hidden fire from the stone and reveal it by m eans of th e requisite steel striker which m ust be necessarily at hand. A nd this fire m ust be caught and vigorously fanned u p in good tin d er well prep ared for this purpose, if it is n o t to be extinguished and disappear again. T h en , afterw ards, you will o b tain a truly ra d ia n t light, sh in in g like fire, and as long as it is tended and preserved, you w ill be able to create, work, and do w ith it as you please. And, likewise h id d en in m an, there exists such a heavenly an d divine lig h t which, as previ ously stated, cannot be placed in m an from w ithout, b u t m ust emerge from w ithin. F or n o t in vain an d w ith o u t reason has God bestowed on and given to m an in the highest p a rt of his body two eyes and ears in order to indicate th a t m an has to learn an d heed w ith in him self a tw ofold seeing and hearing, an inw ard and an outw ard, so th at he may judge sp iritu al things w ith th e inw ard p a rt and allo t sp irit ual things to the sp iritu al (I C orinthians 2), b u t also give to the outw ard its portion. F o r Zosim os a n d th o se o f lik e m in d th e d iv in e w a te r was a corpus m y s tic u m .4 A p erso n a listic psychology w ill n a tu ra lly ask: h ow d id Zosim os co m e to b e lo o k in g fo r a co rp u s m ysticu m ? T h e an sw er w o u ld p o in t to th e h isto ric a l c o n d itio n s: it was a p ro b le m of th e tim es. B u t in so fa r as th e corpus m y s tic u m w as co n ceiv ed by th e alch em ists to b e a g ift o f th e H o ly S p irit, it c a n b e u n d e rs to o d in a q u ite g e n e ra l sense as a v isib le g ift o f g race c o n fe rrin g re d e m p tio n . M a n ’s lo n g in g fo r re d e m p tio n is u n iv e r sal a n d can th e re fo re h av e a n u lte rio r, p e rso n a listic m o tiv e o n ly in e x c e p tio n a l cases, w h e n it is n o t a g e n u in e p h e n o m e n o n b u t a n a b n o rm a l m isu se o f it. H y sterica l self-deceivers, a n d o rd in a ry ones too, h av e a t all tim es u n d e rs to o d th e a r t o f m isu sin g ev ery th in g so as to av o id th e d e m a n d s a n d d u tie s o f life, a n d ab o v e all to s h irk th e d u ty of c o n fro n tin g them selves. T h e y p re te n d to b e seekers a fte r G o d in o r d e r n o t to h av e to face th e tr u t h th a t they are o rd in a ry egoists. In su ch cases it is w ell w o rth ask in g : W h y are y ou seek in g th e d iv in e w ater? Hs W e have n o re a so n to su p p o se th a t a ll th e alch em ists w ere H2

4 T his term occurs in alchemy, e.g.: ‘‘Congeal [the quicksilver] w ith its m ystic body” (“Consilium coniug.,” T h e a tr. chem ,, I, 1659, p. 137). 107

self-deceivers of this sort. T h e d e ep e r we p e n e tra te in to th e o b scurities of th e ir th in k in g , th e m ore we m u st a d m it th e ir rig h t to style them selves “ p h ilo so p h ers.” T h r o u g h o u t th e ages, al chem y was o n e of th e g re a t h u m a n quests fo r th e u n a tta in a b le . So, a t least, we w o u ld describe it if we gave re in to o u r ra tio n a l istic prejudices. B u t th e religious experien ce of grace is an irra tio n a l p h e n o m e n o n , a n d c a n n o t be discussed any m o re th a n can th e “b e a u tifu l” o r th e “g o o d .” Since th a t is so, n o serious q u est is w ith o u t hope. I t is so m eth in g instin ctiv e, th a t c a n n o t b e r e d u ced to a personal aetiology any m ore th a n can in te llig e n c e o r m usicality o r any o th e r in b o rn propen sity . I am th e re fo re of the o p in io n th a t o u r analysis a n d in te rp re ta tio n have d o n e ju stice to th e vision of Zosimos if we have succeeded in u n d e rs ta n d in g its essential co m p o n en ts in th e lig h t of how m en th o u g h t th e n , an d in e lu c id a tin g th e m e a n in g an d p u rp o se of its m ise en scene. W h e n K ekule h a d his d re a m of th e d a n cin g pairs an d d ed u ced from it th e s tru c tu re of th e benzol rin g , he accom plished som e th in g th a t Zosimos strove fo r in vain. H is “ co m p o sitio n of th e w aters” d id n o t fall in to as n e a t a p a tte rn as d id th e carb o n an d h y d ro g en atom s of th e benzol rin g . A lchem y p ro je c te d an in n e r, psychic ex p erien ce in to chem ical substances th a t seem ed to h o ld o u t m ysterious possibilities b u t nevertheless p ro v ed re fracto ry to th e in te n tio n s of th e alchem ist. »44 A lth o u g h chem istry has n o th in g to le arn from th e vision of Zosimos, it is a m in e of discovery fo r m o d e rn psychology, w hich w o u ld com e to a sorry pass if it co u ld n o t tu rn to these testim o nies of psychic ex p erien ce from a n cie n t tim es. Its statem en ts w o u ld th e n be w ith o u t su p p o rt, like novelties th a t c a n n o t be c o m p ared w ith an y th in g , a n d whose v alu e it is alm ost im p o s sible to assess. B u t such d o cu m en ts give th e in v estig ato r an A r ch im e d ea n p o in t o u tsid e his ow n n a rro w field of w ork, a n d th e re w ith a n in v a lu a b le o p p o rtu n ity to find his b earin g s in th e seem in g chaos o f in d iv id u a l events.

Ill PARACELSUS AS A SPIR IT U A L PHENOM ENON

[O rig in a lly a le c tu re , “P aracelsu s als geistige E rsc h e in u n g ,’’ w hich, revised a n d e x p a n d e d , was p u b lis h e d in Paracelsica: Ziuei V orlesu ng en iiber den A r z t u n d P h i l o s o p h e n T h e o p h r a s tu s (Z urich, 1942). [In th e p re s e n t tra n s la tio n , c h a p te r a n d section h ea d in g s have b e e n a d d e d to e lu c id a te th e s tru c tu re of th e m o n o g ra p h . T w o b rie f sta te m e n ts fo u n d a m o n g J u n g ’s p o sth u m o u s p a p e rs have, because o f th e ir relev an ce to th e su b je c t-m a tte r, b e e n a d d e d as fo o tn o te s o n p p . 136 a n d 144.— E d i t o r s .]

FO REW ORD T O

“ P A R A C E L S IC A ”

T h is little b o o k com prises tw o lectu res d e liv e re d this y e a r o n th e oc casion o£ th e f o u r-h u n d re d th a n n iv e rsary of th e d e a th of P a ra c e l sus.1 T h e first, “ P aracelsu s th e P h y sicia n ,” 2 was d e liv e re d to th e Swiss Society fo r th e H isto ry of M e d ic in e a n d th e N a tu ra l Sciences a t th e a n n u a l m e e tin g o f th e Society fo r N a tu re R esearch , Basel, Sep te m b e r 7, 1941; th e second, “ P aracelsu s as a S p iritu a l P h e n o m e n o n ,” was given a t th e P aracelsu s c e le b ra tio n s in E in sie d e ln , O c to b e r 5, 1941. T h e first le c tu re goes in to p r in t u n a lte re d e x c e p t fo r a few m in o r changes. B u t th e sp ecial n a tu r e of th e th em e has o b lig e d m e to tak e th e second le c tu re o u t of its o rig in a l fra m ew o rk a n d to e x p a n d it in to a p ro p e r treatise. T h e stylistic fo rm a n d scope of a le c tu re a re n o t su ite d to p o rtra y th e u n k n o w n a n d e n ig m a tic P aracelsu s w ho sta n d s b esid e o r b e h in d th e figure we m e e t in h is pro lific m ed ical, scientific, a n d th eo lo g ic a l w ritin g s. O n ly w h e n th ey a re ta k e n to g e th e r d o th ey give a p ic tu re of this c o n tra d ic to ry a n d yet so signifi c a n t p e rso n a lity . I am aw are th a t th e title of this le c tu re is so m e w h at p re s u m p tu ous. T h e re a d e r s h o u ld tak e it sim ply as a c o n trib u tio n to o u r k n o w l edge of th e a rc a n e p h ilo so p h y o f P aracelsus. I d o n o t claim to h av e sa id a n y th in g final o r conclusive o n th is difficult su b je c t, a n d am o n ly too p a in fu lly aw are of gaps a n d in ad e q u a c ie s. M y p u rp o se was c o n fin ed to p ro v id in g clues th a t m ig h t p o in t th e w ay to th e roots a n d psychic b a c k g ro u n d o f his p h ilo so p h y , if such it can b e called. B esides a ll th e o th e r th in g s h e was, P aracelsus was, p e rh a p s m ost d e e p ly o f all, a n a lc h e m ic a l “ p h ilo s o p h e r” w hose relig io u s view s in volved h im in a n u n co n scio u s conflict w ith th e C h ris tia n beliefs of h is age in a w ay t h a t seem s to us in e x tric a b ly confused. N evertheless, in this co n fu sio n are to be fo u n d th e b e g in n in g s o f p h ilo so p h ic a l, psychological, a n d relig io u s p ro b le m s w h ich a re ta k in g c le a re r shape in o u r ow n epoch. B ecause of this, I h a v e fe lt it a lm o st a n h isto ric a l d u ty to c o n trib u te w h a t I m ay in a p p re c ia tio n of p re sc ie n t ideas w h ic h h e le ft b e h in d fo r us in h is tre a tise D e v ita longa. O cto b er 1941

C. G. J.

1 [P h ilip p u s A u reolu s T h e o p h r a stu s B om b astu s v o n H o h e n h e im , k n ow n as P ara celsus, b orn 1 4 9 3 , in E in sied eln , d ie d Sept. 2 1 , 1541, in Salzburg.—- E d i t o r s .] 2 [In C oll. W o r k s , V ol. 15.— E d i t o r s .] I 10

I. T H E T W O SO U R C E S O F K N O W L E D G E : T H E L IG H T OF N A T U R E AND T H E L I G H T O F R E V E L A T IO N >45

T h e m an whose d e ath fo u r h u n d re d years ago we com m em o ra te today ex erted a p ow erful influence on all su b se q u e n t g en er ations, as m uch by sheer force of his p erso n ality as by his p ro d i gious lite ra ry activity. H is influence m ade itself felt chiefly in the field of m edicine an d n a tu ra l science. In philosophy, n o t only was m ystical sp ecu latio n stim u la te d in a fru itfu l way, b u t philosophical alchem y, th e n on th e p o in t of e x tin c tio n , received a new lease of life an d enjoyed a renaissance. I t is n o secret th a t G oethe, as is ev id en t from th e second p a rt of Faust, still felt the im pact of th e p ow erful sp irit of Paracelsus. >46 I t is n o t easy to see this sp iritu a l p h e n o m en o n in th e ro u n d an d to give a really com prehensive acco u n t of it. Paracelsus was too c o n trad icto ry o r too chaotically m any-sided, fo r all his o b v i ous one-sidedness in o th e r ways. F irst an d forem ost, h e was a physician w ith all th e stren g th of his sp irit a n d soul, an d his fo u n d a tio n was a firm religious belief. T h u s he says in his Parag ra n u m :1 “Y ou m u st be of an honest, sincere, strong, tru e faith in G od, w ith all y o u r soul, heart, m in d , a n d th o u g h t, in all love a n d tru st. O n th e fo u n d a tio n of such fa ith an d love, G od w ill n o t w ith d raw his»truth from you, an d w ill m ake his w orks m a n i fest to you, believable, visible, a n d com forting. B u t if, n o t hav in g such faith, you are against G od, th e n you w ill go astray in y o u r w ork an d w ill have failures, a n d in consequence people w ill have no faith in y o u .” T h e a rt of h e alin g a n d its dem ands w ere the suprem e c rite rio n for Paracelsus. E v ery th in g in his life was devoted to this goal of h e lp in g a n d h ealing. A ro u n d this card in al p rin c ip le w ere g ro u p e d all his experiences, all his I Ed. Strunz, p. 97. [For th e tran slation o f th e d irect q u o ta tio n s from P aracelsus in the tex t an d fo o tn o tes o f th is section I am in d eb ted to D r. R . T . L lew ellyn . — T

ra n sla to r

Ill

k n o w le d g e , all h is efforts. T h i s h a p p e n s o n ly w h e n a m a n is ac tu a te d b y som e p o w e rfu l e m o tio n a l d r iv in g fo rce, by a g re a t pas sio n w h ic h , u n d e te r r e d b y re fle c tio n a n d c ritic ism , o v ersh ad o w s h is w h o le life . T h e d r iv in g fo rce b e h in d P arace lsu s w as h is com p assio n . “ C o m p a ss io n ,” h e ex claim s, “ is th e p h y s ic ia n ’s sch o o l m a s te r.” 2 I t m u s t b e in b o r n in h im . C o m p a ssio n , w h ic h has d riv e n m a n y a n o th e r g re a t m a n a n d in s p ir e d h is w o rk , was also th e s u p re m e a r b ite r of P a ra c e lsu s’s fate. >47 T h e in s tr u m e n t w h ic h h e p u t a t th e serv ice o f h is g re a t c o m p assio n w as h is scien c e a n d his a rt, w h ic h h e to o k o v e r fro m h is fa th e r. B u t th e d y n a m is m a t th e b ack o f h is w o rk , th e co m p as sio n itself, m u s t h a v e co m e to h im fro m th e p r im e so u rc e of e v e ry th in g e m o tio n a l, th a t is, fro m his m o th e r, o f w h o m h e n e v e r spoke. S he d ie d y o u n g , a n d she p r o b a b ly le ft b e h in d a g r e a t d e a l o f u n sa tisfie d lo n g in g in h e r so n — so m u c h th a t, so fa r as w e k n o w , n o o th e r w o m a n w as a b le to c o m p e te w ith th a t fard is ta n t m o th e r-im a g o , w h ic h f o r th a t re a so n was all th e m o re fo rm id a b le . T h e m o re re m o te a n d u n r e a l th e p e rs o n a l m o th e r is, th e m o re d e e p ly w ill th e s o n ’s y e a rn in g fo r h e r c lu tc h a t h is so u l, a w a k e n in g th a t p r im o r d ia l a n d e te r n a l im a g e o f th e m o th e r fo r w hose sak e e v e ry th in g th a t em b ra ces, p ro te c ts , n o u r ishes, a n d h e lp s assum es m a te r n a l fo rm , fro m th e A lm a M a te r of th e u n iv e rs ity to th e p e rs o n ific a tio n o f cities, c o u n trie s , sciences, a n d id eals. W h e n P arace lsu s says th a t th e m o th e r o f th e c h ild is th e p la n e t a n d star, th is is in th e h ig h e s t d e g re e tr u e o f h im se lf. T o th e m o th e r in h e r h ig h e st fo rm , M a te r E cclesia, h e r e m a in e d f a ith f u l a ll h is life, d e s p ite th e v e ry fre e c ritic is m h e le v e lle d a t th e ills o f C h ris te n d o m in th a t ep o ch . N o r d id h e su c c u m b to th e g r e a t te m p ta tio n o f th a t age, th e P r o te s ta n t schism , th o u g h h e m a y w e ll h av e h a d it in h im to go o v e r to th e o th e r cam p . C o n flic t w as d e e p ly r o o te d in P a ra c e lsu s’s n a tu r e ; in d e e d , it h a d to b e so, fo r w ith o u t a te n s io n o f o p p o site s th e re is n o en erg y , a n d w h e n e v e r a v o lc a n o , su c h as h e was, e ru p ts , w e s h a ll n o t go w ro n g in s u p p o s in g th a t w a te r a n d fire h av e cla sh e d to g e th e r. »48 B u t a lth o u g h th e C h u r c h r e m a in e d a m o th e r fo r P arace lsu s a ll h is life, h e n e v e rth e le ss h a d tw o m o th e rs : th e o th e r was M a te r N a tu r a . A n d if th e fo rm e r was a n a b s o lu te a u th o rity , so to o w as th e la tte r . E v e n th o u g h h e e n d e a v o u re d to co n ce al th e co n flict b e tw e e n th e tw o m a te r n a l sp h e re s o f in flu e n c e , h e w as 2 "D e cad ucis,” ed . H u ser, I, p . 589.

h onest en o u g h to ad m it its existen ce; in d eed , h e seem s to have had a very good id ea o f w hat such a d ilem m a m eant. T h u s he says: “I also confess that I w rite lik e a pagan and y et am a C hris tian .” 3 A ccord in gly he nam ed the first five sections o f his Param iru m de q u in q u e e n tib u s m o r b o r u m “Pagoya.” “P agoyu m ” is one o f his favou rite n eologism s, co m p o u n d ed o f “p agan u m ” and the H eb rew w ord ‘'goyim .” H e h eld that k n ow led ge of the na ture of diseases was pagan, since this know led ge cam e from the “lig h t o f n atu re” and n o t from rev ela tio n .4 “M agic,” he says, is “the preceptor and teacher o f the p hysician,” 5 w h o derives h is k now led ge from the lu m e n naturae. T h ere can be n o d o u b t the “lig h t of n atu re” was a second, in d ep en d en t source o f k n ow led ge for Paracelsus. H is closest p u p il, A dam von B od en stein , puts it like this: “T h e Spagyric has the things o f nature n o t by au th or ity, b u t by his ow n ex p erien ce.” 0 T h e con cep t o f the lu m e n 3 “T h e r e f o r e

C h ris tia n k n o w le d g e is b e tte r th a n n a tu r a l k n o w le d g e , a n d a p r o p h e t o r a n a p o s tle b e tte r th a n a n a s tro n o m e r o r a p h y sic ia n . . . b u t I am c o m p e lle d to a d d t h a t th e sick n e e d a p h y sic ia n n o t a p o stles, ju s t as p ro g n o s tic a tio n s r e q u ir e a n a s tro n o m e r n o t a p r o p h e t ” (“V o n E rk a n tn u s d es G e stirn s,” ed . S udhoff, X II, p p . 496f.). 4 H e says in th e f o u r th tre a tis e o f P a r a m i r u m p r i m u m (ed. S u d h o if, I, p . 215), sp e a k in g o f th e “ e n s s p i r it u a le ” o f diseases: “ If w e a re to ta lk o f th e E n s S p ir itu ale, w e a d m o n is h y o u to p u t a sid e th e style w h ic h you call th e o lo g ic a l. F o r n o t e v e ry th in g w h ic h is c a lle d T h e o lo g i a is h o ly a n d also n o t e v e ry th in g it tre a ts o f is h o ly . A n d , m o re o v e r, n o t e v e ry th in g is tr u e w h ic h th e u n c o m p r e h e n d in g d e a l w ith in th eo lo g y . N o w a lth o u g h it is tr u e th a t th e o lo g y d e sc rib e s th is E n s m o st p o w e rfu lly , i t d o es n o t d o so u n d e r th e n a m e a n d te x t o f o u r f o u r th P a g o y u m . A n d , in a d d itio n , th e y d e n y w h a t w e a re p ro v in g . B u t th e r e is o n e th i n g w h ic h you m u s t u n d e r s ta n d fro m us, n a m e ly , th a t th e a b ility to reco g n ize th is E n s does n o t co m e fro m C h ris tia n b e lie f, fo r it is a P a g o y u m to us. I t is, h o w ev e r, n o t c o n tr a ry to th e b e lie f in w h ic h w e s h a ll d e p a r t fro m th is life. A cc o rd in g ly , y o u m u s t reco g n ize t h a t in n o w ay a re y o u to u n d e r s ta n d a n E n s as b e in g o f th e sp irits, by sa y in g th e y a re a ll dev ils, fo r th e n you a re ta lk in g n o n se n sic a lly a n d fo o lish ly lik e th e D e v il.” B C f. “ L a b y r in th u s m e d ic o ru m ,” ed . S u d h o ff, X I, p p . 207!.: “ A n d as th e M ag i fro m th e E a st f o u n d C h ris t in th e s ta r b y m e a n s o f th is sign, so is fire fo u n d in th e flin t. T h u s a re th e a rts fo u n d in n a tu r e , a n d it is e a sie r to see th e la t t e r th a n it w as to lo o k f o r C h ris t." 3 D e v it a lon ga (1562), p . 56. In “ C a p u t d e m o rb is s o m n ii” (ed. S u d h o ff, IX , p . 360), P a ra c e lsu s says o f th e l u m e n n a tu r a e : “ L o o k a t A d a m a n d M oses a n d o th e rs. T h e y s o u g h t in th em selv es w h a t w as in m a n a n d h a v e re v e a le d it a n d a ll k a b b a lis tic a r ts a n d th e y k n e w n o th in g a lie n to m a n n e ith e r fro m th e D e v il n o r fro m th e s p irits , b u t d e riv e d th e i r k n o w le d g e fro m th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e . T h is th e y n u r t u r e d in th em selv es . . . i t com es fro m n a tu r e w h ic h c o n ta in s its m a n -

n a tu r a e m a y d e r iv e f r o m th e O c c u lta p h ilo s o p h ia o f A g r ip p a v o n N e tte s h e im (1 5 3 3 ), w h o s p e a k s o f a lu m in o s ita s s e n su s n a tu r a e t h a t e x te n d s e v e n to th e f o u r - f o o te d b e a sts a n d e n a b le s t h e m to f o re te ll th e f u t u r e .7 P a r a c e ls u s says a c c o r d in g ly : I t is, th erefo re, also to b e k n o w n th a t th e a u g u rie s o f th e b ird s are caused by these in n a te sp irits, as w h e n cocks fo re te ll f u tu r e w e a th e r a n d peacocks th e d e a th o f th e ir m a ste r a n d o th e r such th in g s w ith th e ir crow ing. A ll th is com es fro m th e in n a te s p irit a n d is th e L ig h t of N a tu re . J u s t as i t is p re se n t in an im a ls a n d is n a tu r a l, so also it dw ells w ith in m a n a n d he b ro u g h t it in to th e w o rld w ith him self. H e w ho is chaste is a g o o d p ro p h e t, n a tu r a l as th e b ird s, a n d th e p ro p h ec ies of b ird s a re n o t c o n tra ry to n a tu r e b u t a re of n a tu re . E ach, th e n , a c co rd in g to his ow n state. T h e se th in g s w h ich th e b ird s a n n o u n c e can also be fo re to ld in sleep, fo r it is th e a stra l s p irit w h ich is th e in v isib le b o d y of n a tu r e .8 A n d i t s h o u ld be k n o w n th a t w h e n a m a n p ro p h esies, h e does n o t speak fro m th e D evil, n o t from S a tan , a n d n o t fro m th e H o ly S p irit, b u t he speaks fro m th e in n a te s p irit of th e in v isib le b o d y w h ic h teaches M a g ia m a n d in w h ic h th e M a g u s has his o rig in .9 T h e lig h t of n a tu r e com es fro m th e A s tr u m : “ N o th in g c a n b e in m a n u n le s s i t h a s b e e n g iv e n to h i m b y th e L i g h t o f N a t u r e , a n d w h a t is i n t h e L i g h t o f N a t u r e h a s b e e n b r o u g h t b y t h e s ta r s .” 10 T h e p a g a n s still p o ssesse d th e l ig h t o f n a t u r e , “ f o r to n er o£ activity w ith in itse lf. I t is a ctive d u rin g sleep a n d h en ce th in g s m u st be used w h en d orm a n t and n o t aw ake— sleep is w ak in g for such arts— for th in g s h ave a sp irit w h ich is a ctiv e for th em in sleep . N o w it is true th a t Satan in h is w isd om is a K abbaIist a n d a p o w erfu l o n e. So, too, are th ese in n a te sp irits in m an . . . for it is th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e w h ich is at w ork d u r in g sleep an d is th e in v isib le body and was n everth eless born lik e th e v isib le and n a tu ra l body. B u t there is m ore to be k n ow n than th e m ere flesh, for from th is very in n a te sp irit com es th at w h ich is v isib le . . . th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e w h ich is m a n ’s m en to r d w ells in th is in n a te sp ir it.” P aracelsus also says th a t th o u g h m en d ie, th e m en to r goes on tea ch in g (A str o n o m ia m a g n a , ed. Sudhoff, X II, p, 23; “D e pod agricis,” ed. H u ser, I, p. 566). t O ccu lta p h ilo s o p h ia , p . lx v iii. T h e lu m e n n a tu r a e also plays a con sid erab le ro le in M eister Eckhart. 8 Cf. th e fine sayin g in ‘‘F ragm enta m e d ica ” (ed. H u ser, I, p . 141): "G reat is h e w hose dream s are righ t, th a t is, w h o lives and m o v es h a rm o n io u sly in th is kab balistic, in n a te sp ir it.” 8 “C ap ut de m orb is so m n ii,” ed. Sudhoff, IX , p . 361. 10 A str o n o m ia m a g n a, ed . Sudhoff, X II, p . 23; also “L ab. m ed .,” ed. Sudhoff, ch. II. an d “D e p estilita te," T ra ct. I (ed. H u ser, I, p . 327). T h e a stru m th eory

*49

act in the L ig h t o f N a tu re an d to rejoice in it is d iv in e d esp ite b ein g m o rta l.” B efore C h rist cam e in to th e w orld, th e w o rld was still endow ed w ith the lig h t of n a tu re , b u t in com parison w ith C h rist this was a “ lesser lig h t.” “ T h e re fo re we sh o u ld know th a t we have to in te rp re t n a tu re according to th e sp irit of n a tu re , th e W o rd of G od according to th e sp irit of G od, a n d the D evil ac cording to his sp irit also.” “ H e w ho knows n o th in g of these things is a gorged pig a n d w ill n o t leave ro o m for in stru c tio n a n d ex p erien ce.” T h e lig h t of n a tu re is th e q u in ta essentia, ex tracted by G od him self from th e fo u r elem ents, an d d w ellin g “ in o u r h e arts.” 11 I t is e n k in d le d by th e H oly S p irit.12 T h e lig h t of n a tu re is an in tu itiv e ap p reh en sio n of th e facts, a k in d of illu m in a tio n .13 I t has tw o sources: a m o rtal an d an im m o rtal, w hich Paracelsus calls “angels.” 14 “ M an ,” he says, “ is also an angel a n d has all th e la tte r’s q u a litie s.” H e has a n a tu ra l light, b u t also a lig h t outside th e lig h t of n a tu re by w hich he can search o u t s u p e rn a tu ra l th in g s.13 T h e rela tio n sh ip of this su p e rn a tu ra l lig h t to th e lig h t of rev elatio n rem ain s, how ever, o b scure. Paracelsus seems to have h eld a p e cu liar trich o to m o u s view in this respect. T h e a u th e n tic ity of o n e ’s ow n exp erien ce of n a tu re against the a u th o rity of tra d itio n is a basic th em e of P aracelsan th in k ing. O n this p rin c ip le he based his attack on th e m edical schools, a n d his p u p ils16 c arrie d th e re v o lu tio n even fu rth e r by attack in g A risto te lia n philosophy. I t was an a ttitu d e th a t o p en ed th e way for th e scientific in vestigation of n a tu re a n d h elp ed to em an cip ate n a tu ra l science from the a u th o rity of tra d itio n . T h o u g h this lib e ra tin g act h ad th e m ost fru itfu l consequences, it also led to th a t conflict betw een know ledge an d fa ith w hich poisoned th e sp iritu a l atm osphere of the n in e te e n th cen tu ry in p a rtic u la r. Paracelsus n a tu ra lly h a d n o in k lin g of th e possibility of these late repercussions. As a m edieval C h ristian , he still lived h a d b e e n fo r e sh a d o w e d in th e O c c u lta p h ilo s o p h ia o f A g r ip p a , to w h o m P a r a c e lsu s w a s m u c h in d e b te d . 1 1 A s tr o n o m ia m a g n a , e d . S u d h o ff, X I I , p p . 36 a n d 304. 12 P a r a m ir u m , p p . 35L i s “ L ab . m e d „ ” e d . S u d h o ff, ch . V III. 14 " D e p o d a g r ic is ,” e d . H u se r , I, p . 566. i s " D e n y m p h is ,” p r o lo g u e (ed. S u d h o ff, X I V , p . 115). i e A d a m v o n B o d e n s te in a n d G erard D o r n , for in sta n c e .

1*5

in a u n ita ry w o rld a n d d id n o t feel the tw o sources of k n o w l edge, th e d iv in e a n d th e n a tu ra l, as th e conflict it la te r tu rn e d o u t to be. As he says in his “ P h ilo so p h ia sagax” : “ T h e r e are, th erefo re, tw o kinds of know ledge in this w orld: an e te rn a l a n d a tem poral. T h e e te rn a l springs directly from th e lig h t of the H o ly S pirit, b u t th e o th e r directly from th e L ig h t of N a tu re .’’ I n his view th e la tte r k in d is am b iv alen t: b o th good a n d bad. T h is know ledge, he says, “ is n o t from flesh an d b lo o d , b u t fro m th e stars in th e flesh a n d blctod. T h a t is th e treasu re, th e n a tu ra l S u m m u m B o n u m .” M an is tw ofold, “ one p a rt te m p o ra l, the o th e r p a rt e tern al, a n d each p a rt takes its lig h t fro m G od, b o th th e te m p o ra l a n d th e e tern al, a n d th e re is n o th in g th a t does n o t have its o rig in in G od. W hy, th en , sh o u ld the F a th e r’s lig h t be c o nsidered pagan, a n d I be recognized a n d co n d em n e d as a pagan?” G od the F a th e r c reated m an “ fro m b elow u p w a rd s,” b u t G od the Son “from above dow nw ards.” T h e re fo re P aracel sus asks: “I f F a th e r an d Son are one, how th e n can I h o n o u r tw o lights? I w o uld be c o n d em n e d as an id o la te r: b u t th e n u m b e r o n e preserves m e. A n d if I love tw o a n d accord to each its lig h t, as G od has o rd a in e d for everyone, how th e n can I b e a p agan?” 1S0 I t is clear en o u g h fro m this w h at his a ttitu d e was to th e p ro b le m of th e two sources of know ledge: b o th lig h ts d erive from th e u n ity of G od. A n d yet— w hy d id h e give th e n a m e “ Pag o y u m ” to w h a t he w ro te in th e lig h t of n a tu re ? W as h e p lay in g w ith w ords, o r was it an in v o lu n ta ry avow al, a d im p re se n tim e n t of a d u a lity in th e w o rld an d th e soul? W as Paracelsus really u naffected by th e schism atic sp irit of the age, a n d was his a ttack o n a u th o rity really confined only to G alen, A vicenna, R hazes, an d A rn a ld u s de V illanova? A.

*5»

M A G IC

P aracelsus’s scepticism a n d rebellio u sn ess stop sh o rt a t th e C h u rc h , b u t he also re in e d th e m in b efo re alchem y, astrology, a n d m agic, w hich he believed in as ferv en tly as h e d id in d iv in e re v e latio n , since in his view they p ro ceed ed fro m th e a u th o rity of th e lu m en naturae. A n d w hen he speaks of th e d iv in e office of th e physician, he exclaim s: “ I u n d e r th e L o rd , th e L o rd u n d e r m e, I u n d e r h im o u tsid e m y office, a n d h e u n d e r m e o u tsid e his 1 16

office.” 17 W h a t k in d o f s p ir it addresses us in th ese w ords? D o th e y n o t re c a ll th o se o f th e la te r A n g elu s Silesius? I am as great as God, A nd he is sm all like me; H e can n o t be above, N o r I below him be. i52

T h e r e is n o d e n y in g th a t th e h u m a n eg o ’s affinity w ith G o d h e re raises a d is tin c t c la im to b e h e a rd a n d also to b e reco g n ized as su ch . T h a t is th e s p ir it of th e R en aissan c e— to give m a n in his m ig h tin e ss, in te lle c tu a l p o w er, a n d b e a u ty a v isib le p lace b esid e G o d . D e u s et H o m o in a n ew a n d u n p re c e d e n te d sense! A g rip p a v o n N e tte sh e im , P a ra c e lsu s’s o ld e r c o n te m p o ra ry a n d a n a u th o r ity o n th e C a b ala, d eclares in h is scep tical a n d c o n tu m a c io u s b o o k D e in c e rt itu d in e et vanitate scien tiar um:ls A grippa spares no m an. H e contem ns, knows, knows not, weeps, laughs, waxes w roth, reviles, carps a t all things; being him self philosopher, dem on, hero, God, an d all things.

P arace lsu s to b e su re d id n o t rise to su ch u n f o r tu n a te h eig h ts o f m o d e rn ity . H e fe lt a t o n e w ith G o d a n d w ith h im se lf. W h o lly a n d u n r e m ittin g ly en g ag e d in th e p ra c tic a l a r t o f h e a lin g , his bu sy m in d w asted n o tim e o n a b s tra c t p ro b le m s, a n d h is ir r a tio n a l, in tu itiv e n a tu r e n e v e r p u rs u e d lo gical reflectio n s so far th a t th e y re s u lte d in d e s tru c tiv e in sig hts. *53 P aracelsu s h a d o n e fa th e r, w h o m h e h e ld in lo v e a n d resp ect, b u t, as w e h av e said, lik e every tr u e h e ro h e h a d ttvo m o th e rs, a h e a v e n ly o n e a n d a n e a rth ly o n e — M o th e r C h u rc h a n d M o th e r N a tu re . C a n o n e serve tw o m o th ers? A n d ev en if, lik e P a ra c e l sus, o n e feels o n e se lf a p h y sician c re a te d b y G o d , is th e re n o t s o m e th in g su sp icio u s a b o u t p ressin g G o d in to o n e ’s service in side th e p h y s ic ia n ’s office, so to speak? O n e can easily o b je c t th a t P arace lsu s said th is, lik e so m u c h else, o n ly in p assin g a n d th a t it is n o t to b e ta k e n all th a t serio u sly . H e h im se lf w o u ld p ro b a b ly h av e b e e n a s to n ish e d a n d in d ig n a n t if h e h a d b e e n ta k e n a t his w o rd . T h e w ords th a t flow ed in to h is p e n cam e less fro m d e e p re fle c tio n th a n fro m th e s p ir it o f th e age in w h ic h h e liv ed . N o IT "D e caducis,” ed. Sudhoff, V III, p. 267. 18 I used th e ed itio n of 1584, “as finally revised by th e a u th o r.” 117

one can claim to be im m u n e to the sp irit of his ow n epoch o r to possess a n y th in g like a com plete know ledge of it. R egardless of o u r conscious convictions, we are all w ith o u t ex cep tio n , in so far as we are p articles in the mass, gnaw ed a t a n d u n d e rm in e d by th e s p irit th a t ru n s th ro u g h the masses. O u r freed o m ex ten d s o nly as far as o u r consciousness reaches. B eyond th a t, we succum b to th e unconscious influences of o u r en v iro n m e n t. T h o u g h we m ay n o t be clear in a logical sense a b o u t th e deepest m eanings of o u r w ords a n d actions, these m eanings nevertheless exist a n d they have a psychological effect. W h e th e r we know it o r n o t, th e re rem ain s in each of us th e tre m e n d o u s ten sio n be tw een th e m an w ho serves G od an d th e m an w ho com m ands G od to do his b id d in g . !54 B u t th e g re a ter the tension, th e g re a ter th e p o te n tia l. G re a t energy springs from a corresp o n d in g ly g reat tension o f o p p o sites. I t was to th e c o n stellatio n of th e m ost p o w erfu l opposites w ith in h im th a t Paracelsus ow ed his alm ost d aem o n ic energy, w hich was n o t a n u n allo y ed gift of G o d b u t w e n t h a n d in h a n d w ith his im p e tu o u s an d q u arrelso m e te m p e ram en t, his h asti ness, im p atien ce, discontentedness, a n d his arrogance. N o t for n o th in g was Paracelsus th e p ro to ty p e of Faust, w hom Jaco b B u rc k h a rd t once called “a g reat p rim o rd ia l im age” in th e soul of every G erm an . F ro m F aust th e lin e leads d ire c t to N ietzsche, w ho was a F austian m a n if ever th ere was one. W h a t still m a in ta in e d th e balance in th e case of Paracelsus a n d A ngelus Silesius— “ I u n d e r G od an d G od u n d e r m e”— was lost in th e tw en tie th cen tu ry , a n d th e scale sinks low er an d low er u n d e r the w eight o f a n ego th a t fancies itself m o re a n d m o re godlike. P a ra celsus shared w ith A ngelus Silesius his in n e r piety a n d the to u c h in g b u t d an g ero u s sim plicity of his re la tio n sh ip to G od. B u t alongside th is sp iritu a lity a c o u n terv ailin g c h th o n ic s p irit m ade itself felt to a n alm ost frig h te n in g degree: th e re was n o fo rm of m an ticism an d m agic th a t Paracelsus d id n o t practise h im self o r re c o m m en d to others. D a b b lin g in these arts— no m a tte r how e n lig h te n e d o n e th in k s o n e is— is n o t w ith o u t its psychological dangers. M agic always was a n d still is a source of fascination. A t th e tim e of Paracelsus, certain ly , th e w o rld teem ed w ith m arvels: everyone was conscious of the im m ed iate presence of th e d a rk forces of n a tu re . A stronom y a n d astrology w ere n o t y et separated. K epler still cast horoscopes. In ste a d of 1 18

chem istry th e re was only alchem y. A m ulets, talism ans, spells for healin g w ounds an d diseases w ere taken as a m a tte r of course. A m an so avid for know ledge as Paracelsus could n o t avoid a th o r ough in vestigation of a ll these things, only to discover th a t strange a n d re m a rk a b le effects re su lted from th e ir use. B u t so far as I know he n ev er u tte re d a clear w arn in g a b o u t the psychic dangers of m agic fo r th e a d e p t.19 H e even scoffed at the doctors because they u n d e rsto o d n o th in g of m agic. B u t h e does n o t m e n tio n th a t they k ep t away from it o u t of a q u ite ju stifiab le fear. A n d yet we know from th e testim ony of C o n rad G essner, of Z urich, th a t th e very doctors w hom Paracelsus attack ed s h u n n e d m agic on religious g ro u n d s an d accused h im an d his p u p ils of sorcery. W ritin g to C rato von C raffth eim 20 a b o u t P aracelsus’s p u p il A dam von B o d en stein 1 G essner says: “I know th a t m ost p eople of this k in d are A rians a n d deny th e d iv in ity of C h rist . . . O p o rin in Basel, once a p u p il of T h e o p h ra stu s a n d his p riv ate assistant [familiaris], re p o rte d strange tales co n cern in g th e la tte r’s in terco u rse w ith dem ons. T h e y are given to senseless astrology, geom ancy, necrom ancy, a n d o th e r fo rb id d en arts. I m yself suspect th a t they axe the last of the D ru id s, those of the an cie n t Celts w ho w ere in stru c te d fo r several years in u n d e r g ro u n d places by dem ons. I t is also c ertain th a t such things are d one to this very day a t Salam anca in Spain. F ro m this school also arose th e w an d erin g scholars, as they are com m only called. T h e m ost fam ous of these was Faust, w ho d ie d n o t so long ago.” E lsew here in the sam e le tte r G essner w rites: “ T h e o p h ra stu s has assuredly b een an im pious m a n a n d a sorcerer [magus], a n d has h a d in terco u rse w ith d em o n s.” 21 *55 A lth o u g h this ju d g m e n t is based in p a rt on th e u n re lia b le testim ony of O p o rin a n d is essentially u n fa ir o r actu ally false, it nevertheless shows how unseem ly, in th e o p in io n of co n tem p o ra ry doctors of re p u te , was Paracelsus’s p re o c cu p a tio n w ith m agic. H e him self, as we have said, h ad n o such scruples. H e drew m agic, like ev erything else w o rth know ing, in to his o rb it an d trie d to ex p lo it it m edically for th e b enefit of th e sick, 19 H e d id , how ever, o n ce rem ark th at h e h ad fou n d th e ston e w h ich others sou gh t “to th eir ow n h u r t.” B u t m any o th er alch em ists say the sam e. 29 [P ersonal p h ysician to F erd in an d I. Cf. J u n g, "Paracelsus th e P h ysician ,” pars, a i f . — E d i t o r s .]

21 E p isto la ru m m e d ic in a liu m C o n ra d i G essneri, fol. i c

u n p e rtu rb e d by w h a t it m ig h t do to h im p erso n ally o r w h a t the im p licatio n s m ig h t be fro m the religio u s p o in t o f view. F o r him m agic an d th e w isdom of n a tu re h a d th e ir place w ith in th e di vinely o rd a in e d o rd e r as a m y ste riu m et magnate D ei, a n d so it was n o t difficult fo r h im to b rid g e th e gulf in to w hich h a lf the w o rld h a d p lu n g e d .22 In ste ad of ex p erien cin g any conflict in him self, he fo u n d his arch-enem y outside in the g reat m ed ical au th o rities o f th e past, as w ell as in th e host of academ ic physicians against w hom he le t fly like the p ro p e r Swiss m ercen ary h e was. H e was in fu ria te d bey o n d m easure by the resistance of his op p o n e n ts a n d h e m ade enem ies everyw here. H is w ritin g s are as tu rb u le n t as his life a n d his w anderings. H is style is vio len tly rh e to ric a l. H e always seems to be speaking im p o rtu n a te ly in to som eone’s ear— som eone w ho listens u n w illin g ly , o r against w hose th ick skin even th e best arg u m en ts re b o u n d . H is exposi tio n o f a su b jec t is seldom system atic o r even c o h eren t; i t is co n stan tly in te rru p te d by ad m o n itio n s, addressed in a su b tle o r coarse vein to a n in v isible a u d ito r afflicted w ith m o ra l deafness. Paracelsus was a little too sure th a t he h a d his en em y in fro n t of h im , a n d d id n o t n o tic e th a t it was lodged in his ow n bosom . H e consisted of tw o persons w ho n ev er really co n fro n te d o n e a n o th er. H e n o w h ere betrays th e least susp icio n th a t he m ig h t n o t be at one w ith him self. H e felt him self to b e u n d iv id e d ly one, an d all th e th ings th a t constantly th w a rte d h im h a d of course to be his e x te rn a l enem ies. H e h a d to c o n q u e r th e m a n d p ro v e to them th a t h e was the “ M o n arch a,” th e sovereign ru le r, w hich secretly a n d u n k n o w n to him self was th e very th in g h e was n o t. H e was so unconscious o f th e conflict w ith in h im th a t h e n ev er n o tic e d th e re was a second ru le r in his ow n house w ho w orked against h im a n d opposed e v ery th in g he w an ted . B u t every u n conscious conflict w orks o u t like th a t: one o b stru cts a n d u n d e r m ines oneself. Paracelsus d id n o t see th a t th e tru th of th e C h u rc h a n d th e C h ristia n sta n d p o in t c o u ld n ev er g et alo n g w ith 22

"I’m left to struggle still towards the light: Could I but break, the spell, all magic spurning, A nd clear my path, all sorceries unlearning, Free then, in N ature’s sight, from evil ban, I ’d know at last the worth o f being m an.’’ (Faust: P art T w o, trans. Wayne, pp. 263k) Faust’s belated insight never dawned on Paracelsus.

the th o u g h t im p licit in all alchemy, “ G od u n d e r m e.” A nd w hen one unconsciously works against oneself, the resu lt is im patience, irrita b ility , and an im p o te n t longing to get o n e’s o p p o n e n t dow n w hatever the means. G enerally certain symptoms appear, am ong them a peculiar use of language: one wants to speak forcefully in o rd er to impress o n e’s opponent, so one em ploys a special, “ bom bastic” style full of neologisms which m ight be described as “power-words.” 23 T h is sym ptom is ob servable n o t only in the psychiatric clinic b u t also am ong certain m odern philosophers, and, above all, w henever an y th in g u n w orthy of belief has to be insisted on in the teeth of in n e r resist ance: the language swells up, overreaches itself, sprouts gro tesque words distinguished only by th eir needless com plexity. T h e w ord is charged w ith the task of achieving w hat cannot be done by honest means. It is the old w ord magic, and som etim es it can degenerate into a regular disease. Paracelsus was afflicted O O w ith this m alady to such a degree th a t even his closest pupils were obliged to com pile “oncm astica” (word-lists) and to p u b lish com m entaries. T h e unw ary read er continually stum bles over these neologisms and is com pletely baffled at first, for P ara celsus never b othered to give any explanations even w hen, as often happens, the w ord was a hapax legomenon (one th a t occurs only once). O ften it is only by com paring a n u m b e r of passages th a t one can approxim ately m ake o u t the sense. T h e re are, how ever, m itigating circum stances: doctors have always loved using m agically incom prehensible jargon fo r even th e m ost ord in ary things. I t is p a rt of the m edical persona. B ut it is odd indeed th a t Paracelsus, who p rid ed him self on teaching an d w ritin g in G erm an, should have been the very one to concoct the m ost intricate neologisms o u t of L atin, G reek, Italian , H ebrew , and possibly even Arabic. *56 Magic is insidious, and therein lies its danger. A t one point, w here Paracelsus is discussing w itchcraft, he actually falls, into using a magical w itch-language w ith o u t giving the least explanation. For instance, instead of “Z w irnfaden” (twine) he says “ Sw indafnerz,” instead of "N ad el” (needle) “D allen ,” instead of “L eiche” (corpse) “ C hely,” instead of 23 T h i s e x p r e s s i o n n e o lo g is m s . i t o r s .]

w a s in

[S e e “ T h e

fa c t u sed

P s y c h o lo g y

by an

in s a n e p a t ie n t

o f D e m e n tia

to d e s c r ib e h e r

P r a e c o x ,' ' p a r s .

155,

ow n

2 0 8 .— E

“F ad en ” (thread) “D ap h n e,” an d so o n .24 In m agical rites the inversion of letters serves th e diabolical purpose of tu rn in g the divine o rd er in to an infernal disorder. I t is rem ark ab le how cas ually and u n th in k in g ly Paracelsus takes over these magically distorted words and sim ply leaves the read er to m ake w hat he can of them . T h is shows th a t Paracelsus m ust have been th o r oughly steeped in the lowest folk beliefs and p o p u lar supersti tions, and one looks in vain for any trace of disgust at such squ alid things, th o u g h in his case its absence was certainly not d u e to lack of feeling b u t ra th e r to a k in d of n a tu ra l innocence a n d naivete. T h u s he him self recom m ends the m agical use of w ax m anikins in cases of sickness,25 and seems to have designed an d used am ulets an d seals.28 H e was convinced th a t physicians sho u ld have an u n d erstan d in g of the m agic arts a n d should not eschew sorcery if this m ig h t help th e ir patients. B u t this k in d of folk m agic is n o t C hristian, it is dem onstrably pagan— in a word, a “P agoyum .” B. ALCHEM Y *57

Besides his m anifold contacts w ith folk su perstition there was an o th er, m ore respectable source of “pagan” lore th a t h ad a g reat influence on Paracelsus. T h is was his know ledge of and intense preo ccu p atio n w ith alchemy, w hich he used n o t only in his pharm acology an d pharm aceutics b u t also for “philosophi cal” purposes. Since earliest tim es alchem y contained, o r actu ally was, a secret doctrine. W ith th e triu m p h of C h ristian ity u n d er C onstan tin e the old pagan ideas d id n o t vanish b u t lived on in the strange arcane term inology of philosophical alchem y. Its chief figure was H erm es o r M ercurius, in his d u al significance as quicksilver a n d the w orld soul, w ith his com panion figures Sol ( = gold) an d L u n a ( = silver). T h e alchem ical o peration con sisted essentially in separating th e p rim a m ateria, th e so-called chaos, in to th e active p rinciple, th e soul, a n d the passive p rin ciple, the body, w hich were th en re u n ite d in personified form in H e calls th is p ro ce d u re likew ise a “pago y u m .” “D e p e s d lita te ,” T ra c t. IV, ch. I I (ed. H u ser, I, p. 353). 2 3 F or instance, th e v io le n t fo rm of St. V itu s’s D ance is cu re d by “ a w ax m a n ik in in to w hich o a th s a re stu ck .” "D e m o rb is a m e n tiu m ," T ra c t. I I , ch. I l l (ed. H u se r, I, p. 501); also P aram irum , ch. V. 2 6 "A rch id o x is m agicae,” ed . H u ser, I I , p. 546. 24

1¾¾

the coniunctio o r “chym ical m arriage.” In o th er words, the coniunctio was allegorized as the hierosgamos, the ritu a l cohabi tation of Sol and L una. From this u n io n sprang the ftIius sapientiae or filius philosophorum , the transform ed M ercurius, w ho was tho u g h t of as h erm ap h ro d itic in token of his ro u n d e d p er fection. [Cf. fig. B2.] 158 T h e opus alchymicum, in spite of its chem ical aspects, was always understood as a k ind of rite after th e m an n er of an opus divinum. For this reason M elchior C ibinensis, at th e b eg in n in g of the sixteenth century, could still represent it in th e form of a Mass,27 since long before this the filius or lapis philosophorum had been reg arded as an allegory of C h rist.28 M any things in Paracelsus th a t w ould otherw ise rem ain incom prehensible m ust be u n derstood in term s of this traditio n . In it are to be fo u n d the origins of practically the whole of his philosophy in so far as it is n o t Cabalistic. I t is evident from his w ritings th at h e h ad a considerable know ledge of H erm etic lite ra tu re .29 Like all m e dieval alchem ists he seems n o t to have been aw are of th e tru e n atu re of alchem y, although the refusal of th e Basel p rin te r C onrad W aldkirch, at the end of the sixteenth century, to p rin t the first p a rt of Aurora consurgens (a treatise falsely ascribed to St. T hom as A quinas) on account of its ‘‘blasphem ous charac te r” 30 shows th a t the dubio u s n a tu re of alchem y was ap p aren t even to a laym an. T o m e it seems certain th a t Paracelsus was com pletely naive in these m atters and, in te n t only on th e wel fare of the sick, used alchem y prim arily for its practical value regardless of its m urky background. Consciously, alchem y for him m eant a know ledge of the materia medica an d a chem ical procedure fo r p rep arin g m edicam ents, above all the well-loved arcana, the secret rem edies. H e also believed th at one could make gold an d engender h o m u n c u li.31 T h is aspect of it was so p red o m in an t th at one is inclined to forget th a t alchem y m eant very m uch m ore to him th an that. W e know this from a b rief 2I T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , III (1659), PP- 7 5 8 ®· C f. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , pars. 4 8 0 ft; A u r o r a C o n su rg en s (ed. v o n F ranz), p . 43: “ F or [th e scien ce] is a g ift an d sacram en t o f G od a n d a d iv in e m a tte r .” 28 Cf. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , P a rt III, ch . 5: “T h e L ap is-C h rist P a r a lle l.” 29 H e m e n tio n s H er m es, A rch ela u s, M o rien u s, L u lly , A r n a ld u s, A lb e r tu s M agn u s, H e lia A r tista , R u p escissa , a n d others. 30 A r tis a u r ife ra e (1593), I, p . 185. 31 “D e n a tu ra reru m ," ed . S u d h off, X I, p . 313. 123

re m a rk in th e Paragranum , w here he says th a t th e physician h im self is " rip e n e d ” by the a r t.82 T h is sounds as th o u g h the alchem ical m a tu ra tio n sh o u ld go h a n d in h a n d w ith th e m a tu ra tio n of th e physician. If we are n o t m istaken in this assum ption, we m u st fu r th e r conclude th a t Paracelsus n o t only was ac q u a in te d w ith th e arcan e teachings of alchem y b u t was con v inced of th e ir rightness. I t is of course im possible to prove this w ith o u t d e ta ile d in v estigation, fo r th e esteem w h ich he ex pressed fo r alchem y th ro u g h o u t his w ritings m ig h t in the en d re fe r only to its chem ical aspect. T h is special p re d ile c tio n of his m ad e h im a fo re ru n n e r a n d in a u g u ra to r of m o d e rn chem ical m edicine. E ven his b elief in th e tra n sm u ta tio n of m etals a n d in th e lapis p h ilo so p h o ru m , w hich he shared w ith m any others, is n o evidence of a d e ep e r affinity w ith th e m ystic b a ck g ro u n d of th e ars aurifera. A n d yet such an affinity is very p ro b a b le since his closest follow ers w ere fo u n d am ong th e alchem ical physi cians.33 C. T H E A RCAN E TEA C H IN G

160

I n th e course of o u r in q u iry we shall have to scru tin ize m o re closely the arcane teach in g of alchem y, w hich is so im p o rta n t fo r an u n d e rs ta n d in g of th e sp iritu a l side of Paracelsus. I m u st ask th e re a d e r to forgive m e in advance for p u ttin g his a tte n tio n a n d p a tien ce to such a severe test. T h e su b ject is ab stru se an d w rap p ed in obscurity, b u t it co nstitutes an essential p a rt of th e Paracelsan s p irit a n d ex erted a p ro fo u n d influence o n G oethe, so m u ch so th a t th e im pressions he g a in ed in his L eipzig days c o n tin u e d to engross h im even in old age: in d eed , they form ed th e m a trix fo r Faust. W h e n one reads Paracelsus, it is chiefly th e tech n ical n eo lo gisms th a t seem to give o u t m ysterious hints. B u t w h en o n e tries to establish th e ir etym ology a n d th e ir m ean in g , as o fte n as n o t one ends u p in a b lin d alley. F o r instance, o ne can guess th a t 32 Das B u ch P aragranum , ed. Strunz, p. 13. 33 H is influence show ed itself n o t so m uch in any essential m odification o f a l

chem ical m ethods as in deep en ed p hilosophical sp ecu latio n . T h e m ost im p o rta n t of these p hilosophical alchem ists was th e physician G e ra rd D o rn , of F ra n k fu rt am M ain. H e w rote a d etailed com m entary on on e of P aracelsus’s ra re L atin treatises, D e vita longa. See in fra , pars. 313!!. 12 4

“Iliaster” o r “Y liastrum ” is com posed etym ologically of OXij (m at ter) and ό.στήο (star), and th a t it means ab o u t the same as the spiritus vitae of classical alchemy, or th at “C agastrum ” is con nected w ith κακό s (bad) and ά σ τ ή ρ , o r th a t “A nthos” an d “Anth era” are em bellishm ents of the alchem ical flores. Even his philosophical concepts, such as the doctrine of the astrum , only lead us back to the know n alchem ical and astrological trad itio n , from w hich we can see th a t his doctrine of the corpus astrale was n o t a new discovery. W e find this idea already in an old classic, the “T ractatu s A ristotelis,” w here it is said th at the “planets in m an ” have a m ore pow erful influence th an th e heavenly bodies;34 an d w hen Paracelsus says th a t the m edicine is found in the astrum , we read in the same treatise th at “ in m an, who is m ade in the im age of God, can be fo u n d the cause and the m edicine.” B ut th a t o th er pivot of Paracelsus’s teaching, his belief in the light of n atu re, allows us to surm ise connections w hich il lu m in ate the obscurities of his religio medica. T h e lig h t h idden in n a tu re and p articularly in h u m an n a tu re likewise belongs to the stock of an cien t alchem ical ideas. T h u s the “T ractatu s A ris totelis” says: “See therefore th a t the lig h t which is in thee be n o t darkness.” T h e light of n a tu re is indeed of great im portance in alchemy. Ju st as, according to Paracelsus, it enlightens m an as to the w orkings of n a tu re and gives him an u n d erstan d in g of n atu ral things “ by cagastric m agic” (per m agiam cagastricam),35 so it is the aim of alchem y to beget this lig h t in th e shape of the filius philosophorum . A n equally ancient treatise of A rabic provenance a ttrib u te d to H erm es,36 the “T ractatu s au reu s,” says (M ercurius is speaking): “ My lig h t excels all o th er lights, and my goods are higher th a n all o th er goods. I beget the light, b u t the darkness too is of my natu re. N o th in g b e tte r or m ore w orthy of veneration can come to pass in the w orld th an th e u n io n of S i “N a m P la n e ta e S p h aerae et e le m e n ta in h o m in e p e r r e v o lu tio n e m su i Zodiaci veriu s e t v ir tu o siu s o p e r a n tu r , q u a m a lie n a corp ora se u sig n a su p e rio r a corp o r a lia ” (For th e p la n e ts, sp h eres, a n d e le m e n ts in m a n w ork m o r e tr u ly a n d p o w er fu lly th r o u g h th e r e v o lu tio n o f th eir zod iac th a n fo r e ig n b o d ies o r th e h ig h er b o d ily sign s). T h e a t r . c h e m . , V {1660), p . 790. 85 “L ib e r A zoth," ed . H u ser, II, p . 5 2 s. T h e C a g a s tr u m is a n in fe r io r o r “bad " form o f th e Y li a s t r u m . T h a t i t is th is “ cagastric” m a g ic w h ic h o p e n s th e u n d e r sta n d in g is w o r th n o tin g . Se H er m es is an a u th o r ity o fte n c ite d b y P aracelsu s.

162

m yself w ith m y so n .” 37 In the “ D icta B e lin i” (B elinus is a p seudo-A pollonius of T y a n a ) M ercu riu s says: “ I e n lig h te n all th a t is m in e, an d I m ake th e lig h t m an ifest o n th e jo u rn e y from m y fa th e r S a tu rn .” 38 “ I m ake the days of th e w o rld e te rn a l, and I illu m in e all lights w ith m y lig h t.” 39 A n o th e r a u th o r says of th e “chym ical m a rria g e ” from w hich arises th e filius philosop h o r u m : “T h e y em brace a n d th e new lig h t is b e g o tte n of them , w hich is lik e n o o th e r lig h t in th e w hole w o rld .” 40 T h is idea of th e lig h t, w ith Paracelsus as w ith o th e r alche m ists, coincides w ith th e concept of S ap ien tia a n d Scientia. W e can safely call th e lig h t the c en tral m ystery o f philosophical alchem y. A lm ost always it is personified as th e filiusj o r is at least m e n tio n e d as o n e of his o u tsta n d in g a ttrib u te s . I t is a S a w o p io v p u re a n d sim ple. O fte n th e texts re fe r to th e n eed fo r a fa m ilia r sp irit w ho sh o u ld h e lp the a d ep t a t his w ork. T h e M agic P ap y ri do n o t h esitate to enlist the services even of the m a jo r gods.41 T h e filius re m a in s in th e a d e p t’s pow er. T h u s th e treatise of H aly, k in g of A rab ia, says: “A n d th a t son . . . shall serve th ee in thy house in this w orld a n d in th e n e x t.” 42 Long before Paracelsus, as I have said, this filius was e q u a te d w ith C hrist. T h e parallel comes o u t very clearly in th e sixteenthc e n tu ry G e rm a n alchem ists w ho w ere in flu en ced by Paracelsus. F o r instance, H e in ric h K h u n ra th says: “T h is [the filius philosop h o ru m ], th e Son of th e M acrocosm , is G od a n d c re a tu re . . . 37 Q u o ted from th e version in R o sa riu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , vo l. II o f D e a lch im ia (1550), p . 133. R e p r in te d in B ib lio th e c a ch em ica c u rio sa , II, p p . 87(!. 38 T h e lig h t arises from th e darkness o f Saturn. 39 Q u o ted from th e versio n o f R o sa riu m in A r t. a u rif., II, p p . 379 an d 381. T h e o rig in a l (1550) ed itio n o f th e R o sa riu m is based o n a tex t th a t d ates back to a b o u t th e m id d le of th e 15th cent. 40 M ylius, P h ilo so p h ia re fo rm a ta , p. 244. (M ylius w as th e greatest o f th e a l ch em ical com p ilers a n d gave extracts from n u m ero u s a n cien t tex ts, m ostly w ith o u t n a m in g th e sources.) Significantly, th e old est o f th e C h in ese alchem ists, W ei-P o-yan g, w h o liv e d a b o u t a .d . 140, w as fa m ilia r w ith th is id ea. H e says: “H e w h o p rop erly cu ltiv a tes h is in n a te n a tu re w ill see th e y ello w lig h t sh in e forth as it sh ou ld ." (L u -ch ’ia n g W u a n d T . L. D avis, “A n A n cien t C h in ese T r ea tise on A lch em y,” p . 262.) 41 P reisendanz, P a p y r i G raecae M a g ica e, I, p . 137, P ap. IV , lin e 2081, co n cern in g th e acq u isitio n o f a p a re d ro s. 42 Q u o ted in R o sa riu m (A rt. a u r if., II, p . 248). Cf. P reisend an z, II, p p . 45—46, lin e 48: “I kn ow th ee, H erm es, and th o u k n ow est m e. I am th o u an d th o u art I, an d th ou sh o u ld st serve m e in a ll th in g s.” 126

that [Christ], is the son of God, the θεάνθρωπος, that is, G od and m an; the one conceived in the womb of the Macrocosm, the other in the w om b of the Microcosm, and both of a virginal womb. . . . W ith o u t blasphem y I say: In the Book o r M irro r of N ature, the Stone of the Philosophers, the Preserver of the Macrocosm, is the symbol of C hrist Jesus Crucified, Saviour of the whole race of m en, th at is, of the Microcosm. From the stone you shall know in n a tu ra l wise C hrist5 and from ChTist th e stone.” 43 T o m e it seems certain th a t Paracelsus was ju st as u n con scious of the fu ll im plications of these teachings as K h u n rath was, who also believed he was speaking “w ith o u t blasphem y.” But in spite of this unconsciousness they were of the essence of philosophical alchem y,44 and anyone who practised it th ought, lived, and acted in the atm osphere of these teachings, w hich per haps had an all the m ore insidious effect the m ore naively and uncritically one succum bed to them . T h e “n a tu ra l lig h t of m an” o r the “star in m a n ” sounds harmless enough, so th a t n o n e of the authors had any n o tio n of the possibilities of conflict th a t lurked w ith in it. A nd yet th a t light or filius philosophorum was openly nam ed the greatest an d m ost victorious of all lights, and set alongside C hrist as the Saviour and Preserver of the w orld I W hereas in C hrist G od him self became m an, the filius philoso phorum was extracted from m atter by h u m an art and, by m eans of the opus, m ade into a new light-bringer. In the form er case the m iracle of m a n ’s salvation is accom plished by G od; in the latter, the salvation or transfiguration of the universe is b ro u g h t about by the m in d of m an— “Deo concedente,” as the authors never fail to add. In the one case m an confesses “ I u n d e r G od,” in the o th er he asserts “ G od u n d e r m e.” M an takes the place of the C reator. M edieval alchem y prepared the way for the greatest intervention in the divine w orld order th a t m an has ever at tem pted; alchem y was the daw n of the scientific age, w hen th e *3 A m p h itk e a tru m sap ien tia e aeternae, p. 1 9 7 : "Hie, filius m u n d i m aioris, D eus et creatura . . . ille (scl. Christus) filius D ei 6thv8po>vos, h. e. D eu s et hom o: U n u s irt u te io m u n d i maioris; alter in utero m u n d i m inoris, uterque V irgineo, conceptus. . . . A bsque blasphem ia dico: Christi crucifixi, salvatoris totiu s generis hum ani, i.e., m u n d i m inoris, in N aturae libro, et ceu Speculo, typus est Lapis Philosophorum servator m u n d i maioris. E x lapide Christum naturaliter cognoscito et ex Christo lapidem ." 44 M ylius (P hil, ref., p. 9 7 ) says o f the filiu s ignis: “ H ere lies all o u r philosophy."

127

d a em o n of th e scientific sp irit co m p elled th e forces of n a tu re to serve m an to a n e x te n t th a t h ad n ev er been k n o w n before. I t was from the sp irit of alchem y th a t G oethe w ro u g h t th e figure of the “s u p e rm a n ” Faust, an d this su p erm an led N ietzsche’s Z arathustra to declare th a t G od was dead a n d to p ro claim th e w ill to give b irth to th e su p erm an , to “create a god fo r yourself o u t of your seven devils.” 45 H e re we find th e tru e roots, th e p rep arato ry processes deep in th e psyche, w hich u n le ash e d th e forces a t w ork in the -world today. Science a n d technology have in d e ed con q u e re d th e w orld, b u t w h e th e r the psyche has g ain ed a n y th in g is a n o th e r m atter. l64 Paracelsus’s p reo ccu p atio n w ith alchem y exposed h im to an influence th a t left its m ark on his s p iritu a l d ev elo p m en t. T h e in n e r driving-force b e h in d th e asp iratio n s of alchem y was a p re s u m p tio n w hose daem o n ic g ra n d e u r o n th e o n e h a n d a n d psy chic d a n g er46 o n th e o th e r sh o u ld n o t be u n d e re stim ate d . M uch of th e o v e rb e arin g p rid e a n d a rro g a n t self-esteem , w hich con trasts so strangely w ith th e tru ly C h ristia n h u m ility of P aracel sus, com es from this source. W h a t e ru p te d like a volcano in A g rip p a von N e tte sh e im ’s “him self d em o n , h ero , G o d ” re m a in e d , w ith Paracelsus, h id d e n u n d e r th e th re sh o ld of a C h ris tia n consciousness an d expressed itself o n ly in d irec tly in exag g erated claim s a n d in his irrita b le self-assertiveness, w hich m ade h im enem ies w herever h e w ent. W e know fro m ex p erien ce th at such a sym ptom is d u e to u n a d m itte d feelings of in fe rio rity , i.e., to a re a l fa ilin g of w hich one is usu ally unconscious. I n each of us th e re is a pitiless ju d g e w ho m akes us feel g u ilty even if we a re n o t conscious of h aving d o n e a n y th in g w rong. A lth o u g h we do n o t know w hat it is, it is as th o u g h it w ere k n o w n som ew here. P aracelsus’s desire to h elp th e sick a t all costs was d o u b tless q u ite 45 T h u s S pake Z a ra th u stra (trans. K aufm ann), p. 176: ‘‘L on ely o n e, yo u are g o

in g th e w ay to you rself. A n d your w ay lead s past yo u rself a n d your seven devils. . . . Y ou m u st con su m e y o u rself in y o u r ow n flam e; h o w co u ld yo u w ish to becom e n e w u nless you h ad first b ecom e ashes! L o n ely o n e, yo u are g o in g the w ay o f th e creator: y ou w o u ld create a g o d for you rself o u t o f you r seven d evils.” Cf. ‘‘C on siliu m c o n iu g ii,” A r s ch em ica , p . 237: “ O ur sto n e slays itse lf w ith its ow n d art”; and th e ro le o f th e in c in e ra tio an d th e p h o e n ix a m o n g th e a l ch em ists. T h e d e v il is th e S a tu rn in e form o f th e a n im a m u n d i. 4 ft T h e se w ere k n ow n to th e a lch em ists sin ce earliest tim es. O lym p iod oru s, for in stan ce, says th a t in le a d (Saturn) th ere is a sham eless d em o n (the sp iritu s m ercu rii) w h o drives m en m ad. (B erth elot, A lc h im iste s grecs, II, iv, 43.)

128

pure and genuine. B ut the magical means he used, and in p ar ticular the secret c o n ten t of alchemy, were diam etrically o p posed to th e sp irit of C hristianity. A nd that rem ain ed so w hether Paracelsus was aware of it o r not. Subjectively, he was w ithout blam e; b u t th a t pitiless judge condem ned him to feel ings of in ferio rity that clouded his life. D. TH E PRIM ORDfAL M AN

165

T h is crucial point, nam ely the arcane doctrine of the m ar vellous son of the philosophers, is the subject of u n frien d ly b u t perspicacious criticism by C onrad Gessner. A propos the works of a p u p il of Paracelsus, A lexander a Suchten,47 he writes to Crato; “ B ut look w ho it is w hom he reveals to us as the son of God, nam ely none o th e r than the spirit of the w orld and of n a ture, an d the same who dwells in o u r bodies (it is a w onder that he does n o t add the spirit of the ox and the ass!). T h is sp irit can be separated from m a tte r o r from the body of the elem ents by the technical procedures of the T heop h rastu s school. If anyone were to take him at his w ord, he w ould say th a t he had m erely voiced a p rinciple of the philosophers, b u t n o t his own opinion. H e repeats it, however, in o rd er to express his agreem ent. A nd I know th at o th e r T h eo p h rastian s besm irch such things w ith th eir w ritings, from w hich it is easy to conclude th at they deny the divinity of C hrist. I myself am entirely convinced th a t T h e o phrastus has been an A rian. T h e y endeavour to persuade us th at C hrist was a q u ite ordinary m an, and th a t in h im was no oth er spirit than in us.” 48 166 G essner’s charge against the T heophrastus school and against the M aster him self applies to alchem y in general. T h e extrac tion of the w orld soul from m atter was n o t a peculiarity of Paracelsan alchemy. B u t the charge of A rianism is unjustified. I t was obviously prom pted by the well-known parallel betw een the filius philosophorum and C hrist, though so far as I know this now here occurs in Paracelsus’s own writings. O n the o th e r h and, in a treatise called “Apokalypsis H erm etis,” ascribed by H u ser to Paracelsus, there is a com plete alchem ical confession of faith which lends G essner’s charge a certain weight. T h e re Paracelsus 4T Born in D anzig at the b egin n in g of the 16th cent., studied in Basel. 48 EpistoIarum m ed icin aliu m Conradi Gessnerir Lib. I, fol. 2r.

129

167

168

says of the “sp irit of the fifth essence” : “T h is is th e sp irit of tru th , w hom the w orld cannot com preh en d w ith o u t th e inspira tio n of the H oly G host, o r w ith o u t the in stru ctio n of those who know h im .” 49 “H e is the soul of the w orld,” m oving all and preserving all. In his initial earthly form (th at is, in his original S aturnine darkness) he is unclean, b u t he purifies him self pro gressively d u rin g the ascent th ro u g h his watery, aerial, and fiery forms. Finally, in the fifth essence, he appears as the “clarified body.” 50 “T h is sp irit is the secret th a t has been h id d en since the b eg in n in g of things.” Paracelsus is speaking here as a tru e alchem ist. L ike his p u pils, he draws th e C abala, w hich h ad been m ade accessible to th e w orld at large thro u g h Pico della M iran d o la an d A grippa, in to the scope of his alchem ical speculations. “A ll you w ho are led by your relig io n to prophesy fu tu re events an d to in te rp re t the past and the present to people, you who see ab ro ad and read h id d e n letters an d sealed books, w ho seek in th e e arth an d in walls for w hat is b u rie d , you w ho learn great w isdom and a rt— bear in m in d if you wish to apply all these things, th a t you take to yourselves the religion of the G abal a n d w alk in its light, for the G abal is w ell-founded. Ask an d it w ill be g ra n te d to you, knock, you w ill be h eard a n d it w ill be o p en ed u n to you. From this g ran tin g an d o p en in g th ere w ill flow w hat you desrre: you w ill see in to the lowest depths of the earth , in to the depths of hell, in to the th ird heaven. You w ill gain m o re w isdom than Solom on, you w ill have greater co m m u n io n w ith G od than Moses an d A aron.” 51 J u st as th e w isdom of the C abala coincided w ith the Sapientia of alchem y, so th e figure of A dam K adm on was identified w ith th e filius p h ilo sophorum . O riginally this figure m ay have been the ανθρω-π-os φ ω τ ε ιν ό ς , th e “m an of lig h t” w ho was im prisoned in A dam , a n d w hom we e n co u n ter in Zosimos of Panopolis 4 9 T h is is a rec u r re n t fo r m u la in a lc h e m ic a l treatises,

so T h e c o r p u s g lo r ific a tio n is o f o th e r a u th o rs. 51 “D e r e lig io n e p e r p e tu a ,” e d . S u d h o ff, P a rt 2, I, p p . io o f. A n e q u a lly p r e su m p tu o u s v ie w is e x p r essed in " D e p o d a g ricis" (ed. H u se r , I, p, 565): “ T h u s m an a c q u ir es h is a n g e lic q u a litie s fr o m h e a v e n a n d is h e a v e n ly . H e w h o k n o w s th e a n g e ls k n ow s th e a stra , h e w h o k n o w s th e a stra a n d th e h o r o s c o p u m k n o w s th e w h o le w o r ld , a n d k n o w s h o w to b r in g to g e th e r m a n a n d th e a n g e ls.” [T h is a n d th e a b o v e p a ssa g e in th e t e x t are tr a n sla te d by D r. R . T . L le w e lly n .— T r a n s l a t o r .]

(third century).®2 B ut the m an of lig h t is an echo of th e preC hristian d octrine of the P rim o rd ial M an. U n d er the influence of M arsilio Ficino an d Pico della M irandola, these and o th er N eoplatonic ideas had already become popularized in th e fif teenth century an d were know n to nearly every educated person. In alchem y they fell in w ith the rem nants of classical trad itio n . Besides this there were the views of the Cabala, w hich h ad been philosophically assessed by Pico.53 H e and A grippa54 were p ro b ably the sources for Paracelsus’s som ew hat scanty know ledge of the Cabala. For Paracelsus the P rim o rd ial M an was identical w ith the “astral” m an: “T h e tru e m an is the star in us.” 53 “T h e star desires to drive m an towards great w isdom .” 50 In his Paragranum he says: “For heaven is m an an d m an is heaven, an d all m en are one heaven, an d heaven is only one m an .” 57 M an stands in the relationship of a son to the in n e r heaven,58 which is the Father, w hom Paracelsus calls the hom o m a xim u s59 or A dech,00 an arcane nam e derived from Adam. Elsew here he is called A rcheus: “ H e is therefore sim ilar to m an and consists of the fo u r elem ents an d is an A rcheus and is com posed of four parts; say then, he is the great Cosmos.” 81 U n d o u b ted ly this is the P rim o rd ial M an, for Paracelsus says: “In the whole Ides there is b u t O ne M an, the same is extracted by the U iastrum 62 52 In Zosimos the "man o f lig h t’’ ^ i s = r a a n , φώς = Iight) is sim ply called φώς. H e is the spiritual m an who has clothed h im self in A dam ’s body. Christ let Adam approach (ιτροσήν) and accepted h im into paradise (B erthelot, A Ich. grecs, III, xlix, 5-10). Cf. Psych ology and A lch em y, par. 456. 53 "De arte cabalistica,” O pera om nia, I. 54 O cculta p h ilo so p h ia . 55 A stron om ia m agna, ed. Sudhoff, X II, p. 55. 56 Ibid., p. 62. 57 Ed. Strunz, p. 56; also “V on der A stronom ey,” ed. H user, I, p. 215. 58 Strunz, p. 55. 59 Pico della M irandola also uses this term in H e p ta p lu s, I, ch. VII (O pera om n ia,

h P- 59 )· 60 De v ita longa (ed. D orn), pp. 1698:. A dech is the "interior m an,” presum ably identical w ith A niadus and E dochinum (see infra). C oncerning the h om o m a x i m us see Paragranum , p p . 45, 59. D orn calls Adech the “in visib ilem hom inem m axim um .” e i "Von den dreyen ersten essentiis,” ch. IX , ed. H user, I, p. 325. T h e idea that the Prim ordial M an consists o f four parts is fou n d also in G nosticism (Barbelo = "God is fo u r”). 62 T h e U iastrum (or Iliaster) is som ething like th e sp iritu s v ita e or sp iritu s m ercurialis o f the alchem ists. T h is is the occult agent in quicksilver, w hich, ex-

an d is the P ro to p last.” Ides or Ideus is “ the gate th ro u g h w hich all created things have proceeded,” the “globule o r m ateria” from w hich m an was created .83 O th e r secret nam es for the P rim o rd ia l M an are Id e c h tru m 64 and P ro to th o m a .65 T h e n u m b e r of nam es alone shows how preoccupied Paracelsus was w ith this idea. T h e an cien t teachings ab o u t the A n th ro p o s o r P ri m o rd ial M an assert th a t God, or the w orld-creating p rin cip le, was m ade m anifest in the form of a “ first-created” (protoplastus) m an, usually of cosmic size. I n In d ia he is P rajap ati o r P urusha, w ho is also “th e size of a th u m b ” an d dwells in th e h e a rt of every m an, like the Iliaster of Paracelsus. In P ersia h e is G ayom art (gayo-maretan, ‘m ortal life’), a y o u th of dazzling w hiteness, as is also said of the alchem ical M ercurius. In the Zohar he is M etatron, w ho was created to g eth er w ith light. H e is the celestial m an w hom we m eet in th e visions of D aniel, Ezra, E noch, an d also in P hilo Judaeus. H e is one of the p rin cip al figures in G nosticism , w here, as always, he is connected w ith the question of creation an d re d e m p tio n .66 T h is is the case w ith Paracelsus. tra c te d in th e fo rm o f th e a q u a p e rm a n e n s, serves, in h ig h ly p a ra d o x ic a l fa sh io n , to se p a ra te th e o c c u lt a g e n t, th e a n im a (soul), fro m th e b o d y (or su b stan ce). T h e c o n tra d ic tio n is d u e to th e fac t th a t M e rc u riu s is a se lf-tra n sfo rm in g b e in g , re p re se n te d as a d ra g o n th a t d e v o u rs itself fro m th e ta il ( u r o b o r o s = ta il-e a te r), o r else as tw o d ra g o n s e a tin g e a c h o th e r. T h e fu n c tio n o f th e Ilia s te r is ju s t as p a ra d o x ic a l: i t is itse lf a c re a te d th in g , b u t it b rin g s a ll c re a tu re s o u t o f a p o te n tia l s ta te o f ex isten ce in th e w o rld o f id eas (w h ich is p ro b a b ly th e m e a n in g o f P ara c e lsu s’s N e o p la to n ic " Id e s”) in to a c tu a l existen ce. [See also in fra , p a rs. i 7 off.] 63 “ D e ta r ta r o : F ra g m e n ta a n a to m ia e ,” ed. S udhoff, II I, p . 4 6 2 . 34 Ib id ., p. 4 6 5 : “ H e is th e first m a n a n d th e first tre e a n d th e first c re a te d o f e v e ry th in g w h atso e v e r,” 35 = " F irst T h o m a s ,” i.e., th e first u n b e lie v e r a n d d o u b te r. 36 B ousset, H a u p ip r o b le m e d e r G nosis, p p . i 6 ff.

2. “DE V IT A L O N G A ” : AN E X P O S IT IO N O F T H E SE C R E T D O C T R IN E >6g

T h e treatise D e vita longa,1 difficult as it is to u n d erstan d in parts, gives us some inform ation on this point, though we have to extricate it w ith an effort from the arcane term inology in which it is em bedded. T h e treatise is one of the few that were w ritten in L atin; the style is exceedingly strange, b u t all the same it contains so m any significant hints th at it is w orth investi gating m ore closely. A dam von B odenstein, who edited it, says in a dedicatory le tte r2 to L udw ig W olfgang von H apsberg, gov e rn o r of B adenw eiler, th a t it was “ taken dow n from the m outh of Paracelsus an d carefully revised.” T h e obvious inference is th at the treatise is based on notes of Paracelsus’s lectures and is n o t an original text. As B odenstein him self w rote fluent and eas ily understandable L atin, q u ite unlike th at of the treatise, one m ust assume th a t he did n o t devote any p a rtic u la r atten tio n to it and m ade no effort to p u t it in to m ore intelligible form , o th er wise m uch m ore of his own style w ould have crept in. Probably he left the lectures m ore or less in th eir original state, as is p ar ticularly a p p aren t towards the end. It is also likely th a t he had no very clear understan d in g of w hat they were about, any m ore than had the supposed translator O porin. T h is is no t surprising, as the M aster him self all too often lacks the necessary clarity w hen discussing these com plicated m atters. U n d er these circum stances it is difficult to say how m uch should be p u t down to incom prehension and how m uch to undisciplined thinking. N or is the possibility of actual errors in transcription excluded.3 In 1 E d . S u d h o ff, I I I . F o l. d a r o f t h e i s t e d n . (1562). 3 T o g iv e b u t o n e e x a m p le : o n e p a ssa g e says t h a t “ t h e r e is n o t h in g o f m o r ta lity in th e S c a io la e ,” w h ile a n o th e r sp e a k s o f th e “ d e a t h a n d life o f t h e S c a io la e ’’ ( in fra , p a rs . 207, 214). N o t m u c h r e lia n c e s h o u ld th e r e f o r e b e p la c e d o n B o d e n s te in ’s “ re v is io n .” A s a g a in s t m y v ie w t h a t th e V ita lortga c o n sists o f le c tu re n o te s , o n e m u s t c o n s id e r t h e fa c t t h a t t h e r e a re o r ig in a l fra g m e n ts w r itte n in

L5IB

o u r in te rp re ta tio n , therefore, we are on u n c e rta in g ro u n d from the start, an d m uch m ust rem ain conjecture. B u t as Paracelsus, for all his originality, was strongly influenced by alchem ical thin k in g , a know ledge of the earlier a n d co n tem porary alchem i cal treatises, an d of the w ritings of his pupils and followers, is of considerable h elp in in te rp re tin g some of the concepts and in filling o u t certain gaps. A n a tte m p t to com m ent on an d to in te r p re t the treatise, therefore, is n o t entirely hopeless, despite th e a d m itte d difficulties. A . T H E ILIASTER

>7°

T h e treatise is m ainly concerned w ith the conditions u n d e r w hich longevity, w hich in Paracelsus’s o p in io n extends u p to a th o u san d years o r m ore, can be attain ed . In w hat follows I shall give chiefly the passages th a t relate to the secret d o ctrin e an d are of h elp in ex p lain in g it.4 Paracelsus starts by giving a d efin itio n of life, as follows: “ Life, by H ercules, is n o th in g o th e r th a n a certain em balsam ed M um ia, w hich preserves th e m o rtal body from the m ortal w orm s an d from c o rru p tio n 5 by m eans of a m ix ed saline so lu tio n .” M um ia was well know n in the M iddle Ages as a m edicam ent, an d it consisted of th e pulverized parts of real Egyptian m um m ies, in w hich there was a flourishing trade. Paracelsus a ttrib u te s in c o rru p tib ility to a special v irtu e o r agent n am ed “balsam .” T h is was som ething lik e a n a tu ra l elixir, by m eans of w hich the body was k e p t alive or, if dead, in c o rru p t ible.® By the same logic, a scorpion o r venom ous snake necesGerm an (ed. Sudhoff, III, pp. 295ft.). T h e se m ay b e Paracelsus’s drafts for a Germ an version. T h e d ate o f com p osition o f th e V ita lon ga is perhaps 1526. N o origin al MSS. o f Paracelsus have b een preserved (ib id ., p p . xxxiiff.). 4 T h e follow in g discussion m akes n o attem p t to ev alu ate the treatise as a w h ole, for w h ich reason I have n o t considered th e D e v ita Iibri tre s o f M arsilio F icin o an im p ortan t con trib u tio n in th is respect. 5 T h e w ord aestph ara in the L a tin m ay be o f A rabic origin . D orn translates it as c o rru p tio . A n other possible derivation is φάρω, ‘to render in v isib le,’ ‘to k ill,’ and αί<ττ6ω, 'to cleave,’ ‘to dism em ber.’ C orruption or p u trefaction involves d ecom p osi tion and hence th e disappearance o f th e previous form . “N ih il m eh ercle v ita est aliu d , nisi M um m ia quaedam B alsam ita, conservans m ortale corpus a m ortalibus verm ibus et aestphara, cum im pressa liq u o ris salliu m com m istura.” 6 R u lan d , A L ex ico n o f A lch e m y , p. 69 (s.v. B a lsa m u m s. B alsam us): "It is the

PA R A C EL SU S AS A S P IR IT U A L P H E N O M E N O N

sarily had in it an alexipharm ic, i.e., an antidote, otherw ise it w ould die of its ow n poison. 171 Paracelsus goes on to discuss a great m any arcane rem edies, since diseases shorten life and have above all to be cured. T h e chief am ong these rem edies are gold and pearls, which la tte r can be transform ed in to the quinta essentia. A peculiar potency is a ttrib u te d to C heyri,7 w hich fortifies the m icrocosm ic body so m uch th a t it “m ust necessarily contin u e in its conservation through the universal anatom y of the four elem ents.” 8 T h e re fore the physician should see to it th a t the “anatom y” ( = struc ture) of the four elem ents “be contracted into the one anatom y of the microcosm, n o t out of the corporeal, b u t o u t of th at which preserves the corporeal.” T h is is the balsam , w hich stands even h ig h er than the qu in ta essentia, the th in g th a t ord in arily holds the fo u r elem ents together. I t “excels even n a tu re herself” because it is produced by a “bodily o p eratio n .” 9 T h e idea th at the a rt can m ake som ething higher than n atu re is typically al chem ical. T h e balsam is the life principle, the spiritus m ercurii, and it m ore or less coincides w ith the Paracelsan concept of the Iliaster. T h e la tte r is hig h er than the four elem ents and d eter m ines the length of life. It is therefore roughly the same as the balsam, o r one could say th at the balsam is the pharm acological liq u o r of a n in te rio r sa lt m ost ca re fu lly a n d n a tu ra lly p re se rv in g its b o d y fro m c o rru p tio n . . . . I n G e rm a n th e te rm [is] B ald zam en [‘soon to g e th e r’], i.e., q u ick ly jo in e d [celeriter c o n iu n c tu m : h e n c e a m ean s o f p ro m o tin g th e c o n iu n c tio , see infra]. E x te rn a l B alsam o f th e E lem en ts is liq u o r o f e x te rn a l M ercu ry . . . th e firm a m e n ta l essence o f existences, th e Q u in tessen ce.” H en ce B. in te rn u s is a liq u o r M e rc u rii in te rn i. 7 C heyri is th e yellow w allflo w er [C h eira n th u s c h eiri, in co rre c tly g iv en as] Viola petraea lu tea [m o u n ta in pansy] in th e H e rb a l o f T a b e rn a e m o n ta n u s; it is a b o rtifacien t a n d resto rativ e . T h e p la n t b ears fo u r-p e ta lle d yellow blossom s. G ale n (De sim p lic iu m m e d ic a m e n to ru m fa c u lta tib u s , L ib. V II) says it has a ca rm in a tiv e a n d w arm in g effect. In R u la n d (L exico n , p. g8), C h eiri P aracelsicum , as a p p lie d to m in e ra ls, is qu ick silv er; Flos ch e iri is th e w h ite e lix ir of silver, also th e essence of gold. ‘‘.O thers say it is p o ta b le g o ld ,” h en ce it is a n a rc a n u m su b serv in g th e p h ilo so p h ic a l aim o f alch em y . P aracelsu s h im self a llu d e s to its fo u rfo ld n a tu re : “ . . . a n d th e S pagyric m akes a te m p e ra te b e in g o u t of th e fo u r [elem ents], as th e flower C h eiri show s.” “F ra g m e n ta m ed ica ,” ed. Sudhoff, II I, p. 301. N“ Q uod p e r u n iv e rsa m q u a tu o r e le m e n to ru m a n a to m ia m p e rd u r a re in sua co n serv atio n e d e b e t” (Lib. IV , ch. I). In th e G e rm a n fra g m e n ts to th e V ila longa P aracelsus says: ‘‘F o r C h e iri is m o re th a n V enus, A n th o s m o re th a n M ars.” 8 P ro b ab ly by a process o f e x tra c tio n .

or chem ical aspect of the Iliaster.10 T h e Iliaster has three forms: Ilia ster san ctitu s,11 p a ra tetu s,12 and magnus. T h ey are subordi nate to m an (“m icrocosm o su b d iti”) and can be brought “in to o n e gam onym us.” Since Paracelsus attributes a special “vis ac potestas co n iu n ctio n is” to the Iliaster, this enigm atic “gam ony m u s’’ (τάμοϊ = m arriage, ο ν ο μ α — nam e) m ust be interpreted as a k in d o f chym ical w edding, in other words as an in d issolu b le, herm aphroditic u n io n .13 T h ere are as m any Iliastri as there are m en; that is to say in every m an there is an Iliaster that holds together each in d iv id u a l’s peculiar com b in ation of q u alities.14 10 [T h e fo llo w in g passag e is a slig h t c o n d e n sa tio n o f a n o te e n title d “T h e C o n c e p t o f M e rc u riu s in H e rm e tic P h ilo so p h y ,” d a te d E in sie d e ln , O ct. 11, 1942, d is co vered am o n g J u n g 's p o s th u m o u s p a p e rs : " T h is co n cep t— i f o n e can call it su ch — n o t o n ly h a s a w e a lth o f m e a n in g s b u t a p p e a rs in v a ria n t fo rm as Ilia s tru m , Iliastes, Ilia d u s, Y leides, Y leidus, etc. Such a n in te n sific a tio n o f P a ra ce lsu s's e ty m o lo g ical p ro c liv itie s in d ic a te s th a t a special im p o rta n c e a tta c h e s to a n id e a so v a rio u sly n a m e d . S o m etim es th e I lia s te r is th e p r in c ip iu m , th e p r im a m a te ria , th e chaos, th e p rim a c o m p o sitio , co n sistin g o f th e th re e basic su b stan ces, M e rc u riu s, s u lp h u r, a n d salt; so m etim es i t is th e a er ele m e n la lis or c o e lu m , ‘th e tr u e s p irit in m a n , w h ic h p e rv a d e s a ll h is lim b s’; som etim es th e ‘o c c u lt v irtu e o f n a tu r e , by w h ich a ll th in g [s] increase, a re n o u ris h e d , m u ltip ly , a n d q u ic k e n ,’ as R u la n d , a p u p il of P ara ce lsu s, defines it (L exico n , p . 181); so m etim es th e sp ir itu s v ita e , w h ic h is n o n e o th e r th a n vis M e rc u rii. I t is th u s id e n tic a l w ith th e M e rc u ria l s p irit, w h ic h w as th e c e n tra l co n c e p t of a lch e m y fro m th e o ld e st tim es to its h ey day in th e se v e n te e n th c e n tu ry . L ike th e M e r c u riu s p h ilo s o p h o r u m , th e P a ra c e lsa n M e rc u riu s is a c h ild o f Sol a n d L u n a , b o rn w ith th e h e lp o f s u lp h u r a n d salt, th e ‘stra n g e so n o f chaos,’ as G o e th e calls M e p h isto p h e le s. P a racelsu s n a m e s it ‘o m n e fu m o su m et h u m id u m in q u o v is c o rp o re ,’ th e m o ist, b re a th lik e o r v a p o ro u s so u l d w e llin g in a ll bodies. I n its h ig h e s t fo rm th e I lia s te r signifies th e passage o f th e m in d o r so u l in to a n o th e r w o rld , as to o k p la ce w ith E n o ch , E lias, a n d o th e rs. (R u la n d , L e x ic o n , p . 181. Cf. Ezek. 1 : 13 a n d L u k e to : 18.) N o t o n ly is it th e life-g iv er, i t is th e p sy ch o p o m p in th e m ystic tra n sfo rm a tio n , le a d in g th e w ay to in c o r r u p t ib ility o r im m o rta lity . T h e ‘seed o f th e Ilia s tric s o u l’ is th e s p irit o f G od h im self, a n d o n i t is im p rin te d ‘G o d ’s lik en ess.’ ” — E d i t o r s .] 11 S a n c titu s from sancire, ‘to m a k e u n a lte ra b le o r in v io la b le ’; sa n c titu s — affirm atu s, ‘m a d e firm .’ R u la n d (L e x ic o n , p . 181): “ T h e first, o r im p la n te d [Iliaste r] is th e sp a n o f life .” 12 P ro b a b ly d e riv e d fro m irαραιτίομαι, ‘to o b ta in b y prayer,* ‘to e n tr e a t.’ R u la n d : “T h e second Ilia ste r, p re p a re d Ilia s te r.” 13 T h e p ro d u c t o f Sol a n d L u n a w as re p re s e n te d as a h e rm a p h ro d ite . 14 D e v ita lo n g a , L ib . IV, cap. IV : “E iu s u ltr a m ille s u n t species . . . p o tiu s iu x ta h oc, u t q u ilib e t m icro co sm u s p e c u lia re m suam , a tq u e ad eo p e rfe c ta m c o n iu n c tio n e m h a b e a t, q u ilib e t, in q u a m , u tr in q u e p e rfe c ta m su a m ac p ro p ria m v ir tu te m ” (T h e re a re m o re th a n a th o u s a n d species th e re o f . . . so th a t each

I t therefore seems to be a k in d of universal form ative principle and principle of individuation. B . T H E A Q U A ST E R

172

T h e Iliaster forms the starting p o in t for the arcane prep ara tion of longevity. “W e will explain w hat is most needful in this process regarding the Iliaster. In th e first place, the im p u re an i m ate body m ust be purified through the separation of the ele m ents, which is done by your m editating u p o n it; this consists in the confirm ation of your m ind beyond all bodily and m echanic w ork.” 15 In this way a “new form is im pressed” on the im pure body. 173 I have translated im aginatio here by “m ed itatin g ,” In the Paracelsist tradition imaginatio is the active power of the astrum (star) or corpus coeleste sive supracoeleste (R uland), th a t is, of the higher m an w ithin. H ere we encounter the psychic factor in alchemy: the artifex accompanies his chemical w ork w ith a si m ultaneous m ental operation which is perform ed by means of the im agination. Its purpose is to cleanse away the im pure ad m ixture and at the same tim e to bring ab o u t the “confirm ation” of the m ind. T h e Paracelsan neologism confirm am entum is probably n o t w ithout reference to the “ firm am ent.” D u rin g this work m an is “raised up in his m ind, so th a t he is m ade equal to the E nochdiani” (those who enjoy an unusually long life, like Enoch).16 H ence his “ in terio r anatom y” m ust be h eated to the m icrocosm m ay h ave its ow n sp ec ia l an d even p erfect c o n ju n ctio n , each , I say, its ow n perfect an d p ecu lia r virtu e). 10 L ib . IV , cap. VI: ‘ Q uod m a x im e necessariu m est in h oc processu erga iliastru m , d escrib am us: P rin c ip io u t im p u r u m a n im a tu m d e p u re tu r citra sep aration em e le m en to ru m , q u o d fit per tuam ip siu s im a g in a tio n cm , cum ea in a n im i tui c on lirraam cn to co n sistit, p r a e ter o m n e m corp oralem a c mechanicurrt lab orem ." 10 Cf. G en . 5 : 2 3 - 2 4 : “ A n d a ll th e days o f E n o ch w ere th r e e h u n d r e d sixty a n d five years. A n d E n och w alk ed w ith G od: and h e was not; for G od took h im .” A c co rd in g to th e c h r o n o lo g ist S caliger (A n i m a d v e r s i o n e s in c h ro n o lo g ia Eusebii) E n o c h w as r esp o n sib le fo r th e d iv isio n o f th e year. E n o ch was a lso con sid ered a p refig u ra tio n o f C h rist, lik e M eich ised ek . Cf. P ico d e lla M iran d ola (''D e arte ca b a listica ,” O p e r a o m n i a , I, p . 3 0 2 0 ): " D en u o S im o n a it, p ater n oster A dam , rursus e x S eth n e p o te m su scep it, m em or eiu s C ab alae, q u am sib i R a z iel tradiderat, q u o d ex su a p r o p a g a tio n e n asceretu r h o m o fu tu ru s salvator. Q uare vocatu s est E nos, id est, h o m o .” (A gain S im on says th a t o u r fa th er A d am received a n o th e r g r a n d c h ild from S eth , h a v in g in m in d th a t C abala w h ic h R a z iel had

highest degree.17 In this way the im pu rities are consum ed and only the solid is left, “w ith o u t ru st.” W h ile th e artifex heats the chem ical substance in the furnace he him self is m orally u n d e r going the same fiery to rm en t and p u rificatio n .18 By projecting him self in to the substance he has becom e unconsciously id en ti cal w ith it and suffers the same process. Paracelsus does n o t fail to p o in t o u t to his reader th a t this fire is n o t th e same as th e fire in the furnace. T h is fire, he says, contains n o th in g m o re of the “ Salam andrine Essence o r M elusinian A res,” b u t is ra th e r a “retorta distillatio from the m idst of the centre, beyond all coal fire.” Since M elusina is a w atery creature, the “ M elusinian A res” 19 refers to the so-called “A q u aster,” 29 w hich stands for the w atery aspect of the Iliaster, i.e., the Iliaster w hich a n i m ates an d preserves th e liquids in the body. T h e Iliaster is w ith o u t d o u b t a sp iritu al, invisible prin cip le alth o u g h it is also som ething like the p rim a m ateria, w hich, however, in alchem ical usage by no m eans corresponds to w hat we u n d e rstan d by m a t ter. For the alchem ists the p rim a m a te ria was th e h u m id u m radicale (radical m oisture),21 the w ater,22 the spiritus aquae,23 an d vapor terrae; 24 it was also called the “soul” of the sub stances,23 the sperma m u n d i ,26 A dam ’s tree of paradise w ith its h and ed dow n to h im , that o f his seed sh o u ld b e horn a m an w h o w o u ld be a saviour. W herefore h e was called Enos, that is, Man.) I t L ib. IV, ch. VI: “Q uare m icrocosm um in sua interiore an atom ia reverberari op ortet in suprem am usq u e reverberationem ” (W herefore the m icrocosm in its in terior an atom y m u st be reverberated up to the h igh est reverberation). T h is takes place in the re v e rb era to riu m , a calcin in g furnace. “R everberation is ig n i tion, reducing substances under the influence of a p oten t fire, and by m eans of reverberation and repercussion, in to a fine ca lx ” (R u lan d , p. 276). 18 T h e “T ractatu s aureus” says (ch. IV): “B urn up the body of the air w ith very m u ch fire, and it w ill im b u e you w ith the grace you seek ” (A rs Chemicaj p. 24). ie Ares is som etim es m ascu lin e, too. 20 From aq u a an d as Crum = ‘w ater star.’ 21 A lbertus M agnus, “D e m in eralib u s et rebus m eta llicis” (B orgnet, vol. V, T ract. I, ch. 2). 22 R upescissa in H ogh elan d e, “D e alchem iae difficultatibus," T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659)» P- 172· 23 M ylius, P h il, ref., p. 16. 24 Ibid. 25 D ialogu e betw een Synesios and D ioskoros in B erth elot, A lch . grecs, II, iii. 26 T u rb a P h ilo so p h o ru m (ed. R uska), Sermo X III, p. 122; H ogh elan d e, in T h ea tr. chem ., I (1659), p . 150. A q u o ta tio n from Senior.

m any flowers, w hich grow s on th e sea,27 th e ro u n d body fro m th e c e n tre ,28 A dam a n d th e accursed m a n ,20 th e h e rm a p h ro d itic m o n ste r,80 th e O n e a n d th e ro o t of itself,31 th e AU,82 a n d so on. T h e sym bolical nam es of th e p rim a m a te ria all p o in t to th e a n im a m iin d i, P la to ’s P rim o rd ial M an, th e A n th ro p o s a n d mys tic A dam , w ho is d escrib ed as a sphere ( = w holeness), consist in g of fo u r p arts (u n itin g d ifferen t aspects in itself), h e rm a p h ro d itic (beyond div isio n by sex), an d d am p (i.e., psychic). T h is pain ts a p ic tu re of th e self, th e in d escrib ab le to tality o f m an . 174 T h e A q u aster, too, is a sp iritu a l p rin cip le; fo r instance, it shows the ad ep t th e “ way by w hich he can search o u t d iv in e m agic.” T h e a d e p t h im self is an “ aq u astric m a g icia n .” T h e “scayolic33 A q u a s te r” shows h im th e “g re a t cause” w ith th e h elp of th e T rara m es (ghostly spirits). C h rist took his body from th e celestial A q u aster, a n d th e body of M ary was “ necrocom ic” 34 an d “a q u astric.” M ary “cam e from th e iliastric A q u aster.” T h e r e , P aracelsus em phasizes, she stood o n th e m o o n (the m o o n is always re la te d to w’ater). C h rist was b o rn in th e celestial A quaster. In th e h u m a n skull th e re is an “a q u astric fis su re ,” in m e n on th e fo reh ead , in w om en a t th e back of the head. T h ro u g h this fissure w om en are liab le to be in v ad ed in th e ir “cagastric” A q u aster by a crow d of d iab o lical sp irits; b u t m en, th ro u g h th e ir fissure, give b irth , “ n o t cagastrically b u t necrocom ically, to th e necrocom ic A n i m a m vel s p ir itu m vitae m icrocosm i, th e iliastric s p irit o f life in th e h e a rt.” In the "c e n tre of th e h e a rt dw ells th e tru e soul, th e b re a th of G o d .” 35 *75 F ro m these q u o ta tio n s it is easy to see w h a t th e A q u aster Cd

27 A b u ’l Q asim , K ita b a l-’ilm a l-m u k ta s a b , ed. H o lm y a rd , p. 23. 28 D o r n , “ P h ysica g e n e sis,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p. 349. D o rn says fu rth er:

“ O f th e cen tre th ere is n o en d , an d no p e n can r ig h tly describ e its p o w er and the in fin ite abyss o f its m y steries.” 29 O Iym p iod oru s in B e rth elo t, A lc h . grecs, II, iv, 32. T h e m yth o f th e θίοκατάρακτο! is to b e fo u n d ib id ., 52. 30 H o g h e la n d e , “D e alch . d iff.,” p . 159. SI R o s a r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p . 369. 32 “L ib e r P la to n is q u a r to r u m ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., V (1660), p . 118. 3 » ScaioIae are so m e th in g lik e h ig h e r m e n ta l fu n ctio n s, co m p a r a b le p sy c h o lo g i ca lly to th e arch etyp es. See in fra, pars. 2o6ff. 34 “ N e cr o c o m ic ” r e la tin g to the sp h ere o f th e n e c ro c o m ica , i.e., te le p a th ic p h e n o m e n a o r even ts in d ic a tiv e o f th e fu tu re. R u la n d (L e x ic o n , p . 238) d e scrib es th em as ‘‘signs f a llin g from h ea v en u p o n ea rth .” 35 “ L ib er A z o th ,” p p . 52 iff.

m eans. W hereas the Iliaster seems to be a dynam ic sp iritu al p rinciple, capable of b o th good an d evil, th e A quaster, because of its watery n atu re, is m ore a “psychic” p rin cip le w ith quasi m aterial a ttrib u te s (since the bodies of C hrist and M ary partook of it). B u t it functions psychically as a “ necrocom ic” (i.e., tele pathic) agent related to the sp iritual w orld, an d as the b irth place of the spiritu s vitae. O f all the Paracelsan concepts, th e re fore, the A quaster comes closest to th e m odern concept of the unconscious. So we can see why Paracelsus personifies it as the hom unculus and describes the soul as the celestial A quaster. L ike a tru e alchem ist, he th o u g h t of the A quaster and Iliaster as exten d in g b oth upw ards and dow nw ards: they assume a sp irit u al o r heavenly form as well as a quasi-m aterial o r earthly one. T h is is in keeping w ith the axiom from “T a b u la sm aragdina” : “W h at is below is like w hat is above, th at the m iracle of th e one th in g m ay be accom plished.” T h is one th in g is the lapis o r filius p h ilo s o p h o r u m .36 As the definitions an d nam es of the prim a m ateria m ake a b u n d an tly plain, m a tte r in alchem y is m aterial and spiritual, and sp irit sp iritu al and m aterial. O nly, in the first case m a tte r is cruda, Confusaj grossaJ Crassaj densa, an d in the second it is subtilis. Such, too, is the op in io n of Paracelsus. c . A RES

R a th e r superficially, A dam von B odenstein conceives “A res” to be the “ prim e n a tu re of things, d eterm in in g th e ir form and species.” 37 R u la n d lum ps it together w ith the Iliaster an d Archeus. B u t whereas the Iliaster is the hypostasis of bein g in gen eral (“generis generalissim i substantia”), A rcheus is given the role of a “dispenser of n a tu re ” (naturae dispensator) an d “ in iti a to r.” Ares, however, is the “assigner, w ho extends th e peculiar n a tu re to each species, and gives in d iv id u al form .” 38 I t can therefore be taken as the p rinciple of in d iv id u atio n in the strict sense. I t proceeds from the supracelestial bodies, for “such is th e property and n a tu re of supracelestial bodies th at they straig h t way produce o u t of n o th in g a corporeal im agination [imaginationem corporalem ], so as to be tho u g h t a solid body. O f this 36 Hortulamis,

“Commentarius,” De alchemia, pp. 363!!, Onomasticon, pp. i8f. 38 Ruland, Lexicon, p. 38.

PA RA C ELSU S AS A S P IR IT U A L P H E N O M E N O N

kind is Ares, so that w hen one thinks of a w olf, a w olf appears.39 T h is w orld is like the creatures com posed of the four elem ents. From the elem ents arise things which are in no way like their origins, b u t nonetheless Ares bears them all in h im self.” 40 »77 Ares, accordingly, is an in tu itiv e concept for a preconscious, creative, and form ative principle w hich is capable of giving life A res = M ars. T h e referen ce to th e w o lf s u p p o rts th is in te rp re ta tio n , fo r th e w olf is th e a n im a l of M ars. J o h a n n e s B raceschus of B rix en , a c o n te m p o ra ry of P aracelsus, states in h is “ L ig n u m v ita e ” (B ib l. ch em ., I, p p . 91 iff.) th a t th e p rin c ip le o f th e life -p ro lo n g in g m e d ic in e is M ars, to w h ich h e refers th e saying o f R hazes: “A ccipe p e tra m p o st ingressum Solis in a rie te m ” (T a k e th e sto n e a fte r th e s u n ’s e n try in to A ries). B raceschus co n tin u es: " T h is th in g [M ars] is a m an w hose co m p lex io n is choleric. . . . T h is h o t a n d b ilio u s m a n is iro n . . . it is called a m an because it has soul, body, a n d sp irit. . . . T h a t m e ta l, a lth o u g h it is b e g o tte n by th e v irtu e of a ll th e stars a n d p la n e ts, is nev erth eless especially b e g o tte n in th e e a rth b y v irtu e o f th e m o st h ig h a n d m ig h ty P o le S tar called th e G re a t B e a r.” M ars is also called th e D aem o g o rg o n , "an c esto r of all th e gods o f th e G e n tiles.” " S u rro u n d e d o n all sides by th ick clouds a n d darkness, h e w alks in th e m id m o st bow els of th e e a rth , a n d is th e re h id d e n . . . n o t b e g o tte n o f any, b u t e te rn a l a n d th e fa th e r of a ll th in g s.” H e is a "shapeless c h im a e ra .” D aem o g o rg o n is e x p la in e d as th e “g o d of th e e a rth , o r a te rrib le god, a n d iro n ." (F or P aracelsu s, as we saw, th e b o d y p u rifie d by th e fire was associated w ith iro n , in so fa r as th e re sid u e w as “ w ith o u t ru s t.”) “T h e a n cie n ts a ttrib u te d to h im e te rn ity a n d chaos fo r c o m p an io n s: e te rn ity a n d th e p re p a re d qu ick silv er, w hich is . . . th e e te rn a l liq u o r.” H e is th e se rp e n t, th e aq u a m ercurialis. “T h e first son o f D aem o g o rg o n was L itig iu s, th a t is, th e s u lp h u r w h ich is called M ars.” “C haos is th a t e a rth ly sa lt called S a tu rn ; fo r it is m a tte r a n d in it ev e ry th in g is w ith o u t fo rm .” A ll liv in g a n d d e a d th in g s a re co n ta in e d in it, o r p ro ceed fro m it. D aem o g o rg o n , o r M ars, th u s co rresp o n d s to th e A res of P aracelsus. P e rn e ty (D ictio n n a ire m y th o -h e r m e tiq u e ) defines “ D a im o rg o n ” as th e “g en iu s of th e e a r th ,” " th e fire w h ich q u ick en s n a tu re , a n d in p a rtic u la r th a t in n a te a n d life-g iv in g s p irit of th e e a rth o f th e sages, w h ich acts th ro u g h o u t th e w hole course o f th e o p e ra tio n s o f th e g re a t w o rk .” P e rn e ty also m e n tio n s "D e m o rg o n ” and a tre a tise o f th e sam e n a m e by R a y m u n d L u lly . T h is trea tise is n o t m e n tio n e d in F e rg u so n ’s B ib lio th e c a ch em ica (1906), b u t it m ig h t be a referen ce to th e “ L ig n u m v ita e ” of B raceschus, w h ich is a d ialo g u e betw een L u lly a n d a p u p il. R o sc h e r (L e x ic o n , I, col. 987) defines D em ogorgon as “a n e n ig m a tic god. M ig h t be d e riv e d fro m δημίουρ-γός.” A strologically, M ars c h a ra c terizes th e in s tin c tu a l a n d affective n a tu r e o f m a n . T h e s u b ju g a tio n a n d tra n s fo rm a tio n o f th is n a tu r e seem s to b e th e th e m e o f th e alc h e m ica l opus. I t is w o rth n o tin g th a t C o lo n n a ’s H y p n e ro to m a c h ia begins w ith th e w olf as th e in itia tin g a n im a l; h e also h as th is significance in C a n to I o f D a n te ’s In fe rn o , w here h e a p p e a rs in a tria d of an im als. T h is lo w er tr ia d co rresp o n d s to th e u p p e r T rin ity ; th e re fo re we m e e t it a g a in as th e tric e p h a lo u s S atan in C an to X X X IV . <0 B o d en stein , D e v ita longa, L ib . I, ch. V II, p . 21.

to in d ivid u al creatures. It is thus a m ore specific principle of in divid u ation than the Iliaster, and as such it plays an im portant role in the purification of the natural m an by fire and his trans form ation in to an “E nochdianus.” T h e fire he is heated w ith is, as we have seen, n o ordinary fire, since it does n ot con tain either the “M elusinian A res” or the ‘‘Salam andrine Essence.” T h e sal am ander sym bolizes the fire of the alchem ists. It is itself of the nature of fire, a fiery essence. A ccording to Paracelsus, Salamand rin i and Saldini are m en or spirits o f fire, fiery beings. It is an old tradition that, because they have proved their in corru p tib il ity in the fire, such creatures enjoy a particularly lon g life. T h e salam ander is also the “in com b u stib le su lp hu r”— another nam e for the arcane substance from w h ich the lapis or filius is pro duced. T h e fire for h eatin g the artifex contains n o th in g m ore of the nature of the salam ander, w hich is an im m ature, transitional form of the filius, that incorru ptible b ein g w hose sym bols in d i cate the self. 178 Paracelsus endow s Ares w ith the attribute “ M elu sinian .” Since M elusina u n d ou b ted ly belongs to the watery realm , the realm of the nym phs, this attribute im ports a watery character in to the concept of Ares, w hich in itself is spiritual. Ares is thus brought into relationship w ith the low er, denser region and is in tim ately connected w ith the body. As a result, Ares becom es so like the A quaster that it is scarcely possible to distinguish them conceptually. It is characteristic o f Paracelsan th in k in g, and of alchem y in general, that there are n o clear-cut concepts, so that on e con cep t can take the place o f another ad infinitum . A t the same tim e every concept behaves hypostatically, as th ou gh it were a substance that cou ld not at the same tim e be another su b stance. T h is typical prim itive p h en om en on is fo u n d also in In dian philosophy, w hich swarms w ith hypostases. E xam ples o f this are the m yths o f the gods, w hich, as in G reek and Egyptian m ythology, m ake utterly contradictory statem ents about the same god. D espite their contradictions, how ever, the myths con tin u e to exist side by side w ith o u t d isturbing on e another. D . M E L U SIN A

179

As we shall m eet w ith M elusina several tim es m ore in the course o f our interpretation, w e m ust exam in e m ore closely the 142

180

n a tu re of this fab u lo u s c re a tu re , a n d in p a rtic u la r th e ro le she plays in Paracelsus. As we know , she belongs to th e re a lm of th e A cjuaster, an d is a w ater-n y m p h w ith th e ta il of a fish o r snake. In th e o rig in al o ld F ren ch leg en d she ap p ears as “m ere L u sin e ,” the ancestress of th e co u n ts of L u sig n an . W h e n h e r h u sb a n d once su rp rised h e r in h e r fish-tail, w hich she h a d to w ear only on Saturdays, h e r secret was o u t a n d she was fo rced to d isap p ear again in to th e w atery realm . She re a p p e a re d only fro m tim e to tim e, as a presage of disaster. M elu sin a com es in to th e sam e category as th e n y m p h s an d sirens w ho dw ell in th e “ N y m p h id id a ,” th e w atery re a lm .41 In th e trea tise “ D e s a n g u in e ,” 42 th e n y m p h is specified as a Schrottli, ‘n ig h tm a re .’ M elusines, on th e o th e r h an d , dw ell in th e b lo o d .43 P aracelsus tells us in “ D e pygm aeis” 44 th a t M elusina was o rig in ally a n y m p h w ho was seduced by B eelzeb u b in to p ractisin g w itch craft. She was descended from th e w hale in w hose b elly th e p ro p h e t J o n a h b e h e ld g reat m ysteries. T h is d e r iv a tio n is very im p o rta n t: th e b irth p la c e of M elu sin a is the w om b of th e m ysteries, o b viously w h at we today w o u ld call th e unconscious. M elusines have n o g en itals,45 a fact th a t c h ara cter izes them as p arad isal beings, since A d am a n d Eve in p aradise h ad n o g en itals e ith e r.43 M o reo v er p arad ise was th e n b e n e a th the w ater “a n d still is.” 47 W h e n th e devil g lid ed in to th e tree of p arad ise th e tree was “sad d en ed ,” an d Eve was seduced by th e “in fe rn a l basilisk .” 48 A dam an d Eve “ fell fo r” th e se rp e n t an d becam e “ m o n stro u s,” th a t is, as a re su lt o f th e ir slip-up w ith th e snake they a c q u ire d g e n ita ls.40 B u t th e M elusines re m a in e d in th e p aradisal state as w ater creatu res a n d w en t on liv in g in th e h u m a n blood. Since b lo o d is a p rim itiv e sym bol fo r th e so u l,80 M elu sin a can b e in te rp re te d as a sp irit, o r at any r a te as som e 41 “Das B uch M eteorum ” (ed. Huser), p. 79. In the Book o f Enoch 19 : 2 the w ives of the fallen angels changed into sirens. 42 p. 071. 43 Ibid., p. 4; “P h ilosop h ia ad A thenienses,” L ib. I, ch. X III. 44 Ed. H user, II, p. 189. 45 “L iber A zoth,” p. 534. 46 ib id ., pp. 523, 537. 47 P. 542.

48 P- 53940 PP- 539- 541so Crawley, T h e Idea of th e Soul, pp. ig and 237.

k ind of psychic p henom enon. Gerard D orn confirms this in his com m entary on D e vita longa, w here he says that M elusina is a “vision appearing in the m in d .” 81 For anyone fam iliar w ith the su blim in al processes o f psychic transform ation, M elusina is clearly an anim a figure. She appears as a variant of the m ercurial serpent, w hich was som etim es represented in the form of a snakew om an52 by way of expressing the m onstrous, d ou b le nature of M ercurius. T h e redem ption of this m onstrosity was depicted as the assum ption and coronation o f the V irgin M ary.53 Bi P. 178. See in f ra , p a r. 214. 52 As in R e u sn e r's P a n d o ra (1588), C odex G e rraa n ic u s A lch eraicu s V adiensis (St. G all, 16th cen t.), a n d C od ex R h e n o v ie n sis (Z u rich , 15th cent.). [Cf. Figs. B 3- 5·] [T h e fo llo w in g (u n d a te d ) n o te on P a n d o ra w as fo u n d a m o n g J u n g ’s p o s th u m o u s p ap ers: "P a n d o ra is o n e o f th e e a rlie s t sy n o p tic a c c o u n ts o f a lch e m y , a n d it m a y be th e first th a t w as w ritte n in G e rm a n . I t was first p u b lis h e d by H e n ric P e tr i in B asel, 1588. I t is a p p a r e n t fro m th e fo re w o rd th a t th e a u th o r w as th e p h y sic ia n H ie ro n y m u s R e u sn e r, w ho, h ow ever, h id e s u n d e r th e p se u d o n y m F ran ciscu s E p im e th e u s, by w h o m th e b o o k w as alle g ed ly ‘m a d e .’ R e u s n e r d e d ic a te s it to D r. R u la n d , th e w ell-k n o w n c o m p ile r o f th e L e x ic o n a lc h e m ia e sive D ic tio n a riu m a lc h e m is tic u m (F r a n k fu rt a. M ., 1612). T h e te x t o f P a n d o ra is a c o m p ila tio n in th e m a n n e r of th e R o sa riu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m (1550), w h ic h is copiously cited . B u t o th e r sources a re used besides th is, fo r in sta n c e th e ‘T r a c ta tu s a u re u s H e rm e tis.’ R e u s n e r w as a p u p il o f P aracelsu s. H is book, b e in g w ritte n in G e rm a n , is a c o n tr ib u tio n to th e G e rm a n iz a tio n o f m e d icin e th a t w as s ta rte d b y P aracelsu s, a n d , as th e fo rew o rd show s, to P a ra ce lsu s’s rev iv al o f th e s p iritu a l tre n d s of alchem y. T h e a c tu a l te x t re m a in s u n in flu e n c e d by th ese in n o v a tio n s a n d ru n s a lo n g th e tr a d itio n a l lines. I t c o n ta in s n o th in g th a t is n o t fo u n d in th e e a rlie r a u th o rs, th o u g h th e lo n g list o f synonym s a t th e e n d deserves sp ecial m e n tio n . T h is co n ta in s a n u m b e r of A ra b ic a n d q u a si-A ra b ic term s w h ich , it a p p e a rs, m u ltip lie d g re a tly d u r in g th e 1 6 th c e n tu ry . B u t th e c h ie f v a lu e o f P a n d o ra lies in th e series o f e ig h te e n sym b o lical p ic tu re s a t th e e n d of th e v o lu m e . As u su al, th e y d o n o t e x p la in th e te x t, o r o n ly very in d ire c tly , b u t th ey a re of c o n sid erab le in te re s t as re g a rd s th e secret c o n te n t o f alch em y . Som e o f th e p ic tu re s d a te fro m th e 15th c e n tu ry a n d a re ta k e n fro m th e D r e ifa ltig k e itsb u c h (C odex G e rm a n ic u s 598, 1420, S ta a tsb ib lio th e k , M u n ic h ), b u t m o st a re fro m th e 16th c e n tu ry . T h e c h ie f so u rce is p ro b a b ly th e ‘A lchym istisches M a n u s c rip t’ in th e U n iv e rs ita tsb ib lio th e k , B asel. O n e o f th e p ic tu re s (th e E c h id n a sym bol of M ercu riu s) m ay com e fro m a 1 6 th -c e n tu ry MS. in St. G a ll.”— E d i t o r s .] 53 See P sychology a n d A lc h e m y , Figs. 224 a n d 232.

E . T H E F IL IU S REG IU S AS T H E A RC A N E SUBSTANCE (M IC H A E L M A IE r ) '81

182

It is n o t my in te n tio n to enter m ore closely into the relations betw een the Paracelsan M elusines and the m ercurial serpent. I only wish to p o in t out the alchem ical prototypes th at may have had an influence on Paracelsus, and to suggest th at the longing of M elusina for a soul and for redem ption has a parallel in that kingly substance which is hidden in the sea and cries ou t for deliverance. O f this filins regius M ichael M aier says:54 “ H e lives and calls from the d ep th s:55 W ho shall deliver m e from the waters an d lead me to dry land? Even though this cry be heard of many, yet none takes it upon himself, m oved by pity, to seek the king. For who, they say, will plunge into the waters? W ho will im peril his life by taking away the peril of another? O nly a few believe his lam ent, and th in k ra th e r that they hear the crashing and roaring of Scylla and C harybdis. T h erefo re they rem ain sit ting indolently a t home, and give no th o u g h t to the kingly treas ure, n o r to th e ir own salvation.” W e know that M aier can have had no access to the Philosop hum ena of H ippolytus, long believed lost, and yet it m ight well have served him as a m odel for the king’s lam ent. T rea tin g of the mysteries of the Naassenes, H ippolytus says: “ B ut w hat th a t form is which comes down from above, from the U nchar acterized [ α χ α ρ α κ τ ή ρ ι σ τ ο υ ] , no m an knows. It is found in earthly clay, and yet none recognize it. B ut th at is the god who dwells in the great flood.56 In the Psalter he calls and cries o u t from m any w aters.57 T h e m any waters, they say, are the m u ltitu d e of m ortal m en, w hence he calls and cries aloud to the u n ch ar acterized M an :58 Save m ine O nly-Begotten59 from the lions.” 60 Sym bo la aureae mensae, p. 380. Psalm 129 : 1 (DV): “ O u t o f th e d e p th I have cried to th ee, O L o rd ." 5 β P salm 29 : to (AV): “ T h e L o rd s itte th u p o n th e flood: yea, th e L o rd sitte th K ing fo r ev er.” Si P salm 28 : 3 (DV): “ T h e voice of th e L o rd is u p o n th e w aters; th e G o d of m ajesty h a th th u n d e re d ; th e L o rd is u p o n m an y w aters." 58 I n th e sense of θζό$ δνθρωττοϊ. 58 τήν μονο-γβνη μου. T h is fem in in e “ o n ly -b e g o tte n ” seems to re fe r to a d a u g h te r, o r to th e soul, as P salm 34 : 17 (DV) affirms: “ R escue th o u m y soul from th e ir m alice: m y only one fro m th e lio n s.” eo Psalm 21 : 22 (DV): "Save m e from th e lio n ’s m o u th . . . .” 84

A nd he receives th e reply [Isaiah 43 : iff.]: “A nd now thus saith the L ord th a t created thee, O Jacob, and form ed thee, O Israel: Fear not, for I have redeem ed thee, and called thee by thy nam e. T h o u a rt m ine. W h en th o u shalt pass th ro u g h th e w aters, I w ill be w ith thee, an d the rivers shall n o t cover thee. W h en thou shalt w alk th ro u g h the fire, th o u shalt n o t be b u rn t, a n d the flames shall n o t b u rn in thee.” H ippolytus goes on to qu o te Psalm 23 : 7ff., (DV), referrin g it to the ascent (ayoSos) or reg en eratio n ( a v a y k ν ν η σ π ) of A dam : “L ift up your gates, O ye princes, an d be ye lifted up, O eternal gates, and the K ing of G lory shall e n te r in. W ho is this K ing of Glory? T h e L o rd who is strong an d m ighty, th e L o rd m ighty in battle. . . . B ut who, say the Naassenes, is this K ing of Glory? A w orm and no m an, the re proach of m en and the outcast of the people.” 81 l83 I t is n o t difficult to see w hat M ichael M aier means. For him the filius regius o r R e x marinus, as is evident from a passage in the tex t n o t q u o te d here, m eans antimony,*52 th o u g h in his us age it has only the nam e in com m on w ith the chem ical elem ent. In reality it is th e secret transform ative substance, w hich fell from the highest place in to the darkest depths of m a tte r w here it awaits deliverance. B u t no one w ill plunge in to these depths in order, by his ow n transform ation in the darkness and by the to r m e n t of fire, to rescue his king. T h e y can n o t hear the voice of the king and th in k it is the chaotic ro a r of destruction. T h e sea (mare n o stru m ) of the alchem ists is th e ir own darkness, th e u n conscious. I n his way, E p ip h an iu s63 correctly in te rp re te d the “m ire of the deep” (Iimus p r o fu n d i) as “ m a tte r b o rn of the m ind, sm utty reflections an d m uddy thoughts of sin .” T h e re fo re D avid in his affliction h ad said (Psalm 68 : 3, DV): “ I stick fast e i H ip p o ly tu s , E le n c h o s, V , 8. T h e e x tr e m e lo w lin e s s o f th e r e d e e m e r ’s o r ig in is e x p r essed e v en m o r e str o n g ly in a lch em y ; th e sto n e is “ cast o n th e d u n g h ill,” " fo u n d in filth ,” e tc. T h e " T r a cta tu s A r is to te lis ” says (T h e a tr . c h e m ., V , 1660, p . 787): " L a p id em a n im a le m esse, q u i ta n q u a m se r p e n s e x c o r r u p tio n e p erfectissim a e n a tu r a e h u m a n a e d e in d u str ia in te r d u o s m o n te s e m issu s g ig n itu r , s c in d itu r e t p r o la b itu r , e t in fossa ca v ern a e c la u d itu r ” (T h e liv in g sto n e w h ic h is in d u str io u sly b r o u g h t fo r th as a se r p e n t b e tw e e n th e tw o m o u n ta in s fr o m th e c o r r u p tio n o f th e m o st p e r fe c t h u m a n n a tu r e , is to r n aw ay an d slip s fo r th , and is sh u t u p in a h o llo w cave), σκώλ-ηξ in c o n ju n c tio n w ith ίξονδίνημα, ‘o u tc a st,’ m ig h t th e r efo r e b e in te r p r e te d as an in te s tin a l w o rm . 62 F rom άνθεμώνιον, th e efflorescence o f m e ta llic salts. C f. L ip p m a n n , E n ts te h u n g u n d A u s b r e itu n g d e r A lc h e m ie , II, p . 40. 63 P a n a r tu m (ed. H o ll), H a er. 36, cap. 4 (II, p p . 4 7 ff)·

146

in th e m ire of th e d e e p .” F o r th e C h u rc h F a th e r these d ark d ep th s co u ld only be evil itself, an d if a k in g g o t stuck in th e m it was on acco u n t of his ow n sinfulness. T h e alchem ists to o k a m ore o p tim istic view : th e d a rk b a ck g ro u n d of th e soul co n tain s n o t only evil b u t a k in g in n eed of, an d capable of, red e m p tio n , o f w hom th e Rosarium says: ‘‘A t th e en d of th e w ork th e k in g w ill go fo rth for thee, .crow ned w ith his d iadem , ra d ia n t as the su n , s h in in g like th e c arb u n c le . . . co n stan t in th e fire.” 64 A n d of th e w orthless p rim a m a te ria they say: ‘‘D espise n o t th e ash, fo r it is th e d ia d em of thy h eart, a n d th e ash of th in g s th a t e n d u re .” 65 l84 T h e se q u o ta tio n s give o n e an idea of th e m ystic a u ra th a t s u rro u n d e d th e figure of th e filius regius, an d I do n o t th in k it superfluous to have d raw n a tte n tio n to th a t d ista n t p e rio d w hen the cen tral ideas o f p h ilo so p h ical alchem y w ere b ein g freely dis cussed by th e G nostics. H ip p o ly tu s gives us p erh ap s th e m ost co m p lete in sig h t in to th e ir analogical th in k in g , w hich is ak in to th a t of th e alchem ists. A nyone w ho cam e in to c o n tact w ith a l chem y d u rin g th e first h alf of th e six te en th ce n tu ry co u ld n o t fail to feel th e fascin atio n of these G n o stic ideas. A lth o u g h M aier lived an d w rote m o re th a n seventy years a fte r Paracelsus, a n d we have n o reason to suppose th a t P aracelsus was ac q u a in te d w ith th e heresiologists, his know ledge of th e alch em i cal treatises, a n d p a rtic u la rly o f H erm es [Fig. B6] w h ich he so often quotes, w o u ld have sufficed to im press u p o n h im the figure of th e filius regius an d also th a t of th e m u ch la u d ed M ater N a tu ra — a figure n o t en tire ly in accord w ith th e views of C h ris tian ity . T h u s th e ‘‘T ra c ta tu s au reu s H e rm e tis ” says: “ O m ig h ti est n a tu re of th e n atu re s, w ho co n tain est a n d separatest th e m id m ost of th e n atu re s, w ho com est w ith th e lig h t a n d a r t b o rn w ith th e lig h t, w ho hast given b irth to th e m isty darkness, w ho a rt th e m o th e r of all b ein g s!” 08 T h is in v o catio n echoes th e classical feeling for n a tu re , an d its style is re m in iscen t of th e oldest a l chem ical treatises, such as those o f pseudo-D em ocritus, a n d of A r t. a u r if ., II, p . 329, q u o ta tio n from L iliu s. Cf. T h e v isio n o f th e “m an com in g u p from th e m id st o f th e sea” (II Esdras 13 : 25 an d 51). 63 R o sa r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m (D e a lc h im ia , 1530), fol. L3V. 66 A rs c h e m ic a , p. 21. T h e “ T ra cta tu s a u r e u s” is o f A rab ic orig in , b u t its c o n te n t d a tes back to m u ch old er sources. It m ay h a v e b een tr a n sm itted by th e H arra n ite sch ool.

th e G reek M agic Papyri. In this same treatise we en co u n te r th e R e x coronatus a n d filius noster rex genitus, o£ w hom it is said: “ For the son is a blessing an d possesses wisdom. Com e h ith e r, ye sons of the wise, an d le t us be glad an d rejoice, fo r d eath is over come, and the son reigns; he is clothed w ith the red garm ent, an d the p u rp le \chermes\ is p u t o n .” H e lives from “o u r fire,” and n a tu re “nourishes him w ho shall e n d u re for ever” w ith a “small fire.” W h en th e son is b ro u g h t to life by the opus, he becomes a “w a rrio r fire” o r a “fighter of fire.” 67 F. THE

P R O D U C T IO N

OF TH E

O N E , OR C E N T R E ,

B Y D IS T IL L A T IO N

185

186

A fter this discussion of some of the basic concepts of al chemy, let us come back to the Paracelsan process of transform ing the Iliaster. Paracelsus calls this process a retorta distillatio. T h e purpose of distillatio n in alchem y was to extract the volatile substance, or spirit, from the im p u re body. T h is process was a psychic as well as a physical experience. T h e retorta distillatio is n o t a know n technical term , b u t presum ably it m ean t a d istillatio n th a t was in some way tu rn e d back u p o n itself. It m ig h t have taken place in the vessel called the Pelican [Fig. By], w here the d istillate runs back in to the belly of the re to rt. T h is was th e “circulatory d istillatio n ,” m uch favoured by th e alche m ists. By m eans of the “thousandfold d istilla tio n ” they h o p ed to achieve a particu larly “refined” resu lt.68 I t is n o t unlikely th a t Paracelsus had som ething like this in m in d , for his aim was to p u rify the h u m a n body to such a degree th a t it w ould finally u n ite w ith the m aior h o m o , th e in n e r sp iritu al m an, an d partake of his longevity. As we have rem arked, this was n o t an ord in ary chem ical operation, it was essentially a psychological procedure. T h e fire to be used was a sym bolical fire, and the d istillatio n had to start “ from th e m idst of th e cen tre ” (ex m edio centri). T h e accentuation of the centre is again a fu n d am en tal idea in alchemy. A ccording to M ichael M aier, the centre contains the “indivisible p o in t,” w hich is sim ple, in d estru ctib le, and etern al. β7 B e lla to r ig n is is a m b ig u o u s. C h e rm e s = arab. k e r m e S = ‘p u r p le ,’ L . c a rm e s in u s = Ita l. c h e r m is i, w h e n c e F. C ram oisi1 E. ca rm in e , c rim so n . Cf. D u C an ge, G losS a riu m 1 s.v. “c a r m e sin u s.” 6S R u p e sc issa , L a V e rtu e l p r o p r ie t e d e la q u in te essen ce d e to u le s Choses1 p. 26. 148

Its physical counterpart is gold, w hich is therefore a symbol of eternity.69 In Christianos the centre is compared to paradise and its four rivers. T h ese sym bolize the philosophical fluids (ύγρά), w hich are em anations from the centre.70 “In the centre o f the earth the seven planets took root, and left their virtues there, wherefore in the earth is a germ inating w ater,” says A u rora consurgens.11 Benedictus Figulus72 writes: Visit the centre of the earth, There you will find the global fire. Rectify it of all dirt, Drive it out with love and ire. . . . H e calls this centre the “house of fire” or “E noch,” obviously borrow ing the latter term from Paracelsus. D orn says that n oth in g is m ore like G od than the centre, for it occupies no space, and cannot be grasped, seen, or measured. Such, too, is the nature o f God and the spirits. T herefore the centre is “an infi n ite abyss of m ysteries.” 7S T h e fire that originates in the centre carries everything upward, but w hen it cools everything falls back again to the centre. “T h e physiochem ists call this move69 D e circulo physico q u a d ra to , p p . 27ft. 19 B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, V I, i, 2. 11 E d. von F ranz, p . 125.

12 R o sa riu m n o v u m o ly m p ic u m , P ars. I, p. 71. E n o ch is th e "son o f m a n " (Book o f E noch, in C harles, A p o c ry p h a a n d P seu d ep ig ra p h a , II, p . 237). 13 “N am u t ip sa [D ivinitas] in co m p re h e n sib ilis, invisibilis, n o n m en su ra b ilis, infinita, in d e te rm in a te , et siq u id u ltra d i d p o test, o m n ia s im ilite r in ce n tro q u ad ra re co n v en ireq u e c e rtu m est. H o c e n im q u ia lo cu m n u llu m o c c u p a t oh q u a n tita tis ca re n tia m , c o m p re h en d ! n o n p o te st, v id e ri n ec m e n s u ra ri. T u m e tia m cu m ea de causa in fin itu m sit, et ab sq u e te rm in is, locu m n o n o ccu p at, n ec d ep in g i p o test, vel im ita tio n e fingi. N ih ilo m in u s o m n ia q u a e lo cu m e tia m n o n im p le n t ob c a re n tia m c o rp u le n tia e , u t s u n t sp iritu s om nes, ce n tro co m p reh e n d ! po ssu n t, q u o d u tr a q u e s in t in c o m p re h e n s ib ilia .” (For it is c e rta in th a t it [th e D ivinity] is in c o m p reh en sib le , invisible, im m e a su ra b le, in fin ite , in d e te rm in a b le , a n d if a u g h t m o re m ay be said, th a t it sq u are s a n d b rin g s a ll th in g s to g e th e r in a centre. F o r this, becau se it occupies n o space, since it lacks q u a n tity , c a n n o t b e co m p reh en d ed , seen, o r m easu re d . Also because fo r th a t reason i t is in fin ite a n d h a s n o b o u n d s, it o ccu p ie s n o space, n o r can it b e d e p ic te d , n o r c a n any likeness of it b e m ad e. N ev erth eless all th in g s w h ich likew ise fill n o p la c e becau se they lack body, as is th e case w ith a ll sp irits, can b e c o m p re h e n d e d in th e cen tre, fo r b o th a re in c o m p reh e n sib le . As th e re fo re th e re is n o e n d o f th e c en tre , n o p en can rig h tly describ e its p o w er a n d th e in fin ite abyss of its m ysteries.) (“ Physica genesis,” T h e a tr . ch em ., I, 1659, PP- 3 3 9 ^·)

m e n t circular, a n d they im itate it in th eir o p eratio n s.” A t the m om ent of cu lm in atio n , ju st before th e descent, th e elem ents “conceive the m ale seeds of the stars,” w hich e n ter in to th e ele m ental m atrices (i.e., the non-sublim ated elem ents) d u rin g the descent. T h u s all created things have fo u r fathers an d fo u r m others. T h e conception of the seeds results from th e “ influxum et im pressionem ” of Sol an d L u n a, w ho thus fu n ctio n as n a tu re gods, though D orn does n o t say this q u ite as clearly.74 l87 T h e creation of the elem ents an d th e ir ascent to heaven th ro u g h th e force of th e fire serve as a m odel fo r the spagyric process. T h e low er waters, cleansed of th e ir darkness, m u st be separated from the celestial w aters by a carefully reg u lated fire. “ In the end it w ill com e to pass th a t this earthly, spagyric foetus clothes itself w ith heavenly n a tu re by its ascent, and then by its descent visibly puts o n the n a tu re of the centre of the earth , b u t nonetheless the n a tu re of the heavenly cen tre w hich it acq u ired by the ascent is secretly preserved.” 75 T h e spagyric b irth (spagirica foetura) is n o th in g o th e r th a n the filius p h ilo so p h o ru m , the in n er, e tern al m an in the shell of the o u ter, m o rtal m an. T h e filius is n o t only a panacea for all bodily defects, it also conquers th e “subtle and sp iritu al sickness in th e h u m a n m in d .” “ For in the O n e,” says D o rn ,76 “is the O ne an d yet n o t th e O ne; it is sim ple an d consists of the n u m b e r four. W h en this is p u ri fied by the fire in the su n ,77 the p u re w ater78 comes fo rth , and, I i I b i d . , p . 349. I n “ P h y sic a T r is m e g is t i” (ib id ., p . 375) D o r n says: “ [Sol] p r im u s p o st D e u m p a te r ac p a ren s o m n iu m v o c a tu s est, c u m in e o q u o r u m v is se m in a r ia v ir tu s a tq u e fo r m a lis d e lite s c it.” (T h e S u n is c a lle d a fte r G o d th e fa th e r a n d p a r e n t o f a ll th in g s , sin c e in h im lie s h id d e n th e se m in a l a n d fo r m a l v ir tu e o f e v e r y th in g w h a tev er.) P . 376: “L u n a m esse m a tr e m e t u x o r e m so lis, q u a e fo e tu m sp a g ir ic u m a so le c o n c e p tu m in su a m a tr ic e u te r o q u e , v e n to g e sta t in a e re .” (T h e m o o n is th e m o th e r a n d w ife o f th e su n , w h o b e a r s in h e r a e ria l w o m b th e sp agyric fo e tu s c o n c e iv e d fro m th e su n .) F rom th is it is e v id e n t th a t th e f iliu s is b e g o tte n o f n a tu r e g o d s in a very u n c h r istia n m a n n er. 15 Ib id ., p . 363. τβ “ P h y sic a T r ith e m ii," T h e a tr . ch ern ., I (1659), p . 391. Ti T h e su n is th e b ir th p la c e o f th e “ sp ir itu a l fire,” m e n tio n e d a b o v e . L ig h tsy m b o ls alw ays refer p sy c h o lo g ic a lly to c o n sc io u sn ess or to a c o n te n t th a t is b e c o m in g c o n sc io u s. T ^ T h e a q u a p u r a is th e a q u a p e r m a n e n s o f th e L a tin a n d A rab ic a lc h e m ists a n d th e ύδωρ θειον o f th e G reeks. I t is th e s p ir itu s m e r c u r ia lis in w a ter fo rm , w h ic h in tu r n serves to e x tr a c t th e “s o u l” o f th e su b sta n c e. T h e s p ir itu s m e r c u r ia lis cor r esp o n d s t o th e sp ir itu a l fire, h e n c e a q u a — ig n is. A lth o u g h th e se term s are u se d 150

h av in g re tu r n e d to sim p licity ,79 it [the q u a te rn ity as u n ity ] w ill show th e a d e p t th e fu lfilm en t of th e m ysteries. T h is is th e c e n tre of th e n a tu ra l w isdom , w hose circu m feren ce, closed in itself, form s a circle: an im m easu rab le o rd e r reac h in g to in fin ity .” “ H e re is th e n u m b e r fo u r, w ith in w hose b o u n d s th e n u m b e r three, to g e th e r w ith th e n u m b e r two c o m b in ed in to O ne, fulfils all things, w hich it does in m iracu lo u s w ise.” In these re latio n s b etw een fo u r, th ree, two, an d one is fo u n d , says D o rn , the “c u lm in a tio n of all know ledge a n d of th e m ystic a rt, a n d th e in fa llib le m id p o in t of th e ce n tre (infallibile me di i centrum).” 80 T h e O n e is th e m id p o in t o f th e circle, th e ce n tre of th e triad , an d it is also th e “ n o v en ary fo etu s” (foetus novenarius), i.e., it is as th e n u m b e r n in e to th e ogdoad, o r as th e q u in tessen ce to th e q u a te rn ity .81 T h e m id p o in t o f th e cen tre is fire. O n it is m o d elled th e sim plest a n d m o st p erfect fo rm , w h ich is th e circle. T h e p o in t is m ost ak in to th e n a tu re of lig h t,8- an d lig h t is a simulacrum D e i .83 J u s t as th e firm am en t was c rea ted in th e m id st of th e w aters above a n d belo w th e heavens, so in m a n th e re is a sh in in g body, th e rad ic al m o istu re, w hich com es from th e sp h ere of th e heavenly w aters.84 T h is body is th e “ sidereal balsam ,” w hich m a in ta in s th e an im a l h eat. T h e s p irit o f th e su p racelestial wain d iscr im in a te ly , they are n o t th e sam e, sin c e fire is active, sp ir itu a l, e m o tio n a l, close to con sciou sn ess, w h ereas w ater is passive, m a teria l, cool, an d o f th e n a tu re o f th e u n con sciou s. B o th are necessary to th e a lch em ica l process sin ce th is is c o n cern ed w ith th e u n io n o f op p o sites. Cf. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , Fig. 4. 19 K h u n r a th (V on h y le a lisc h e n C haos, p . 203) says th a t th e te rn a riu s, p u rified “by th e C ir cu m ro ta tio n or C ircu lar P h ilo s o p h ic a l r ev o lv in g o f th e Q u atern ariu s . . . is b r o u g h t back to th e h ig h e st an d m ost p u re S im p licity . . . o f th e p lu sq u a m p e rfe ct C a th o lic M on ad . . . . T h e im p u re, cru d e O n e b eco m es an e x c e e d in g p u re an d su b tle O n e, th r o u g h th e m a n ife sta tio n o f th e o c c u lt a n d th e o c cu lta tio n o f th e m a n ife st.” 80 “P h ysica T r it h e m ii,” p . 391. Si D o rn , “ D u e llu m a n im i cu m c orp ore,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p. 482. T h is n u m b e r sy m b o lism refers to th e a x io m o f M aria: “ O ne b ecom es T w o , T w o b ecom es T h r e e , a n d o u t o f th e T h ir d com es O n e as th e F o u r th ” (B e rth elo t, A lc h . g recs, V I, v, 6). T h is a x io m r u n s th r o u g h th e w h o le o f a lch em y , an d is n o t u n c o n n e c te d w ith C h ristia n sp ec u la tio n s regard in g th e T r in ity . Cf. m y “ P sych ology a n d R e lig io n ,” p . 60, a n d “A P sych ological A p p ro a ch to th e D ogm a o f th e T r in ity ,” p p . 164ΙΪ. 82 Steeb, C o e lu m S e p h ir o tic u m , p. 19. 83 Ib id ., p. 38. 84 P. 42.

te rs has its seat in th e b ra in , w h ere it co n tro ls th e sense organs. I n th e m icroco sm th e b alsam dw ells in th e h e a rt,85 lik e th e su n in th e m acrocosm . T h e s h in in g b o d y is th e corpus astrale, th e “firm a m e n t” o r “s ta r” in m a n . L ik e th e su n in th e heavens, th e balsam in th e h e a r t is a fiery, r a d ia n t c en tre. W e m e e t th is solar p o in t in th e T u r b a 3s& w h ere it signifies th e “ g erm of th e egg, w h ich is in th e yolk, a n d th a t g erm is set in m o tio n by th e h e n ’s w a rm th .” T h e “ C o n s iliu m c o n iu g ii” says th a t in th e egg are th e fo u r e lem en ts a n d th e “ re d s u n -p o in t in th e cen tre, a n d th is is th e y o u n g c h ick .” 87 M y liu s in te rp re ts th is ch ick as th e b ir d of H e rm e s,88 w h ich is a n o th e r sy n o n y m fo r th e m e rc u ria l se rp e n t. l89 F ro m th is c o n te x t w e can see th a t th e retorta distillatio ex me d io centri resu lts in th e a c tiv a tio n a n d d e v e lo p m e n t of a psy chic c e n tre , a co n c e p t th a t coin cid es psychologically w ith th a t of th e self. G. T H E

*9°

C O N IU N C T IO IN

THE

SP R IN G

A t th e e n d of th e process, says P aracelsu s, a “ p h ysical lig h t n in g ” w ill a p p ea r, th e “lig h tn in g of S a tu r n ” w ill sep arate fro m th e lig h tn in g o f Sol, a n d w h a t ap p ea rs in th is lig h tn in g p e rta in s “ to longevity, to th a t u n d o u b te d ly g re a t Ilia s te r.” 89 T h is p ro c ess does n o t take a n y th in g aw ay fro m th e b o d y ’s w eig h t b u t o n ly fro m its “ tu r b u le n c e ,” a n d th a t “ by v irtu e of th e tra n s lu c e n t c o lo u rs.” 90 “ T r a n q u illity o f m in d ” 91 as a g o al o f th e opus is stressed also by o th e r alchem ists. P aracelsu s has n o th in g good to say a b o u t th e body. I t is “b a d a n d p u tr id .” W h e n it is alive, it lives o n ly fro m th e “ M u m ia .” Its “c o n tin u a l e n d e a v o u r” is to r o t a n d t u r n b ack in to filth . By m ean s o f th e M u m ia th e 85 P . i i y . 86 E d. R u sk a , p . 94. Cf. C o d e x B e ro Iin en sis 532, fo l. i5 4 T: ". . . th e su n -p o in t, th at is th e g erm o f th e egg, w h ic h is in th e y o lk .” 87 A rs c h e m ic a . T h e " C o n siliu m c o n iu g ii” m a y d a te fr o m th e 13th c en t. 88 P h il. r e f ., p . 131. 88 T h e r e is o n ly o n e flash o f lig h tn in g , w h ic h c h a n g e s th e d arkn ess o f S atu rn in to th e b r ig h tn e ss o f J u p ite r . R u la n d (L e x ic o n , p . 153) states: “ M e ta llic fu lm in a tio n is, w ith th e h ig h e r m e ta ls, a p rocess o f p u r g in g . . . . F u lm in a tio n is a m e ta l lic g r a d a tio n , w ith e x c o c tio n , e d u c in g th e p u r e p a r t, th e p e r fe c tio n th e r e o f b e in g in d ic a te d by a n ir r a d ia tin g sp le n d o u r .” 80 T h e c o lo u rs r efe r to t h e c a u d a p a v o n is , w h ic h ap p ea rs ju s t b e fo r e th e c o m p le t io n o f th e o p u s. 81 C f. in fr a , pars. 2 o if.

IM/

A fish m eal, w ith acco m p an y in g sta tu e o f th e h e rm a p h ro d ite . T h o u g h th e p ic Â tu r e is u n d o u b te d ly secular, it c o n tain s echoes of early C h ristia n m otifs. T h e significance of th e h e rm a p h ro d ite in th is c o n te x t is u n k n o w n to m e. B ritish M useum , MS. A dd. 15268 (13th cent.)

The filius or rex in the form of a hermaphrodite. The axiom of Maria is represented by 1 3 snakes: the filius, as mediator, unites the one with the three. Characteristically, he has bat's wings. To the right is the Pelican, symbol of the distil/alio circulaloria; to the left. the arbor philosophica with golden flowers; underneath, the chthonic triad as a threeÂˇ headed serpent. From Rosarium philosophorum (1550), ÂŁ01. X, iiiv

T h e R eb is: fro m “ Book o f th e H oly T r in ity a n d D e scrip tio n o f th e Secret o f th e T ra n s m u ta tio n of M e tals” (1420), in th e C odex G erm an icu s 598 (S taatsb ib lio th ek , M u n ich ), fol. 1 0 5 V . T h e illu s tra tio n m ay h a v e served as a m o d el for th e h e rm a p h ro d ite in th e R osariu m (pi. B2)

Melusina as the aqua permanens, opening the side of the {tlius (an allegory of Christ) with the lance of Longinus. The figure in the middle is Eve (earth), who is reunited with Adam (Christ) in the coniunctio. From their union is born the hermaphrodite, the incarnate Primordial Man. To the right is the athanor (furnace) with the vessel in the centre, from which the lapis (hermaphrodite) will arise. The vessels on either side contain Sol and Luna . Woodcut from Reusner's Pandora: Das ist, die edelst Gab Gottes, oder de?' werde und heilsame Stein der Weysen (Basel, 1588), p. 249

T h e a n i m a as Melusina, e m b r a c i n g a man rising o u t of the sea ( = unconscious): a coniunctio animae cum corpore. T h e gnomes are the planetary spirits in the f o r m of paredroi (familiars). British Museum, MS. Sloane 5025, a variant of the Ripley Scrowle (1588)

T h e K ing’s Son (filiu s regis) a n d th e m ystagogue H erm es o n a m o u n ta in , an obvious allu sio n to th e T e m p ta tio n (L uke, ch. 4). T h e accom p an y in g tex t says: “ A nother m o u n ta in of In d ia lies in th e vessel, w hich th e S p irit an d Soul, as son a n d guide, have to g e th e r ascend ed .” T h e tw o a re called sp irit a n d soul because they rep resen t v o latile substances w hich rise u p d u rin g th e h e a tin g of th e p rim a m ate ria . From L am b sp rin g k , “De la p id e p h ilo so p h ico ,” fig. X II, in M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m (F rank fu rt a. M., 1678), p . 365

Picture of the Pelican, the vessel in which t h e circulatory distillation takes place. Page f r o m R h e n a n u s , Solis e puteo emergentis sive dissertationis chymotechnicae libri tres ( F r a n k f u r t a. M., 1613)

“ peregrinus m icrocosm us” (w andering microcosm) controls the physical body, an d for this the arcana are needed.92 H ere P ara celsus lays particu lar stress on T h e re n ia b in os and N ostoch0i (as before on Cheyri) and on the “trem endous powers” of Me lissa. Melissa is singled o u t for special h o n o u r because in ancient m edicine it was considered to be a means of inducing happiness, and was used as a rem edy for m elancholia and for p urging the body of “black, b u rn t-o u t blood.” 05 It unites in itself the pow ers of the “supracelestial coniunctio,” and that is “Iloch, which comes from the true A niadus.” As Paracelsus had spoken just before of Nostoch, the Iliaster has changed u n d er his eyes into Iloch. T h e A niadus that now makes its appearance constitutes the essence of Iloch, i.e., of the coniunctio. B ut to w hat does the coniunctio refer? Before this Paracelsus had been speaking of a separation of Saturn and Sol. Saturn is the cold, dark, heavy, im pure elem ent, Sol is the opposite. W hen this separation is com pleted and the body has been purified by Melissa and freed from S aturnine m elancholy, then the coniunctio can take place with the long-living inner, o r astral, m an ,86 and from this con ju n c tio n arises the “E nochdianus.” Iloch or A niadus appears to be som ething like the virtue or power of the everlasting m an. T h is “ M agnale” comes ab o u t by the “exaltation of both w orlds,” and “in the true May, when the exaltations of A niada begin, these should be gathered.” H ere again Paracelsus outdoes 92 “ F o r fro m m o r ta l m a n c a n n o t h in g b e c a lle d f o r th w h ic h p ro d u c e s lo n g e v ity , fo r lo n g e v ity is o u ts id e th e b o d y ,'' “ F r a g m e n ta m e d ic a ," ed. S u d h o ff1 I I I , p . 291. «« T h e r e n i a b in is a f a v o u rite a r c a n u m o f P a ra c e ls u s. I t is p in g u e d o m a n n a e (th e fa t o r o il o f m a n n a ) , p o p u la r ly k n o w n as h o n e y d e w — a stick y , re s in o u s c o a tin g o n leaves, w i t h a sw e e tish ta s te . T h i s h o n e y , P a ra c e ls u s says, falls fr o m th e a ir . B e in g a h e a v e n ly fo o d , i t assists s u b lim a tio n . H e also calls i t " m a y d e w .” [F o r a p o s sib le c o n n e c tio n b e tw e e n e rg o t-b a s e d h o n e y d e w a n d C o lev id g c s im a g e in “ K u b la K h a n ,” see T o d d , “ C o le rid g e a n d P a ra c e ls u s, H o n e y d e w a n d L S D .”— E d i t o r s .] 0 * N o s to c h is n o t, as B o d e n s te in su p p o se s, a sp e c ie s o f fire, b u t a g e la tin o u s a lg a t h a t a p p e a r s a f te r c o n tin u o u s r a in . T h e s e a lg a e a re s till k n o w n as N o sto c s in m o d e rn b o ta n y . I t w a s e a r lie r s u p p o s e d t h a t N o sto c s fe ll fro m th e a ir, o r fro m th e sta rs. (T h e y a re a lso c a lle d s ta r je lly a n d w itc h e s '- b u tte r.) R u l a n d (L e x ic o n , p . 240) d e fin e s i t as “ a ra y o r r a d ia ti o n o f a c e r ta in s ta r, o r its o ffsc o u rin g , s u p e r flu ity , e tc . c ast o n e a r t h .” H e n c e , lik e I h e r e n ia b in 1 it is a s u b lim a tin g a rc a n u m , b e c a u se it c o m es f r o m h e a v e n . ®5 T a b e r n a e m o n ta n u s , H e r b a l, s.v. “ M e lissa .” F o r th is re a s o n th e c o n iu n c tio is d e p ic te d as th e e m b ra c e of tw o w in g e d b e in g s, a s in th e R o s a r iu m . C f. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y 1 F ig . 268.

him self in obscurity, b u t this m u ch a t least is ev ident, th a t A niadus denotes a sp rin g tim e co n d itio n , th e “efficacity of th in g s,” as D o rn defines it. !91 W e m eet this m o tif in o n e of th e earliest G reek texts, e n ti tled th e “In s tru c tio n of C leo p atra by th e A rch p riest K om arios,” 97 w here O stanes98 an d his com panions say to C leo p atra: Make known to us how the highest descends to the lowest, and the lowest ascends to the highest, and the midmost draws near to the lowest and the highest, so that they are made one w ith it;99 how the blessed waters come down from above to awaken the dead, who lie round about in the midst of Hades, chained in the darkness; how the elixir of life comes to them and awakens them, rousing them out of their sleep. . . . *9«

C le o p atra answers: W hen the waters come in, they awaken the bodies and the spirits, which are im prisoned and powerless. . . . G radually they bestir themselves, rise up, and clothe themselves in bright colours,100 glo rious as the flowers in spring. T h e spring is glad and rejoices in the blossoming ripeness they have p u t on.

J93

R u la n d defines A n iad a101 as “ fru its a n d pow ers of p aradise an d heaven; they are also th e C h ristian Sacram ents . . . those things w hich by th o u g h t, ju d g m e n t, a n d im ag in atio n p ro m o te longevity in u s.” 102 T h e y seem th e re fo re to be pow ers th a t co n fer everlasting life, a n even m o re p o te n t φάρμακον αθανασίας th a n C heyri, T h e re n ia b in , N ostoch, an d M elissa. T h e y co rresp o n d to th e blessed w aters of K om arios a n d also, ap p are n tly , to th e C o m m u n io n substances. In th e sp rin g all the forces of life are in a state of festive ex altatio n , an d th e opus alc h ym icu m should also b egin in th e sp rin g 103 (already in th e m o n th of A ries, w hose ru le r is M ars). A t th a t tim e th e A n iad a sh o u ld b e “g a th e re d ,” 97 T h e te x t is assign ed to th e tst cen t.

a .d

B e rth elo t, A lch . grecs, IV , x x , 8.

98 A n alread y legen d ary (P ersian) a lch em ist o f p erh ap s th e 4 th cen t. B .C . 99 1 in sert in B e r th e lo t’s tex t th e r ea d in g o f MS. P aris 2250 (καί κατώτατον ώστε),

w h ic h m akes better sense. 100 T h e c a u d a p a v o n is o f th e L atin alch em ists. 101 T h e n o m in a tiv e p lu ra l corresp on d in g to a n ia d o ru m is p resu m ab ly a n ia d a rather th an a n ia d i. 102 L e x ic o n , p . 30. 103 A d e r iv a tio n th a t w o u ld com e closest in m e a n in g to th e term A n ia d u s w o u ld b e from iv b u v , ‘to perfect, c o m p le te .’ T h e form A n y a d e i, d efin ed b y R u la n d (L ex ico n , p . 32) as “ e tern a l sp ring, the n e w w orld , th e P arad ise to c o m e,” argues in favou r o f this.

as though they were healing herbs. T h e re is an am biguity here: it could also m ean the gathering together of all the psychic pow ers for the great transform ation. T h e hierosgamos of P oliphilo likewise takes place in the m onth of M ay,104 that is, the u n io n w ith the soul, the la tte r em bodying the w orld of the gods. A t this m arriage the hum an an d the divine are m ade one; it is an “exaltation of b oth w orlds,” as Paracelsus says. H e adds signifi cantly: “A nd the exaltations of the nettles b u rn too, and the colour of the little flame105 sparkles and shines.” N ettles were used for m edicinal purposes (the p rep aratio n of n e ttle w ater), and were collected in May because they sting m ost strongly w hen they are young. T h e n ettle was therefore a symbol of youth, w hich is “m ost prone to the flames of lust.” 106 T h e a llu sion to the stinging n ettle and the flam m ula is a discreet re m inder th a t not only M ary b u t Venus, too, reigns in May. In the next sentence Paracelsus rem arks th a t this power can be “changed in to som ething else.” T h e re are exaltations, he says, far m ore pow erful than the nettle, nam ely the A niada, and these are fo u n d n o t in the m atrices, th at is, in the physical elem ents, b u t in the heavenly ones. T h e Ideus w ould be n o th in g if it had not bro u g h t forth greater things. For it had m ade an o th er May, w hen heavenly flowers bloom ed. A t this tim e A nachm us10T m ust be extracted and preserved, even as “musk rests in the p om ander108 and the virtue of gold in lau d an u m .” 109 O ne can 104 T a u r u s, th e zod iacal sig n o f M ay, is th e H o u se o f V en u s. In th e G reekE g y p tia n zod iac th e b u ll carries th e su n -d isk , w h ic h rests in th e sick le m o o n (th e sh ip o f V en u s), an im a g e o f th e c o n iu n c tio . (Cf. B u d g e, A m u le ts a n d S u p e r s titio n s , p . 4>o.) T h e T a u r u s sign is co m p o sed o f th e su n -d isk w ith th e m o o n ’s horns: 8 . Cf. th e a lch em ica l p a r a lle l in D e e, "M onas h ie r o g ly p h ic a ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I I (1659), p p . sooff. 105 I h a v e g iv e n a lite r a l tr a n sla tio n o f “ n ite tq u e ac sp le n d e t fia m m u la e color." B u t sin c e P aracelsu s w as fa m ilia r w ith A g r ip p a ’s D e o c c u lta p h ilo s o p h ia , h e m ay h a v e b e e n r efe rr in g to, or q u o tin g , a passage from th is w ork. In B o o k I, ch. X X V II , w e read o f trees an d p la n ts th a t “ are arm ed w ith sh arp th orn s, o r b u rn , prick , or c u t th e sk in by th e ir co n ta ct, su ch as th e th istle , n e ttle , a n d little flam e (fla m m u la ) .” H er e fla m m u la is th e n a m e for v a rio u s k in d s o f cro w fo o t (ra n u n cu lu s), w h ic h w as u sed as a corrosive an d vesican t a n d is m e n tio n e d as su ch in D io sc o r id es (.M ed ica m a te ria , p . 295). w e P ic in e llu s , M u n d u s sy m b o lic u s, s.v. “u r tica .” 107 A n a ch m u s is m e n tio n e d a lo n g w ith th e Scaiolae; see in fra, p ar. 207. 108 P o m a n d e r — p o m a m b r a = p o m u m a m b ra e . A m b r a is a bezoar o f th e pot-fish o r sp erm -w h a le, p rized o n a c co u n t o f its p e r fu m e (am bergris). T h e s e a n d other a rom atics w ere u sed as “p la g u e b a lls” to d rive aw ay th e fe tid va p o u rs o f sick*

enjoy longevity only w hen one has gathered the powers of Anachmus. T o my knowledge, there is no way of distinguishing Anachmus from Aniadus. rooms. Muscus is m entioned as an arom atic in Dioscorides (M edica materia, p. 42). In A grippa (Occult. phil., I, p. xxxiv) the arom atics subordinated to Venus include “ladanum , am bra muscus." In ou r text “muscus in pom am b ra” is im mediately followed by “laudanum .” According to Dioscorides (Med. m at., p. 106), ladanum is the juice of an exotic p la n t whose leaves “acquire in the spring a certain fattiness . . . out of which is m ade w hat is called ladanum .” Tabernaem ontanus says this juice is aromatic. 109 L audanum is the arcane remedy of Paracelsus. It has n o thing to do with opium , though it may be derived from the above-m entioned ladanum . Adam von Bodenstein (De vita longa, p. 98) m entions two laudanum recipes of P ara celsus.

3 - T H E N A T U R A L T R A N S F O R M A T IO N M YSTERY 194

A niadus (or A niadum ), intei-preted by B odenstein and D orn as the “efficacity of things,” is defined by R u lan d as “the regenerated sp iritu al m an in us, the heavenly body im planted in us C hristians by the H oly G host through the m ost H oly Sacra m ents.” T h is in te rp re ta tio n does full justice to the role which A niadus plays in the w ritings of Paracelsus. T h o u g h it is clearly related to the sacram ents and to the C om m union in particular, it is equally clear th a t there was no question of arousing or im planting the in n e r m an in the C hristian sense, b u t of a “scien tific” union of the n a tu ra l w ith the spiritual m an w ith the aid of arcane techniques of a m edical n atu re. Paracelsus carefully avoids the ecclesiastical term inology and uses instead an esoteric language which is extrem ely difficult to decipher, for the obvi ous purpose of segregating the “n a tu ra l” transform ation mystery from the religious one and effectively concealing it from pry ing eyes. O therw ise the w elter of esoteric terms in this treatise would have no explanation. N o r can one escape the im pression that this mystery was in some sense opposed to the religious mys tery: as the “n e ttle ” and the flam m ala show, the am biguities of Eros were also included in it .1 I t had far m ore to do w ith pagan antiquity, as is evidenced by the Hypnerotom achia PoUphilis than w ith the C hristian mystery. N o r is there any reason to suppose that Paracelsus was sniffing o u t nasty secrets; a m ore cogent m otive was his experience as a physician who had to deal w ith m an as he is an d n o t as he should be and biologically speak ing never can be. M any questions are p u t to a doctor which he cannot honestly answer w ith “sh ould” b u t only from his know l edge and experience of n atu re. In these fragm ents of a n a tu re 1 C onfirm ation of this may be found in the work of the alchem ist an d mystic John Pordage (1607-1681), "E in Philosophisches Send-Schreiben vom Stcin der W eissheit,” p rin te d in Roth-Scholtz, D eutsches T h ea tru m chem icum , I, pp. 557-596. For text, see my “Psychology of the T ransference,” pars. 507if.

!95

m ystery there is n o th in g to suggest a m isplaced curiosity or per verse interest on Paracelsus’s part; they bear w itness rather to th e strenuous efforts of a physician to find satisfactory answers to psychological question s w h ich the ecclesiastical casuist is in clin ed to twist in his ow n favour. T h is nature m ystery was in d eed so m uch at odds w ith the C hurch— despite the superficial analogies— that th e H ungarian alch em ist N icolau s M elch ior Szebeny,2 cou rt astrologer to Ladislaus II (1471—1516), m ade the b o ld attem pt to present the o p u s a lch ym ic u m in the form of a Mass.3 It is difficult to prove w h ether and to w hat exten t the alchem ists w ere aware that they w^ere in conflict w ith the Church. M ostly they show ed n o insight in to w hat they were d oin g. T h is is true also of Paracelsus— ex cep t for a few hints ab ou t the “P agoyum .” It is the m ore und er standable that n o real self-criticism cou ld com e about, since they g e n u in e ly b elieved that they were perform in g a w ork w ellp leasin g to G od o n the p rinciple “q u o d natura r e lin q u it im perfectum , ars perficit’’ (what nature left im perfect, the art per fects). Paracelsus h im self was w h olly filled w ith th e godlin ess of his profession as a doctor, and n o th in g d isq u ieted or disturbed his C hristian faith. H e took it for granted that his w ork su p p le m en ted the hand o f G od and that he was the fa ith fu l stew ard of the talent that had b een entrusted to him . A n d as a m atter of fact he was right, for the h um an sou l is n ot som eth in g cu t off from nature. It is a natural p h en o m en o n lik e any other, and its problem s are just as im portant as the q u estions and riddles w h ich are presen ted by th e diseases o f the body. M oreover there is scarcely a disease o f the body in w h ich psychic factors d o n o t play a part, just as physical ones have to be con sid ered in m any psychogenic disturbances. Paracelsus was fu lly alive to this. In his ow n p ecu liar w ay h e took the psychic p h en om en a in to ac co u n t as perhaps n on e o f the great physicians ever d id before or after him . A lth o u g h his h o m u n cu li, T rara m e s, D u rdales, nym phs, M elusines, etc., are the grossest superstitions for us socalled m oderns, for a m an o f Paracelsus’s tim e they w ere n o th in g S C o n d e m n e d to d e a th u n d e r F erd in an d I, an d e x ec u te d in P ragu e, M ay 2, 1531. See P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , par. 480 a n d n. 3 “A d d am e t processum su b form a m issae, a N ic o la o C ib in en si, T r a n silv a n o , ad L ad islau m U n g a ria e e t B o h e m ia e regem o lim m issu m ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I l l (1659), p p . 758®.

o£ the sort. In those days these figures were living and effective forces. T h e y were projections, of course; b u t of that, too, P ara celsus seems to have had an inkling, since it is clear from n u m e r1 ous passages in his w ritings th a t he was aware that hom unculi and suchlike beings were creatures of the im agination. H is m ore prim itive cast of m in d a ttrib u te d a reality to these projections, and this reality did far greater justice to th eir psychological effect than does o u r rationalistic assum ption of the absolute u n reality of projected contents. W hatever th eir reality may be, functionally at all events they behave ju st like realities. W e should not let ourselves be so b lin d ed by the m odern ratio n alis tic fear of superstition th a t we lose sight com pletely of those little-know n psychic phenom ena which surpass o u r present sci entific understanding. A lthough Paracelsus had no notio n of psychology, he nevertheless affords— precisely because of his “be nighted su p erstitio n ”— deep insights into psychic events which the m ost up-to-date psychology is only now struggling to investi gate again. Even though mythology may n o t be “tru e ” in the sense th a t a m athem atical law or a physical experim ent is true, it is still a serious subject for research and contains q u ite as m any tru th s as a n a tu ra l science; only, they lie on a different plane. O ne can be perfectly scientific ab o u t mythology, for it is ju st as good a n a tu ra l product as plants, anim als or chem ical elements. •9s Even if the psyche were a pro d u ct of the will, it w ould still n o t be outside n ature. N o d o u b t it w ould have been a greater achievem ent if Paracelsus had developed his n atu ral philosophy in an age w hen the psyche had been discredited as an object of scientific study. As it was, he m erely included in the scope of his investigations som ething th at "was already present, w ith o u t being obliged to prove its existence anew. Even so his achievem ent is sufficiently great, despite the fact th a t we m oderns still find it difficult to estim ate correctly the full psychological im plications of his views. For what, in the end, do we know ab o u t the causes and motives th a t p rom pted m an, for m ore th an a thousand years, to believe in th a t “absurdity” the tran sm u tatio n of metals and the sim ultaneous psychic transform ation of the artifex? W e liave never seriously considered the fact th a t for the m edieval investigator the red em p tio n of the w orld by G od’s son and the tran substantiation of the Eucharistic elem ents were n o t the last word, o r rather, n o t the last answer to the m anifold enigmas of

m an and his soul. If the opus alchym icum claim ed equality w ith the opus d ivin u m of the Mass, the reason for this was n o t gro tesque presum ption b u t the fact that a vast, unknow n N ature, disregarded by the eternal verities of the C hurch, was im peri ously dem anding recognition and acceptance. Paracelsus knew, in advance of m odern times, th a t this N atu re was n o t only chem ical an d physical b u t also psychic. Even though his T raram es and w hatnot cannot be dem onstrated in a test tube, they never theless had th eir place in his world. A nd even if, like all the rest of them , he never produced any gold, he was yet on the track of a process of psychic transform ation that is incom parably m ore im p o rtan t for the happiness of the individual th an the posses sion of the red tincture. A . TH E LIGHT OF T H E DARKNESS

»97

So when we try to elucidate the riddles of the Vita longa we are following the traces of a psychological process that is the vi tal secret of all seekers after tru th . N ot all are vouchsafed the grace of a faith th at anticipates all solutions, n o r is it given to all to rest content w ith the sun of revealed tru th . T h e light that is lighted in the heart by the grace of the H oly Spirit, th at same light of nature, however feeble it may be, is m ore im p o rtan t to them than the great light which shines in the darkness and which the darkness com prehended not. T h ey discover th a t in the very darkness of natu re a light is hidden, a little spark w ith o u t which the darkness w ould n o t be darkness.4 Paracelsus was one of these. H e was a w ell-intentioned, hum ble C hristian. His ethics and his professed faith were C hristian, b u t his m ost secret, deepest passion, his whole creative yearning, belonged to the lum en naturae, the divine spark bu ried in the darkness, whose sleep of death could not be vanquished even by the revelation of G od’s son. T h e light from above m ade the darkness still darker; b u t the lum en naturae is the light of the darkness itself, which illum inates its own darkness, and this light the darkness com prehends. T herefore it turns blackness into brightness, burns away “all superfluities,” and leaves behind n o th in g b u t “faecem 4 “Pharmaco ignito spolianda densi est corporis um bra” (T he drug b ein g ignited, the shadow o f the dense body is to be stripped away). Maier, Sym bola aureae m ensae, p. g t .

l6o

198

et scoriam e t te rra m d a m n a ta m ” (dross a n d scoriae an d th e re je cted earth ). P aracelsus, like all th e p h ilo so p h ical alchem ists, was seeking for so m eth in g th a t w o u ld give h im a h o ld on th e d ark, bodyb o u n d n a tu re of m an , on th e soul w hich, in tan g ib ly in terw o v en w ith th e w o rld a n d w ith m a tte r, a p p ea red befo re itself in th e te rrify in g form of strange, dem o n iacal figures a n d seem ed to be th e secret source of life-sh o rten in g diseases. T h e C h u rch m ig h t exorcise dem ons an d b an ish them , b u t th a t only alien ated m an fro m his ow n n a tu re , w hich, unconscious of itself, h a d clo th ed itself in these spectral form s. N o t sep aratio n of th e n a tu re s b u t u n io n of th e n a tu re s was th e goal of alchem y. F ro m th e tim e of D em o critu s its l e itm o ti v h a d b een : “ N a tu re rejoices in n a tu re , n a tu re co n q u ers n a tu re , n a tu re ru les over n a tu re .” 5 T h is p r in ciple is pagan in feelin g an d an expression of n a tu re w orship. N a tu re n o t on ly co n tain s a process of tra n sfo rm a tio n — it is itself tran sfo rm a tio n . I t strives n o t for iso latio n b u t fo r u n io n , for th e w ed d in g feast follow ed by d eath an d re b irth . P aracelsu s’s “ ex al ta tio n in M ay” is this m arriag e, th e “g am o n y m u s” o r hierosgam os of lig h t an d darkness in th e shape of Sol a n d L u n a. H e re the opposites u n ite w h at th e lig h t fro m above h ad stern ly d i vided. T h is is n o t so m u c h a rev ersio n to a n tiq u ity as a c o n tin u a tio n of th a t relig io u s feelin g fo r n a tu re , so alien to C h ris tian ity , w hich is expressed m ost b e a u tifu lly in th e “ Secret I n s c rip tio n ” in th e G re a t M agic P ap y ru s o f P a ris:6 Greetings, entire edifice of the Spirit of the air, greetings, Spirit that penetratest from heaven to earth, and from earth, which abideth in the m idst of the universe, to the utterm ost bounds of the abyss, greetings, Spirit that penetratest into me, and shakest me, and departest from me in goodness according to God’s will; greetings, beginning and end of irrem ovable N ature, greetings, thou who revolvest the elements which untiringly render service, greetings, brightly shining sun, whose radiance m inistereth to the world, greetings, moon shin ing by night w ith disc of fickle brilliance, greetings, all ye spirits of the demons of the air, greetings, ye for whom the greeting is offered in praise, brothers and sisters, devout m en and women! O great, greatest, incom prehensible fabric of the world, formed in a circle! 5 Ή φ ύσα T f j φύσα τίρ τη τα ι, καί ή φύαιs την φϋσιν νικα, καί ή φύσιS την φνσιν κρατά. B erthelot, A lch . grecs, II, ί, 3. β Preisendanz, P a p y ri Graecae M agicae, I. ρ. 111.

16 1

Heavenly One, dwelling in the heavens, aetherial spirit, dwelling in the aether, having the form of water, of earth, of fire, of wind, of light, of darkness, star-glittering, damp-fiery-cold Spirit! I praise thee, God of gods, who hast fashioned the world, who hast established the depths upon the invisible support of their firm foundation, who hast separated heaven and earth, and hast encompassed the heavens with golden, eternal wings, and founded the earth upon eternal bases, who hast hung the aether high above the earth, who hast scattered the air with the self-moving wind, who hast laid the wa ters round about, who callest forth the tempests, the thunder, the lightning, the rain: Destroyer, Begetter of living things, God of the Aeons, great art thou, Lord, God, R uler of All! *99

J u s t as th is p ray er has com e dow n to us em b ed d ed in a mass of m agical recipes, so does th e lu m e n naturae rise u p from a w orld of kobolds an d o th e r creatu res of darkness, veiled in m agi cal spells an d alm ost ex tin g u ish ed in a m orass o f m ystification. N a tu re is certain ly equivocal, an d o n e can b lam e n e ith e r P a ra celsus n o r the alchem ists if, anxiously aw are of th e ir resp o n sib il ities, they cau tio u sly expressed them selves in parables. T h is p ro ced u re is in d eed th e m o re a p p ro p ria te one in th e circum stances. W h a t takes place betw een lig h t an d darkness, w h at u n ite s th e opposites, has a share in b o th sides a n d can b e ju d g e d ju s t as w ell from the left as fro m th e rig h t, w ith o u t o u r beco m in g an y th e w iser: in d eed , we can on ly o p en u p th e o p p o sitio n again. H e re only th e sym bol helps, for, in accordance w ith its parad o x ical n a tu re , it represen ts th e “ te rtiu m ” th a t in logic does n o t exist, b u t w h ich in re a lity is th e liv in g tru th . So we sh o u ld n o t b e grudge Paracelsus a n d th e alchem ists th e ir secret language: d e e p e r in sig h t in to th e p ro b lem s of psychic d ev elo p m en t soon teaches us how m u c h b e tte r it is to reserve ju d g m e n t in stead of p re m a tu re ly a n n o u n c in g to all an d su n d ry w hat's w hat. O f course we all have a n u n d e rsta n d a b le desire fo r crystal clarity, b u t we are a p t to forget th a t in psychic m atters we are d ealin g w ith processes of ex perience, th a t is, w ith tran sfo rm atio n s w hich should n ev er be given h a rd an d fast n am es if th e ir liv in g m ove m e n t is n o t to petrify in to so m eth in g static. T h e p ro te a n m ythologem an d th e sh im m erin g sym bol express th e processes of th e psyche far m ore tren c h an tly and, in th e end, far m o re clearly th a n th e clearest concept; fo r th e sym bol n o t only conveys a vis ualizatio n of th e process b u t— an d this is perhaps ju s t as im por162

tant·—it also brings a re-experiencing of it, of that tw ilight which we can learn to understand only through inoffensive empathy, b u t which too m uch clarity only dispels. T h u s the symbolic hints of m arriage an d exaltation in the “tru e May,” w hen the heavenly flowers bloom and the secret of the in n er m an is made manifest, by the very choice and sound of the words convey a vision and experience of a clim ax whose significance could be am plified only by the finest flights of the poets. B ut the clear and unam biguous concept w ould find not the smallest place w here it w ould fit. A nd yet som ething deeply significant has been said, for as Paracelsus rightly rem arks: “W hen the heavenly m arriage is accomplished, who will deny its superexcellent virtue?” B. T H E U N IO N 200

O F M A N ’S T W O N A T U R E S

Paracelsus is concerned here w ith som ething of great im por tance, and in recognition of this I have p u t in an apologia for the symbol, which unites w hat is divided. B ut he too felt the need of some explanation. T h u s he says in the second chapter of Book V th a t m an has two life forces: one of them n atu ral, the other “aerial, w herein is n o th in g of the body.” (We w ould say th a t life has a physiological and a psychic aspect.) H e therefore ends D e vita longa with a discussion of incorporeal things. “ Mis erable in this respect are m ortals to w hom N atu re has denied her first and best treasure, which the m onarchy of N atu re con tains, namely, the lum en naturae!” 7 he exclaims, leaving us in no dou b t w hat the lum en naturae m eant to him . H e says th at he will now go beyond N atu re and consider A niadus. L et no one take exception to w hat he w ill now set forth concerning the power of the G uarini, Saldini, Salam andrini, and M elusina. If any should be astonished at his words, he should n o t let th at detain him , b u t should ra th e r read to the end, w hen he will understand all. Those live longest, says Paracelsus, who have lived “the ae rial life” (vitam aeream). T h e ir life lasts anything from six h u n dred to a thousand or eleven h u n d red years, and this is because they have lived in accordance w ith the “ru le of the M agnalia, I “Miseros hoc loco m ortales, quibus prim um ac optim um thesaurum (quam naturae monarchia in se claudit) natura recusavit, puta, naturae lu m en .” D e vita longa, ed. Bodenstein, p . 88.

which are easily understood.” O ne should therefore im itate A n i adus, “and that by means of the air alone”— that is, by psychic means— “whose power is so great that the end of life has nothing in com m on w ith it. Further, if the said air be w anting, that which lies hidden in the capsule w ill burst forth.” By the “cap su le” Paracelsus probably means the heart. T h e soul or an im a iliastri dwells in the fire of the heart. It is im passibilis (nonsentient, incapable of suffering), whereas the cagastric soul, w hich is passibilisj “floats” on the water of the capsule.8 T h e heart is also the seat of the im agination, and is the “sun in the M icrocosm.” 9 H ence the a n im a iliastri can burst forth from the heart w hen it lacks “air”; that is to say, if psychic rem edies are not applied, death occurs prem aturely.10 Paracelsus continues: “But if this [i.e., the a n im a iliastri] should be wholly filled -with that [air] which renews itself again, and is then m oved into the centre, that is, outside that under which it lay hidden before and still lies hid [i.e., in the heart capsule], then as a tranquil thing it is n ot heard at all by anything corporeal, and resounds only as Aniadus, Adech, and Edochinum . W hence comes the birth of that great Aquaster, which is born beyond N ature” (i.e., supernaturally).11 8 “L iber A zoth/' p. 534. 8 “De pestiiitate,” T ract. I, ed. H user, I, p. 334. 10 "N ihil enim aliud mors est, nisi dissolutio quaedam , quae ubi accidit, turn dem um m oritur corpus. . . . H uic corpori Deus ad iu n x it aliud quoddam , p u ta coeleste, id quod in corpore vitae existit. Hoc opus, hie labor est, ne in dissolutionem, quae m ortalium est et huic soli adiuncta, eru m p at.” (For death is n o th ing b u t a kind of dissolution which takes place when the body dies. . . . T o this body God has added a certain other thing of a heavenly n atu re, th a t of the life w hich exists in the body. T h is is the task, this the toil: th a t it b u rst not forth at the dissolution w hich is the lot of mortals, b u t is joined to this [body] alone.) "Fragm enta," ed. Sudhoff, III, p. ag2. η “S equuntur ergo qui vitam aeream vixerunt, quorum alii a 600 annis ad 1000 et 1too annum pervenerunt, id quod iu x ta praescriptum m agnalium quae facile deprehenduntur, ad hunc modum accipe: Com para aniadum , idque per solum aera, cuius vis ta n ta est, u t nihil cum illo com m une habeat term inus vitae. P orro si abest iam dictus aer, eru m p it extrinsecus id, quod in capsula delitescit. Jam si idem ab illo, quod denuo renovatur fu erit refertum , ac denuo in m edium perlatum , scilicet extra id sub quo p rius delitescebat, imo adhuc delitescit, iam u t res tranquilla prorsus non au d iatu r a re corporali, et u t solum aniadum adech, denique et edochinum resonet.” Lib. V, cap. III. D orn (De vita longa, p. 167) comments on this passage as follows: a) T h e im ita tio n of A niadus is effected undeT the influence of “ im aginationis, 164

PARACELSUS AS A SPIRITUAL PHEN O M ENO N 802

203

T h e meaning of this laborious explanation seems to be that by psychic means the soul is not only prevented from escaping but is also brought back into the centre, the heart region. But this time it is not enclosed in the capsula cordis, where it lay hidden and as it were imprisoned till then; it is now outside its previous habitation. T his indicates a certain degree of freedom from bondage to the body, hence the “tranquillity” of the soul, which, when it dwelt inside the heart, was too much exposed to the power of imagination, to Ares and the formative principle. T he heart, for all its virtues, is a restless and emotional thing, all too easily swayed by the turbulence of the body. In it dwells that lower, earthbound, “cagastric” soul which has to be separated from the higher, more spiritual Iliaster. In this liberated and more tranquil sphere the soul, unheard by the body, can re-echo those higher entities, Aniadus, Adech, and Edochinum, who form the upper triad. We have seen already that Adech stands for the inner homo maximus. He is the astral man, the manifestation of the macro cosm in the microcosm. Since he is named along with Aniadus and Edochinum, they are probably parallel designations. Aniaaestim ationis vel phantasiae,” w hich is equivalent to “a ir” = spirit. By this is ob viously m eant the kind of active im agination th a t takes place in yoga or in the spiritu al exercises of Ignatius Loyola, who employs the term s consideratio, contem platio, m editatio, ponderatio, and im aginatio per sensus for the “realization” of the im agined content. (Cf. T h e Spiritual Exercises o f St. Ignatius Loyola, trans. Rickaby, in p articu lar pp. 4off., th e m editatio n on Hell.) T h e realization of A niadus has about the same purpose as the contem plation of the life of Jesus in these exercises, w ith the difference th a t in the form er case it is the unknow n P rim ordial M an w ho is assim ilated thro u g h in dividual experience, w hereas in the later it is the known, historical personality of th e Son of M an. b) T h e lack of air is explained by D orn as du e to the fact th a t it was “ex hau sted ” by the efforts required for the realization. c) T h a t w hich bursts forth from the heart is evil, w hich dwells in the h eart. D orn continues: “Indeed it is constrained u n d e r the vehicle u n d er which it still lies h id .” H is conjecture of evil and constraint is n o t supported by the text. On the contrary, D orn overlooks the preceding depuratio as a result of w hich the operation takes place in an already purified ("calcined") body. T h e reverberatio and the subsequent sublim ing processes have already rem oved the denser ele ments, including the nigredo and evil. d) As a result of his conjecture D orn is obliged to read “in tra n q u illa ” for “ tran q u illa.” e) D orn here defines Adech as th e “im aginary in n er m a n ” an d E dochinum as Enochdianum .

dus certainly has this m eaning, as m entioned earlier. Edochinu m seems to be a variant of Enochdianus: Enoch belonged to the race of protoplasts related to the O riginal M an, who “tasted n o t death,” or at any rate lived for several h u n d red years. T h e three different names are probably only amplifications of the same conception— th at of the deathless O riginal M an, to whom the m ortal m an can be approxim ated by means of the alchem i cal opus. As a result of this approxim ation the powers and a ttri butes of the hom o m axim us flow like a helpful and healing stream into the earthly natu re of the microcosmic m ortal man. Paracelsus’s conception of the hom o m axim us does m uch to elu cidate the psychological motives of the alchemical opus in gen eral, since it shows how the m ain product of the work, the aurum non vulgi or lapis philosophorum , came to have such a variety of names and definitions: elixir, panacea, tincture, q u in t essence, light, east, m orning, Aries, living fount, fruit-tree, an i mal, Adam, man, hom o altus, form of m an, brother, son, father, pater m irabilis, king, herm aphrodite, deus terrenus} salvator, sen a to r, filius macrocosmi, and so on.12 In com parison w ith the “m ille nom ina” of the alchemists, Paracelsus used only about ten names for this entity, which exercised the speculative fantasy of the alchemists for m ore than sixteen h u n d red years. so4 D o rn ’s com m entary lays particular emphasis on the signifi cance of this passage. A ccording to him , these three— Aniadus, Adech, and E dochinum — form the one “pure and w ell-tem pered elem ent” (elem entum p u ru m tem peratum ) as contrasted w ith the four, im pure, gross, and worldly elements, which are far re moved from longevity. From these three comes the “m ental vi sion” of th at great A quaster, which is born supernaturally. T h a t is to say, from the A niadic m other, w ith the aid of Adech and through the power of the im agination, comes the great vision, which im pregnates the supernatural m atrix so that it gives b irth to the invisible foetus of longevity, that is created or begotten by the invisible or extrinsic Iliaster. D orn ’s insistence on three as opposed to four is based on his polemical attitu d e to the axiom of M aria and to the relation of the q uaternity to th e T rin ity , which I have discussed elsewhere.13 Characteristically, D orn *2 “L a p id is p h ilo so p h o r u m n o m in a ,” MS. 2263-64, Ste. G en evieve, P aris, v o l. II, fo l. 129, an d P ernety, F a b les e g y p tie n n e s e t gre c q u e s, I, p p . ig6ff. ! 3 “P sych ology an d R e lig io n ,” p . 60.

overlooks the fact th a t the fo urth is in this case the microcosmic m ortal m an, w ho com plem ents the u p p er tria d .11 205 U nion w ith the hom o m axim us produces a new life, which Paracelsus calls “vita cosm ographica.” In this life “tim e appears as well as the body Jesahach” (cum locus turn corpus Jesahach).15 Locus can m ean “ tim e” as well as “space,” and since, as we shall see, Paracelsus is here concerned w ith a sort of G olden Age, I have translated it as “tim e.” T h e corpus Jesahach may thus be the corpus glorificationis, the resurrected body of the alchemists, and w ould coincide w ith th e corpus astrale. C . T H E Q U A T E R N IT Y

OF TH E

HOM O

M A X IM U S

206

In this last chapter Paracelsus makes alm ost u n tran slatab le allusions to the four Scaiolae, and it is no t a t all clear w hat could be m eant. R uland, who had a wide knowledge of the contem po rary Paracelsist literature, defines them as “sp iritu al powers of th e m in d ” (spirituales mentis vires), qualities and faculties which are fourfold, to correspond w ith the four elem ents. T h ey are the four wheels of the fiery chariot th at swept E lijah u p to heaven. T h e Scaiolae, he says, originate in the m in d of m an, “from w hom they d epart an d to whom they are tu rn e d back” (a quo recedunt, et ad quem reflectuntur). 207 L ike the fo u r seasons and the four quarters of heaven, the fo u r elem ents are a q u atern ary system of o rien tatio n which al ways expresses a totality. In this case it is obviously the totality of the m ind (anim us), w hich here w ould be b etter translated as “consciousness” (including its contents). T h e o rien tin g system of consciousness has fo u r aspects, which correspond to four em p iri cal functions: thinking, feeling, sensation (sense-perception), in tu itio n . T h is q u atern ity is an archetypal arran g em en t.16 As an archetype, it can be in terp reted in any n u m b e r of ways, as R u la n d shows: he interprets the four first of all psychologically, as phantasiaJ 7 im a g in a tio n speculatio ,19 an d agnata fides (ini* Cf. “A P sych o lo g ica l A p p roach to th e D o g m a o f th e T r in ity ,” p p . 1645. ! 5 L ib. V , cap. V . Jesah ach is n o t a k n o w n H eb re w w ord . 10 C o n cern in g th e lo g ic a l asp ect o f th is arra n g em en t see S ch o p en h a u er, ‘‘O n the F o u r fo ld R o o t o f th e P r in c ip le o f Sufficient R e a so n .” I r E v en a t th a t tim e p h a n t a s i a m e a n t a su b je ctiv e fig m en t o f th e m in d w ith o u t o b je c tiv e v a lid ity . is . w See p . 168.

167

born faith). T h is interpretation is of value only so far as it al ludes unm istakably to certain psychic functions. Since every archetype is psychologically a fascinosurrij i.e., exerts an influ ence that excites and grips the im agination, it is liable to clothe itself in religious ideas (which are themselves of an archetypal nature). A ccordingly R uland says that the four Scaiolae also stand for the four m ain articles20 of the Christian faith: baptism, b elief in Jesus Christ, the sacrament of the Last Supper, and love of on e’s neighbour.21 In Paracelsus, Scaioli are lovers of wis dom. H e says: “Ye pious filii Scaiolae et A nachm i.” 22 T h e Anachmus ( = Aniadus) is therefore closely connected w ith the four Scaiolae. So it w ould not be overbold to conclude that the four Scaiolae correspond to the traditional quadripartite man and express his all-encompassing wholeness. T h e quadripartite na ture of the hom o m axim us is the basis and cause of all division in to four: four elem ents, seasons, directions, etc.23 In this last chapter, says Paracelsus, the Scaiolae caused him the greatest difficulties,24 “for in them is nothing of m ortality.” But, he as sures us, w hoever lives “by reason of the Scaiolae” is im m ortal, and he proves this by the exam ple of the Enochdiani and their *8 A n im age-m aking, form -giving, creative activity o f th e m in d . F o r P aracelsus it was th e corpus astrale, o r th e creative p o w er o f th e a stra l m a n . I® By this is m e a n t "p h ilo so p h ic a l” th in k in g , s® R u la n d was a P ro te sta n t. 21 "W h ereb y we a tta in n o t m erely p ro lo n g e d b u t e te rn a l life,” ad d s R u la n d . D o rn (De v ita longa, p p . i76f.) agrees w ith R u la n d ’s psychological in te rp re ta tio n . 22 [Sudhoil, X IV , p . 644. T h is co u ld b e tra n sla te d e ith e r as "Ye p io u s sons, Scaiolae a n d A n a c h m i” (nom . pi.) o r as "Ye p io u s sons of Scaiola (gen. fem . sing.) an d A n ach m u s” (gen. m asc. sing.). Scaiolae m u st be fem . a n d th ere fo re can h a rd ly b e in ap p o sitio n to “ filii." T h e q u o ta tio n has b e e n lo cated a n d checked, an d begins: “N ow m a rk w ell in this m y p h ilo so p h y : I have w ritte n a special treatise on th e n y m p h is, pygm aeis, silvestribus, gnom is fo r th e love a n d d ele c ta tio n of th e tru e Scaiolis (den w axen Scaiolis zu lieb e u n d gefallen ). T h e re fo re , ye pio u s filii Scaiolae et A n ach m i . . T h is m ay be Ju n g 's source for th e sta te m e n t th a t th e “Scaioli are lovers o f w isdom .” (If Scaiolis is tak e n as m asc. in th is co ntext, th e nom . sing, w o u ld be Scaiolus a n d th e nom . p i. Scaioli.) Cf. Psychology a n d A lc h e m y , p a r. 42a, n . 50: "Scayolus . . . m ean s th e a d e p t.” N e ith e r Scaiolus n o r Scaioli can be traced from th e R e g isterb a n d to th e Sudhoff edn., co m p iled by M a rtin M u lle r (E insiedeln, i960).— T r a n s l a t o r .] 23 F o r th is reason it is said th a t th e la p is o r filiu s c o n tain s th e fo u r elem en ts or is th e ir quintessence, w h ich can b e e x tra c te d fro m th em , lik e A niadus. 24 “ I n q u o m e p lu rim u m o fie n d u n t Scaiolae” (D orn, p . 174).

208

209

descendants. D orn explains the difficulty o£ the Scaiolae by say ing th a t the m in d m ust exercise itself w ith extraordinary la bours (m e n tem exercere m iris laboribus), and, as th ere is in th e Scaiolae n o th in g of m ortality, this w ork exceeds o u r m ortal endeavours.25 A lthough D orn, like R uland, emphasizes the psychic n a tu re of the Scaiolae (“m ental powers and virtues, properties of the arts of the m in d ”), so th a t actually they are attrib u tes of the n a tu ra l m an an d m ust therefore be m ortal, and although Para celsus him self says in other w ritings that even the lu m en naturae is m ortal, it is nevertheless asserted here that the n a tu ra l powers of the m ind are im m ortal and belong to the Archa— the p rin ci ple th a t existed before the w orld. W e hear n o th in g m ore ab o u t the “m ortality” of the lum en naturae, b u t ra th e r of etern al principles, of the invisibilis hom o m axim us (Dorn) and his four Scaiolae, which appear to be in terp reted as m ental powers and psychological functions. T h is contradictio n is resolved w hen we bear in m in d th a t these concepts of Paracelsus were th e result not of ratio n al reflection b u t of in tuitiv e introspection, which was able to grasp the q u aternary structu re of consciousness and its archetypal natu re. T h e one is m ortal, the o th er im m ortal. D o rn ’s explanation as to why th e Scaiolae are “ difficult” m ight also be extended to Adech ( = Adam , A nthropos),20 who is the ru le r of the Scaiolae a n d /o r th e ir quintessence. Paracelsus 25 Ib id ., p . 177. 26 T h e fo llo w in g passages from P ico d e lla M ira n d o la (O p e r a o m n i a , I, p. 3018),

on th e C ab alistic in te r p r e ta tio n o f A d am , m ay h ave b e e n k n o w n to P aracelsus: “D ix it n a m q u e D eus: E cce A d am sic u t u n u s e x n o b is, n o n e x v o b is in q u it, sed u n u s ex n ob is. N a m in v o b is an g elis, n u m er u s est e t a lter ita s. In n o b is, id est, D e o , u n ita s in fin ita , aetern a, sim p licissim a e t a b so lu tissim a . . . . H in c sane c o n iic im u s a lter u m q u en d a m esse A d am coelestem , a n g e lis in c o elo d em o n stra tu m , u n u m e x D e o , q u e m v e rb o fecerat, e t a lter u m esse A d am terren u m . . . . Iste, u n u s est cu m D eo , h ie n o n m o d o a lter est, v e ru m etia m a liu s et a liu d a D e o . . . . Q u o d O nkeIus . . . sic in terp reta tu r. . . . Ecce A d am fu it u n ig e n itu s m e u s.” (A n d G o d said , L o, A d a m is as o n e o f us— h e sa id n o t “o f y o u ,” b u t “ o f u s.” F or in y o u a n g e ls th ere is n u m b e r a n d d ifferen ce; b u t in us, th a t is, in G od , th e r e is u n ity , in fin ite, e ter n a l, sim p le, a n d a b so lu te. . . . H e n c e w e clea rly co n jectu re th a t th ere is a certain o th e r h e a v e n ly A d am , sh o w n to th e a n g els in h e a v e n , th e o n e from G od, w h o m h e m ad e by h is w ord , a n d th e o th er, e a rth ly A d a m . . . . T h e form er is o n e w ith G od , th e la tter n o t o n ly seco n d , b u t o th e r an d separate from G od. . . . W h ic h O n k elo s th u s in terp rets: L o, A d a m w as m y o n ly b e g o tten son.)

actually calls him “ that difficult Adech.” Also, it is “ that great A dech’’ who hinders o u r intentions.27 T h e difficulties of the art play no small role in alchemy. G enerally they are explained as technical difficulties, b u t often enough, in the G reek texts as well as in the later L atin ones, there are rem arks ab o u t the psychic natu re of the dangers and obstacles th at com plicate the work. Partly ,they are dem onic influences, partly psychic dis turbances such as m elancholia. T hese difficulties find expression also in the names and definitions of the prim a m ateria, which, as the raw m aterial of the opus, provides am ple occasion for weari some trials of patience. T h e prim a m ateria is, as one can so aptly say in English, “ tantalizing” : it is cheap as d irt and can be had everywhere, only nobody knows it; it is as vague and evasive as the lapis th at is to be produced from it; it has a “ thousand nam es.” A nd the worst thing is th at w ithout it the work cannot even be begun. T h e task of the alchem ist is obviously like shoot ing an arrow through a thread h u n g u p in a cloud, as Spitteler says. T h e prim a m ateria is “saturnine,” and the malefic Saturn is the abode of the devil, or again it is the m ost despised and re jected thing, “throw n o u t into the street,” “cast on the dung h ill,” “found in filth.” These epithets reflect no t only the per plexity of the investigator b u t also his psychic background, which anim ates the darkness lying before him , so that he discov ers in the projection the qualities of the unconscious. T h is easily dem onstrable fact helps to elucidate the darkness th a t shrouds his spiritual endeavours and the labor Sophiae: it is a process of com ing to term s w ith the unconscious, which always sets in when a m an is confronted w ith its darkness. T h is confrontation forced itself on the alchem ist as soon as he made a serious effort to find the prim a m ateria. D. T H E R A P P R O C H E M E N T W I T H

THE

U N C O N S C IO U S

I do n o t know how m any or how few people today can imag ine w hat “com ing to terms w ith the unconscious” means. I fear they are only too few. B ut perhaps it will be conceded that the second p a rt of G oethe’s Faust presents only incidentally and in 27 See n e x t n o te a n d p a r . 214.

d o u btful degree an aesthetic problem , b u t prim arily and in far greater degree a hum an one. I t was a preoccupation th at accom panied the poet rig h t into old age, an alchemical encounter w ith the unconscious, com parable to the labor Sophiae of Paracelsus. I t is on the one hand an endeavour to understand the archetypal w orld of the psyche, on the other h an d a struggle against the sanity-threatening danger of fascination by the measureless heights and depths and paradoxes of psychic tru th . T h e denser, concretistic, daytim e m ind here reaches its lim its; for the “ C ed u rin i” (Paracelsus), the “ m en of crasser tem peram ent” (D orn), there is no way into “the untro d d en , the untreadable regions”— “and in this place,” says Paracelsus, “the A quaster does n o t break in ” (the dam p soul th at is akin to m atter). H ere the hum an m in d is confronted w ith its origins, the archetypes; the finite consciousness w ith its archaic foundations; the m ortal ego w ith the im m ortal self, A nthropos, purusha, atm an, or w hatever else be the names that hum an speculation has given to that collective preconscious state from which the individual ego arose. K insm an and stranger at once, it recognizes and yet does n o t recognize th at unknow n b ro th er who steps towards it, in ta n gible yet real. T h e m ore it is bou n d by tim e and space, the more it will feel the other as “ th a t difficult A dech” who crosses its purpose at every m isguided step, who gives fate an unexpected twist, and sets it as a task the very thing it feared. H ere we m ust feel o u r way w ith Paracelsus in to a question th at was never openly asked before in o u r culture, and was never clearly put, partly from sheer unconsciousness, partly from holy dread. M oreover, the secret doctrine of the A nthropos was dangerous because it had noth in g to do w ith the teachings of the C hurch, since from th at p o in t of view C hrist was a reflection— and only a reflection— of the in n e r A nthropos. H ence there were a h u n d red good reasons for disguising this figure in indecipherable secret names. an T h a t being so, we may perhaps be able to understand an o th e r dark passage from the concluding chapter, which runs: “If, therefore, I should count myself am ong the Scaiolae [or: Scaioli, ‘lovers of w isdom ’] in the m anner of the N ecrolii [ = ad epts], th a t w ould be som ething which in my view should be u n dertaken, b u t it is hindered by that great Adech, who deflects 171

o u r purpose b u t not the procedure. I leave this to you th eo reti cians to discuss.” 28 O ne gets the im pression th a t Adech is almost hostile to the adept, or at least in te n t on frustrating him in some way. From our above reflections, w hich are based on practical experience, we have seen how problem atical is the relation of the ego to the self. W e have only to m ake the further assum ption that this is w hat Paracelsus m eant. A nd this does indeed seem to be the case: he “counts him self” among the Scaioli, the philosophers, o r “im plants him self” in the Scaiolae, the q u atern ity of the O ri ginal M an— which seems to me a quite possible conception since another synonym for the quaternity is Paradise w ith its fo u r riv ers, or the eternal city, the M etropolis, w ith its four gates29 (the alchem ical equivalent is the dom us sapientiae and the squared circle). H e w ould thus find himself in the im m ediate vicinity of Adech and w ould be a citizen of the eternal city— another echo of C hristian ideas. T h e fact that Adech does no t deflect the work (m odus here presum ably means m ethod, procedure, as con trasted w ith propositum , purpose, intention) is understandable since Paracelsus is no do u b t speaking of the alchem ical opus, which always rem ains the same as a general procedure though its goal may vary: sometimes it is the production of gold (chrysopoea), sometimes the elixir, sometimes the aurum potabile or, finally, the mysterious filius unicus. Also, the artifex can have a selfish o r an idealistic attitude towards the work. 2 8 “ P o r r o s i p r o r a t io n e N e c r o lio r u m S c a io lis in se r e r e t, e sse t q u o d e x c ip ie n d u m d u c e r e m , id q u o d m a x im u s i lle A d e c h a n t e v e r t it e t p r o p o s it u m n o s tr u m , a t n o n

m o d u m d e d u c it: Q u o d V ob is T h e o r ic is d is c u t ie n d u m r e li n q u o ” (D e v i t a lo n g a , e d . D o r n , p p . 174L ). N e c r o li i a re t h e a d e p ts (“L ib e r A z o th ,'' p . 5 2 4 ). N e c r o lia o r n e c r o lic a m e a n s “ m e d ic in e c o n s e r v in g l i f e ” (D e v i t a lo n g a , p . 173). 29 T h e M o n o g e n e s ( filiu s u n ig e n itu s ) is id e n t ic a l w it h t h e c ity , a n d h is lim b s w ith i t s g a te s. C f. B a y n e s , A C o p t ic G n o s tic T r e a ti s e , p p . 5 8 a n d 89; a lso P s y c h o lo g y

a n d A l c h e m y , p a r s. 138L

4. T H E C O M M E N T A R Y O F G E R A R D D O R N W e now com e to th e en d of th e treatise D e vita longa. P a ra celsus h e re sum s u p th e w hole o p e ra tio n in a n ex trem ely co n d en sed w ay w h ich m akes in te rp re ta tio n even m o re h azard o u s th a n u su al. As w ith so m an y o th e r passages in th e Vita longa, we m u st ask ourselves: Is th e a u th o r b e in g in te n tio n a lly obscure, o r c a n ’t h e h e lp it? O r sh o u ld we ascrib e th e co n fu sio n to his e d i tor, A dam von B o d en stein ? T h e o b scu rities of this last c h a p te r have n o p a ra lle l in a ll P aracelsu s’s w ritin g s. O n e w o u ld be in clin ed to le t th e w h o le trea tise go h a n g d id it n o t c o n ta in th in g s w hich seem to b elo n g to th e m o st m o d e rn psychological insights. I now give th e o rig in a l te x t of P aracelsus to g e th e r w ith D o r n ’s co m m en ta ry fo r th e b en efit of read ers w ho w ish to form th e ir ow n ju d g m e n t: Paracelsus: De vita longa (i 562), Lib. V, cap. V, pp. 94*'. A tque ad hunc m odum abiit And in this m anner, through the e nym phididica n atu ra interven- intervention of the Scaiolae, Melientibus Scaiolis in aliam trans- usina departs from h er nymphm utationem perm ansura Melo- ididic nature, to rem ain in an syne, si difficilis ille Adech another transm utation if th a t diffi nuisset, qui u tru n q u e existit, cult Adech perm it, who rules cum mors turn vita Scaiolarum. over both the death and life of A nnuit praeterea prim a tem- the Scaiolae. Moreover, he per pora, sed ad finem seipsum im- mits the first times, b u t at the m utat. Ex quibus colligo super- end he changes himself. From m onica1 figmenta in cyphantis which I conclude th at the superaperire fenestram. Sed u t ea fig- m onic1 figments in the C yphanta antur, recusant gesta Melosynes, open a window. B ut in order to quae cuiusm odi sunt, missa faci- become fixed, they have to op mus. Sed ad natu ram nym phidi- pose the acts of M elusina, which, dicam. Ea u t in animis nostris of whatever kin d they may be, concipiatur, atque ita ad annum we dismiss to the nym phididic 1 From super = ‘above/ and monere = ‘inspire,’ hence ‘inspired from above.’

an ia d in 2 im m ortales perveniam us arrip im u s characteres Ve neris, quos et si vos u n a cum aliis cognoscitis, m inim e taraen usurpatis. Id ip su m autem absolvim us eo q u o d in prio rib u s capitibus indicavim us, u t hanc vitam secure tandem adsequam ur, in q u a aniadus d o m in a tu r ac reg n at, et cum eo, cui sine fine assistim us, p erm anet. H aec atq u e alia arcana, n u lla re prorsus in digent.3 E t in h u n c m odum vi tam longam conclusam relin q u imus.

realm . B ut in order th a t [she] may be conceived in our m inds, and we arrive im m ortal a t the year A n iadin,2 we take the char acters of Venus, which, even if you know yourselves one w ith others, you have nevertheless p u t to little use. W ith this we con clude w hat we treated of in the earlier chapters, th a t we m ay safely a tta in th a t life over w hich A niadus dom inates an d reigns, an d w hich endures for ever w ith h im , in w hom we are present w ith o u t end. T h is a n d o th er mys teries are in need of n o th in g w hatever.3 A nd herew ith we end ou r discourse on longevity.

D orn: D e vita longa (1583), p. 178 [Paracelsus] says th a t M elusina, [Paracelsus] a it M elosinam , i.e. app aren tem in m ente visionem i.e., the vision ap p earin g in the . . . e nym phididica n a tu ra , in m ind, departs from h e r nym phaliam tran sm u tatio n em abire, ididic n a tu re in to an o th e r trans in q u a perm ansura[m ] esse, si m u ta tio n , in w hich she w ill re m odo difficilis ille A dech, in te m ain if only th a t difficult Adech, th a t is, the in n e r m an, perm it, rio r hom o vdl. a n n u erit, hoc est, th a t is, approve: w ho brings faveret: q u i quidem u tru n q u e ab o u t bo th , th a t is, d e a th a n d efficit, videlicet m ortem , et vitam Scaiolarum , i.e. m en taliu m oper- life, of the Scaiolae, th a t is, the ationum . H a ru m tem pora prim a, m en ta l operations. T h e first i.e. in itia a n n u it, i.e. ad m ittit, times, th a t is, the beginnings, of sed ad finem seipsum im m utat, these he perm its, th a t is, favours; intellige p ro p te r intervenientes b u t a t the en d he changes h im ac im pedientes distractiones, quo self, nam ely because of the dis m inus con seq u an tu r effectum tractions th a t intervene a n d im inchoatae, scl. operationes. Ex pede, so th a t the things begun, qu ibus [Paracelsus] colligit su- th a t is, th e operations, do not perm onica1 figm enta, hoc est, o b tain their effect. From w hich [Paracelsus] concludes th a t the speculationes aenigm aticas, in cyphantis [vas stillatorium ], i.e. superm onic1 figments, th a t is, 2 N o t found anywhere else. May be interpreted as the “tim e of p erfection .1 s A favourite saying o f the alchem ists, applied to the lapis. I See above.

se p ara tio n u m vel p raep aratio n u m op eratio n ib u s, a p e rire fenestram , hoc est, intellectum , sed u t figantur, i.e. ad finem perduc a n tu r, recusant gesta M elosines, hoc est, visionum varietates, et observationes, q u ae cuius m odi su n t (ait) m issa facim us. A d natu ra m ny m p h id id icam rediens, u t in anim is nostris co n cip iatu r, in q u it a tq u e hac via ad a n n u m a n ia d in 2 perveniam us, hoc est, ad vitam longam per im aginationem , a rrip im u s characteres Veneris, i.e. am oris scutum et loricam ad v irilite r adversis resisten d u m obstaculis: a m o r enim om nem difficultatem superat: quos et si vos u n a cum aliis cognoscitis, p u ta to characteres, m inim e tam en usurpatis. A bsolvit ita q u e iam Paracelsus ea, q u ae p rio rib u s capitibus indicavit in vitam hanc secure consequendam , in q u a d o m in a tu r e t reg n a t aniadus, i.e. re ru m efficicia et cum ea is, cui sine fine assistim us, perm an et, aniadus nem pe coelestis: H aec a tq u e alia arcana n u lla re prorsus in d ig e n t.3

2, 3 See above.

enigm atical speculations, in the C yphanta [distilling vessel], o p en a w indow , th a t is, the u n d e r standing, by m eans of the opera tions of separation o r p re p a ra tion; b u t in ord er to becom e fixed, th a t is, bro u g h t to an end, they have to oppose the acts of M elusina, th a t is, divers visions an d observations, w hich of w h at ever k in d they m ay be, he says, we dismiss. R e tu rn in g to the n y m p h id id ic realm , in o rd er th a t [she] m ay be conceived in o u r m inds, a n d th a t in this way we m ay a tta in to the year A n ia d in ,2 th a t is, to a long life by im ag in a tion, we take th e characters of V enus, th a t is, the shield and b u ck ler of love, to resist m anfully the obstacles th a t co nfront us, for love overcom es all difficulties; w hich characters, even if you know yourselves one w ith others, you have nevertheless p u t to little use. A nd thus Paracelsus brings to a n end those things w hich he tre a te d of in the ear lie r chapters, th a t we m ay safely o b ta in th a t life over w hich A ni adus, th a t is, the efficacity of things, dom inates a n d reigns, a n d w hich endures for ever w ith him , nam ely the heavenly A n ia dus, in w hom we are present w ith o u t end: this a n d o th e r mys teries are in need of n o th in g w h atever.3

A . M E L U S IN A AND T H E PROCESS O F IN D IV ID U A TIO N

2>5

T h e text certainly needs a commentary! T h e Scaiolae, as the four parts, limbs, o r em anations of the A nthropos,4 are the or gans w ith which he actively intervenes in the w orld of appear ances o r by which he is connected w ith it, just as the invisible quinta essentia, or aether, appears in this w orld as the four ele m ents or, conversely, is composed out of them. Since the Scaio lae, as we have seen, are also psychic functions, these m ust be understood as m anifestations or effluences of the O ne, the invis ible A nthropos. As functions of consciousness, and particularly as im aginatio, speculatio, phantasia, and fides, they “in terv en e” and stim ulate M elusina, the water-nixie, to change herself into hum an form. D orn thinks of this as a “vision appearing in the m in d ” and n o t as a projection on a real woman. So far as o u r biographical knowledge extends, this latter possibility does no t seem to have occurred to Paracelsus either. In C olonna’s H ypnerotomachia P oliphili the Lady Polia attains a high degree of reality (far m ore so than D ante’s ethereal Beatrice b u t still n o t as m uch as H elen in Faust II), yet even she dissolves into a lovely dream as the sun rises on the first day of May: . . . tears shone in her eyes like clear crystals, like round pearls, like the dew which Aurora strews on the clouds of dawn. Sighing like a heavenly image, like incense of musk and amber rising to give delight to the spirits of heaven, she dissolved into thin air, leaving nought behind her but a breath of heavenly fragrance. So, with my happy dream, she vanished from my sight, saying as she went: Poliphilo, most dear beloved, farewell! 5

216

Polia dissolves ju st before the long-desired u n io n w ith her lover. H elen, on the other hand, vanishes only w ith the dissolu tion of h e r son E uphorion. T h o u g h Paracelsus gives clear in d i cations of the n u p tial m ood w ith his “exaltation” in May and his allusion to the stinging nettle and the little flame, he disregards entirely the projection on a real person o r a concretely visual ized, personified image, b u t chooses instead the legendary figure of M elusina. Now this figure is certainly n o t an allegorical chi m era or a m ere m etaphor: she has h er p articu lar psychic reality F o r a p a ra lle l, cf. E n o ch 40 : 2, w h ere G od h as fo u r faces a n d is su rro u n d e d by th e fo u r angels of th e Face. B T h e D ream o f P o lip h ilo (ed. Fierz-D avid), p . 210. 4

176

217

in the sense th at she is a glam orous apparition who, by h er very nature, is on one side a psychic vision b u t also, on account of the psyche’s capacity for im aginative realization (which Paracelsus calls Ares), is a distinct objective entity, like a dream which tem porarily becomes reality. T h e figure of M eIusina is em i n ently suited to this purpose. T h e anim a belongs to those b o r derline phenom ena which chiefly occur in special psychic situa tions. T h e y are characterized by the m ore or less sudden collapse of a form or style of life which till then seemed the indispensable foundation of the indiv id u al’s whole career. W hen such a catas trophe occurs, n o t only are all bridges back into the past broken, b u t there seems to be no way forw ard into the future. O ne is confronted w ith a hopeless and im penetrable darkness, an abys mal void th at is now suddenly filled with an allu rin g vision, the palpably real presence of a strange yet helpful being, in the same way that, when one lives for a long time in great solitude, the silence o r the darkness becomes visibly, audibly, and tangibly alive, and the unknow n in oneself steps u p in an unknow n guise. T h is peculiarity of the anim a is found also in the M elusina legend: Em m erich, C ount of Poitiers, had adopted Raym ond, th e son of a poor kinsm an. T h e relation betw een adoptive father and son was harm onious. B ut once, on the h u n t, when pursuing a w ild boar, they got separated from the rest and w ent astray in the forest. N ight fell and they lit a fire to warm themselves. Sud denly the C o unt was attacked by the boar, and R aym ond struck at it w ith his sword. B ut by an unlucky accident the blade re bounded and dealt the C ount a m ortal blow. R aym ond was in consolable, and in despair m ounted his horse to flee he knew n o t where. A fter a tim e he came to a m eadow w ith a b u b b lin g spring. T h e re he found three beautifu l women. O ne of them was M elusina, who by her clever counsel saved him from dis h onour and a homeless fate. A ccording to the legend, R aym ond found him self in the cat astrophic situation we have described, w hen his whole way of life had collapsed and he faced ruin. T h a t is the m om ent when the harbinger of fate, the anim a, an archetype of the collective unconscious, appears. In the legend M elusina sometimes has the tail of a fish and sometimes th at of a snake; she is half hum an, half anim al. Occasionally she appears only in snake form. T h e 177

legend apparently has Celtic roots,6 b u t the m otif is found prac tically everywhere. It was not only extraordinarily popular in Europe during the M iddle Ages, b u t occurs also in India, in the legend of Urvashi and Pururavas, which is m entioned in the Shatapatha-B rahm ana.7 It also occurs am ong the N o rth A m eri can Indians.8 T h e m otif of half-man, half-fish is universally dis sem inated. Special m ention should be made of C onrad Veceriu s,9 according to whom M elusina, or Melyssina, comes from an island in the sea where nine sirens dwell, who can change into any shape they want. T h is is of particular interest as Para celsus m entions M elusina along w ith “Syrena.” 10 T h e tradition probably goes back to Pom ponius M ela,11 who calls the island “Sena” and the beings who dwell there “Senae.” T h ey cause storms, can change their shape, cure incurable diseases, and know the fu tu re .12 Since the m ercurial serpent of the alchemists is n o t infrequently called virgo and, even before Paracelsus, was represented in the form of a M elusina, the la tte r’s capacity to change her shape and to cure diseases is of im portance in th a t these peculiarities were also predicated of M ercurius, and w ith special emphasis. O n the other hand, M ercurius was also de picted as the grey-bearded M ercurius senex or H erm es Trism egistus, from which it is evident th at two em pirically very com m on archetypes, nam ely the anim a and the W ise O ld M an,13 flow together in the symbolic phenom enology of M ercurius. Both are daemons of revelation and, in the form of M ercurius, represent the panacea. Again and again M ercurius is called verSatilisj versipellis, m u tabilis, servus or ceruus fugitivus, Proteus, etc. 819 T h e alchemists, an d Paracelsus too, were no d o u b t con fronted often enough w ith the dark abyss of not-knowing, and, unable to go forward, were on their own admission dependent on revelation or illum ination o r a helpful dream . For this rea* G rim m , T e u to n ic M y th o lo g y , I, p. 434. T Sacred B ooks o f th e East, X X V I, p . 91. 8 B a rin g -G o u ld , C u rio u s M y th s of th e M id d le A g e s, p p . 502ff. 9 “D e reb u s gestis Im p eratoris H en ric i V II,” G e rm a n ia e H is to r ic o ru m (ed. U rstisius), II, p p . 63L 10 P a ra g ra n u m , p . 105. [Cf. "Paracelsus th e P h y sic ia n ,” par. 24.] 11 Fl. 1st cen t. a .d . 12 C h ro n o g ra p h ia , e d . Frick, p . 67. i s C f. m y “A rch etyp es o f th e C o llectiv e U n co n scio u s” an d “C on cern in g th e A rch etyp es, w ith Sp ecial R e fer e n c e to th e A n im a C o n cep t.”

178

220

son they needed a “m inistering sp irit,” a fam iliar o r xapeSpos, to whose invocation the G reek Magic Papyri bear witness. T h e snake form of the god of revelation, and of spirits in general, is a universal type. Paracelsus seems to have know n n o th in g of any psychological premises. H e attrib u tes the appearance and transform ation of M elusina to the effect of the “interven in g ” Scaiolae, the driving spiritual forces em anating from the hom o m axim us. T h e opus was subordinated to them , for its aim was to raise m an to the sphere of the A nthropos. T h e re is no d o u b t that the goal of the philosophical alchem ist was higher self-developm ent, or the p ro duction of w hat Paracelsus calls the hom o maior, or w hat I w ould call individuation. T h is goal confronts the alchem ist at the start w ith the loneliness w hich all of them feared, w hen one has “only” oneself for company. T h e alchemist, on principle, w orked alone. H e form ed no school. T h is rigorous solitude, to gether w ith his preoccupation w ith the endless obscurities of th e work, was sufficient to activate the unconscious and, through the pow er of im agination, to b rin g into being things that ap p ar ently were not there before. U n d e r these circum stances “enig m atical speculations” arise in which the unconscious is visually experienced as a “vision appearing in the m in d .” M elusina emerges from the watery realm and assumes h u m an form — some times q u ite concretely, as in Faust / , w here Faust’s hopelessness leads him straight into the arms of G retchen, in w hich form Melusina w ould doubtless rem ain were it no t for the catastrophe which drives Faust still deeper into magic: M elusina changes into H elen. B u t she does n o t rem ain even there, for all attem pts at concretization are shattered like the re to rt of the hom unculus against the throne of Galatea. A nother pow er takes over, “th at difficult A dech,” who “at the end changes him self.” T h e greater m an “hinders o u r purpose,” for Faust has to change him self at death in to a boy, the p u er aeternus, to w hom the tru e w orld w ill be shown only after all desirousness has fallen away from him . “ M iserable m ortals, to whom N atu re has denied h er first and best treasure, the lum en naturae!” It is Adech, the in n e r m an, w ho w ith his Scaiolae guides the purpose of the adept and causes him to behold fantasy images from which he w ill draw false conclusions, devising o u t of them situations of whose provisional and fragile n a tu re he is unaw are.

283

N o r is he aw are th a t by k n o ck in g on th e d o o r of th e u n k n o w n h e is obeying the law of the in n e r, fu tu re m an, an d th a t he is diso b ed ien t to this law w henever he seeks to secure a p e rm a n e n t advantage o r possession fro m his work. N o t his ego, th a t frag m e n t of a personality, is m ean t; it is ra th e r th a t a w holeness, of w hich he is a p art, w ants to be tran sfo rm ed fro m a la te n t state of unconsciousness in to a n ap p ro x im ate consciousness of itself. T h e “acts of M elu sin a” are deceptive phantasm s com p o u n d e d of su p rem e sense an d th e m ost p ern icio u s nonsense, a v eritab le veil of M aya w hich lu res an d leads every m o rta l astray. F rom these phantasm s th e wise m an w ill ex tract th e “superm o n ic ” elem ents, th a t is, th e h ig h e r in sp iratio n s; h e extracts ev ery th in g m ean in g fu l an d v aluable as in a process of d istilla tio n ,14 an d catches th e precious drops of th e liq u o r Sophiae in the ready b eak er of his soul, w here they “ open a w indow ” for his u n d erstan d in g . Paracelsus is h ere a llu d in g to a d iscrim in ativ e process of critical ju d g m e n t w hich separates th e chaff from th e w heat— a n in d isp en sab le p a rt of any rap p ro c h e m e n t w ith the unconscious. I t req u ire s n o a rt to becom e stu p id ; th e w hole a rt lies in e x tra ctin g w isdom from stu p id ity . S tu p id ity is th e m o th er of the wise, b u t cleverness never. T h e “ fix atio n ” refers alchem ically to the lapis b u t psychologically to th e co n so lid atio n of feel ing. T h e d istillate m u st be fixed an d h e ld fast, m u st becom e a firm conviction an d a p e rm a n e n t co n ten t. B.

223

T H E H I E R O S G A M OS O F

THE

E V E R L A S T IN G

M AN

M elusina, th e deceptive Shakti, m u st r e tu r n to th e w atery realm if th e w ork is to reach its goal. She sh o u ld n o lo n g er dance before th e ad ep t w ith a llu rin g gestures, b u t m u st becom e w h at she was from th e b eg in n in g : a p a rt of his w holeness.15 As such she m ust b e “conceived in th e m in d .” T h is leads to a u n io n of conscious a n d unconscious th a t was always p resen t uncon1 4 " A n d so t h is s p ir it is e x tr a c te d a n d s e p a r a te d fr o m t h e o t h e r sp ir it, a n d t h e n

t h e S p a g y r ic h a s t h e w in e o f h e a lt h .” (“ F r a g m e n ta ,” e d . S u d h o ff, II I, p . 305.) I S T h e a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d ic tio n b e t w e e n t h e r e je c tio n o f t h e g e s ta M e lo s in e s a n d t h e a s s im ila t io n o f t h e a n im a is d u e to t h e fa c t th a t t h e g e s ta o c c u r i n a sta te o f a n im a p o ss e ss io n , fo r w h ic h r e a s o n th e y m u s t b e p r e v e n t e d . T h e a n im a is t h e r e b y fo r c e d in t o t h e in n e r w o r ld , w h e r e sh e f u n c t io n s as t h e m e d iu m b e tw e e n t h e e g o a n d t h e u n c o n s c io u s , as d o e s t h e p e r s o n a b e t w e e n t h e e g o a n d th e e n v ir o n m e n t.

PARACELSUS AS A SPIRITUAL PH EN O M EN O N

sciously b u t was always denied by the one-sidedness of the con scious attitude. From this u n io n arises that wholeness w hich the introspective philosophy of all tim es and clim es has character ized w ith an inexhaustible variety of symbols, names, and con cepts. T h e “m ille n om in a” disguise the fact that this coniunctio is n ot concerned w ith anything tangible or discursively appre hensible; it is an experience that sim ply cannot be reproduced in words, but whose very nature carries with it an unassailable feelin g of eternity or timelessness. 224 I w ill n ot repeat here what I have said elsewhere on this sub ject. It makes no difference anyway what one says about it. Para celsus does, however, give one more h in t which I cannot pass over in silence; this concerns the “characters of V enus.” 10 !6 T h is recalls the “signs and characters of the p lan ets” in A grippa, w hich are im p rin ted on m an a t b irth as on everything else. B ut m an has, conversely, the faculty of re-approxim ating him self to the stars: “Potest enim anim us noster per im aginationem vel rationem quandam im itatione, ita alicui stellae conform sri, u t subito cuiusdam stellae m uneribus im pleatur. . . . D ebem us ig itu r in quovis opere et rerum applicatione vehem enter affectare, im aginari, sperare firmissimeque credere, id enim plurim um erit adium ento . . . anim um h u m anum q u an d o per suas passiones et effectus ad opus aliquod attentissim us fuerit, coniungi ipsum cum stellarum animis, etiam cum intelligentiis: et ita q uoque coniunctum causam esse u t m irabilis quaedam virtus operibus ac rebus nostris in fu n d atu r, cum quia est in eo rerum om nium apprehensio et potestas, turn q u ia omnes res habent n atu ralem obedientiam ad ipsum , et de necessitate efficaciam et m ovent ad id quod desiderat nim is forti desiderio. E t secundum hoc verificatur artificium characterum , im aginum , incantationum et serm onum , etc. . . . A nim us enim nostcr quando fertu r in aliquem m agnum excessum alicuius passionis vel virtutis, arrip it saepissime ex se ipso horam vel o p p o rtu n itatem fortiorem , etc. . . . hie est m odus p e r quem in v en itu r efficacia [operationum ].” (For through a certain m ental faculty o u r sp irit can thus by im itation be m ade like to some star, so th a t it is suddenly filled w ith the functions of a star. . . . W e ought therefore in every w ork an d application of things eagerly to aspire, imagine, hope, and most firmly believe, for th a t will be a very great help. . . . [De occult, phil., Lib. I, cap. 66.] T h e h um an spirit, when through its passions and operations it is highly in te n t upon any work, should join itself w ith the spirits of the stars, yea, w ith th e ir intelligences; an d w hen thus conjoined, be th e cause th a t a certain w onder ful virtue is infused into our works an d afTairs, b o th because there is in it a grasping of and pow er over all things, and because all things have a n atu ra l and necessarily efficacious obedience to it, and move towards w hat it desires w ith an extrem ely strong desire. A nd according to this is verified th e work of the ch ar acters, images, incantations, and words, etc. . . . For w hen o u r sp irit is moved to any great excess of any passion or virtue, it very often snatches for itself a more effective hour or opportunity, etc. . . . T h is is the way by w hich the efficacy [of the operations] is found.) (Lib. I, cap. 67.)

S25

M elusina, being a water-nixie, is closely connected with M organa, the “sea-born,” whose classical counterpart is A phro dite, the “foam -born.” U nion w ith the fem inine personification of the unconscious is, as we have seen, a well-nigh eschatological experience, a reflection of which is to be found in the Apocalyp tic M arriage of the Lam b, the C hristian form of the hierosgamos. T h e passage runs (Revelation 19 : 6-10): And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, say ing, Alleluia; for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the mar riage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me: Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren . . .

226

T h e “he” of the text is the angel that speaks to Jo h n ; in the language of Paracelsus, he is the hom o maior, Adech. I need hardly p o in t out that Venus is closely related to the love-goddess Astarte, whose sacred marriage-festivals were know n to every one. T h e experience of union underlying these festivals is, psy chologically, the em brace and com ing together again of two souls in the exaltation of spring, in the “ true May” ; it is the successful reu n itin g of an apparently hopelessly divided duality in the wholeness of a single being. T h is unity embraces the m ul tiplicity of all beings. H ence Paracelsus says: “If you know your selves one w ith others.” Adech is n o t m y self, he is also that of my brothers: “I am thy fellowservant, and of thy b reth ren .” T h a t is the specific definition of this experience of the coniunctio: the self which includes me includes many others also, for the unconscious th a t is “conceived in our m in d ” does n o t belong to me and is n o t peculiar to me, b u t is everywhere. It is the q u in tessence of the individual and at the same tim e the collective. 227 T h e participants in the m arriage of the Lam b en ter into eternal blessedness; they are “virgins, which were no t defiled w ith w om en” and are “redeem ed from am ong m en” (Rev. 182

14 : 4). In Paracelsus the goal of redem p tio n is "the year Aniad in ,” or tim e of perfection, w hen the O ne M an reigns for ever. C. SPIRIT AND NATURE

W hy did Paracelsus n o t avail him self of the C hristian im ag ery, w hen it expresses the same tho u g h t so very clearly? W hy does Venus appear in the place of M elusina, and why is it n o t th e m arriage of the Lam b, b u t a hierosgamos of Venus and M ars, as the text itself hints? T h e reason is probably the same as th a t which com pelled Francesco C olonna to make Poliphilo seek his beloved Polia n o t w ith the M other of God b u t w ith Venus. For the same reason the boy in C hristian R osencreutz’s Chymical W ed d ing17 led the hero down to an u n d erg ro u n d cham ber, on the door of w hich was a secret inscription graven in copper characters. C opper (cu p ru m ) is correlated w ith the Cyprian (A phrodite, Venus). In the cham ber they fo u n d a three-cor n ered tom b containing a copper cauldron, and in it was an angel hold in g a tree that d rip p ed continually into the cauldron. T h e tom b was supported by three anim als: an eagle, an ox, and a lion.18 T h e boy explained th at in this tom b Venus lay buried, who had destroyed m any an u p rig h t m an. C o n tin u in g th eir de scent, they came to the bedcham ber of Venus and found the goddess asleep on a couch. Indiscreetly, the boy tw itched the coverlet away and revealed h e r in all h er naked beauty.19 T r a n s. F o x cro ft, p p . i26ff. 18 T h e lo w e r triad, c o rr esp o n d in g to th e u p p e r T r in ity , a n d c o n sistin g o f th e

th e r io m o r p h ic sy m b o ls o f th e th ree evan gelists. T h e an g el as th e fo u r th sym b ol o ccu p ies a sp ecial p o sitio n , w h ic h in th e T r in ity is assign ed to th e d e v il. R e versal o f m oral values: w h a t is e v il ab ove is g o o d b elo w , an d v ice versa. 18 In th e G o ld e n A ss o f A p u le iu s th e process o f r e d em p tio n b e g in s at th e m o m en t w h en th e h ero , w h o h as b e e n c h a n g ed in to an ass b eca u se o f h is d isso lu te life , su cceed s in sn a tc h in g a b u n c h o f roses from th e h a n d o f th e p r iest o f Isis, a n d e a tin g th em . R o ses are th e flow ers o f V en u s. T h e h e r o is th e n in itia te d in to th e m ysteries o f Isis, w h o , as a m o th e r god d ess, corresp on d s to th e M ater G loriosa in F au st I I . It is o f in te r e st to n o te th e a n a lo g ies b e tw e en th e prayer to th e M ater G loriosa a t th e e n d o f F au st a n d the prayer to Isis at th e e n d o f th e G o ld e n A ss: (F aust I I , trans. W a y n e, p . 288) O c o n tr ite hearts, seek w ith y o u r eyes

(G o ld e n Ass) Y ou are in d e e d th e h o ly p reserver of h u m a n k in d ,

«9

T h e ancient w orld contained a large slice of n atu re and a num ber of questionable things which C hristianity was b o und to overlook if the security of a spiritual standpoint was n o t to be hopelessly compromised. No penal code and no m oral code, not even the sublim est casuistry, will ever be able to codify and pro nounce ju st judgm ent upon the confusions, the conflicts of duty, and the invisible tragedies of the n atu ral m an in collision with the exigencies of culture. “Spirit” is one aspect, “N atu re” an other. “You may pitch N ature out w ith a fork, yet she’ll always come back again,” says the poet.20 N ature must not w in the game, b u t she cannot lose. A nd w henever the conscious m ind clings to hard and fast concepts and gets caught in its own rules and regulations— as is unavoidable and of the essence of civilized consciousness—n a tu re pops up w ith h er inescapable demands. N ature is n o t m atter only, she is also spirit. W ere that n o t so, the only source of spirit would be hum an reason. It is the great achievem ent of Paracelsus to have elevated the “light of n a tu re ” to a principle and to have emphasized it in a far m ore funda m ental way than his predecessor Agrippa. T h e lumen naturae is the natural spirit, whose strange and significant workings we can observe in the m anifestations of the unconscious now that psyT h e visage of salvation;

Offering amid the evil chances of the unfortunate the kindly protection of a mother,

B lissful in that gaze, arise

And no sm allest m om ent that passes is devoid o f your favours,

T hrough glad regeneration.

B ut both by land and by sea you care for men, driving off life’s storms and stretching out to them your saving hand; w herewith you unravel the most tangled webs of fate, and calm the tempests of fortune, and control the varied wanderings o f the stars.

N ow may every pulse o f good Seek to serve before thy face;

W herefore, poor though I am, I w ill do what I may, as a devotee,

Virgin, Queen of M otherhood, Keep us, Goddess, in thy grace.

T o keep ever hidden in my heart the vision of your divine face and most holy godhead.

20 Horace, Epist. I. x. 24.

chological research has come to realize th a t the unconscious is n o t ju st a “subconscious” appendage or the dustbin o£ conscious ness, b u t is a largely autonom ous psychic system for com pensat ing the biases an d aberrations of the conscious attitu d e, for the m ost p art functionally, though it sometimes corrects them by force. Consciousness can, as we know, be led astray by n a tu ra l ness as easily as by spirituality, this being the logical consequence of its freedom of choice. T h e unconscious is n o t lim ited only to the instinctual and reflex processes of the cortical centres; it also extends beyond consciousness and, w ith its symbols, anticipates future conscious processes. It is therefore q u ite as m uch a “supraconsciousness.” 230 Convictions an d m oral values w ould have no m eaning if they were n o t believed and did n o t possess exclusive validity. A nd yet they are m an-m ade and tim e-conditioned assertions or explanations w hich we know very well are capable of all sorts of m odifications, as has happened in the past and w ill h ap p en again in the fu tu re. A ll th a t has happened d u rin g the last two th o u sand years shows th at they are reliable signposts for certain stretches of the way, then comes a painful upheaval, which is felt as subversive and im m oral, u n til a new conviction takes root. So far as the essential traits of hum an n a tu re rem ain the same, cer ta in m oral values enjoy perm an en t validity. T h e m ost m eticu lous observance of the T e n C om m andm ents, however, is no o b stacle to the m ore refined forms of tu rp itu d e, an d the far loftier principle of C hristian love of one’s neig h b o u r can lead to such tangled conflicts of d u ty that sometimes the G ordian knot can only be cut w ith a very u nchristian sword. D. T H E ECCLESIASTICAL SACRAM ENT AND T H E OPUS ALC H Y M IC UM

sS1

Paracelsus, like m any others, was unable to m ake use of the C hristian symbolism because the C hristian form ula inevitably suggested the C hristian solution and w ould thus have conduced to the very th in g th a t had to be avoided. It was n a tu re an d h e r p a rticu lar “lig h t” that had to be acknow ledged and lived w ith in the face of an attitu d e that assiduously overlooked them . T h is could only be done u n d e r the protective aegis of the arcanum . B ut one should n o t im agine Paracelsus or any o th er alchem ist 185

settling down to invent an arcane term inology th at w ould make the new doctrine a kind of private code. Such an undertaking w ould presuppose the existence of definite views and clearly de fined concepts. B ut there is no question of that: none of the al chemists ever had any clear idea of what his philosophy was really about. T h e best proof of this is the fact that everyone w ith any originality at all coined his own terminology, w ith the result that no one fully understood anybody else. For one alchemist, LulIy was an obscurantist and a charlatan and G eber the great au th o r ity; while for another, G eber was a Sphinx and L ully the source of all enlightenm ent. So w ith Paracelsus: we have no reason to suppose that behind his neologisms there was a clear, consciously disguised concept. I t is on the contrary probable that he was try ing to grasp the ungraspable w ith his countless esotericisms, and snatched at any symbolic h in t th at the unconscious offered. T h e new world of scientific knowledge was still in a nascent dreamstate, a m ist heavy w ith the future, in which shadowy figures groped about for the right words. Paracelsus was not reaching back into the past; rather, for lack of anything suitable in the present, he was using the old rem nants to give new form to a renew ed archetypal experience. H ad the alchemists felt any seri ous need to revive the past, their eruditio n would have enabled them to draw on the inexhaustible storehouse of the heresiologists. B ut except for the “A quarium sapientum ,” 21 which like wise treats of heresies, I have found only one alchem ist (of the sixteenth century) who shudderingly adm its to having read the Panarium of Epiphanius. N or are any secret traces of Gnostic usages to be found, despite the fact th a t the texts swarm w ith unconscious parallels. 232 T o re tu rn to o u r text: it is clear th at it describes a procedure for attaining nothing less than im m ortality (“that we may ar rive im m ortal at the year A niadin”). T h ere is, however, only one way to this goal, and that is through the sacraments of the C hurch. These are here replaced by the “sacram ent” of the opus alchym icum , less by word than by deed, and w ithout the least sign of any conflict with the orthodox C hristian standpoint. 233 W hich way did Paracelsus hold to be the true one? O r were 21 M usaeum h erm eticu m , pp. 73ff. [T his sentence has been altered in accordance w ith the correction given in Psychology an d A lch em y, 2nd edn., par. 431, n. 11.— T r a n s l a t o r .]

b o th o£ them tru e for him? Presum ably the latter, an d th e rest he “ leaves to the theoreticians to discuss.” 234 W h at is m eant by the “characters of V enus” rem ains ob scure. T h e “sapphire” 22 which Paracelsus prized so m uch, the cheyri, ladanum , m uscus, an d am bra belong, according to A grippa , 23 to Venus. T h e goddess undoubtedly appears in o u r te x t on a higher level, in keeping w ith h er classical cognomens: doctaj sublim is} magistra rerum hum anarum divinarum que, etc .24 O ne of h er characters is certainly love in th e widest sense, so D orn is n o t w rong w hen he interprets them as the “shield and buckler of love.” Shield an d buckler are m artial attrib u tes, b u t there is also a Venus armata .25 M ythologically, the personified A m or is a son of Venus an d Mars, whose cohabitation in al chemy is a typical co n iu n ctio .26 D orn, despite being a Paracelsist, had a decidedly polem ical a ttitu d e towards certain fu n d a m ental tenets of alchem y ,27 so th a t a C hristian love of one’s neighbour, well arm ed against evil, suited him very well. B u t so far as Paracelsus is concerned this in te rp re ta tio n is d o u b tfu l. T h e w ord Venus points in q u ite an o th er direction, an d since the C hristian gifts of grace were included in his C atholic faith he had in any case no need of a christianized Am or. O n the con trary, a Venus M agistra o r A phrodite U rania, or even a Sophia, w ould have seemed to him m ore ap p ro p riate to the mystery of the lu m en naturae. T h e words “m inim e tam en usurpatis” m ig h t also be a h in t at discretion .28 H ence th e Venus episode in the Chym ical W ed d in g may have m ore bearing on the in te rp re tatio n of this cryptic passage th an D o rn ’s w ell-m eant circum lo cution. 235 T h e concluding reference to a “life w ith o u t e n d ” u n d e r 22 "For b efo re th e sa p p h ir e e x isted , th ere w as n o a r ca n u m ” (P a ra g ra n u m 1 p . 77). D e v it a lo n g a , e d . D o r n , p . 7a: " T h e y are to be referred to th e c h e y ri a n d th e sapp h ir in e flow er, i.e., to th ose tw o p r e cio u s ston es o f th e p h ilo so p h e r s.” B o d e n stein (1O n o m a stic o n , p . 64): “T h e sa p p h ir in e m aterial: th a t liq u id in w h ic h th e r e is n o h a r m fu l m a tte r .” 23 O c c u lt, p k i l., I, cap. 28, p . x x x iv . 2 4 C arter, E p ith e ta D e o r u m , s.v. “V e n u s.” 2 5 Ib id . 26 T h e h e r m a p h r o d itic V e n u s w as regard ed as ty p ify in g th e c o n iu n c tio o f S u lp h u r a n d M ercu rius. C f. P ern ety , F a b les e g y p tie n n e s e t g re c q u e s, II, p. 119. 2 7 C f. " P sych ology an d R e lig io n ,” p . 60. 2 8 i t c o u ld b e tra n sla ted as "you h a v e m e n tio n e d n o t at a ll.”

187

the dom inion of A niadus is very rem iniscent of Rev. 20 :4 : . . and they lived and reigned w ith C hrist a thousand years.” T h e year A niadin w ould thus correspond to the thousand-year reign in the Apocalypse. 236 In conclusion I would rem ark that the survey of the secret doctrine which I have attem pted to sketch here makes it seem likely that besides the physician and C hristian in Paracelsus there was also an alchemical philosopher at work who, pushing every analogy to the very lim it, strove to penetrate the divine mysteries. T h e parallel w ith the mysteries of the C hristian faith, which we can only feel as a most dangerous conflict, was no Gnostic heresy for him , despite the most disconcerting resem blances; for him as for every other alchemist, m an had been en trusted w ith the task of bringing to perfection the divine will im planted in nature, and this was a truly sacram ental work. T o the question “Are you, as it would seem, an H erm etic?” he could have replied w ith Lazarello: “I am a C hristian, O King, and it is no disgrace to be that and an H erm etic at the same tim e.” 29 29 L a z a re llo , C ra te r H e r m e tis (1505), fol. 32'·-'’. (As i n R e itz e n s te in , P o im a n d re s,

P- 320·)

237

238

- E P IL O G U E

I had long been aware th a t alchemy is no t only the m other of chemistry, b u t is also the fo reru n n er of o u r m odern psychology of the unconscious. T h u s Paracelsus appears as a pioneer not only of chem ical m edicine b u t of em pirical psychology and psy chotherapy. It may seem th at I have said too little ab o u t Paracelsus the self-sacrificing physician and C hristian, and too m uch ab o u t his dark shadow, th a t o th er Paracelsus, whose soul was interm ingled w ith a strange spiritual cu rren t which, issuing from im m em orial sources, flowed beyond h im into a distant fu tu re. B ut— ex tenebris lux— it was precisely because he was so fascinated by magic th at he was able to open the door to the realities of n a tu re for the benefit of succeeding centuries. T h e C hristian and the p rim itive pagan lived together in h im in a strange and m arvellous way to form a conflicting whole, as in o th er great Renaissance figures. A lthough he had to en d u re the conflict, he was spared th a t agonizing split betw een knowledge and faith that has riven the later epochs. As a m an he had one father, b u t as a spirit he had two m others. H is spirit was heroic, because creative, and as such was doom ed to Prom ethean guilt. T h e secular conflict th a t broke o u t at the tu rn of the sixteenth century, and whose living im age stands before our eyes in the figure of Paracelsus, is a p re requisite for higher consciousness; for analysis is always followed by synthesis, an d w hat was divided on a lower level w ill reap pear, un ited , on a higher one.

IV T H E SPIRIT MERCURIUS

[G iven as two lectures a t th e E ranos C onference, Ascona, Sw itzerland, in 1942, th e them e of w hich was “T h e H erm etic P rin cip le in M ythology, Gnosis, a n d A lchem y.” P u b lish ed as “D er Geist M ercurius,” Eranos-Jahrbuch 1942 (Zurich, 1943); revised a n d ex p an d ed in Sym bolik des Geistes: Stu d ien iiber psychische P hanom enologie . . . (Psychologische A bhandlu n g en , V I; Zurich, 1948). A n E nglish tran slatio n by Gladys P h elan a n d H ild e g a rd N agel, title d T h e S p irit M ercury, was p u b lish ed as a book by the A nalytical Psychology C lub of N ew York, Inc., in 1953, a n d form s the basis of the p resen t tran slatio n . Some b rief ch apters have been com bined.— E

d i t o r s .]

( H e r m e s , r u l e r of t h e w o r l d , d w e l l e r i n t h e h e a r t , circle of t h e m o o n , R o u n d a n d s q u a r e , i n v e n t o r of t h e w o r d s of t h e t o n g u e , O b e d i e n t t o j u s t i c e , w e a r e r of t h e c h l a m y s , s h o d i n w i n g e d s a n d a l s , G u a r d i a n of t h e m a n y - s o u n d i n g t o n g u e , p r o p h e t t o m o r t a l s . )

â&#x20AC;&#x201D;A Magic Papyrus (Preisendanz, II, p. 139)

P a rt I

i. T H E S P I R I T IN T H E B O T T L E 239

In m y c o n trib u tio n 1 to th e sym posium on H erm es I w ill try to show th a t this m an y -h u ed a n d w ily god d id n o t by any m eans die w ith th e d eclin e of th e classical era, b u t on th e co n tra ry has gone o n liv in g in stran g e guises th ro u g h th e cen tu ries, even in to re c e n t tim es, a n d has k e p t th e m in d of m a n busy w ith his de ceptive arts a n d h e a lin g gifts. C h ild re n are still to ld G rim m ’s fairytale of “T h e S p irit in th e B o ttle,” w h ich is ever-living like all fairytales, a n d m o reo v er co n tain s th e q u in tessen ce an d d eep est m e a n in g of th e H e rm e tic m ystery as it has com e dow n to us today: Once upon a time there was a poor woodcutter. H e had an only son, whom he wished to send to a high school. However, since he could give him only a little money to take w ith him, it was used up long before the time for the exam inations. So the son went home and helped his father w ith the work in the forest. Once, during the m idday rest, he roam ed the woods and came to an immense old oak. T h ere he heard a voice calling from the ground, “Let me out, let me out!” He dug down among the roots of the tree and found a well-sealed glass bottle from which, clearly, the voice had come. H e opened it and instantly a spirit rushed out and soon became half as high as the tree. T h e spirit cried in an awful voice: “I have had my punishm ent and I will be revenged! I am the great and mighty spirit M ercurius, and now you shall have your reward. Whoso releases me, him I m ust strangle.” T his made the boy u n easy and, quickly thinking u p a trick, he said, “First, I m ust be sure that you are the same spirit th a t was shut u p in th at little bottle.” T o prove this, the spirit crept back into the bottle. T h en the boy m ade haste to seal it and the spirit was caught again. B ut now the spirit promised to rew ard him richly if the boy would let 11 give only a general survey o f the M ercurius concept in alchem y and by no m eans an exhaustive exposition o f it. T h e illustrative m aterial cited should therefore be taken only as exam ples and makes no claim to com pleteness. [For the "symposium on H erm es” see the editorial n ote on p . 1 9 1 .— E d i t o r s .]

him out. So he let him out and received as a reward a small piece of rag. Q uoth the spirit: "If you spread one end of this over a wound it will heal, and if you ru b steel or iron with the other end it will turn into silver.” T hereupon the boy rubbed his damaged axe with the rag, and the axe turned to silver and he was able to sell it for four hundred thaler. T hus father and son were freed from all worries. T h e young m an could retu rn to his studies, and later, thanks to his rag, he became a famous doctor.2 240

N ow , w h at in sig h t can we gain fro m this fairytale? As you know , we can tre a t fairytales as fantasy p roducts, like dream s, conceiving th em to b e sp o n tan eo u s statem en ts of th e u n co n scious a b o u t itself. 24 1 As a t the b eg in n in g of m any dream s so m eth in g is said ab o u t th e scene of th e d ream action, so th e fairytale m en tio n s th e for est as the place of th e m agic h ap p en in g . T h e forest, d a rk an d im p en etra b le to th e eye, like d eep w ater a n d th e sea, is th e con ta in e r of the u n k n o w n an d th e m ysterious. I t is an a p p ro p ria te synonym for th e unconscious. A m ong th e m any trees— th e living elem ents th a t m ake u p th e forest— one tree is especially conspic uous for its g reat size. T rees, like fishes in th e w ater, rep resen t the liv in g co n ten ts of th e unconscious. A m o n g these contents one of special significance is characterized as an “ oak.” T re e s have in d iv id u ality . A tree, th erefo re, is o ften a sym bol of p er sonality .3 L u d w ig I I of B avaria is said to have h o n o u re d certain p artic u la rly im pressive trees in his p ark by having th e m saluted. T h e m ighty old oak is p ro v erb ially th e k in g of th e forest. H ence it rep resen ts a cen tral figure am o n g th e co n ten ts o f th e u n co n scious, possessing p erso n ality in th e m ost m ark ed degree. I t is th e p ro to ty p e of th e s e l f , a sym bol of th e source a n d goal of the in d iv id u a tio n process. T h e oak stands for th e still unconscious core of th e personality, th e p la n t sym bolism in d ic a tin g a state of deep unconsciousness. F ro m this it m ay be co n clu d ed th a t the h ero of th e fairy tale is p ro fo u n d ly unconscious of him self. H e is one of the “sleepers,” th e “ b lin d ” o r “ b lin d fo ld e d ,” w hom we 2 [A u th o r’s paraph rase. Cf. “ T h e S p irit in th e B o ttle ,” G r im m ’s F airy T a les (trans. H u n t, rev. Stern), p p . 4 58-63.— E d i t o r s .] 3 C on cern in g p erson ification o f trees, see Frazer, T h e M a g ic A r t, II, ch. 9. T r ee s are also th e d w e llin g places o f sp irits o f th e d ead o r are id e n tic a l w ith th e life o f the n ew b o rn c h ild (ib id ., I, p . 184).

en co u n ter in the illustrations of certain alchem ical treatises.4 T h ey are the unaw akened who are still unconscious of th em selves, who have n o t yet integrated th e ir future, m ore extensive personality, th eir “w holeness,” or, in the language of the mys tics, the ones who are n o t yet “enlightened.” For o u r hero, therefore, the tree conceals a great secret.5 242 T h e secret is h idden n o t in the top b u t in the roots of the tre e ;8 and since it is /o r has, a personality it also possesses the most striking marks of personality— voice, speech, and conscious purpose, and it dem ands to be set free by the hero. I t is caught an d im prisoned against its will, dow n there in the earth am ong the roots of the tree. T h e roots extend in to the inorganic realm , in to the m ineral kingdom . In psychological terms, this w ould m ean th at the self has its roots in the body, indeed in the body’s chem ical elem ents. W hatever this rem arkable statem ent of the fairytale may m ean in itself, it is in no way stranger than the m iracle of the living p lan t rooted in the inanim ate earth. T h e alchem ists described th e ir four elem ents as radices, correspond ing to the Em pedoclean rhizom ata, and in them they saw the constituents of the m ost significant and central symbol of al chemy, the lapis philosophorum , which represents the goal of the in d iv iduation process. 243 T h e secret h idden in the roots is a sp irit sealed inside a bottle. N aturally it was n o t hidden away am ong the roots to start with, b u t was first confined in a bottle, which was then hidden. Presum ably a m agician, th a t is, an alchem ist, caught an d im prisoned it. As we shall see later, this sp irit is som ething like the n u m en of the tree, its spiritus vegetativus, which is one 4 Cf. th e title -p a g e o f M u tu s lib e r , sh o w in g an a n g e l w a k in g th e sle ep er w ith a

tr u m p e t (“T h e P sy ch o lo g y o f th e T r a n sfe r e n c e ,” F ig. 11). A lso th e illu s tr a tio n in M ic h e lsp a c h e r ’s C abala, s p e c u lu m a r tis e t n a tu ra e (P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , Fig. 93). In th e fo reg ro u n d , b e fo r e a m o u n ta in u p o n w h ic h is a te m p le o f th e in itia te s, stan d s a b lin d fo ld e d m a n , w h ile fu r th e r back a n o th er m an ru n s a fter a fo x w h ic h is d isa p p e a rin g in to a h o le in th e m o u n ta in . T h e “h e lp fu l a n im a l” show s th e w ay to th e te m p le. T h e fo x or h are is its e lf th e “e v a siv e” M ercu rius as g u id e (biryybs). 5 F or a d d itio n a l m a ter ia l o n th e tree sym b ol, see in fra, “T h e P h ilo s o p h ic a l T r e e ,”

P a rt II. 6 T h is m o tif w as u sed in th e sam e sense by th e G nostics. Cf. H ip p o ly tu s, E len ch os, V, 9, 15, w h ere th e m a n y -n a m ed and th o u sa n d -e y ed “W ord o f G o d ” is “h id d e n in t h e r o o t o f A ll.”

244

d efin itio n o£ M ercu riu s. As the life p rin cip le of th e tree, it is a sort of sp iritu al q u intessence ab stracted from it, a n d co u ld also be described as th e prin cipiu m individuationis. T h e tree w ould th e n be th e o u tw ard a n d visible sign of th e realizatio n of the self. T h e alchem ists ap p e a r to have h eld a sim ilar view. T h u s th e “A u relia o ccu lta” says: “T h e p h ilosophers have so u g h t most eagerly for the cen tre o f the tree w hich stands in th e m idst of th e earth ly p arad ise.” 7 A ccording to th e sam e source, C hrist him self is this tree.8 T h e tree co m parison occurs as early as E ulogius of A lex an d ria (c. a . d . 600), w ho says: “ B ehold in the F a th e r the root, in th e Son th e b ran ch , an d in th e S p irit th e fru it: fo r th e substance [ ο υ σ ί α ] in th e th re e is o n e.” 8 M ercurius, too, is trinus et unus. So if we tran slate it in to psychological language, th e fairytale tells us th a t th e m e rc u rial essence, th e prin cipiu m individuUtionisj w ould have developed freely u n d e r n a tu ra l conditions, b u t was ro b b e d of its freedom by d elib e ra te in te rv e n tio n from outside, a n d was artfu lly confined an d b an ish ed lik e an evil spirit. (O nly evil spirits have to be confined, a n d th e wickedness of this sp irit was show n by its m u rd ero u s in te n t.) S up p o sin g the fairytale is rig h t a n d th e s p irit was really as w icked as it relates, we w o u ld have to conclude th a t th e M aster w ho im p riso n ed the prin cipiu m individuationis h ad a good en d in view. B u t who is this w ell-in ten tio n ed M aster w ho has th e p o w er to b an ish the p rin c ip le of m a n ’s in d iv id u atio n ? Such pow er is given only to a ru le r of souls in th e s p iritu a l realm . T h e idea th a t th e p rin cip le o f in d iv id u a tio n is th e source of all evil is fo u n d in Schopen h a u e r a n d still m o re in B u ddhism . In C h ristian ity , too, h u m a n n a tu re is ta in te d w ith o rig in al sin a n d is red eem ed from this stain by C h rist’s self-sacrifice. M an in his “n a tu ra l” c o n d itio n is n e ith e r good n o r p u re, a n d if he sh o u ld develop in th e n a tu ra l way the resu lt w o u ld be a p ro d u c t n o t essentially d ifferen t from an anim al. Sheer in stin c tu a lity a n d n aiv e unconsciousness u n tro u b le d by a sense o f g u ilt w o u ld p revail if th e M aster had n o t in te rru p te d the free d ev elo p m en t of th e n a tu ra l b ein g by in tro d u cin g a d istin ctio n betw een good an d evil an d o u tlaw in g the evil. Since w ith o u t g u ilt th e re is n o m o ral consciousness and r Theatrum Chemicumj IV

{1659), p. 500. S Ib id ., p. 478: “ (C hrist), w h o is th e tree o f life b o th sp ir itu a l and. b o d ily .” 9 K rueger, D a s D o g m a v o n d e r D r e i e in ig k e i t u n d G o l t m e n s c h h e it , p . 207.

196

w ithout awareness of differences no consciousness at all, we m ust concede that the strange intervention of the m aster of souls was absolutely necessary for the developm ent of any k in d of con sciousness and in this sense was for the good. A ccording to o u r religious beliefs, G od him self is this M aster— and the alchemist, in his small way, competes w ith the C reator in so far as he strives to do w ork analogous to the w ork of creation, an d therefore he likens his microcosm ic opus to the work of the w orld creator.10 245 In o u r fairytale the natu ral evil is banished to the “roots,” that is, to the earth, in o th e r words the body. T h is statem ent agrees w ith the historical fact that C hristian thought in general has held the body in contem pt, w ith o u t bothering m uch about the finer doctrinal distinctions.11 For, according to doctrine, n e ith e r the body n o r n a tu re in general is evil perse: as the work of God, or as the actual form in -which he manifests himself, n a tu re cannot be identical w ith evil. Correspondingly, the evil spirit in the fairytale is n o t simply banished to the earth and allowed to roam ab o u t at will, b u t is only hidden there in a safe and special container, so th at he cannot call atten tio n to himself anyw here except rig h t u n d e r the oak. T h e bottle is an artificial h u m an product an d thus signifies the intellectual purposeful ness and artificiality of the procedure, whose obvious aim is to isolate the sp irit from the surro u n d in g m edium . As the vas Herm eticum of alchemy, it was “herm etically” sealed (i.e., sealed w ith the sign of H erm es);12 it had to be m ade of glass, and had also to be as ro u n d as possible, since it was m eant to represent the cosmos in which the earth was created.13 T ra n sp a re n t glass is som ething like solidified w ater o r air, both of which are syno nyms for spirit. T h e alchem ical re to rt is therefore equivalent to the anima m u n d i, w hich according to an old alchemical concep tio n surrounds the cosmos. Caesarius of H eisterbach (th irteen th century) m entions a vision in w hich the soul appeared as a W i n th e “D ic ta B e lin i” M ercu riu s even says: “ O u t o f m e is m a d e th e bread from w h ic h com es th e w h o le w o rld , an d th e w orld is form ed from m y m ercy, an d i t fa ils n o t, b ecau se it is th e g ift o f G o d ” (D istin c tio X X V III, in T h e a tr . ch em ., V , 1660, p , 87). U Cf. th e d o c tr in e o f th e s ta tu s iu s titia e o rig in a lis an d s ta tu s n a tu ra e in te g ra e . 12 Cf. R ev. 20 : 3: "and set a se a l u p o n him ." 13 “T h e F ift is o f C on cord an d o f L ove, / B e tw ee n e y o u r W arkes a n d the Spheare a b o v e .”— N o r to n ’s “ O r d in a ll o f A lc h im y ,” T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m B r ita n n ic u m , ch . 6, p . 92.

246

spherical glass vessel .14 Likew ise th e “s p iritu a l” o r “eth ereal” (,aethereus) p h ilo so p h e rs’ stone is a precious v itr u m (sometimes described as m alleabile) w hich was o ften eq u ated w ith th e gold glass ia u ru m v itr e u m ) of th e heavenly Je ru sa le m (Rev. 2 1 : 2 1 ) . I t is w o rth n o tin g th a t th e G erm an fairy tale calls th e spirit confined in th e b o ttle b y th e n am e of th e pagan god, M ercurius, w ho was consid ered id e n tica l w ith th e G erm an n a tio n a l god, W o tan . T h e m e n tio n of M ercu riu s stam ps th e fairy tale as an alchem ical folk legend, closely re la te d o n th e one h a n d to the allegorical tales used in teach in g alchem y, a n d o n th e o th e r to th e w ell-know n g ro u p of folktales th a t clu ster ro u n d th e m otif o f the “sp e llb o u n d s p irit.” O u r fairytale th u s in te rp re ts the evil s p irit as a pagan god, forced u n d e r th e influence of C hris tia n ity to descend in to th e d a rk u n d e rw o rld an d be m orally disqualified. H erm es becom es th e d em o n of th e m ysteries cele b ra te d by all ten ebriones (obscurantists), an d W o tan th e dem on of forest a n d sto rm ; M ercu riu s becom es th e soul of th e metals, th e m etallic m a n (h o m u n c u lu s), th e d rag o n {serpens m ercurialis), the ro a rin g fiery lion, th e n ig h t rav en (nycticorax), an d the black eagle— th e last fo u r b ein g synonym s fo r th e devil. In fact th e s p irit in th e b o ttle behaves ju s t as th e devil does in m any o th e r fairytales: h e bestows w ealth by ch an g in g base m etal into gold; a n d like th e devil, he also gets tricked. 14 D ia lo g u s m ira c u lo ru m , trans. b y Scott a n d B la n d , I, p p . 4a, 236.

247

T H E C O N N E C T IO N B E T W E E N S P IR IT A N D T R E E

B efore co n tin u in g o u r discussion of the sp irit M ercu riu sj I should like to p o in t o u t a n o t u n im p o rta n t fact. T h e place w here he lies confined is n o t ju st any place b u t a very essential one— nam ely, u n d e r th e oak, the king of the forest. In psycholog ical term s, this m eans th a t the evil sp irit is im prisoned in the roots of the self, as the secret h id d en in the p rin cip le of in d iv id uation. H e is n o t identical w ith the tree, n o r w ith its roots, b u t has been p u t th ere by artificial means. T h e fairytale gives us no reason to th in k th a t the oak, w hich represents th e self, has grow n o u t of the sp irit in the bottle; we may ra th e r conjecture th a t the oak presented a suitable place for concealing a secret. A treasure, fo r instance, is preferably b u rie d n e ar some k in d of landm ark, o r else such a m a rk is p u t u p afterw ards. T h e tree of paradise serves as a prototype fo r this and sim ilar tales: it, too, is n o t identical w ith the voice of the serpen t w hich issued from i t .1 H ow ever, it m ust n o t be forgotten th a t these m ythical m otifs have a significant connection w ith certain psychological p h e n o m en a observed am ong p rim itive peoples. In all such cases th ere is a n o tab le analogy w ith p rim itiv e anim ism : certain trees are an im ated by souls— have the character of personality, we w ould say— an d possess a voice th a t gives com m ands to h u m an beings. A m aury T a lb o t 2 reports one such case from N igeria, w here a n ative soldier h eard an oji tree calling to him , an d tried desperately to b reak o u t of the barracks an d hasten to th e tree. U n d e r cross-exam ination he alleged th a t all those who bore the n am e of the tree now an d th en heard its voice. H e re the voice is u n d o u b te d ly identical w ith the tree. T h ese psychic phenom ena 1 MeTttrrius1 in the form of L ilith 01 M elusina1 appears in the tree in the Ripley Scrowle. T o this context belongs also the hamadryad as an interpretation of the so-called “Aenigma Bononiense.” Cf. M ysterium Coniunctionis, pp. 68f. 2 In the Shadow 0} the Bush, pp. 31L

suggest th at originally the tree and the daem on were one and the same, and that their separation is a secondary phenom enon corresponding to a higher level of culture and consciousness. T h e original phenom enon was nothin g less than a n atu re deity, a tremendum pure and simple, which is m orally n eutral. But the secondary phenom enon implies an act of discrim ination which splits m an off from n atu re and thus testifies to the exist ence of a m ore highly differentiated consciousness. T o this is added, as a tertiary phenom enon testifying to a still higher level, the m oral qualification which declares the voice to be an evil spirit u n d er a ban. It goes w ithout saying that this th ird level is m arked by a belief in a “higher” and “good” G od who, though he has not finally disposed of his adversary, has nevertheless ren dered him harmless for some tim e to come by im prisonm ent (Rev. 20 : 1-3). 248 Since at the present level of consciousness we cannot suppose that tree daemons exist, we are forced to assert th a t the prim itive suffers from hallucinations, that he hears his own unconscious which has projected itself into the tree. If this theory is correct— and I do n o t know how we could form ulate it otherwise today— then the second level of consciousness has effected a differentia tion between the object “tree” and the unconscious content pro jected into it, thereby achieving an act of enlightenm ent. T h e th ird level rises still higher and attrib u tes “ evil” to the psychic content w hich has been separated from the object. Finally a fourth level, the level reached by o u r consciousness today, car ries the enlightenm ent a stage fu rth er by denying the objective existence of the “spirit” and declaring th a t the prim itive has heard nothing at all, b u t merely had an auditory hallucination. Consequently the whole phenom enon vanishes into th in air— w ith the great advantage th at the evil spirit becomes obviously non-existent and sinks into ridiculous insignificance. A fifth level, however, which is b o u n d to take a quintessential view of the m atter, wonders about this conjurin g trick th at turns what began as a m iracle into a senseless self-deception— only to come full circle. Like the boy who told his father a made-up story ab o u t sixty stags in the forest, it asks: “B ut what, then, was all the rustling in the woods?” T h e fifth level is of the opinion that som ething did happen after all: even though the psychic content was n o t the tree, n o r a spirit in the tree, n o r indeed any sp irit at 200

all, it was n ev erth eless a p h e n o m e n o n th ru s tin g u p fro m th e u n conscious, th e existence of w h ich ca n n o t be d en ied if o n e is m in d e d to g ra n t th e psyche any k in d of reality. I f one d id n o t do th a t, o n e w o u ld have to e x te n d G o d ’s creatio ex n ih ilo — w h ich seem s so o b n o x io u s to th e m o d e rn in tellect— very m u c h fu r th e r to in c lu d e steam engines, au to m o b iles, radios, an d every lib ra ry o n earth , all of w h ich w o u ld p resu m ab ly have arisen fro m u n im ag in ab ly fo rtu ito u s co n g lo m eratio n s of atom s. T h e only th in g th a t w o u ld have h a p p e n e d is th a t th e C re a to r w o u ld have b e e n re n a m e d C o n g lo m eratio . 249 T h e fifth level assum es th a t th e u n conscious exists a n d has a re a lity ju s t lik e any o th e r ex isten t. H o w ev er o dious it m ay be, this m eans th a t th e “s p ir it” is also a reality , a n d th e “ev il” s p irit a t th a t. W h a t is even worse, th e d istin c tio n betw een “g o o d ” an d “ evil” is su d d en ly n o lo n g e r obsolete, b u t h ig h ly to pical an d necessary. T h e cru cial p o in t is th a t so lo n g as th e evil s p irit can n o t be p ro v ed to b e a su b jectiv e psychic ex p erien ce, th e n even trees a n d o th e r su ita b le objects w o u ld have, once again, to b e seriously co n sid ered as its lo d g in g places.

3. T H E PR O B L E M O F F R E E IN G M E R C U R IU S 250

W e w ill n o t pursue the paradoxical reality of the uncon scious any fu rth er now, b u t will re tu rn to the fairytale of the spirit in the bottle. As we have seen, the spirit M ercurius bears some resem blance to the “cheated devil.” T h e analogy, how ever, is only a superficial one, since, unlike the gifts of the devil, the gold of M ercurius does n o t tu rn to horse droppings b u t re m ains good m etal, and the magic rag does n o t tu rn to ashes by m orning b u t retains its healing power. N or is M ercurius tricked out of a soul th at he w anted to steal. H e is only tricked into his own b etter nature, one m ight say, in that the boy succeeds in b ottlin g him u p again in order to cure his bad m ood and make him tractable. M ercurius becomes polite, gives the young fellow a useful ransom and is accordingly set free. W e now hear about the stu d en t’s good fortune and how he became a w onder w orking doctor, b u t— strangely enough— n o th in g ab o u t the do ings of the liberated spirit, though these m ight be of some in ter est in view of the web of m eanings in which M ercurius, w ith his many-sided associations, entangles us. W h at happens w hen this pagan god, H erm es-M ercurius-W otan, is let loose again? Being a god of magicians, a spiritus vegetativus, and a storm daem on, he will hardly have re tu rn e d to captivity, and the fairytale gives us no reason to suppose th a t the episode of im prisonm ent has finally changed his nature to the pink of perfection. T h e b ird of H erm es has escaped from the glass cage, and in consequence som ething has lrappened which the experienced alchemist wished at all costs to avoid. T h a t is why he always sealed the stopper of his bottle w ith magic signs and set it for a very long tim e over the lowest fire, so that “he who is w ithin may no t fly ou t.” For if he escapes, the whole laborious opus comes to n o th ing and has to be started all over again. O u r lad was a Sunday’s child and possibly one of the poor in spirit, on whom was be stowed a b it of the K ingdom of H eaven in th e shape of the self202

renew ing tincture, w ith reference to which it was said that the opus needed to be perform ed only once.1 B ut if he had lost the magic rag he w ould certainly never have been able to produce it a second tim e, by himself. It looks as though some M aster had succeeded in capturing the m ercurial spirit and then hid him in a safe place, like a treasure— perhaps p u ttin g him aside for some fu tu re use. H e may even have planned to tam e the w ild M ercurius to serve him as a w illing “fam iliar,” like M ephisto— such trains of thought are n o t strange to alchemy. Perhaps he was disagreeably surprised w hen he re tu rn e d to th e oak tree and found th at his b ird had flown. A t any rate, it m ight have been b etter not to have left the fate of the bottle to chance. 251 Be th a t as it may, the behaviour of the boy—successfully as it w orked o u t for him — m ust be described as alchem icalIy incor rect. A part from the fact th a t he may have infringed upon the legitim ate claims of an unknow n M aster by setting M ercurius free, he was also totally unconscious of w hat m ig h t follow if this tu rb u le n t spirit were let loose upon the world. T h e golden age of alchem y was the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century. A t th a t tim e a storm bird did indeed escape from a spir itu al vessel which the daem ons m ust have felt was a prison. As I have said, the alchemists were all for n o t lettin g M ercurius es cape. T h e y w anted to keep him in the b o ttle in o rd e r to trans form him : for they believed, like Petasios, th a t lead (another arcane substance) was “so bedevilled and shameless th at all who wish to investigate it fall into madness through ignorance.” 2 T h e same was said of the elusive M ercurius w ho evades every grasp— a real trickster who drove the alchemists to despair.3 1 “For h e that shall end it once tor certeyne, / Shall never have need e to begin againe.”— N o rto n ’s “ O rdinall o f A lchim y,” T h ea tr. chem . B rit., ch. 4, p. 48. 2 O lym piodorus in B erthelot, A lch im istes grecs, II, iv, 43. 3 Cf. the entertain in g “ D ialogus M ercurii alchym istae et naturae,” in T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p p . 4 4 9 s.

i. IN T R O D U C T O R Y 252

T h e interested reader will w ant, as I do, to find ou t more about this spirit— especially w hat o u r forefathers believed and said about him . I will therefore try w ith the aid of text citations to draw a picture of this versatile and shim m ering god as he ap peared to the masters of the royal art. For this purpose we m ust consult the abstruse literature of alchemy, which has not yet been properly understood. N aturally, in later times, the history of alchemy was m ainly of interest to the chemist. T h e fact that it recorded the discovery of m any chemical substances and drugs could not, however, reconcile him to the p itifu l meagreness, so it seemed to him , of its scientific content. H e was n o t in the position of the older authors, such as Schmieder, who could look on the possibility of goldm aking w ith hopeful esteem and sym pathy; instead he was irritated by the futility of the recipes and the fraudulence of alchemical speculation in general. T o him alchemy was bound to seem a gigantic aberration th at lasted for m ore than two thousand years. H ad he only asked himself w hether the chem istry of alchemy was authentic or not, th at is, w hether the alchemists were really chemists or merely spoke a chemical jargon, then the texts themselves w ould have suggested a line of observation other than the purely chemical. T h e scien tific eq u ipm ent of the chem ist does not, however, fit him to p u r sue this other line, since it leads straight into the history of reli gion. T h u s it was a philologist, R eitzenstein, w hom we have to thank for prelim inary researches of the greatest value in this field. I t was he w ho recognized the m ythological and Gnostic ideas em bedded in alchemy, thereby opening u p the whole sub ject from an angle which promises to be m ost fru itfu l. For al chemy, as the earliest Greek and Chinese texts show, originally form ed p a rt of Gnostic philosophical speculations which also in cluded a detailed knowledge of the techniques of the goldsm ith and ironsm ith, the faker of precious stones, the druggist and 204

a53

apothecary. In East and W est alike, alchem y contains as its core the G nostic doctrine of the A nthropos and by its very n a tu re has the character of a peculiar doctrine of redem ption. T h is fact necessarily escaped the chemist, although it is expressed clearly enough in the G reek and L atin texts as well as in the Chinese of ab o u t the same period. T o begin w ith, of course, it is alm ost impossible for o u r sci entifically trained m inds to feel their way back in to th at p rim i tive state of participation m ystique in which subject and object are identical. H ere the findings of m odern psychology stood me in very good stead. Practical experience shows us again and again th a t any prolonged preoccupation w ith an unknow n object acts as an almost irresistible b a it for the unconscious to project itself in to the unknow n n a tu re of the object and to accept the resu lt a n t perception, and the in terp retatio n deduced from it, as ob jective. T h is phenom enon, a daily occurrence in practical psy chology and m ore especially in psychotherapy, is w ith o u t d o u b t a vestige of prim itivity. O n the prim itive level, the whole of life is governed by anim istic assum ptions, th a t is, by projections of subjective contents into objective situations. For exam ple, Karl von den Steinen says th a t the Bororos th in k of themselves as re d cockatoos, although they readily ad m it th a t they have no feathers.1 O n this level, the alchem ists’ assum ption th a t a cer tain substance possesses secret powers, o r th at there is a prirna materia somewhere which works m iracles, is self-evident. T h is is, however, n o t a fact th a t can be understood or even thought of in chemical terms, it is a psychological phenom enon. Psychol ogy, therefore, can m ake an im p o rtan t co n trib u tio n towards elucidating the alchem ists’ m entality. W hat to the chemist seem to be the absurd fantasies of alchemy can be recognized by the psychologist w ithout too m uch difficulty as psychic m aterial con tam inated with chemical substances. T h is m aterial stems from the collective unconscious and is therefore identical w ith fantasy products th at can still be found today am ong both sick and healthy people who have never heard of alchemy. O n account of the prim itive character of its projections, alchemy, so barren a field for the chemist, is for the psychologist a veritable gold-m ine of m aterials which throw an exceedingly valuable light on the structure of the unconscious. IV o n den Steinen, U n ter den N a tu rvo lk ern Zentral-B rasiliens1 pp. 35¾!-, 51*.

205

254

Since in w h at follows I shall o ften re fe r to th e o rig in al texts, it m ig h t b e as w ell to say a few w ords a b o u t this lite ra tu re , some of w hich is n o t easily accessible. I shall leave o u t of acco u n t the few C hinese texts th a t have been tran slated , a n d shall on ly m en tio n th a t T h e Secret o f th e G o ld en F low er, p u b lish e d by R ic h a rd W ilh elm a n d myself, is rep resen tativ e of its class. N o r can I consider th e In d ia n “Q u ick silv er System.” 2 T h e W estern lite r a tu re I have used falls in to fo u r groups: 1. T e x ts by an cien t authors. T h is g ro u p com prises m ain ly G reek texts, w hich have b een ed ited by B erth elo t, a n d those tran sm itted by th e A rabs, likew ise ed ited by him . T h e y d ate from th e p erio d betw een th e first an d eig h th cen tu ries. 2. T e x ts by th e early L a tin ists. T h e m ost im p o rta n t of these are tran slatio n s from th e A rab ic (or H ebrew ?). R ece n t re search shows th a t m ost of these texts d eriv e fro m th e H a rra n ite school, w hich flourished u n til a b o u t 1050, an d was also, p ro b ably, the source of th e C orpus H e rm e tic u m . T o this g ro u p be lo n g certain texts w hose A rab ic o rig in is d o u b tfu l b u t w hich at least show A rabic influence— fo r instance, th e “S u m m a perfectio n is” of G e b e r a n d th e A risto tle an d A vicenna treatises. T h is p erio d extends fro m th e n in th to th e th irte e n th cen tu ry . 3. T e x ts by th e later L a tin ists. T h ese com prise th e p rin ci pal g ro u p a n d ran g e from th e fo u rte e n th to th e sev en teen th century. 4. T e x ts in m o d ern E u ro p ea n languages. S ix teen th to sev e n te e n th centu ry . A fter th a t, alchem y fell in to d ecline, w hich is w hy I have only occasionally used eig h teen th -cen tu ry texts. 2 Cf. D eussen, A llgem ein e G eschichte d er P h ilo so p h ie, I, Part 3, pp. 336®. T his undoubtedly alchem ical philosophy belongs to the fairly late (m edieval) XJpaPuranas, more particularly to the M aheshvarapurana, hence to a doctrine prin cipally concerned w ith Shiva. “Para-da” (bestowing the Other Shore) signifies quicksilver.

2. M ER C U R 1U S AS Q U IC K SIL V E R A N D /O R W A T E R 255

M ercurius was first understood p retty well everywhere as hydrargyrum 1 (Hg), quicksilver o r argentum vivu m (Fr. vifargent or argent vive). As such, it was called vulgaris (common) and crudus. As a rule, m ercurius philosophicus was specifically distinguished from this, as an avowedly arcane substance that was sometimes conceived to be present in m ercurius crudus, and then, again, to differ from it com pletely. I t was the tru e object of the alchem ical procedure. Quicksilver, because of its fluidity an d volatility, was also defined as water. A p o p u lar saying is: “A qua m anus n o n m adefaciens” (the w ater th a t does no t make the hands wet).2 O th er designations are aqua vitae/ aqua alba,4 aqua sicca .5 T h e last designation, dry w ater, is paradoxical, for which reason I should like to call special atten tio n to it as char acterizing the n a tu re of the object described. A q u a septies distilIata (seven tim es distilled water) and aqueum su b tile6 point to the sublim ated (“sp iritu a l”) n atu re of the philosophic M er curius. M any treatises simply speak of M ercurius as w ater.7 T h e doctrine of the h u m id u m radicale (root-m oisture o r radical m oisture) underlies such designations as h u m id u m album ,8 hum iditas m axim e perm anens incom bustibilis et unctuosa and hum iditas radicalis.10 M ercurius is also said to arise from the m oisture like a vapour11 (which again points to his spiritual

,ΰ

1 From ύδωρ, 'w ater,’ and apyupos, ‘silv er .’ 2 E .g., H o g h e la n d e , “D e a lch em ia e d ifficu lta tib u s,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p. 161. 3 “A q u a r iu m sa p ie n tu m ,” M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , p p . 84, 93. 4 Ib id ., p . 84. H e n c e also lac v ir g in is , n iv is , te r ra a lb a fo lia ta , m a g n e sia , etc. 6 H o g h e la n d e , p . 161. 6 M yliu s, P h ilo s o p h ia r e fo rm a ta , p . 176. T “N o v u m lu m e n ,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 581; “T ra cta tu s a u r e u s,” ib id ., p. 34; “ G loria m u n d i,” ib id ., p . 250; K h u n ra th , Von h y le a lisc h e n C haos, p . 214. &R o s a r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , in A r tis a u rife ra e , II, p . 376. 9 " T ractatu s a u r e u s,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 39. 19 M yliu s, P h il, r e p , p . 31. 11 “G lo ria m u n d i,” p . 244.

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

nature), or to rule the water. 1 2 T h e "divine water" so often m e n t i o n e d in the Greek texts is quicksilver. 1 3 Mercurius as the arcane substance and golden tincture is indicated by the designation aqua aurea14 and by the description of the water as Mercurii caduceus.15 12 Aurora consurgens II, in Art. aurif., I, p. 189. T h i s text r e m a r k s t h a t the water is fire (p. 212). 13 Berthelot, Alch. grecs, IV, vii, 2. 14 Basilius Valentinus, "Practica," Mus. herm., p. 404. 15 Philaletha, " M e t a l l o r u m metamorphosis," ibid., p. 771, a n d " I n t r o i t u s a p e r t u s , " ibid., p. 654.

208

3- M E R C U R IU S AS F IR E *56

M any treatises define M ercurius sim ply as fire.1 H e is ignis elem entaris,2 noster naturalis ignis certissimus ,s which again in dicates his “philosophic” nature. T h e aqua mercurialis is even a divine fire.4 T h is fire is “highly vaporous” (vaporosus).5 In deed, M ercurius is really the only fire in the whole procedure.6 H e is an “ invisible fire, w orking in secret.” 7 O ne text says that the “h e a rt” of M ercurius is at the N o rth Pole and that he is like a fire (n o rth ern lights).8 H e is, in fact, as an o th er text says, “the universal and scintillating fire of the lig h t of n atu re, which car ries the heavenly spirit w ith in it.” 9 T h is passage is particularly im p o rtan t as it relates M ercurius to the lum en naturae, the source of mystical know ledge second only to the holy revelation of the Scriptures. Once m ore we catch a glimpse of the ancient role of H erm es as the god of revelation. A lthough the lum en naturae, as originally bestowed by G od u p o n his creatures, is not by n a tu re ungodly, its essence was nevertheless felt to be abys mal, since the ignis m ercurialis was also connected w ith the fires of hell. I t seems, however, th at the alchemists did no t u n d e r stand hell, o r its fire, as absolutely outside of G od or opposed to him , b u t rath er as an in tern al com ponent of the deity, which m ust indeed be so if G od is held to be a coincidentia opposi1 A u r o r a c o n su rg e n s II, in A r t . aurif., I, p . 212; D o rn , " C ongeries P aracelsicae,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., I (1659), p . 502; M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p . 245. 2 “V ia v e rita tis,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 200. 3 “ T r a c ta tu s a u reu s,” ib id ., p . 39. 4 “A q u a r iu m sa p ie n tu m ,” ib id ., p. 91. B Ib id ., p. go. β “T h e r e is n o fire in a ll th e w ork save M ercu riu s” (“F ons c h y m ica e v e r ita tis,” ib id ., p. 803). I “ M etall. m e ta m o r p h .,” ib id ., p . 766. 8 “A t th e P o le is th e h e a r t o f M ercu rius, w h ich is th e tru e fire, in w h ic h is th e re stin g p la c e o f h is L ord, sa ilin g th r o u g h th is great sea” (" In tro it. apert.," M u s . h e r m ., p. 655). A so m ew h a t ob scu re sym b olism ! 8 " A q u ariu m sa p .,” ib id ., p . 84.

toru m. T h e co n cep t of a n all-encom passing G od m u st neces sarily in c lu d e his opposite. T h e coincidentia, of course, m u st n o t be too radical o r too extrem e, otherw ise G od w o u ld cancel h im self o u t.10 T h e p rin c ip le of th e coincidence of opposites m ust th erefo re be co m p leted by th a t of ab so lu te o p p o sitio n in o rder to a tta in fu ll p arad o x icality an d hence psychological validity. 257 T h e m e rc u rial fire is fo u n d in the “ cen tre of th e e a rth ,” or d rag o n ’s belly, in fluid form . B enedictus F ig u lu s w rites: “Visit th e cen tre of th e earth , th ere you w ill find the global fire.” 51 A n o th e r treatise says th a t this fire is th e “secret, in fe rn a l fire, the w o n d er of the w orld, th e system of th e h ig h e r pow ers in the low er.” 12 M ercurius, th e revelatory lig h t of n a tu re , is also hellfire, w hich in som e m iracu lo u s way is n o n e o th e r th a n a re arra n g e m e n t of th e heavenly, sp iritu al pow ers in th e lower, ch th o n ic w orld of m atter, th o u g h t already in St. P au l's tim e to be ru le d by th e devil. H ell-fire, the tru e energic p rin c ip le of evil, appears h ere as th e m anifest c o u n te rp a rt of th e sp iritu al a n d the good, an d as essentially id en tical w ith it in substance. A fter th at, it can surely cause n o offence w h en a n o th e r treatise says th a t th e m e rc u ria l fire is th e “ fire in w h ich G od him self b u rn s in d iv in e love.” 13 W e are n o t deceiving ourselves if we feel in scattered rem ark s of this k in d th e b re a th of tru e m ysti cism. 258 Since M ercu riu s is h im self of fiery n a tu re , fire does n o t h arm him : he rem ain s u n ch an g e d w ith in it, rejo icin g like th e sala m a n d e r.14 I t is unnecessary to p o in t o u t th a t q uicksilver does n o t behave like this b u t vaporizes u n d e r h eat, as th e alchem ists them selves knew fro m very early tim es. 10 T h is is a p u re ly p sy ch o lo g ica l e x p la n a tio n h a v in g to d o w ith h u m a n c o n c ep tio n s a n d sta tem en ts a n d n o t w ith th e u n fa th o m a b le B ein g. 11 F igu lu s, R osariu m , n o v u m o ly m p ic u m , P ars I, p . 71. T h is is th e “d o m u s ig n is id e m E n o c h .” Cf. "Paracelsus as a S p iritu a l P h e n o m e n o n ,” supra, par. 186. 12 “Ign is in fe rn a lis secretus . . . m u n d i m ira cu lu m , v irtu tu m su p erioru m in inferiorib u s system a” (“In tro it. a p ert.,” p. 654). 13 “Ig n is in q u o D eu s ip se ardet am ore d iv in o ” (“G loria m u n d i,” p. 246). 14 “F or it is h e w h o overcom es th e fire, an d is h im se lf n o t overcom e by th e fire, b u t rests in it as a frien d , rejo icin g in i t ” (G eber, “Sum m a p e r fec tio n is,” D e a lc h e m ia , cap. L X III, p . 139).

SlO

4· M E R C U R IU S AS S P IR IT A N D SO U L

260

If M ercurius had been understood simply as quicksilver, there w ould obviously have been no need for any of the appella tions I have listed. T h e fact th at this need arose points to the conclusion th a t one sim ple and unm istakable term in no way sufficed to designate w hat the alchemists had in m ind w hen they spoke of M ercurius. I t was certainly quicksilver, b u t a very special quicksilver, “o u r” M ercurius, the essence, m oisture, or principle b ehind or w ithin the quicksilver—that indefinable, fascinating, irritating, and elusive th in g which attracts an u n conscious projection. T h e “philosophic” M ercurius, this servus fu g itivu s or ceruus fu g itivu s (fugitive slave o r stag), is a highly im p o rtan t unconscious content which, as may be gathered from the few hints we have given, threatens to ram ify into a set of farreaching psychological problem s. T h e concept swells danger ously and we begin to perceive th at the end is now here in sight. T h erefo re we w ould ra th e r n o t tie this concept prem aturely to any special m eaning, b u t shall content ourselves w ith stating that the philosophic M ercurius, so dear to the alchem ist as the transform ative substance, is obviously a projection of the u n con scious, such as always takes place when the in q u irin g m in d lacks the necessary self-criticism in investigating an unknow n q u a n tity. As has already been indicated, the psychic n a tu re of the ar cane substance did not escape the alchemists; indeed, they actu ally defined it as “sp irit” and “soul.” B ut since these concepts— especially in earlier times— were always am biguous, we m ust ap proach them w ith caution if we w ant to gain a m oderately clear idea of w hat the terms spiritus and anim a m ean t in alchem ical usage.

A. M ERCURIUS AS AN AERIAL SPIRIT

261

Hermes, originally a w ind god, and his co u n terp art the Egyptian T h o th , who “makes the souls to b reath e,” 1 are the forerunners of the alchem ical M ercurius in his aerial aspect. T h e texts often use the terms pneum a and spiritus in the origi nal concrete sense of “air in m otion.” So when M ercurius is de scribed in the Rosarium philosophorum (fifteenth century) as aereus an d volans2 (winged), and in H oghelande (sixteenth century) as totus aereus et spiritualisp w hat is m ean t is n o th ing m ore than a gaseous state of aggregation. Som ething sim ilar is m eant by the poetic expression serenitas aerea in the R ipley Scrowle/ and by the same au th o r’s statem ent th at M ercurius is changed into w ind.5 H e is the lapis elevatus cum vento (the stone uplifted by the w ind).6 T h e expressions spirituale cor pus7 and spiritus visibilis, tam en im palpabilis8 (visible yet im palpable spirit) m ight also m ean little m ore than “a ir” if one recalls the aforem entioned vapour-like n atu re of M ercurius, and the same is probably true even of the spiritus prae cunctis valde puruss (pre-em inently pure spirit). T h e designation incom ~ bustibilis10 is m ore doubtful, since this was often synonymous w ith incorruptibilis and then m eant “eternal,” as we shall see later. Penotus (sixteenth century), a pupil of Paracelsus, stresses the corporeal aspect when he says that M ercurius is “n othing other than the spirit of the w orld become body w ithin the earth .” 11 T h is expression shows b etter th an anything else the contam ination— inconceivable to the m odern m ind— of two sep arate realms, spirit and m atter; for to people in the M iddle Ages 1 T h is characteristic o£ M ercu riu s is stressed in A u r o ra con su rgen s II, in A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 146 an d 190: “ H e m akes th e n ostrils [of the foetu s] in th e fifth m o n th .” 2 R o sa r iu m , p p . 252, 271. 3 T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , I (1659), p . 169. 4 16th cen t. B ritish M useum , MS. A d d. 10302. 6 R ip le y , O p e ra , p . 35. 6 “T ra cta tu s au reu s,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 3g. 7 R o sa r iu m , p . 282. 8 B a siliu s V a le n tin u s, "P ractica,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 404. 8 “In tro it. a p ert.,” ib id ., p . 654. 10 R o sa r iu m , p . 252. H T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), P· 600.

the spiritus m u n d i was also the sp irit which rules nature, and n o t ju st a pervasive gas. W e find ourselves in the same dilem m a w hen an o th er author, M ylius, in his Philosophia reformata ,12 describes M ercurius as an “ interm ediate substance” (m edia su b stantia ), which is evidently synonymous w ith his concept of the anima m edia natura 13 (soul as interm ediate nature), for to him M ercurius was the “spirit and soul of the bodies.” 14 B. M E R C U R IU S AS SO UL 262

a63

“ Soul” represents a higher concept than “sp irit” in the sense of air o r gas. As the “subtle body” or “breath-soul” it means som ething non-m aterial and finer than m ere air. Its essential characteristic is to anim ate and be anim ated; it therefore re p re sents the life principle. M ercurius is often designated as anima (hence, as a fem inine being, he is also called foem ina or virgo), or as nostra a n im a .15 T h e nostra here does n o t m ean “o u r ow n” soul b u t, as in aqua Uostraj M ercurius noster, corpus nostrum , refers to the arcane substance. H ow ever, anim a often appears to be connected w ith spiritus, or is equated w ith i t .16 For the spirit shares the living quality of the soul, and for this reason M ercurius is often called the spiritus vegetativu s 17 (spirit of life) o r spiritus sem inalis .18 A peculiar appellation is found in th a t seventeenth-century for gery which p u rports to be the secret book of A braham Ie Juif, m entioned by Nicolas FIameI (fourteenth century). T h e ep ith et is spiritus P hytonis (from φ ύω , ‘to procreate,’ φ υ τ ό ν , ‘creatu re,’ φ ύ τ ω ρ , ‘procreator,’ and Python, the D elphic serpent), and is ac com panied by the serpent sign: -T i. . 19 Very m uch m ore m aterial is the definition of M ercurius as a “life-giving power like a 12 P. 183.

13 P- 1914 P . 308. 15 “T ra c ta tu s au re u s," M u s . herrn., p . 39. I® M ylius, P h il, ref., p. 308: "(M e rc u riu s est) sp iritu s e t a n im a c o rp o ris.” T h e sam e in V e n tu ra , T h e a tr . ch em ., I I (1659), p . 282, a n d in " T ra c ta tu s M icreris," ib id ., V (1660), p . 92. 11 A egidius d e V adis, ibid ., I I (1659), p . 106. 18 P h ila le th a , “ M etall. m e ta m o rp h .,’’ M u s. h erm ., p . 766. I» A b ra h a m E leazar, U raltes C hym isches W erck1 p p . 2gff. "P h y to n is th e life of a ll th in g s,” p. 34,

glue, holding the w orld together and standing in the m iddle betw een body and spirit.” 20 T h is concept corresponds to M ylius’ definition of M ercurius as the anim a media natura. From here it is b u t a step to the identification of M ercurius w ith the anima m u n d i,21 which is how A vicenna had defined him very m uch earlier (tw elfth to th irteen th century). “ H e is the sp irit of the L ord which fills the whole w orld and in the beginning swam upon the waters. T h ey call him also the spirit of T ru th , which is hidden from the w orld.” 22 A nother text says th at M ercurius is the “supracelestial spirit which is conjoined w ith the light, an d rightly could be called the anim a m u n d i." 23 It is clear from a n u m b er of texts th a t the alchemists related th e ir concept of the anim a m u n d i on the one hand to the w orld soul in P lato’s Tim aeus and on the other to the H oly Spirit, who was present at the C reation and played the role of procreator (φύτωρ), im pregnating the waters with the seed of life just as, later, he played a sim ilar role in the obum bratio (overshadowing) of M ary.24 Elsewhere we read that a “life-force dwells in M ercurius non vulgaris, who flies like solid w hite snow. T h is is a spirit of the macrocosmic as of the microcosmic world, u p o n whom, after the anim a rationalis, the m otion and fluidity of h u m an n atu re itself depends.” 25 T h e snow represents the purified M ercurius in the state of albedo ( = spirituality); here again m atter and spirit are identical. W orth noting is the duality of soul caused by the presence of M ercurius: on the one hand the im m ortal anima rationalis given by G od to m an, which distinguishes him from anim als; on the other hand the m ercurial life-soul, which to all appearances is connected w ith the inflatio or inspiratio of the H oly Spirit. T h is fundam ental duality forms the psychological basis of the two sources of illum ination. 20 H a p p e liu s, “A p h o r ism i B a silia n i,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p. 327. 21 V e ru s H e r m e s (1620). 22 “A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 85. 23 Steeb, C o e lu m S e p h iro tic u m , p . 33. 24 Ib id ., p. 39. 2 5 H a p p e liu s, loc. cit.

THE

SPIRIT

MERCURIUS

C. M E R C U R I U S AS S P I R I T I N INCORPOREAL,

264

METAPHYSICAL

THE SENSE

I n m a n y of the passages it remains d o u b t f u l whether spiritus means spirit in an abstract sense. 2 0 It is moderately certain that this is so in D o r n , for he says that "Mercurius possesses the quality of an incorruptible spirit, which is like the soul, and because of its incorruptibility is called intellectual" 2 7 â&#x20AC;&#x201D;i.e., pertaining to the munaus intelligibilis. O n e text expressly calls him "spiritual and hyperphysical," 28 and another says that the spirit of Mercurius comes from heaven. 2 9 Laurentius Ventura (sixteenth century) may well have b e e n associating himself with the "Platonis liber quartorum" a n d h e n c e w i t h the neo-Platonist ideas of the Harranite school w h e n he defined the spirit of Mercurius as "completely and entirely like itself" (sibi omnino similis) and s i m p l e x , 30 for this Harranite text defines the arcane substance as the res simplex and equates it w i t h God. 3 1 Ostanes q u o t a t i o n of considerable antiquity tian), w h i c h says: "Go to the streamings of you will find a stone that has a spirit." 32 In is characterized as incorporeal , 33

(possibly pre-Christhe N i l e , and there Zosimos Mercurius and by another au-

thor as ethereal and as having b e c o m e rational or wise . 3 i I n the very o l d treatise "Isis to H o r u s " (first century) the divine water is brought by an angel and is clearly of celestial or possibly d a e m o n i c origin, since according to the text the angel A m n a e l w h o brings it is not a morally irreproachable figure.35 For the alchemists, as we k n o w n o t only from the ancient b u t also from the later writers, 26 F o r i n s t a n c e , D j a b i r i n B e r t h e l o t , Chimie au rnoyen age, I I I , p . 169; Rosarium, i n Art. aurif., I I , p . 339; H o g h e l a n d e , Theatr. chem., I {1602), p p . 153, 183. 27 Theatr. chem., I (1659), p . 419. T h e s a m e i n R i p l e y , " A x i o m a t a , " ibid., II (1659), p . 123. 28 " T r a c t a t u s a u r e u s , " Mus. herm., p . 11. H e r e c i t e d f r o m V a l e n t i n u s . 28 Steeb, Coelum Sephiroticum, p. 137. 30 Theatr. chem., I I (1659), p. 231. 31 I b i d . , V (1660), p. 129. 32 B e r t h e l o t , Alch. grecs, I I I , vi, 5. 33 I b i d . , I l l , xxviii, 5. 34 I b i d . , IV, vii, 2. 35 I b i d . , I, xiii, 3. [Cf. s u p r a , " T h e Visions of Zosimos," pars. 9 7 s . ] 215

»66

M ercurius as the arcane substance had a m ore or less secret con nection w ith the goddess of love. In the “ Book of Krates,” which was transm itted by the Arabs and is possibly of A lexandrian ori gin, A phrodite appears w ith a vessel from the m o u th of which pours a ceaseless stream of quicksilver,36 and in the Chymical W edding of C hristian Rosencreutz the central mystery is his visit to the secret cham ber of the sleeping Venus. T h e fact th at M ercurius is in terp reted as spirit and soul, in spite of the spirit-body dilem m a which this involves, indicates th a t the alchemists themselves conceived of th eir arcane sub stance as som ething th at we today w ould call a psychic phenom enon. Indeed, whatever else spirit and soul may be, from the phenom enological point of view they are psychic structures. T h e alchemists never tired of draw ing atten tio n to the psychic n atu re of M ercurius. So far we have concerned ourselves with, statistically, the commonest synonyms such as w ater and fire, spirit and soul, and it is now possible for us to conclude that these exemplify a psychological state of affairs best characterized by (or, indeed, actually dem anding) an antinom ian nom encla ture. W ater and fire are classic opposites and can be valid defini tions of one and the same thing only if this thing unites in itself the contrary qualities of w ater and fire. T h e psychologem “Mercurius” m ust therefore possess an essentially antinom ian dual nature. 36 B erthelot, M oyen dge, III, p 63.

5· T H E D U A L N A T U R E O F M E R C U R IU S *67

M ercurius, follow ing the trad itio n of H erm es, is many-sided, changeable, and deceitful. D orn speaks of “th a t inconstant M er curius,’’ 1 and an o th er calls him versipellis (changing his skin, shifty).2 H e is d u p le x3 and his m ain characteristic is duplicity. I t is said of him th a t he “runs ro u n d the earth and enjoys equally the com pany of the good and the wicked.” 4 H e is “ two dragons,” 5 the “ tw in,” G m ade of “two n atu res” 7 o r “two sub stances.” s H e is the “giant of tw ofold substance,” in explanation of which the text^ cites the twenty-sixth chapter of M atthew , w here the sacram ent of the Last Supper is in stitu ted . T h e C hrist analogy is thus m ade plain. T h e two substances of M ercurius are thought of as dissim ilar, sometimes opposed; as the dragon he is “winged and wingless.” 10 A parable says: “ O n this m o u n tain lies an ever-waking dragon, w ho is called P antophthalm os, for he is covered w ith eyes on both sides of his body, before and behind, and he sleeps w ith some open and some closed.” 11 T h e re is the “com m on and the philosophic” M ercurius;12 he consists of “ the dry and earthy, the m oist and viscous.” 13 Tw o of his elem ents are passive, earth and w ater, and two active, air 1 T h e a tr. c h e m ., I (1659), p . 470. 2 A egidius de V adis, ib id ., I I (1659), p . 105. 3 “ A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 84; T re v isan u s, in T h e a tr . ch em ., I (1659), p . 695; M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 176. 4 “A u relia o ccu lta,” T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p. 506. 5 “ B revis m a n u d u c tio ,” M u s. h erm ., p . 788. 6 V alen tin u s, “ P ra ctice ,” ib id ., p . 425. I M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 18; “ E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u rb a m ," A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 159, 161. 8 D o rn , in T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 420. 8 “A q u a riu m sap.,” M u s. h erm ., p . 111. [Cf. in fra , p a r. 384. n . 5.] 18 “S u m m a riu m p h ilo so p h ic u m ," ib id ., p p . t72f. I I Cf. th e snake vision of Ig n a tiu s L oyola a n d th e p o ly o p h th a lm ia m o tif discussed in “O n th e N a tu re o f th e Psyche,” p p . ig8f. 12 “T ra c ta tu s a u re u s ,” M u s. h erm ., p. 25. 13 "C o n siliu m co n iu g ii,” A rs chem ica (1566), p . 59. 217

a n d fire.14 H e is b o th g o o d a n d ev il.15 T h e “A u re lia o c c u lta ” gives a g ra p h ic d e s c rip tio n of h im :18 I am the poison-dripping dragon, who is everywhere an d can be cheaply had. T h a t u p o n w hich I rest, and th a t w hich rests u p o n me, will be found w ith in me by those who pursue th eir investigations in accordance w ith the rules of the A rt. My w ater and fire destroy and p u t together; from my body you may extract the green lion and the red. B ut if you do n o t have exact knowledge of me, you will destroy your five senses w ith my fire. From my snout there comes a spreading poison th a t has b ro u g h t d eath to many. T h erefo re you should skil fully separate the coarse from the fine, if you do not wish to suffer u tte r poverty. I bestow on you the powers of the m ale an d the fe male, and also those of heaven and of earth. T h e mysteries of my art m ust be h an d led w ith courage an d greatness of m in d if you w ould conquer me by the pow er17 of fire, for already very m any have come to grief, th eir riches an d lab o u r lost. I am the egg of nature, know n only to the wise, who in piety an d modesty b rin g fo rth from m e the microcosm, w hich was p rep ared for m an k in d by Alm ighty God, b u t given only to the few, w hile the m any long for it in vain, th a t they may do good to the poor w ith my treasure and n o t fasten th eir souls to the perishable gold. By the philosophers I am nam ed M ercurius; my spouse is the [philosophic] gold; I am the old dragon, found everywhere on the globe of the earth, fath er and m other, young and old, very strong an d very weak, d eath and resurrection, visible and invisible, h a rd an d soft; I descend in to the earth and ascend to the heavens, I am the highest an d the lowest, the lightest an d the heaviest; often the order of n atu re is reversed in me, as re gards colour, num ber, w eight, an d measure; I contain the light of nature; I am d ark an d light; I come fo rth from heaven and earth; I am know n and yet do n o t exist a t all;18 by v irtu e of the su n ’s rays all colours shine in me, an d all metals. I am the carbuncle of the sun, the m ost noble purified earth , th ro u g h w hich you may change copper, iro n , tin, and lead in to gold. 268

B ecause of h is u n ite d d o u b le n a tu r e M e rc u riu s is d escrib e d as h e rm a p h ro d itic . S o m etim es h is b o d y is said to b e m a scu lin e a n d his so u l fe m in in e , so m etim es th e rev erse. T h e R osarium R o sa riu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p. 208. K hunrath, H y I. Chaos, p. 218. 16 T h e a tr. chem ., IV (1659), p p . 5018:. i t I read v i in stead o f vim . I 8 T h is paradox recalls th e In d ia n asat (n on -existin g). Cf. C hhandogya U p an ish ad , VI, ii, 1 (Sacred B ooks o f th e East, II, p. 93). 14

218

philosophorum , for exam ple, has both versions.19 As vulgaris he is the dead m asculine body, b u t as “o u r” M ercurius he is fem i nine, spiritual, alive and life-giving.20 H e is also called husband and wife,21 bridegroom and bride, or lover and beloved.22 His contrary natures are often called M ercurius sensu strictiori and sulphur, the form er being fem inine, earth, and Eve, and the lat te r m asculine, water, and Adam 23 In D orn he is the “ true h er m aphroditic A dam ,” 24 and in K hunrath he is “begotten of the herm aphroditic seed of the M acrocosm” as “an im m aculate b irth from the herm aphroditic m atter” (i.e., the prim a materia).25 Mylius calls him the “herm aphroditic m onster.” 26 As Adam he is also the microcosm, or even “the h eart of the m icro cosm,” 27 or he has the microcosm “in himself, where are also the fo u r elem ents and the quinta essentia which they call H eaven.” 28 T h e term coelum for M ercurius does not, as one m ight think, derive from the firm am entum of Paracelsus, b u t occurs earlier in Johannes de Rupescissa (fourteenth century).29 T h e term hom o is used as a synonym for “microcosm,” as when M ercurius is nam ed the “ Philosophic am bisexual M an.” 30 In the very old “D icta B elini” (Belinus o r Balinus is a corruption of A pollonius of Tyana), he is the “m an rising from the river,” 31 probably a reference to the vision of Ezra.32 In T rism o sin ’s Splendor solis (sixteenth century) there is an illustration of this.33 T h e idea itself may go back to the B abylonian teacher of xvisdom, Oannes. T h e designation of M ercurius as the “high 19 A r t. a u r if., II, p p . 239, 249. 20 “In tro it. a p e r t.,” M u s. h erm ., p . 653. 21 “G loria m u n d i,” ib id ., p . 250. 22 A u r o ra con su rgen s I, P a ra b le V II. 23 R u la n d , L e x ic o n a lc h e m ia e , p . 47. 24 T h e a tr , c h e m ., I (1659), p . 510. 25 H y I. C haos, p . 62. 20 P h il, ref., p . 19. 27 H a p p e liu s in T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p . 327. 28 P h il, ref., p . 5. 2S L a V e rtu e t p r o p r ie te d e la q u in te essence, p. 15. T h e " m etal o f th e p h ilo s o p h er s” w ill b e c o m e lik e “h e a v e n ,” says th e “T r a cta tu s M icreris,” T h e a tr . ch em .,

V (1660), p . 100. 30 K h u n rath , H y l. C haos, p . ig s . 31 M an get, B ib lio th e c a c h e m ic a , I, p . 478b. 3 2 IV Ezra 13 : 25-53. Cf. C harles, A p o c r y p h a a n d P s e u d e p ig r a p h a , I I , p p . 6 i8 f. 33 In A u r e u m v e llu s (1598), T r a c t 3: S p le n d o r S olis (1920 fa csim ile), p . 23, PI. V III.

m an ” 34 does n o t fit in badly w ith such a pedigree. T h e terms A dam and m icrocosm occur freq u en tly in the tex ts ,35 but the A braham Ie J u if forgery u n b lu sh in g ly calls M ercurius A dam K adm on . 30 As I have discussed this u n m istakab le con tin u ation o f the G nostic doctrin e o f the A nthropos elsew h ere ,37 there is n o n eed for m e to go m ore closely n ow in to this aspect of M ercurius .38 N evertheless, I w ould lik e to em phasize once again that the A nthropos idea coincides w ith the psychological con cep t of the self. T h e atm an and purusha d octrin e as w ell as alchem y give clear proofs o f this. s09 A n oth er aspect o f the dual nature o f M ercurius is his char acterization as sen ex 39 and p u e r .40 T h e figure of H erm es as an old m an, attested by archaeology, brings h im in to direct relation w ith Saturn— a relation sh ip w hich plays a considerable role in alchem y (see infra, pars. 274ff.). M ercurius truly consists of the m ost extrem e opposites; on the on e hand he is u n d ou b ted ly akin to the godhead, on the other he is fou n d in sewers. R osinus (Zosimos) even calls h im the te rm in u s a n i.41 In th e B u n dah ish ,42 the anus of G arotm an is ‘‘lik e h ell on earth.” R u la n d , L exico n alchem iae, p. 47. Jo h n Dee in T h e a tr. chem ., II (1659), p. 195; R o sa riu m , in A rt. aurif., II, p. 309. 3 8 Eleazar, V ralles Chym isches W erck, p. 51. A dam K adm on is th e P rim o rd ial M an; cf. M yste rtu m C oniunetionis, ch. V. 3 7 “ Paracelsus as a S p iritu al P henom enon,” sup ra, pars. 165(!., an d Psychology a n d A lch em y, index, s.v. 38 G ayom art also is a k in d o f vegetation n u m e n like M ercurius, an d like him fertilizes his m o th er, th e ea rth . A t th e place w here his life cam e to an end th e e a rth tu rn e d to gold, a n d w here his lim bs d isin teg rated various m etals ap peared. Cf. C hristensen, Les T yp es d u p rem ier h o m m e et d u p rem ier roi dans Vhistoire legendaire des Iraniens, p p . 26, 29. 39 Senex draco in V alentinus, "P ractica,” M us. kerm ., p. 425. In Verus H erm es (1620), pp. 15, 16, M ercurius is also designated w ith th e G nostic n am e ‘'F ath erM o th er.” 4 0 “D e a rte chim ica,” A rt. aurif., I, p. 581. R eg iu s p u e llu s in “ In tro it. ap e rt.,” M us. herm ., p p . 678, 655. 4 1 A rt. aurif., I, p. 310. H e re it is th e stone id en tical w ith M ercurius th at is so called. T h e context disallows the rea d in g "a n n i.” T h e passage w hich follows soon afte r, “n ascitu r in d u o b u s m o n tib u s,” refers to th e “T ra c ta tu s A ristotelis” ('T h e a tr. chem ., V, 1660, p p . 787!!.), w here th e act o f d efecation is described. (Cf. supra, “Paracelsus as a S p iritu al P h en o m en o n ,” p ar. 182, n . 61.) C orrespond ing illu stratio n s for A urora consurgens m ay be fo u n d in th e C odex R henoviensis. 4 2 Ch. X X V III. Cf. R eitzenstein a n d Schaeder, S tu d ien zu m a n tik e n Synkretism us aus Iran u n d G riechenland, p. 119.

6. T H E U N IT Y A N D T R IN IT Y OF M E R C U R IU S 270

In spite of his obvious duality the u n ity of M ercurius is also emphasized, especially in his form as the lapis. “In all the world he is O ne.” 1 T h e unity of M ercurius is at the same tim e a trinity, w ith clear reference to the H oly T rin ity , although his triadic n a tu re does not derive from C hristian dogma b u t is of earlier date. T riad s occur as early as the treatise of Zosimos, irtpi aperijs (C oncerning the A rt).2 M artial calls H erm es omnia solus et ter unus (All and T h rice O ne).3 In M onakris (Arcadia), a three-headed H erm es was w orshipped, and in G aul there was a three-headed M ercurius.4 T h is G allic god was also a psychopomp. T h e triadic character is an a ttrib u te of the gods of the u n d er w orld, as for instance the three-bodied T y p h o n , three-bodied and three-faced H ecate,5 and the “ancestors” (τριτοπάτορβτ) w ith th eir serpent bodies. A ccording to Cicero,6 these latter are the three sons of Zeus the King, the rex antiquissimusJ T h ey are called the “forefathers” and are wind-gods;8 obviously by the same logic the H o p i Indians believe th at snakes are at the same tim e flashes of lightning auguring rain. K h u n rath calls Mercurius triunus9 and ternarius.10 M ylius represents him as a three1 R o s a r i u m , in A r t . a u r i f . , II , p . 253. 2 B e r t h e lo t , A l c h . g r e c s , I I I , v i, 18: “ T h e u n it y o f th e c o m p o s it io n [p r o d u c e s] th e in d iv is ib le tr ia d , a n d t h u s a n u n d iv id e d t r ia d c o m p o s e d o f se p a r a te e le m e n t s c r e a te s t h e c o sm o s, t h r o u g h t h e f o r e t h o u g h t [προνοίς.] o f t h e F ir st A u t h o r , t h e c a u se a n d d e m iu r g e o f c r e a tio n ; w h e r e fo r e h e is c a lle d T r is m e g is t o s , h a v in g b e h e l d t r ia d ic a lly th a t w h ic h is c r e a te d a n d th a t w h ic h crea tes." 3 E p i g r a m m a t a , V , 24. * R e in a c h , C u l t e s , m y t h e s e t r e l i g i o n s , I I I , p p . r 6 o f. 5 S c h w e itz e r , H e r a k l e s , p p . 84(!. 6 D e n a t u r a d e o r u m , 3, 2 1 , 53. 7 T h e r e is a lso a Z e u s t r i o p s . 8 R o s c h e r , L e x i c o n , V , c o l. 1208. 9 H y L C h a o s , p p . 6 a n d 199. 10 I b id ., p . 203.

h eaded snake.11 T h e “A q u a riu m sap ie n tu m ” says th at he is a “ triu n e , universal essence w hich is nam ed Jeh o v a.12 H e is divine a n d at the same tim e h u m a n .” 13 27l f r o m all this one m ust conclude th a t M ercurius corresponds n o t only to C hrist, b u t to th e triu n e d iv in ity in general. T h e “A u re lia o ccu lta” calls h im “A zoth,” a n d explains th e term as follows: “ F o r he is the A an d O th a t is everyw here p resen t. T h e philosophers have a d o rn ed [him ] w ith th e n am e A zoth, which is c o m p o u n d ed of th e A and Z of the L atins, th e a lp h a and om ega of th e G reeks, a n d th e aleph a n d ta u of th e H ebrew s:

T h e p arallel w ith th e T r in ity co u ld n o t be m ore clearly in d i cated. T h e anonym ous co m m en tato r of the “T ra c ta tu s a u reu s” p u ts th e p arallel w ith C h rist as Logos ju st as unm istak ab ly . All things proceed from th e “ philosophic heaven a d o rn e d w ith an in fin ite m u ltitu d e of stars,” 13 from the creative W o rd in car n ate, the Jo h a n n in e Logos, w ith o u t w hich “was n o t any th in g m ade th a t was m ad e.” T h e c o m m e n tato r says: “T h u s th e W o rd of ren ew al is invisibly in h e re n t in all things, b u t it is n o t ev id en t in elem en tary solid bodies unless they have b een b ro u g h t back to th e fifth, or heavenly a n d astral essence. H en ce this W o rd of renew al is the seed of prom ise, o r th e philo so p h ic heaven re fu l g e n t w ith th e infinite lights of th e stars.” 18 M ercu riu s is the Logos becom e w orld. T h e d escrip tio n given h ere m ay p o in t to his basic id e n tity w ith th e collective unconscious, fo r as I tried to show in m y essay “ O n the N a tu re of the Psyche,” 17 th e im age of th e starry heaven seems to be a visualization of th e pecul ia r n a tu re of the unconscious. Since M ercu riu s is often called filius, his sonship is beyond q u e stio n .18 H e is th erefo re like a I! Phil, ref., p. g6. 12 T his peculiar designation refers to the dem iurge, the saturnine Ialdabaoth, w ho was connected w ith the “God o f the Jews." 13 Mus. herm., p. 112. 14 T heatr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 507. ιε Ibid., p. 614. 16 Ibid., p. 615. 17 Pp. ig8f. 18 Cf. R osarium , in A rt. aurif., II, p. 248: “filius . . . coloris coelici" (cited from 222

272

b ro th e r to C hrist and a second son of God, though in p o in t of tim e he m ust be accounted the elder an d the first-born. T h is idea goes back to the conceptions of the Euchites rep o rted in M ichael Psellus,19 who believed th at G od’s first son was Satanael 20 and th at C hrist was the second.21 However, M ercurius is n o t only the co u n terp art of C hrist in so far as he is the “son” ; he is also the co u n terp art of the T rin ity as a whole in so far as he is conceived to be a chthonic triad. According to this view he w ould be equal to one half of the C hristian G odhead. H e is in deed the dark chthonic half, b u t he is n o t simply evil as such, for he is called “good and evil,” or a “system of the higher powers in the low er.” H e calls to m in d th a t double figure which seems to stand b eh in d both C hrist and the devil— th at enigm atic Lucifer whose attributes are shared by both. In Rev. 22 : 16 C hrist says of himself: “I am the ro o t and the offspring of David, the b rig h t and the m orn ing star.” O ne peculiarity of M ercurius which u n d o u b ted ly relates him to the G odhead and to the prim itive creator god is his abil ity to beget himself. In the “A llegoriae super lib ru m T u rb a e ” he says: “T h e m other bore me and is herself begotten of m e.” 22 As the uroboros dragon, he im pregnates, begets, bears, devours, and slays himself, and “him self lifts him self on high,” as the R osarium says,23 so paraphrasing the mystery of G od’s sacrificial death. H ere, as in m any sim ilar instances, it w ould be rash to assume th at the alchemists were as conscious of th e ir reasoning processes as perhaps we are. B ut m an, and through h im the unH a ly ’s “S ecretu m ”); K h u n ra th , H y l. C haos, passim : "filiu s m acrocosm i,” p . 59: “ u n igen itu s" ; P e n o tu s in T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p . 601: “filiu s h o m in is , fru ctu s v ir g in is.” 1* D e d a e m o n ib u s (trans. M arsilio F icin o ), fo l. N . Vr. 20 Cf. th e rep ort o n th e B o g o m ils in E u th y m io s Z igabenos, “P a n o p lia d o g m a tic a ” (M ig n e, P .G ., v o l. 130, cols. i2gff.). 21 T h e d u a lity o f th e so n sh ip app ears to d a te back to th e E b io n ite s in E p ip h a n iu s: “T w o , th ey assert, w ere raised u p by G od , th e o n e (is) C h rist, th e o th e r th e d e v il” (P a n a riu m 1 X X X , 16, 2). 22 A r t. a u rif., I, p . 151. T h e sam e is said o f G od in th e C o n te s d e l G ra a l o f C h r itie n d e T royes: “ Ce d o in t ic il glor'ieus p ere Q u i d e sa fille fist sa m e re .” (H ilk a , D e r P e r c e v a lro m a n , p . 372.) 23 A r t. a u rif., II, p . 339.

conscious, expresses a great deal th a t is n o t necessarily conscious in all its im plications. N evertheless I sh o u ld lik e to avoid giving th e im pression th a t the alchem ists w ere ab so lu tely unconscious of th e ir thought-processes. H o w little this was so is proved by the above q u o tatio n s. B u t a lth o u g h M ercurius, in m any texts, is stated to be trinus e t Unusj this does n o t p re v e n t h im from shar ing very strongly th e qu a tern ity of the lapis, w ith w hich he is essentially identical. H e thus exem plifies th a t strange dilem m a w hich is posed by the p ro b le m of th re e a n d fo u r— th e wellk now n axiom of M aria P rophetissa. T h e re is a classical H e rm es tetracephalus as w ell as th e H e rm e s tricephalus.2i T h e groundplan of the Sabaean tem ple of M ercuriu s was a trian g le inside a sq u a re .25 In the scholia to th e “T ra c ta tu s a u re u s” th e sign for M ercurius is a square inside a trian g le su rro u n d e d by a circle (sym bol of to tality).26 2 * S ch w eitzer, H e r a k le s , p . 84. 2 5 C h w o lso h n , D ie S s a b ie r u n d d e r S sa b ism u s, II, p . 367. 2 6 B ib I. c h e m ., I, p . 40Q.

η. T H E R E L A T IO N O F M E R C U R IU S T O A S T R O L O G Y A N D T H E D O C T R IN E OF T H E ARCHON S «73

O ne of the roots of the peculiar philosophy relatin g to Mercurius lies in ancient astrology and in the Gnostic doctrine of the archons and aeons, w hich is derived from it. Between Mercurius and the planet there is a relatio n of mystical id en tity due e ith er to contam ination or to an actual spiritual identity. In the first case quicksilver is simply the plan et M ercury as it appears in the earth (just as gold is simply the sun in the earth );1 in the second, the “sp irit” of quicksilver is identical w ith the planetary spirit. Both spirits individually, or the two as one spirit, were personified and called upon for aid o r magically conjured in to service as a paredros or “fam iliar.” W ith in the alchem ical tra d i tion we find directions for such procedures in the H arran ite treatise “ Clavis m aioris sapientiae” of A rtefius,2 which agree w ith descriptions of the invocations m entioned by Dozy and de G oeje.3 T h e re are also references to procedures of this k in d in the "L ib e r Platonis q u a rto ru m .” * Parallel w ith this is the account according to which D em ocritus received the secret of the hieroglyphs from the genius of the p lan et M ercury.5 T h e spirit M ercurius appears here in the role of a mystagogue, as in the Corpus H e rm e tic u m or the visions of Zosimos. H e plays the same role in the rem arkable dream-vision recorded in “A urelia occulta,” w here he appears as the A nthropos w ith a crown of stars.® As the little star n ear the sun, he is the child of sun and 1 M aier, C irculus ph ysicu s qu adratu s, pp. 15ft. 2 T h eatr. chem ., IV (1659), pp. ig8ff. 3 “N ouveau x docum ents pour l ’etu d e de la religion des H arraniens,” p. 341. 4 T h ea tr. chem ., V (1660), pp. io iff. 6 B erthelot, A lch . grecs, Introduction, p. 236. β T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 510. [Supra, par. 106.] H e corresponds to the stella sem p tem p lex w hich appears at the end of the work. “. . . cook, u n til the seven fold star appears, ru n n in g ab ou t through the sphere” (ibid., p. 508). Cf. the early

225

m oon .7 B ut contrariw ise he is also the begetter o f his parents;8 or, as the treatise of W ei Po-yang (c. a .d . 142) rem arks, the gold (sun) gets its q u alities from M ercurius.6 (O w in g to the contam i n ation, the astrological m yth is always th ou gh t of in chem ical terms as w ell.) Because of his h alf-fem in ine nature, M ercurius is often id en tified w ith the m o o n 10 and V en u s.11 As his own d ivin e consort he easily turns in to the goddess of love, just as in his role o f H erm es he is ithyphallic. B u t he is also called the “m ost chaste v irg in .” 12 T h e relation o f quicksilver to the m oon (silver) is obvious en ou gh . M ercurius as the sh in in g and shim m erin g p lanet, appearing lik e V enus close to the sun in the m orn in g or ev en in g sky, is lik e her a L ucifer, a light-bringer (φώσφοροί). H e heralds, as the m o rn in g star does, o n ly m uch m ore directly, the co m in g of the light. 274 B ut the m ost im portant of all for an in terp retation o f Mercurius is his relation to Saturn. M ercurius senex is id en tical w ith Saturn, and to the earlier alchem ists especially, it is n o t quick silver, b u t the lead associated w ith Saturn, w h ich u sually repreC h ris tia n id e a o f C h ris t as th e le a d e r o f th e “ r o u n d d a n c e ’’ o f th e stars. (“ T r a n s fo rm a tio n S ym bolism in th e M ass,” p p . 273ff.) 7 “T a b u la sm a ra g d in a ," R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p . 253, a n d M y liu s, P h il, ref., p . 101. 8 "A lle g o ria e s u p e r Iib ru m T u r b a e ,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 155: “o rig o S olis”; V e n tu ra , T h e a tr . c h em ., I I (1659), p . 296: “T h e s u n rises to g e th e r w ith th e m o o n in th e b e lly of M e rc u riu s .” 9 W e i P o -y an g , “A n A n c ie n t C h in ese T r e a tis e ,” p . 241. id “E p isto la a d H e r m a n n u m ,” T h e a tr . ch e m ., V (1660), p . 800; “ G lo ria m u n d i,” M u s . h e rm ., p p . 224, 244. As th e a rc a n e su b s ta n c e m a g n e s ia h e is c a lle d th e “ fu ll m o o n ” (R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p . 231) a n d su ccu s lu n a ria e (p. 211). H e h as fa lle n d o w n fro m th e m o o n (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I I , vi, g). T h e sig n fo r M e rc u riu s is in th e “B ook o f K ra te s ” (B e rth e lo t, M o y e n age, I I I , p . 48). In th e G reek M agic P a p y ri, H e rm e s is in v o k e d as “ circle o f th e m o o n ” (P re ise n d an z , P a p y ri G raecae M a g ica e, I, p . 195). 11 V ision of K ra te s in B e rth e lo t, M o y e n age, I I I , p . 63. As A d a m w ith V en u s in th e b a th , V a le n tin u s, “ P ra c tic a ,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 425 (cf. A iy s te r iu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p p . 303, 383). As Sal V en eris, g re e n a n d r e d lio n (= V e n u s ), K h u n r a th , H y l. C haos, p p . 91, 104. T h e su b sta n c e of M e rc u riu s consists o f V en u s (M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 17). S ince h is m o th e r V e n u s is th e m a tr ix co rru p ta , M e rc u riu s as h e r son is th e p u e r leprosus (“R o s in u s a d S a rr a ta n ta m ,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 318). I n th e M agic P a p y ri, th e d ay o f A p h ro d ite is asso ciate d w ith H e rm e s (P re ise n d a n z , P a p . G raec. M a g ., I I , p . 120). I n A l-lIr a q I th e a ttr ib u te s o f V en u s a re id e n tic a l w ith th o se o f M e rc u riu s; sister, b rid e , a ir, g re e n , g re e n lio n , p h o e n ix (H o lm y a rd , p . 420). 12 “A u re lia o c c u lta ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p . 480.

8 75

sents the prim a m ateria. In the A rabic text of the T urbaiz quick silver is identical w ith the “w ater of the m oon and of S aturn.’’ In the “D icta B elini” Saturn says: “ My sp irit is the w ater th at loosens the rig id lim bs of my brothers.” 14 T h is refers to the “eternal w ater” which is ju st w hat M ercurius is. R aym und L ully rem arks th at “a certain oil of a golden colour is extracted from the philosophic lead.” 15 In K h u n rath M ercurius is th e “salt of S aturn,” 16 o r Saturn is simply M ercurius. Saturn “draws the eternal w ater.” 17 Like M ercurius, Saturn is herm ap h ro d itic.18 S aturn is “an old m an on a m ountain , and in him the natures are b o u n d w ith th eir com plem ent [i.e., the four elem ents], and all this is in S aturn.” 19 T h e same is said of M ercurius. Saturn is the father and origin of M ercurius, therefore the latter is called “S aturn’s child.” 20 Q uicksilver comes “ from the h eart of Saturn o r is S atu rn ,” 21 an d a “b rig h t w ater” is extracted from the p la n t Saturnia, “ the m ost perfect w ater and flower in the w orld.” 22 T h is statem ent of Sir George R ipley, C anon of B rid lington, is a m ost rem arkable parallel to the G nostic teach ing th at Kronos (Saturn) is a “pow er of the colour of w ater” (ύδατόχρο«) which destroys everything, since “w ater is destruc tio n .” 23 L ike the planetary sp irit of M ercurius, the sp irit of S aturn is “very suited to this w ork.” 24 O ne of the m anifestations of M er curius in the alchem ical process of transform ation is the lion, now green and now red. K h u n rath calls this transform ation “ lu rin g the lion o u t of S aturn’s m o u n tain cave.” From ancient times the lion was associated w ith S atu rn.25 K h u n rath calls him 13 Ed. R u sk a, p . 204. 14 A r t . aurif., II, p . 379. T h e sa m e in D o rn , T h e a t r . c h e m ., I (1659), p p . 56of. !5 C ited in M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p. 302. 16 H y I. Chaos, p. 197. i t “A e n ig m a p h ilo s o p h o r u m ,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., IV (1659), p p . 4g8ff. 18 H y l . Chaos, p. 195. 19 “ R h a sis E p ist.” in M aier, S y m b . a ur. m ens., p . 211. L ik e S atu rn , M ercu riu s c o m b in e s all m e ta ls in h im se lf (ib id ., p. 531). 20 M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p. 305. "S atu rn ’s C h y ld ” in R ip le y ’s “ M e d u lla ” (T h e a t r . c h e m . B r it., p. 391). 21 P a n th e u s, A r s tr a n s m u t . m e ta ll., fo l. gr. 22 R ip le y , O p e r a , p . 317. 23 H ip p o ly tu s , E len ch os, V , 16, 2. 24 " L iber P la to n is q u a rto r u m ,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., V (1660), p p . 127, 136. 25 P reller, G rie c h isc h e M y t h o l o g i e , I, p. 43.

“ th e lio n o£ th e C a th o lic tr ib e ,’’ 26 p a ra p h ra s in g th e “ lio n o f th e tr ib e of J u d a h ”— a n alleg o ry of C h ris t.27 H e calls S a tu rn “ th e lio n g re e n a n d r e d .” 28 I n G n o sticism S a tu rn is th e h ig h e st a rc h o n , th e lio n -h e a d e d Ia ld a b a o th ,29 m e a n in g “ c h ild of chaos.” B u t in a lch em y th e c h ild o f chaos is M e rc u riu s .30 *76 T h e re la tio n to a n d id e n tity w ith S a tu rn is im p o r ta n t b e cause S a tu rn is n o t o n ly a m a le ficus b u t actu a lly th e d w ellingp lace o f th e d ev il h im self. E v en as th e h ig h e st a rc h o n a n d d e m i u rg e his G n o stic r e p u ta tio n was n o t th e best. A cc o rd in g to o n e C a b a listic so u rce, B e e lz e b u b was asso ciated w ith h im .81 MyIius says th a t if M e rc u riu s w ere to b e p u rifie d , th e n L u c ife r w o u ld fall fro m h e a v e n .32 A c o n te m p o ra ry m a rg in a l n o te in a s e v e n te e n th -c e n tu ry tre a tise in m y possession e x p la in s th e te rm s u lp h u r, th e m a sc u lin e p rin c ip le of M e rc u riu s ,33 as diab olu s. If M e rc u riu s is n o t ex actly th e E v il O n e h im self, h e a t le ast co n tain s h im — th a t is, h e is m o ra lly n e u tra l, g o o d a n d evil, o r as K h u n ra th says: “ G o o d w ith th e good, ev il w ith th e e v il.” 34 H is n a tu r e is m o re ex actly d efin ed , ho w ev er, if o n e conceives h im as a process th a t beg in s w ith evil a n d en d s w ith good. A ra th e r d e p lo ra b le b u t p ic tu re s q u e p o e m in Verus H e r m e s (1620) su m m arizes th e process as follow s: A w eakling babe, a greybeard old, Surnam ed the D ragon: m e they ho ld In darkest dungeon languishing T h a t I m ay be reb o rn a king. A fiery sword makes me to sm art, D eath gnaws my flesh an d bones apart. H y L Chaos, p. 93. Cf. C hrist as lio n in the A n co ra tu s o f E p ip h a n iu s an d as lio n cub in St. G reg ory, In S e p te m P salm . P en it., Ps. 5 : 10 (M igne, P.L., vol. 79, col. 609). 28 H y L Chaos, p. 195. 29 B ousset, H a u p t p r o b l e m e d e r Gnosis, pp. 10, 321, 352. 30 For S aturn’s day as th e last day o f creation, see infra, par. 301. 31 C odex P arisiensis 2419, fol. 277r. C ited in R eitzen stein , P o im an d res, p . 75. 32 P hil, ref., p. 18. 33 S u lp h u r is the "fire h id d en in M ercurius” (T revisanus in T h e a t r . chem., I, 1659, p. 700). H e is id en tica l w ith M ercurius: “S u lp h u r is m ercurial and M ercurius is su lp h u real” ("Brevis m an u d u ctio," M u s . h erm ., p. 788). S i H y l . Chaos, p . 186. T h erefo re, h e says, w e sh o u ld pray to G od for th e sp irit o f discretion, th a t it m ay teach u s th e d istin ctio n b etw een g o o d an d ev il. 26 27

228

My soul and spirit fast are sinking, A nd leave a poison, black and stinking. T o a black crow am I akin, Such be the wages of all sin. In deepest dust I lie alone, O th a t the T hree would make the One! O soul, O spirit w ith me stay, T h a t I may greet the light of day. H ero of peace, come forth from me, W hom the whole world would like to see! 277

In this po em M ercu riu s is d escrib in g his ow n tran sfo rm a tio n , w hich a t th e sam e tim e signifies th e m ystic tran sfo rm a tio n of th e artifex ; fo r n o t on ly M ercu riu s b u t also w h at h ap p en s to h im is a p ro je c tio n of th e collective unconscious. T h is, as can easily be seen fro m w h a t has gone before, is th e p ro je c tio n of th e in d iv id u a tio n process, w h ich , b e in g a n a tu ra l psychic o ccu r rence, goes on even w ith o u t th e p a rtic ip a tio n of consciousness. B u t if consciousness p articip a tes w ith som e m easu re of u n d e r stan d in g , th e n th e process is acco m p an ied by all th e em o tio n s of a relig io u s ex p erien ce o r rev elatio n . As a re su lt of this, M ercuriu s ivas id e n tified w ith S ap ie n tia an d th e H o ly G host. I t is th e re fo re very p ro b a b le th a t those heresies w h ich b eg an w ith th e E uchites, P au lician s, B ogom ils, a n d C athars, a n d w h ich d ev el oped th e co n cep t of th e P araclete very m u ch in th e s p irit of th e fo u n d e r of C h ristian ity , w ere c o n tin u e d in alchem y, p a rtly u n consciously an d p a rtly u n d e r a d e lib e ra te disguise.35 8 5 I t is c o n c e iv a b le th a t t h e c u r io u s n a m e f o r t h e a lc h e m is t s in R u p e s c is s a ’s L a

V ertu

p ro p riete

q u in te

essence,

“ le s

pou res

h om m es

e v a n g e lis a n s .”

g o e s b a c k to t h e C a th a r p e r f e c l i a n d p a u p e r e s C h r i s t i . R u p e s c is s a (J e a n d e R o q u e t a illa d c ) liv e d a b o u t t h e m id d le o f t h e 1 4 th c e n t. H e w a s a c r itic o f t h e C h u r c h a n d t h e c le r g y (F e r g u s o n , B i b l i o t h e c a c h e m i c a , I I , p . 3 0 5 ). T h e C a th a r tr ia ls la s t e d i n t o t h e m i d d l e o f t h e 1 4 th c e n t.

8. M E R C U R IU S A N D H E R M E S 278

W e have already m e t w ith a n u m b e r o£ alchem ical statem ents w hich show p lain ly th a t the character of the classical H erm es was faith fu lly re p ro d u c ed la te r in the figure of M ercurius. T h is is in p a rt an unconscious rep e titio n , in p a rt a sp o n tan eo u s re experience, a n d finally also a conscious referen ce to th e pagan god. T h e re can be no d o u b t th a t M ichael M aier was consciously a llu d in g to H erm es as p o in te r of the way (oSjjyos) w hen he said th a t he fo u n d on his m ystic p ere g rin a tio n a statu e of M ercurius p o in tin g the way to paradise,1 a n d th a t h e was re fe rrin g to H erm es th e m ystagogue w hen he m ade th e E ry th ra ea n Sibyl say of M ercurius: “ H e w ill m ake you a w itness of th e m ysteries of G od an d th e secrets of n a tu re .” 2 A gain, as th e d ivin n s ternarius, M ercurius is the revealer of divine secrets,3 or in th e form of gold is conceived to be th e soul of the arcane substance (m agnesia),4 o r the fructifier of the philosophical tree.5 In the “ E pigram m a M ercurio philosophico d ic a tu m ” 6 he is called the m essenger of th e gods, the h e rm e n e u t (in terp reter), an d the E gyptian “T h e u tiu s ” (T h o th ). M aier even goes so far as to re late h im to H erm es K yllenios w hen he calls h im “this faithless a n d all too elusive A rcadian y o u th ,” 7 fo r in A rcadia was the sanctuary of K yllenios5 th e ith y p h allic H erm es. I n th e scholia to th e “T ra c ta tu s a u reu s” M ercurius is n am ed o u trig h t the “ K yllenian h e ro .” 8 M aier’s w ords m ig h t also b e a referen ce to Eros. A n d in fact, in R osencreutz’s C hym ical W e d d in g , M er1 S y m b . aur. m ens., p. 592. [Cf. M ysteriu m C oniunctionis, pars. 276ff.] Ibid., p. 600. D orn, in T h e a tr. chem ., I (1659), p. 547. K h u n ra th , H yl. Chaos, p. 233. 5 R ipley, in T h e a tr. chem ., II (1659), p. 113. β M us. herm ., p. 738. 7 Sym b. aur. m ens., p. 386. 8 T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 673.

2 3 4

curius does appear in the form of C u p id ,9 and punishes the adept for his curiosity in visiting the Lady Venus by w ounding him in the h an d w ith an arrow. T h e arrow is the “d a rt of pas sion” (telum passionis), which is also an a ttrib u te of M ercurius.10 H e is an “archer,” an d indeed one who “shoots w ith o u t a bow strin g ” and is “now here to be found on earth ,” 11 so is obviously a daem on. In the T a b le of Symbols in Penotus12 he is associated w ith nym phs, w hich rem inds one of the pastoral god, Pan. H is lasciviousness is borne o u t by an illustration in the Tripus chimicus of Sendivogius,13 w here he appears o n a triu m p h al chariot draw n by a cock an d a hen, and b eh in d him is a naked p air of em bracing lovers. In this connection may also be m en tioned the num erous som ew hat obscene pictures of the coniunctio in old prints, often preserved m erely as pornographica. Pictures in old m anuscripts of excretory acts, in cluding vom iting, likewise belong to this sphere of the “underw orldly H erm es.” 14 Again, M ercurius represents the “continuous co h ab itatio n ” 15 which is found in unalloyed form in the T a n tric Shiva-Shakti concept. C onnections betw een G reek and A rabic alchemy and In d ia are n o t unlikely. R eitzensteinle reports the story of Padm anaba from a T u rk ish book of folklore17 ab o u t the forty vi ziers, w hich may date back to the tim e of the M oguls. A lready in the first centuries of o u r era, In d ia n religious influences were at work in southern M esopotam ia, and in the second century B.C. there were B uddhist m onasteries in Persia. In the royal tem ple of P adm anabhapura in T ravancore (c. fifteenth century) I found two reliefs representing an entirely no n -In d ian senex ithyphallicus w ith wings. In one of them he stands u p to his waist in the bowl of the m oon. O ne is rem inded of the w inged ithyphal8 Also in the form of the boy showing the way and the “age-old son of the mother.” 1ORipley, Opera, pp. 42iff. n "Introit. apert.,” M us. herm., p. 653. 12 Theatr. chem., II (1659), facing p. iog. 13 P. 67. 14 E.g., Codex Rhenoviensis, Zurich, and Codex Vossianus, Leyden. 15 For this m otif see Symbols of Transformation, pp. 2ogf. 16 Alchemische Lehrschriften und Marchen bei den Arabern, pp. 77L 17 B elletete, trans., Contes turcs.

279

lie o ld m an w ho pursues the “b lu e ” o r “d o g lik e” 18 w om an in H ippolytus. K yllenios does in fact a p p ea r in H ip p o ly tu s10 as id en tical on th e one h a n d w ith the Logos an d o n th e o th e r w ith the w icked Korybas, the phallus, a n d th e d em iu rg ic p rin c ip le in g en eral.20 A n o th e r aspect of this dark M ercu riu s is th e m otherson incest, w hich m ay be traceable to M an d aean influences: there N a b u (M ercurius) a n d Istar (A starte) fo rm a syzygy. A starte is th e m o th e r an d love goddess th ro u g h o u t th e w hole N e ar East, w here she is also ta in te d w ith the incest m otif. N ab u is th e “ M essiah of th e L ie,” w ho because of his m alice is p u n ished an d k e p t in p rison by th e su n 21 T h e texts re m in d us again a n d again th a t M ercurius is “fo u n d in the dung-heaps,” b u t they add ironically th a t “m any have g ru b b e d in the dung-heaps, b u t ex tracted n o th in g th ereb y .” 22 T h is d a rk M ercurius m u st once again b e u n d e rsto o d as re p re sen tin g the in itia l nigredo state, the low est b ein g a sym bol of the highest an d vice versa: Anfang und Ende Reichen sich die H ande.23 H e is the uroboros, the O ne an d All, th e u n io n of opposites accom plished d u rin g the alchem ical process, of w hich P en o tu s says:24 M ercurius is begotten by nature as the son of nature and the fruit of the liquid element. B ut even as the Son of M an is begotten by the philosopher and created as the fruit of the Virgin, so must he [Mercurius] be raised from the earth and cleansed of all earthiness, then he ascends entire into the air, and is changed into spirit. T hus 18 KuavotiSjj o r KUjioeiSjj. H ip p o ly tu s , E le n c h o s, V , 20, 6 a n d 7 (ed . W e n d la n d ) h as th e la t te r re a d in g . T h e a lc h e m ic a l e q u iv a le n ts o f th is stra n g e m y th o lo g e m s u p p o r t b o th p o ssib ilitie s: D o g as L ogos, p sy c h o p o m p , a n d filiu s canis coelici coloris ( p u p p y o f c ele stial h u e ), a ll r e f e rrin g to M e rc u riu s . [C f. M y s te r iu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p a rs, j 74H.] i s E le n c h o s, V, 7, 29. 20 T h e d u a lity o f th e M e rc u riu s c o n c e p t h a s a p a ra lle l in th e sy n c re tist view s o f th e N aassenes, w h o so u g h t to g ra sp a n d ex p re ss th e p sy ch o lo g ical e x p e rie n c e o f th e p a ra d o x ic a l F irs t C ause. B u t I m u s t b e c o n te n t w ith th is h in t. 21 B o u sset, H a u p tp r o b le m e d e r G nosis, p p . 43, 55, 142. 22 R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif,, I I , p . 243. 28 " B e g in n in g s a n d e n d s / T o u c h h a n d s .” 2^ T h e a tr . ch e m ., I (1659), P· 6 ° 1·

is fulfilled the word of the philosopher: He ascends from earth to heaven and receives the power of Above and Below, and puts off his earthy and impure nature and clothes himself in the heavenly nature. Since Penotus is here re ferrin g to the “T a b u la sm aragdina,” it m ust be em phasized th at he departs from the sp irit of the “T a b u la ” in one essential point. In the version of Penotus, the ascent of M ercurius is in entire accord w ith the C hristian trans form ation of the hylic in to the pneum atic m an. T h e “T a b u la ,” on the other hand, says: “ H e ascends from earth to heaven and descends again to earth, and receives the pow er of Above and Below. H is pow er is com plete w hen he has re tu rn e d to earth .” So it is n o t a question of a one-way ascent to heaven, but, in contrast to the ro u te followed by the C hristian R edeem er, who comes from above to below an d from there retu rn s to the above, the filius macrocosmi starts from below, ascends o n high, and, w ith the powers of Above and Below u n ited in himself, retu rn s to earth again. H e carries o u t the reverse m ovem ent and thereby m anifests a n a tu re contrary to that of C hrist and the Gnostic Redeem ers, w hile on the other h an d he displays a certain affinity w ith the B asilidian concept of the th ird sonship. M ercurius has the circular n a tu re of the uroboros, hence he is symbolized by the circulus sim plex of which he is at the same tim e the cen tre.25 H e can therefore say of him self: “I am O ne and at the same tim e M any in myself.” 26 T h is same treatise says th a t the centre of the circle in m an is the earth, and calls it the “salt” to which C hrist referred w hen he said: “Ye are the salt of the earth .” 27 H erm es is a god of thieves and cheats, b u t also a god of rev elation who gave his nam e to a w hole philosophy. Seen in histor ical retrospect, it was a m om ent of the utm ost significance w hen the hum anist P atrizi proposed to Pope Gregory X IV th a t H e r m etic philosophy should take the place of A ristotle in ecclesias tical doctrine. A t th a t m om ent two worlds came into contact, which— after heaven knows w hat happenings!— m ust yet be 25 “Tractatus aureus cum scholiis,” ibid., IV, p. 608. 2« “Aurelia occulta,” ibid., p. 507. 27 Ibid., p. 489.

u n ite d in th e fu tu re . A t th a t tim e i t was o b v io u sly im p o ssib le. A psychological d iffe re n tia tio n o f re lig io u s as w ell as scientific view s is s till n e e d e d b efo re a u n io n c a n b e g in to b e b r o u g h t a b o u t.28 28

[T h is paragraph orig in a lly en d ed the m on ograp h .â&#x20AC;&#x201D; E

d ito r s .]

9- M E R C U R IU S AS T H E A R C A N E S U B S T A N C E 282

M ercu riu s, it is g en erally affirm ed, is th e a rc a n u m ,1 th e p rim a m a te ria ,2 th e “ fa th e r of all m etals,’’ th e p rim ev al chaos, th e e a rth of p aradise, th e “m a te ria l u p o n w hich n a tu re w o rk ed a little , b u t nevertheless le ft im p erfect.” 4 H e is also th e u ltim a m a teria , the goal of his ow n tran sfo rm a tio n , th e sto n e,5 th e tin c tu re, th e p h ilo so p h ic gold, th e carb u n cle, th e p h ilo so p h ic m an, th e second A d am , th e an alo g u e o f C h rist, th e king, th e lig h t of lights, th e deus terrestris, in d e e d th e d iv in ity itself o r its p erfect c o u n te rp a rt. Since I have alread y discussed th e synonym s an d m eanings of th e stone elsew here th e re is n o n e e d fo r m e to go in to fu rth e r details now . 283 Besides b e in g th e p rim a m a te ria of th e low ly b e g in n in g as w ell as th e lapis as th e h ig h est goal, M ercu riu s is also th e process w hich lies b etw een , a n d th e m eans by w hich it is effected. H e is th e “b eg in n in g , m id d le, a n d e n d of th e w o rk .” 8 T h e re fo re he is called th e M e d iato r,7 Servator, a n d Salvator. H e is a m e d ia to r like H erm es. As th e m ed icin a catholica a n d a le xip h a rm a k o n he is th e “ preserv er [servator] of th e w o rld .” H e is th e “h e a le r [salvator] of all im p e rfe c t b o d ie s” 8 a n d th e “ im age of C h rist’s in c a rn a tio n ,” 8 th e u n ig e n itu s “c o n su b stan tial w ith th e p aren 1 ‘‘T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis,” T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p . 608. 2 M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 179; “ T ra c t, a u re u s ,” M u s. h erm ., p . 25; T re v isa n u s in T h e a tr. chem ., I (1659), p . 695. 3 “E x ercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 154. 4 R o sa riu m , ib id ., II, p . 231. 5 V e n tu ra , in T h e a tr . c h e m ., II (1859), P- 232: “ la p is b e n e d ic tu s”; D o rn , in T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 510: "fiery a n d p erfe c t M e rc u riu s” ; p . 520: “T h e A dam ic sto n e is m a d e o u t of th e A d a m ic M e rc u riu s in th e w o m an Eve” ; L ully, C odicillus, p p . 88of.: “T h e good th a t is so u g h t is o u r stone a n d M e rcu riu s.” β " T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis," T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p . 608. 7 “E x ercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 170; R ip ley , C h ym isch e S c h riffte n , p . 31; “T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis,” p . 610; “A m e d ia to r m a k in g p eace betw een en em ies.” 8 "A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p. 111. ®Ib id ., p . 118.

tal h e rm a p h ro d ite .” 10 A ltogether, in th e m acrocosm of n a tu re he occupies the position w hich C hrist holds in the m u n d u s rationalis of div in e revelation. B u t as the saying “ My lig h t su r passes all o th e r lig h ts” 11 shows, the claim of M ercu riu s goes even fu rth e r, w hich is why th e alchem ists endow ed h im w ith the a ttrib u te s of the T r in ity 12 in o rd e r to m ake clear his com plete correspondence to G od. In D ante, Satan is three-headed an d therefore three-in-one. H e is the c o u n te rp a rt of G od in the sense th a t he is G o d ’s antithesis. T h e alchem ists d id n o t h o ld this view of M ercurius; on the contrary, they saw h im as a div in e em an a tio n h arm onious w ith G o d ’s ow n being. T h e stress they laid o n his capacity for self-generation, self-transform ation, self re p ro d u c tio n , an d self-destruction contradicts the idea th a t he is a created being. It is th erefo re only logical w hen Paracelsus and D o rn state th a t the p rim a m ateria is an “ in c re a tu m ” an d a p rin ciple coeternal w ith G od. T h is den ial of creatio ex nihilo is su p p o rte d by the fact th a t in the b e g in n in g G od fo u n d th e T e h o m already in existence, th a t same m a te rn al w o rld of T ia m a t whose son we en co u n te r in M ercu riu s.13 K hunrath, H y l . Chaos, p. 59. u “Septem T ract, h erm et.,” Ars chemica, p. 22. R o sa riu m , p. 381: "I illu m in e the air w ith m y lig h t a n d w arm the earth w ith m y heat, I b rin g forth and nourish the things o f nature, plants an d stones, an d w ith m y pow er I take away the darkness o f n ig h t, and cause day to en d u re in th e w orld, and I lig h te n all lig h ts w ith m y lig h t, even those in w h ich there is n o sp len d ou r nor greatness. For all these are o f m y work, w hen I p u t u p on m e m y garm ents; and those w ho seek m e, let them m ake peace b etw een m e and m y b rid e.” T h is is cited from the “D icta B e lin i” (p rin ted in M an get’s B ib l. chem., I, p. 478). T h er e are variation s in the text. I have q u oted the passage in fu ll because o f its psych ological interest. 12 “For in the Stone are body, soul, and sp irit, and yet it is on e sto n e” (“Exercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. aurif., I, p. 170). 1 3 Cf. P sychology an d A lc h e m y , par. 26.

10. SU M M ARY T h e m u ltiple aspects o£ M ercurius may be sum m arized as follows: (1) M ercurius consists of all conceivable opposites. H e is thus q u ite obviously a duality, b u t is nam ed a u n ity in spite of the fact th at his in n u m erab le in n e r contradictions can d ram ati cally fly apart into an equal n u m b e r of disparate and apparently in d ep en d en t figures. (2) H e is bo th m aterial and spiritual. (3) H e is the process by w hich the low er and m aterial is transform ed into the higher and spiritual, and vice versa. (4) H e is the devil, a redeem ing psychopom p, an evasive trickster, and G od’s reflection in physical n atu re. (5) H e is also the reflection of a mystical experience of the artifex th a t coincides w ith the opus alchymicum. (6) As such, he represents on the one h an d th e self and on th e o th er the in d iv id u atio n process and, because of the lim itless n u m b e r of his names, also the collective unconscious.1 # # *

C ertainly goldm aking, as also chem ical research in general, was of great concern to alchemy. B ut a still greater, m ore im passioned concern appears to have been— one cannot very well say the “investigation”— b u t ra th e r the experience of the u n co n scious. T h a t this side of alchemy— the μυστικά— was for so long m isunderstood is due solely to the fact th at n o th in g was know n of psychology, let alone of the suprapersonal, collective u n co n scious. So long as one knows n o th in g of psychic actuality, it will be projected, if it appears at all. T h u s th e first know ledge of psychic law an d order was found in the stars, and was later ex tended by projections into unknow n m atter. T hese two realm s of experience branched off into sciences: astrology becam e astron1 H en ce the designation of M ercurius as more nostru m .

237

286

omy, a n d alchem y chem istry. O n the o th e r h an d , the p ecu liar co n nection betw een ch aracter a n d the astronom ical d e te rm in a tio n of tim e has only very recently begun to tu rn in to som ething app ro ach in g an em pirical science. T h e really im p o rta n t psychic facts can n e ith e r be m easured, w eighed, n o r seen in a test tu b e o r u n d e r a m icroscope. T h e y are th erefo re supposedly in d e term in ab le, in o th e r w ords they m ust be left to people w ho have a n in n e r sense for them , ju s t as colours m u st be show n to the seeing a n d n o t to the b lin d . T h e store of projections fo u n d in alchem y is, if possible, even less know n, an d there is a fu rth e r draw back w hich m akes closer investigation extrem ely difficult. For, u n lik e the astrolog ical constitu en ts of character w hich, if negative, are a t m ost u n pleasant for th e in d iv id u al, th o u g h am using to his n e ig h b o u r, th e alchem ical projections re p re se n t collective co n ten ts th a t stand in p ain fu l contrast— o r ra th e r, in com pensatory re la tio n — to o u r highest ra tio n a l convictions an d values. T h e y give the strange answers of the n a tu ra l psyche to th e u ltim a te questions w hich reason has left u n to u c h ed . C o n trary to all progress an d b elief in a fu tu re th a t w ill deliver us from th e sorrow ful present, they p o in t back to som ething prim eval, to the a p p aren tly h o p e lessly static, e tern al sway of m a tte r th a t m akes o u r fondly believed-in w orld look like a p hantasm ag o ria of sh iftin g scenes. T h e y show us, as the red em p tiv e goal of o u r active, desirous life, a sym bol of the inorganic— the stone— so m eth in g th a t does n o t live b u t m erely exists o r “ becom es,” the passive su b ject of a lim itless a n d u n fath o m ab le play of opposites. “ Soul,” th a t b o d i less ab stractio n of th e ra tio n a l in tellect, an d “sp irit,” th a t twodim ensional m e ta p h o r of dry-as-dust philosophical dialectic, ap p e ar in alchem ical pro jectio n in alm ost physical, plastic form , like tan gible breath-bodies, an d refuse to fu n c tio n as co m p o n en t p arts of o u r ra tio n a l consciousness. T h e h o p e fo r a psychology w ith o u t th e soul is b ro u g h t to n o th in g , an d the illu sio n th a t th e unconscious has only ju s t been discovered vanishes: in a som e w hat p e cu liar form , adm ittedly, i t has b een know n for close o n two th o u san d years. L e t us, how ever, n o t d elu d e ourselves: n o m ore th a n we can separate th e constitu en ts of ch aracter from th e astronom ical d eterm in an ts of tim e are we able to separate th a t u n ru ly an d evasive M ercurius from th e au to n o m y o f m atter. Som ething of the p ro jection-carrier always clings to th e projec238

tion, and even if we succeed to some degree in in teg ratin g in to o u r consciousness the p art we recognize as psychic, we shall in te grate along w ith it som ething of the cosmos and its m ateriality; o r rath er, since the cosmos is infinitely greater than we are, we shall have been assim ilated by the inorganic. "T ran sfo rm your selves into living philosophical stones!” cries an alchem ist, b u t he d id n o t know how infinitely slowly the stone “becomes.” A nyone w ho gives serious th o u g h t to the “n a tu ra l lig h t” th at em anates from the projections of alchem y w ill certainly agree w ith the M aster who spoke of the “wearisomeness of the in te r m inable m ed ita tio n ” dem anded by the work. In these projec tions we encounter the phenom enology of an “objective” spirit, a tru e m atrix of psychic experience, the m ost ap p ro p riate sym bol for which is m atter. N ow here an d never has m an controlled m a tte r w ith o u t closely observing its behaviour and paying heed to its laws, and only to the ex ten t th a t he did so could he con trol it. T h e same is tru e of th a t objective sp irit w hich today we call the unconscious: it is refractory like m atter, m ysteri ous and elusive, an d obeys laws w hich are so non-hum an or suprahum an th at they seem to us like a crim en laesae majestatis hum anae. If a m an puts his h an d to the opus, he repeats, as the alchem ists say, G od’s w ork of creation. T h e struggle w ith the unform ed, w ith the chaos of T iam at, is in tru th a p rim ordial experience. 887 Since the psyche, w hen directly experienced, confronts us in the “living” substance it has anim ated and appears to be one w ith it, M ercurius is called argentum vivu m . Conscious discrim ination, o r consciousness itself, effects th a t w orld-shattering in tervention w hich separates body from soul and divides the sp irit M ercurius from th e hydrargyrum , as if draw ing off th e sp irit in to the bottle, to speak in term s of o u r fairytale. B ut since body and soul, in spite of the artificial separation, are u n ite d in the m ystery of life, the m ercurial spirit, though im prisoned in the bottle, is yet found in the roots of the tree, as its quintessence an d living num en. In the language of the U panishads, he is the personal atm an of the tree. Isolated in the bottle, he corresponds to the ego and the principle of individ u atio n , w hich in th e I n d ian view leads to the illusion of in d iv id u al existence. Freed from his prison, M ercurius assumes th e character of the suprapersonal atm an. H e becomes the one an im atin g p rin cip le of all

288

created things, the hiranyagarbha (golden germ ),2 th e suprap ersonal self, rep resen ted by th e filius m acrocosm i, th e one stone of th e wise. “R osinus ad S a rratan tam ” cites a saying of “ M alus P hilosophus” 3 w hich attem pts to fo rm u late th e psychological re la tio n of th e lapis to consciousness: “T h is stone is below thee, as to obedience; above thee, as to d o m in io n ; th erefo re from thee, as to know ledge; a b o u t thee, as to equals.” 4 A p p lied to the self, this w ou ld m ean: “T h e self is su b o rd in a te to you, yet on th e o th e r h a n d ru les you. I t is d e p e n d e n t o n y o u r ow n efforts an d y o u r know ledge, b u t transcends you a n d em braces all those w ho are of like m in d .” T h is refers to th e collective n a tu re of th e self, since th e self epitom izes the w holeness of th e personality. By definition, w holeness includes th e collective unconscious, w hich as experience seems to show is everyw here id entical. T h e e n c o u n te r of the p oor stu d e n t w ith the sp irit in the b o t tle portrays the sp iritu a l ad v en tu re of a b lin d an d un aw ak en ed h u m a n being. T h e sam e m o tif underlies the tale of th e sw ine h e rd w ho clim bed the w orld-tree,5 a n d also form s the le itm o tiv of alchem y. F or w h at it signifies is th e in d iv id u a tio n process as it p repares itself in th e unconscious an d grad u ally enters con sciousness. T h e com m onest alchem ical sym bol fo r this is th e tree, th e arbor philosophica, w hich derives from th e paradisal tree of know ledge. H ere, as in o u r fairytale, a daem onic serp en t, an evil spirit, prods an d persuades to know ledge. I n view of th e B iblical precedent, it is n o t su rp risin g th a t th e sp irit M ercu riu s has, to say the least, a great m an y connections w ith th e d ark side. O ne of his aspects is th e fem ale serpent-daem on, L ilith or M elusina, w ho lives in the philosophical tree. A t th e sam e tim e, he n o t only partakes of th e H oly S p irit b u t, according to alchem y, is actually id en tical w ith it. W e have no choice b u t to accept this shocking parad o x a fte r all we have le a rn t a b o u t th e am bivalence of the sp irit archetype. O u r am biguous M ercu riu s sim ply conC f. M aitray an a-B rah m an a U p an ish ad , V, 8 (Sacred Books of th e East, vol. ig, p. 311). H e occurs as th e spiritus vegetativus an d collective soul in th e V edantaS utras (ibid., vol. 34, p. 173, an d vol. 48, p. 578). ®T h e treatise of R osinus (Zosimos) is p robably o f A rab ic origin. "M alu s” m ig h t b e a co rru p tio n of "M agus.” T h e F ihrist of Ib n al-N adim ( a . d . 9 8 7 ) lists, along w ith w ritings of R im as (Zosimos), tw o works by M agus one of w hich is en title d “T h e Book of th e W ise M agus (?) o n th e A r t” (Ruska, T u rb a , p. 272). 4 A rt. aurij., I, p. 310. B Cf. “T h e P henom enology of the S pirit in F airytales,” p p . 2318. 2

240

firms the rule. In any case, the paradox is no worse th an the C reato r’s w him sical n o tio n of enlivening his peaceful, in n o cen t paradise w ith the presence of an obviously ra th e r dangerous treesnake, “accidentally” located on the very same tree as the fo rb id den apples. 289 I t m ust be ad m itted th a t the fairytale an d alchem y b o th show M ercurius in a predom inantly unfavourable light, which is all the m ore striking because his positive aspect relates him n o t only to the H oly Spirit, b u t, in the form of the lapis, also to C hrist and, as a triad, even to the T rin ity . It looks as if it were precisely these relationships which led the alchem ists to p u t p a r ticu lar stress on the dark and dubious q u ality of M ercurius, and this m ilitates strongly against the assum ption th a t by th e ir lapis they really m eant Christ. If this had been th e ir m eaning, why should they have ren am ed C hrist the lapis p h ilo s o p h o r u m ? T h e lapis is at m ost a co u n terp art o r analogy of C hrist in th e physical world. Its symbolism, like th a t of M ercurius who constitutes its substance, points, psychologically speaking, to the self, as also does the symbolic figure of Christ.® In com parison w ith th e p u rity and u n ity of the C hrist symbol, M ercurius-Iapis is am bigu ous, dark, paradoxical, and thoroughly pagan. I t therefore re p re sents a p a rt of the psyche which was certainly n o t m oulded by C hristianity and can on no account be expressed by the symbol “C hrist.” O n the contrary, as we have seen, in m any ways it points to the devil, who is know n at times to disguise him self as an angel of light. T h e lapis form ulates an aspect of the self w hich stands apart, b o u n d to n a tu re and at odds w ith the C hris tian spirit. I t represents all those things which have been elim i n ated from the C hristian m odel. B ut since they possess living reality, they cannot express themselves otherw ise th an in dark H erm etic symbols. T h e paradoxical n a tu re of M ercurius reflects an im p o rtan t aspect of the self— the fact, nam ely, th a t it is essen tially a c o m p le x io O p p o sito ru m j and indeed can be n o th in g else if it is to represent any k ind of totality. M ercurius as d e u s terrestris has som ething of th a t deus a b s c o n d itu s (hidden god) which is an essential elem ent of the psychological self, an d th e self can n o t be distinguished from a God-image (except by incontestable an d unprovable faith). A lthough I have stressed th a t th e lapis is e [Cf. Psychology a nd A lchem y, ch. 5 , “T h e Lapis-Christ Parallel," and A ion , ch. 5 , "Christ, a Symbol o f the Self."— E d i t o r s . ]

241

290

a sym bol em b racin g th e opposites, it sh o u ld n o t be th o u g h t of as a— so to speak— m ore com plete sym bol of th e self. T h a t w o u ld be decidedly incorrect, for actually it is an im age w hose fo rm an d c o n ten t are largely d e term in e d by the unconscious. F o r this rea son it is never fo u n d in the texts in finished an d w ell-defined form ; we have to com bine all the scattered references to the various arcane substances, to M ercurius, to the tran sfo rm atio n process a n d the end product. A lth o u g h the lapis in one aspect o r a n o th e r is alm ost always the subject discussed, th ere is n o real consensus of o p in io n in reg ard to its actual form . A lm ost every a u th o r has his ow n special allegories, synonyms, a n d m etaphors. T h is m akes it clear th a t th e stone, th o u g h in d e ed an o b ject of g eneral ex p erim en t, was to an even g reater e x te n t an o u tc ro p p in g of th e unconscious, w hich only sporadically crossed the b o rd e rlin e of subjectivity a n d gave rise to th e vague general concept of the lapis p h ilo sophorum . O pposed to this figure veiled in th e tw ilig h t of m ore o r less secret doctrines th e re stands, sharply o u tlin e d by dogm a, th e Son of M an an d Salvator M undi, C h rist the Sol N ovus, before w hom th e lesser stars pale. H e is th e affirm ation of th e daylight of con sciousness in trin ita ria n form . So clear an d definite is th e C h rist figure th a t w hatever differs from h im m u st a p p ea r n o t only in fe rio r b u t perverse a n d vile. T h is is n o t th e re su lt of C h rist’s ow n teaching, b u t ra th e r of w h at is ta u g h t a b o u t him , a n d especially of the crystal p u rity w hich dogm a has bestow ed u p o n his figure. As a resu lt, a tension of opposites such as h ad n ev er occurred b efore in th e w hole history of C h ristia n ity b e g in n in g w ith th e C reatio n arose betw een C h rist an d th e A n tich rist, as Satan 01 th e fallen angel. A t the tim e of Jo b , Satan is still fo u n d am ong th e sons of G od. “ N ow there was a day,” it says in J o b 1 : 6, “w hen th e sons of G od cam e to p resen t them selves before th e L ord, an d Satan cam e also am ong th em .” T h is p ic tu re of a celes tia l fam ily re u n io n gives n o h in t of th e N ew T e sta m e n t “ G et thee hence, Satan” (M atthew 4 : 10), n o r yet of th e d ragon c h ain ed in th e u n d e rw o rld for a th o u san d years (Rev. 20 : 2). I t looks as if the su p erab u n d a n ce of lig h t o n one side h a d p ro d u ced a n all th e blacker darkness on th e other. O n e can also see th a t th e uncom m o nly great diffusion of black substance m akes a sin less b e in g alm ost im possible. A loving b elief in such a b e in g n a t u rally involves cleansing o n e ’s ow n house of black filth. B u t th e 242

filth m ust be d u m p ed som ew here, and no m atter w here the d u m p lies it w ill plague even the best of all possible w orlds w ith a bad smell. 291 T h e balance of the p rim ordial w orld is upset. W h at I have said is n o t in ten d ed as a criticism , for I am deeply convinced n o t only of the relentless logic b u t of the expediency of this develop m ent. T h e em phatic differentiation of opposites is synonymous w ith sharper discrim ination, and th a t is the sine qua non for any b roadening o r h eightening of consciousness. T h e progressive differentiation of consciousness is the m ost im p o rtan t task of h u m an biology and accordingly meets w ith the highest rew ards— vastly increased chances of survival and the developm ent of pow er technology. F rom the phylogenetic p o in t of view, the effects of consciousness are as far-reaching as those of lungb reath in g an d w arm-bloodedness. B ut clarification of conscious ness necessarily entails an obscuration of those dim m er elem ents of the psyche w hich are less capable of becom ing conscious, so th a t sooner o r later a split occurs in the psychic system. Since it is n o t recognized as such it is projected, and appears in the form of a m etaphysical split betw een the powers of light and the pow ers of darkness. T h e possibility of this projection is guaranteed by the presence of num erous archaic vestiges of the original dae mons of light an d darkness in any age. I t seems likely, therefore, th a t the tension of opposites in C hristianity is derived to a still unclarified degree from the dualism of ancient Persia, though the two are n o t identical. 292 T h e re can be no d o u b t th a t the m oral consequences of the C hristian developm ent represent a very considerable advance com pared w ith the ancient Israelite relig io n of law. T h e C hristi anity of the synoptic gospels signifies little m ore th an a com ing to term s w ith issues inside Judaism , w hich m ay fairly be com pared w ith the m uch earlier B uddhist reform ation inside H in d u polytheism . Psychologically, b oth reform ations resu lted in a tre m endous strengthening of consciousness. T h is is particularly evident in the m aieutic m ethod em ployed by Shakyam uni. B ut the sayings of Jesus m anifest the same tendency, even if we dis card as apocryphal the clearest form ulatio n of this kind, th e Iogion in C odex Bezae to L uke 6 : 4: “ M an, if th o u know est w hat thou doest, th o u a rt blessed. If thou know est it not, th o u a rt accursed and a transgressor of the law.” A t all events, the para-

b le of the u n ju s t stew ard (L uke 16) has n o t fo u n d its way in to th e A pocrypha, w here it w ould have fitted so well. *93 T h e r if t in the m etaphysical w orld has slowly rise n in to con sciousness as a sp lit in th e h u m a n psyche, an d th e struggle b e tw een lig h t an d darkness moves to th e b a ttle g ro u n d w ith in . T h is shift of scene is n o t en tirely self-evident, fo r w hich reason St. Ig n atiu s Loyola considered i t necessary to o p en o u r eyes to th e conflict a n d im press’ it on o u r feelings by m eans of th e m ost drastic sp iritu a l exercises.7 T h e se efforts, fo r obvious reasons, h a d only a very lim ite d range of applicatio n . A n d so, strangely enough, it was the m edical m en w ho, a t th e tu r n o f th e n in e te en th century, w ere forced to in terv en e an d g et th e o b stru cted process of conscious realization going again. A p p ro ach in g th e p ro b lem from a scientific angle, an d in n o c en t of any religious aim , F reu d u ncovered the abysm al darkness of h u m a n n a tu re w hich a w ould-be e n lig h te n ed optim ism h ad striven to conceal. Since th e n psychotherapy, in one form o r an o th er, has p ersist ently ex plored th e extensive area of darkness w hich I have called th e shadow . T h is a tte m p t of m o d e rn science o p en ed th e eyes of only a few. H ow ever, the historic events of o u r tim e have p a in te d a p ic tu re of m a n ’s psychic reality in in d e lib le colours of b lo o d an d fire, a n d given h im an o b ject lesson w hich he will n ev er be able to fo rg et if— an d this is th e g re a t q u estio n — he has today a cq u ired en o u g h consciousness to keep u p w ith th e fu ri ous pace of th e devil w ith in him . T h e only o th e r h o p e is th a t he m ay le arn to c u rb a creativity w hich is w asting itself in the ex p lo ita tio n of m a te ria l pow er. U n fo rtu n ate ly , all attem p ts in th a t d ire c tio n look like bloodless U topias. *94 T h e figure of C hrist th e Logos has raised th e a n im a rationalis in m a n to a level of im portance w hich rem ains u n o b je ctio n ab le so long as it know s itself to be below an d su b ject to th e nbptos, the L o rd of Spirits. R eason, how ever, has set itself free an d p ro claim ed itself th e ru le r. I t has sat e n th ro n e d in N o tre D am e as Deesse R aison a n d h e ra ld ed events th a t w ere to com e. O u r con sciousness is n o lo n g er confined w ith in a sacred tem enos of o th e r w orldly, eschatological images. I t was h elp ed to break free by a force th a t d id n o t stream dow n from above— like th e lu m e n de lu m in e — b u t cam e u p w ith trem en d o u s pressure from below an d increased in stren g th as consciousness detached itself from the 7 T h e S p ir itu a l E xercises (trans. R ickaby), pp. 75ft.

244

darkness and clim bed into the light. In accordance w ith the p rinciple of com pensation w hich runs th ro u g h the whole of n a ture,, every psychic developm ent, w hether individual o r collec tive, possesses an o p tim u m which, w hen exceeded, produces an enantiodrom ia, th a t is, tu rn s in to its opposite. C om pensatory tendencies em anating from the unconscious may be n o ted even d u rin g the approach to the critical turning-point, though if con sciousness persists in its course they are com pletely repressed. T h e stirrings in the darkness necessarily seem like a devilish be trayal of the Ideal of sp iritu al developm ent. Reason can n o t help condem ning as unreasonable everything that contradicts it or deviates from its laws, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. M orality can p e rm it itself no capacity for change, for w hatever it does n o t agree w ith is inevitably im m oral and has therefore to be repressed. I t is n o t difficult to im agine the m u ltitu d e of energies w hich m ust flow off in to the unconscious u n d e r such conscious dom ination. 295 H esitantly, as in a dream , th e introspective bro o d in g of the centuries gradually p u t together the figure of M ercurius and created a symbol w hich, according to all the psychological rules, stands in a com pensatory relatio n to C hrist. It is no t m eant to take his place, n o r is it identical w ith him , for then indeed it could replace him . It owes its existence to the law of com pensa tion, and its object is to throw a bridge across the abyss separat ing the two psychological w orlds by presenting a subtle com pen satory c o u n terp o in t to the C hrist image. T h e fact th a t in Faust the com pensatory figure is not, as one m ig h t alm ost have ex pected from the a u th o r’s classical predilections, the wily messen ger of the gods, but, as the nam e “ M ephistopheles” 8 shows, a fam iliaris risen from the cesspits of m edieval magic, proves, if anything, the ingrained C hristian character of G oethe’s con sciousness. T o the C hristian m entality, the dark antagonist is al ways the devil. As I have shown, M ercurius escapes this p re ju dice by only a h a ir’s breadth. B u t he escapes it, thanks to the fact th a t he scorns to carry on opposition at all costs. T h e magic of his nam e enables him , in spite of his am biguity and duplicity, to keep outside the split, for as an ancient pagan god he possesses a n a tu ra l undividedness w hich is im pervious to logical and m oral contradictions. T h is gives him in v u ln erab ility and incorrupti8

[From L . m ep hitis, a noxiou s ex h a la tio n from the earth.— T r a n s l a t o r . ]

bility, the very q u alities we so u rg e n tly n eed to heal th e sp lit in ourselves. 296 If one m akes a synopsis of all the descriptions an d alchem ical p ictures of M ercurius, they form a strik in g p arallel to th e sym bols of the self d eriv ed from o th e r sources. O n e can hard ly es cape the conclusion th a t M ercurius as the lapis is a sym bolic ex pression fo r th e psychological com plex w hich I have defined as th e self. Sim ilarly, th e C h rist figure m u st b e view ed as a self sym bol, an d for the same reasons. B u t this leads to an ap p aren tly insoluble co n trad ictio n , for it is n o t at first clear how th e u n c o n scious can shape tw o such different images fro m one an d the same content, w hich m oreover possesses th e ch aracter of totality. C ertain ly th e centuries have d o n e th e ir sp iritu a l w ork u p o n these two figures, and one is in clin ed to assum e th a t b o th have been in large m easure a n th ro p o m o rp h ized d u rin g th e process of assim ilation. For those w ho h old th a t b o th figures are in v en tio n s of th e intellect, the co n trad ictio n is q u ick ly resolved. I t th en m erely reflects th e subjective psychic situ atio n : th e two figures w ould stand for m an an d his shadow. 297 T h is very sim ple an d obvious so lu tio n is, u n fo rtu n ate ly , fo u n d ed o n prem ises th a t do n o t stan d u p to criticism . T h e fig ures of C h rist an d th e devil are b o th based o n archetypal p a t terns, a n d w ere never in v en ted b u t ra th e r experienced. T h e ir existence preceded all cognition of th e m ,9 a n d the in te lle ct had n o h a n d in th e m a tte r, except to assim ilate th e m an d if possible give them a place in its philosophy. O nly th e m ost superficial intellectu alism can overlook this fu n d a m e n tal fact. W e are a c tu ally co n fro n ted w ith two d ifferen t images of th e self, w hich in all lik elih o o d presented a d u a lity even in th e ir o rig in al form . T h is d u a lity was n o t in v ented, b u t is an auto n o m o u s p h en o m en o n . 298 Since we n a tu ra lly th in k from the stan d p o in t of conscious ness, we in ev itab ly com e to th e conclusion th a t th e sp lit betw een consciousness an d th e unconscious is th e sole cause of this d u a l ity. B u t experience has d e m o n strated th e existence of a preconscious psychic fu n c tio n in g an d of co rresp o n d in g au to n o m o u s factors, the archetypes. O nce we can accept th e fact th a t th e voices a n d delusions o f th e insane an d th e phobias an d obses sions of th e n e u ro tic are beyond ra tio n a l co n tro l, a n d th a t th e ego c an n o t v o lu n ta rily fabricate dream s b u t sim ply dream s w h at 9 Evidence for this is the widespread m otif of the two hostile brothers. 246

it has to, th e n we can also u n d e rs ta n d th a t th e gods cam e first a n d theology la ter. In d e e d , we m u st go a step fu rth e r a n d as sum e th a t in th e b e g in n in g th e re w ere tw o figures, o n e b rig h t a n d o n e shadow y, an d only afterw ard s d id th e lig h t of conscious ness d etach itself fro m th e n ig h t a n d th e u n c e rta in sh im m e r of its stars. 299 So if C h rist a n d th e d a rk n atu re -d e ity are au to n o m o u s im ages th a t can be d irec tly ex p erien ced , we are o b lig ed to reverse o u r ra tio n a listic causal seq u en ce, a n d in stead of d e riv in g these figures fro m o u r psychic co n d itio n s, m u st d eriv e o u r psychic c o n d itio n s fro m these figures. T h is is ex p ec tin g a good deal of th e m o d e rn in te lle c t b u t does n o t a lte r th e logic o f o u r h y p o th e sis. F ro m this s ta n d p o in t C h rist ap p ears as th e arch ety p e of co n sciousness a n d M ercu riu s as th e arch ety p e of th e unconscious. As C u p id a n d K yllenios, he tem p ts us o u t in to th e w o rld of sense; h e is th e b en ed icta virid ita s an d th e m u lti flores of early spring, a g od of illu sio n a n d d e lu sio n of w h o m it is rig h tly said: “ Inv e n itu r in v en a / S an g u in e p le n a ” (H e is fo u n d in th e v ein sw ollen w ith blood). H e is a t th e sam e tim e a H erm es C hthonios a n d an Eros, y et it is fro m h im th a t th e re issues th e “ lig h t surpassing all lig h ts,” th e lu x m o d ern a , fo r th e lapis is n o n e o th e r th a n th e figure o f lig h t v eiled in m a tte r .10 I t is in this sense th a t St. A u g u stin e q u o tes I T h essalo n ian s 5 : 5, “Ye are all th e c h ild re n of lig h t, a n d th e c h ild re n o f th e day: we are n o t of th e n ig h t, n o r of d ark n ess,” a n d d istin g u ish es tw o form s of know ledge, a co g n itio vesp ertin a a n d a co gnitio m a tu tin a , th e first c o rre sp o n d in g to th e scientia creaturae a n d th e second to th e scientia C reatoris .11 I f we e q u a te cog n itio w ith conscious ness, th e n A u g u stin e ’s th o u g h t w o u ld suggest th a t th e m erely h u m a n a n d n a tu ra l consciousness g rad u ally d ark en s, as a t n ig h t fall. B u t ju s t as ev en in g gives b ir th to m o rn in g , so fro m th e darkness arises a n ew lig h t, th e stella m a tu tin a , w h ich is a t once th e ev en in g a n d th e m o rn in g star— L u cifer, th e lig h t-b rin g er. 300 M ercu riu s is by n o m eans th e C h ristia n d ev il— th e la tte r 10 Cf. the saying of Ostanes concerning th e stone th at has a spirit. 11 “For th e know ledge o f the creature, in com parison w ith the know ledge of the Creator, is bu t a tw ilight; and so it dawns and breaks into m orning w hen the creature is drawn to the love and praise of the Creator. N or is it ever darkened, save w hen the Creator is abandoned by th e love o f the creature.”— T h e City of G o d , X I, vii.

co u ld ra th e r be said to be a “d ia b o liz atio n ” of L u cifer o r of M ercurius. M ercu riu s is a n a d u m b ra tio n of th e p rim o rd ia l lightb rin g er, w ho is n ev er him self the light, b u t a φωσφόρου who b rings th e lig h t of n a tu re , the lig h t of th e m oon a n d th e stars w hich fades before the new m o rn in g light. O f this lig h t St. A u g u stin e says th a t it w ill never tu rn to darkness unless th e C reator is a b an d o n e d by the love of his creatures. B u t this, too, belongs to the rh y th m of day an d n ig h t. As H o ld e rlin says in “ P atm os” ; an d sh a m efu lly A p o w er wrests aw ay the h eart from us; F or the H ea v en ly each d em an d sacrifice, B u t if it sh o u ld b e w ith h eld , N e v e r has th at led to good . 3°

W h e n all visible lights are ex tin g u ish ed one finds, according to the w ords of the wise Y ajnavalkya, th e lig h t of th e self. “W h at th e n is th e lig h t of m an? Self is his lig h t. I t is by th e lig h t of the self th a t a m an rests, goes forth, does his w ork a n d re tu rn s .” 12 T h u s, w ith A ugustine, the first day of creatio n begins w ith selfknow ledge, cognitio su i ipsius , 13 by w hich is m e a n t a know l edge n o t of the ego b u t of th e self, th a t objective p h en o m en o n of w hich th e ego is the su b je c t.14 T h e n , follow ing th e o rd e r of th e days of creation in Genesis, comes know ledge of the firm a m en t, of th e earth , the sea, the plants, the stars, th e anim als of th e w ater an d air, a n d finally, on th e sixth day, know ledge of the la n d anim als an d of ipsius h o m in is, of m an him self. T h e cognitio m a tu tin a is self-knowledge, b u t th e cognitio vespertina is know ledge of m a n .15 As A u gustine describes it, the cognitio B rih ad aran y ak a U panishad, IV, 3, 6 (c£. H u m e, T h e T h irte e n P rincipal U panishads, p. 133). 13 “A nd w hen i t [the cre a tu re ’s know ledge] comes to th e know ledge o£ itself, th a t is one d ay ” (Et hoc cum facit in cognitione sui ipsius, dies u n u s est).— T h e City o f G od, X I, vii. T h is m ay be the source for th e stran g e d esig n atio n of the lapis as "filius u n iu s diei." [Cf. M yste riu m C oniunctionis, p p . 335, 504.] 1* “Since n o know ledge is b e tte r th a n th a t by w hich m an know s him self, let us exam ine o u r thoughts, words, an d deeds. F or w h a t does it avail us if we are to investigate carefully a n d u n d e rsta n d rig h tly th e n a tu re of all things, yet do n ot u n d e rsta n d ourselves?”— L ib e r de S p iritu et A n im a , L I (M igne, P.L., vol. 40, cols. 816-17). T h is book is a very m u ch la te r treatise falsely a ttrib u te d to A u gustine. 15 "W herefore th e know ledge of th e creature, w hich is in itself evening know l edge, was in G od m o rn in g know ledge; fo r th e cre atu re is m ore p la in ly seen in 12

248

m a tu tin a gradually grows old as it loses itself in the “ten thou sand things” and finally comes to man, although one w ould ex pect this to have happened already w ith the onset of selfknowledge. B ut if this were true, A ugu stin e’s parable w ould have lost its m ean in g by contradicting itself. Such an obvious lapse cannot be ascribed to so gifted a man. H is real m ean in g is that self-know ledge is the scientia C r e a to r is ^ a m orning lig h t revealed after a n ig h t during w hich consciousness slum bered, wrapped in the darkness o f the unconscious. But the know ledge arising w ith this first light finally and inevitably becom es the scientia hominis, the know ledge of man, who asks him self: “W ho is it that knows and understands everything? W hy, it is m yself.” T h a t marks the com in g of darkness,17 ou t of w hich arises the seventh day, the day of rest: “But the rest of God sign i fies the rest of those w ho rest in G od.” 18 T h e Sabbath is there fore the day on w hich m an returns to G od and receives anew the light of the cognitio matutina. A nd this day has no even in g.19 From the sym bological standpoint it may n ot be w ithout signifi cance that A ugustine had in m ind the pagan names of the days of the week. T h e grow ing darkness reaches its greatest intensity on the day of V enus (Friday), and changes into L ucifer on SatGod th an it is seen in itself.”— Dialogus Q uaestionum L X V , Q uaest. XXVI (Migne, P.L., vol. 40, col. 741). 18T h e L iber de S piritu et A n im a attrib u tes very great im portance to selfknowledge, as being an essential condition for u n io n w ith God. “T h ere are some w ho seek God through outw ard things, forsaking th a t w hich is in them , an d in them is God. L et us therefore retu rn to ourselves, th a t we may ascend to o u r selves. . . . At first we ascend to ourselves from these outw ard and inferior things. Secondly, we ascend to the high heart. . . . In the th ird ascent we ascend to G od” (chs. L I-L II; Migne, P .L., vol. 40, col. 817). T h e “high h e a rt” (cor altum ; also “deep h e a rt”) is the m andala divided into four, th e imago D ei, or self. T h e L iber de S piritu et A n im a is in the m ainstream of A ugustinian tra dition. A ugustine him self says (De vera religione L X X I I , Migne, P.L., vol. 34, col. 154): “Go n o t outside, re tu rn into yourself; tr u th dwells in the in n er m an. A nd if you find th a t you are by n a tu re changeable, transcend yourself. B u t re m em ber th a t when you transcend yourself, you m ust transcend yourself as a reasoning soul.” is “Evening descends w hen the sun sets. Now the sun has set for m an, th a t is to say, th a t lig h t of justice w hich is the presence of G od.”— Enarrationes in Ps. X X I X , II, 16 (trans. H obgin and C orrigan, I, p. 308). T hese words refer to Ps. 30 : 5 (A.V.): “W eeping may tarry for the night b u t joy com eth in the m o rning.” 18 T h e City of God, X I, viii. Cf. also Dialog. Quaest. L X V , Quaest. XXVI, 1O Confessions (trans. Sheed), p. 289.

u r n ’s day. S aturday heralds the lig h t w hich appears in full stren g th on Sun-day. As I have shown, M ercu riu s is closely re lated n o t only to V enus b u t m ore especially to S atu rn . As Merc urius h e is ju v en is, as S atu rn senex. 3°2 I t seems to m e th a t A u gustine a p p re h en d e d a g reat tru th , nam ely th a t every sp iritu a l tru th gradu ally tu rn s in to som ething m aterial, becom ing n o m ore th a n a to o l in th e h a n d of m an. In consequence, m an can hard ly avoid seeing him self as a know er, yes, even as a creator, w ith boundless possibilities a t his com m and. T h e alchem ist was basically this so rt of person, b u t m uch less so th an m o d e m m an. A n alchem ist co u ld still pray: “ P urge the h o rrib le darknesses of o u r m in d ,” b u t m o d ern m an is al ready so d a rk e n ed th a t n o th in g beyond th e lig h t of his ow n in tellect illu m in ates his w orld. “ Occasus C hristi, passio C h risti.” 20 T h a t surely is w hy such strange things are h a p p en in g to o u r m u ch la u d ed civilization, m ore like a G o tterd d m m eru n g th an any n o rm a l tw ilight. 3°3 M ercurius, th a t two-faced god, comes as the lu m e n naturae, th e Servator a n d Salvator, only to those w hose reason strives to w ards th e highest lig h t ever received by m an, a n d w ho d o n o t tru s t exclusively to th e cognitio vespertina. F o r those w ho are u n m in d fu l of this lig h t, the lu m e n naturae tu rn s in to a perilous ignis fa tu u s, a n d the psychopom p in to a diab o lical seducer. L u cifer, w ho co u ld have b ro u g h t light, becom es th e fa th e r of lies w hose voice in o u r tim e, su p p o rte d by press a n d radio, revels in orgies of pro p ag an d a and leads u n to ld m illio n s to ru in . so Enarrationes in Ps. CIIIj Sermo III, 21 (Migne, P.L., vol. 37, col. 1374).

V T H E P H IL O S O P H IC A L T R E E

[O riginally w ritte n fo r a F estschrift p la n n e d to m ark the 70th b irth d ay of G ustav Senn, professor of b o tan y at the U niversity of Basel. O w ing to the u n tim ely d eath of Professor Senn, the F estschrift d id n o t a p p ear, an d J u n g ’s essay, e n title d “D er philosophische B aum ,” was p u b lish e d in the V erh a n d lu n g e n der N aturforschend en Gesellschaft Basel, L V l (1945): 2, 411-23. A revised a n d e x p a n d e d version a p p e a re d in Fon den W urzeln des Bewusstseins: Stu d ie n Uber den A rchetypus (Psychologische A b h a n d lu n g e n , Vol. IX ; Zurich, 1954), from w hich the p re se n t tran slatio n is m ade.— E d i t o r s .]

All theory, my friend, is grey, B ut green lifeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s golden tree. Faust I

IN D IV ID U A L R E P R E S E N T A T IO N S O F T H E T R E E SYMBOL

A n image w hich freq u en tly appears am ong the archetypal configurations of the unconscious is that of the tree o r the w on der-w orking plant. W h en these fantasy products are draw n or painted, they very often fall in to sym m etrical patterns th a t take the form of a m andala. If a m andala may be described as a sym bol of the self seen in cross section, th e n the tree w ould rep re sent a profile view of it: the self depicted as a process of grow th. I shall n o t discuss here the conditions u n d e r w hich these pictures are produced, for I have already said all th a t is necessary in my essays “A Study in the Process of In d iv id u atio n ” an d “ C oncern ing M andala Sym bolism .” T h e exam ples I now propose to give all come from a series of pictures in which my patients tried to express th eir in n e r experiences. In spite of the diversity of the tree symbol, a n u m b e r of basic features may be established. In the first p art of my essay I shall com m ent on the pictures that have been rep ro d u ced and then, in the second part, give an account of the philosophical tree in alchem y an d its historical background. My case m aterial has no t been influenced in any way, for none of the patients had any previous know ledge of alchem y o r of sham anism . T h e pictures were spontaneous products of creative fantasy, an d th eir only conscious purpose was to express w hat happens w hen u n con scious contents are taken over into consciousness in such a way th a t it is not overw helm ed by them and th e unconscious not subjected to any distortion. M ost of th e pictures were done by patients w ho were u n d e r treatm ent, b u t some by persons who

w ere not, o r w ere no longer, u n d e r any th e ra p e u tic influence. I m u st em phasize th a t I carefully avoided saying an y th in g in a d vance th a t m ig h t have h a d a suggestive effect. N in e te e n of the thirty-tw o pictures w ere done at a tim e w hen I m yself knew n o th in g of alchem y, an d th e rest before my book Psychology and A lch e m y was published. F igure i 3°6

T h e tree stands by itself on an islan d in th e sea. Its g re a t size is in d icated by the fact th a t the u p p e r p a rt of it is c u t off by th e edge of the pictu re. T h e buds an d the little w h ite flowers suggest th e com ing of spring, w hen th e great tree, w hose age far exceeds th e span of h u m a n existence, w ill aw aken to new life. T h e soli tariness of the tree an d its axial positio n in th e cen tre of th e p ic tu re b rin g to m in d th e w orld-tree an d th e w orld-axis— a ttr i b u tes w ith w hich th e tree sym bol is alm ost u n iv ersally endow ed. T h e se traits give expression to the in n e r process a t w ork in the p a in te r, a n d show th a t it has n o th in g to do w ith his personal psychology. H e re th e tre e represents a sym bol th a t is universal an d alien to the personal consciousness. I t is possible, how ever, th a t th e p a in te r was m ak in g conscious use o f the C hristm as tree in o rd e r to illu stra te his in n e r state. Figure 2

3°7

T h e abstract stylization a n d th e p o sitio n of th e tree on the globe of the earth illu stra te the feeling o f sp iritu a l isolation. T o m ake u p for this, th e p erfect sym m etry of th e crow n p o in ts to a u n io n of opposites. T h is is th e m o tiv a tin g force a n d th e goal of th e in d iv id u a tio n process. If the p a in te r of such a p ic tu re n e i th e r identifies w ith th e tree n o r is assim ilated by it,1 h e w ill n o t succum b to th e d an g er of an auto-erotic isolation, b u t will only be intensely aw are th a t his ego p erso n ality is co n fro n ted w ith a sym bolical process he m u st com e to term s w ith because it is ju s t as real a n d u n d e n ia b le as his ego. O n e can deny an d n u l lify this process in all sorts of ways, b u t in d o in g so all th e values rep resen ted by the sym bol are lost. A naively cu rio u s m in d w ill n a tu ra lly cast ro u n d for a ra tio n a l ex p lan atio n , an d if it does n o t 1 Cf. A io n j pp. 24ff.

find o ne a t once it e ith e r m akes do w ith a facile an d com p letely in a d e q u a te hypothesis o r else tu rn s away in d isa p p o in tm e n t. I t seems to be very h a rd fo r p eo p le to live w ith rid d les o r to let th e m live, a lth o u g h o n e w o u ld th in k th a t life is so fu ll of rid d le s as it is th a t a few m o re th in g s w e c a n n o t answ er w o u ld m ake no difference. B u t p erh ap s it is ju s t this th a t is so u n e n d u ra b le , th a t th e re are irra tio n a l th in g s in o u r ow n psyche w hich u p set the conscious m in d in its illu so ry ce rta in tie s by c o n fro n tin g it w ith th e rid d le of its existence. F igure 3 308

T h e p ic tu re shows a tree o f lig h t th a t is a t the sam e tim e a ca n d e la b ru m . T h e ab strac t fo rm of th e tree p o in ts to its s p irit u al n a tu re . T h e en d s o f th e b ran ch es are lig h te d candles illu m i n a tin g th e dark n ess of an enclosed space, p erh ap s a cave o r vault. T h e secret a n d h id d e n n a tu re of th e process is th u s em phasized an d its fu n c tio n m ad e clear: th e illu m in a tio n of consciousness. F ig u re 4

3°9

A lth o u g h c u t o u t of gold-foil, th e tree is realistic. I t is still in th e w in try , leafless state of sleep. I t rises u p ag ain st a cosm ic b a ck g ro u n d a n d bears in its b ran ch es a large g o ld en ball, p ro b ab ly th e sun. T h e gold in d icates th a t th o u g h th e p a in te r does n o t y et have a living, conscious re la tio n to th is c o n ten t, she n evertheless has a n em o tio n a l in tu itio n of its g re a t value. F ig u re 3

3 10

T h e tree is leafless b u t bears little re d flowers, h a rb in g e rs of spring. T h e b ran ch es are tip p e d w ith flames, a n d fire leaps u p fro m th e w ater o u t of w h ich th e tree is grow ing. So th e tree is also so m eth in g lik e th e je t of a fo u n ta in . T h e sym bol of th e fo u n ta in , th e fo n tin a , is k n o w n in alchem y; in th e alchem ical p ic tu res it is o ften show n as a m ed iev al to w n fo u n ta in ,2 a n d th e u p rig h t p a rt in th e m id d le w o u ld co rresp o n d to th e tree. T h e u n io n o f fire a n d w ater expresses th e u n io n of opposites. T h e p ic tu re bears o u t th e alch em ical saying: “ O u r w ater is fire.” 2 [Cf. “T h e Psychology o f the T ransference,” Fig. 1.]

255

Figure 6 3 11

T h e tree is red and looks lik e a branch o f coral. It is n ot reflected in the water, b u t grows sim u ltan eou sly downw ards and upwards. T h e fo u r m ou n tain s in the low er h alf o f the picture are n o t reflections either, for their opposites are five m ountains. T h is suggests that the low er w orld is n ot a m ere reflection of the upper w orld, b u t that each is a w orld in itself. T h e tree stands in the m id d le b etw een two walls o f rock, rep resenting the op p o sites. T h e four m ou n tain s also appear in Figure 24. Figure 7

3 12

T h e tree has broken w ith irresistible force through the earth’s crust, h eavin g up m ou n tain ou s boulders on eith er side. T h e painter is expressing an analogous process in h im self, w hich runs its course o f necessity and can n ot be ch eck ed by any a m o u n t o f resistance, Since the boulders are snow -capped m o u n tains, the tree has the cosm ic character o f the w orld-tree. F igure 8

3 1¾

T h e tree is leafless, b u t its branches end in little flam es lik e a Christm as tree. Instead of grow in g from the earth or water, it grows o u t o f th e body of a w om an. T h e p ain ter was a Protestant and was n o t fam iliar w ith th e m ed ieval sym bolism o f Mary as earth and stella marts. Figure 9

3*4

T h e tree is o ld and h u ge and stands on a tangle o f roots w hich is strongly em phasized. T w o dragons are approaching from le ft and right. In the tree there is a boy w ho has clim b ed up to w atch the dragons. W e are rem in d ed o f the dragons that guard the tree o f the H esperides, and o f the snakes that guard the hoard. T h e conscious sid e o f the boy is in a rather precarious situ ation because the m od icu m o f security it has ju st acquired is liab le to be d evou red again by the unconscious. T h e tu rm oil of the u n con sciou s is in d icated by the tangled roots as w ell as by the evid en tly enorm ous dragons and the tininess o f the ch ild.

T h e tree itself is n o t threatened inasm uch as its grow th is in d e p e n d en t of h u m an consciousness. It is a n a tu ra l process, and it is even dangerous to risk d istu rb in g it since it is guarded by drag ons. B u t because this is a n a tu ra l and ever-present process it can give m an protection provided that he summons u p courage enough to clim b in to the tree despite its guardians. F igure 10 3*5

O nce again we m eet the two dragons, b u t in the form of croc odiles. T h e tree is abstract and doubled, and is loaded w ith fruit. For all its d u ality it gives the im pression of being a single tree. T his, besides the rin g th a t unites the two trees, points to the u n io n of opposites which are also represented by the two croco diles. In alchemy, M ercurius is symbolized by the tree as well as by the dragon. H e is notoriously “d u p lex ,” is b o th m asculine and fem inine, and is m ade one in the hierosgamos of the chymical w edding. T h e synthesis of M ercurius forms an im p o rtan t p a rt of the alchem ical procedure. F igure n

3*6

A lthough tree and snake are b oth symbols of M ercurius, they stand for two different aspects on account of the la tte r’s dual n atu re. T h e tree corresponds to the passive, vegetative principle, the snake to the active, anim al principle. T h e tree symbolizes e arth b o u n d corporeality, the snake em otionality and the possession of a soul. W ith o u t the soul th e body is dead, and w ith o u t the body the soul is unreal. T h e u n io n of th e two, w hich is plainly im m in en t in this picture, w ould m ean the an i m ation of the body and the m aterialization of the soul. Similarly, the tree of paradise is an earnest of the real life which awaits the first parents w hen they em erge from th eir in itial childlike (i.e., plerom atic) state. Figure 12

3*7

T re e and snake are united. T h e tree bears leaves, an d the sun rises in its m idst. T h e roots are snakelike.

Figure 13 S18

3 !9

T h e stylized tree has in its tru n k a locked door leading to a h idden recess. T h e m iddle branch is decidedly snakelike and bears a lum inous body like a sun. T h e sim ple-m inded bird, re p resenting the painter, weeps because it has forgotten the key to the door. It obviously suspects th a t th ere is som ething valuable inside the tree. Figure 14 T h e same p ain ter did a n u m b e r of variations on the treasure m otif. H ere and in the n ext picture it takes the form of a hero m yth: the hero discovers a sealed coffer in a h id d en vault, w ith a w onderful tree grow ing o u t of it. T h e little green dragon that follows the hero like a dog corresponds to the fam iliar sp irit of the alchemists, the m ercurial serpent o r draco viridis. M ythlike fantasies of this kind are n o t infrequen t, an d are m ore or less the equivalent of alchem ical parables or didactic tales. Figure 13

320

X he tree does n o t w ant to yield u p the treasure an d clasps the coffer all the tighter. W hen the hero touches the tree, a flame springs o u t a t him . I t is a fire-tree, like th at of the alche mists, and like the w orld-tree of Sim on Magus. Figure 16

S21

M any birds are sitting on the leafless tree, a m o tif fo u n d also in alchemy. T h e tree of wisdom (Sapientia) is su rro u n d ed by num erous birds, as in R eusner’s Pandora (1588), or else the birds fly ro u n d the figure of H erm es Trism egistus, as in De chem ia (1566).3 T h e tree is shown guarding a treasure. T h e precious stone h idden in its roots recalls G rim m ’s fairytale of the bottle h id d en in the roots of th e oak tree, w hich contained the sp irit M ercurius. T h e stone is a d ark blue sapphire, b u t its con nection w ith the sapphire stone in Ezekiel, w hich played a great role in ecclesiastical allegory, was n o t know n to th e p ain ter. T h e [Cf. P sychology a n d A lch em y, Figs. 231 (the P an dora picture) and 128 (the H erm es picture). D e chem ia is the work b y Zadith Senior.— E d i t o r s .]

special v irtue of the sapphire is th at it endows its w earer w ith chastity, piety, and constancy. I t was used as a m edicam ent for “com forting the h e art.” 4 T h e lapis was called the “sapphirine flower.” 5 Birds, as w inged beings, have always symbolized spirit o r thoughts. So the m any birds in o u r picture m ean th a t the thoughts of th e p ain ter are circling ro u n d the secret of the tree, th e treasure h idden in its roots. T h is symbolism underlies the parables of the treasure in the field, the pearl of great price, and th e grain of m u stard seed. Only, the alchemists were n o t refer rin g to the K ingdom of H eaven, b u t to the “ad m iran d u m M u n d i M aioris M ysterium ” (the w ondrous mystery of the m ac rocosm), and it looks as though the sapphire in the p ictu re has a sim ilar m eaning. Figure /7 3®a

T h is was done by the same painter, b u t a t a m uch later stage, w hen th e same idea reappeared in differentiated form . H e r tech nical ab ility has also im proved. T h e birds have been replaced by heart-shaped blossoms, for the tree has now come alive. Its four branches correspond to the square-cut sapphire, whose “con stancy” is em phasized by the little uroboros encircling it. In Horapollo the uroboros is the hieroglyph of etern ity .50 For the al chemists the self-devouring dragon was herm ap h ro d itic because it begot and gave b irth to itself. T h e y therefore called the sapp h irin e flower (i.e., the lapis) “H erm ap h ro d iti flos saphyricus.” Constancy and perm anence are expressed n o t only in th e age of the tree b u t also in its fruit, the lapis. L ike a fru it, the lapis is at the same tim e a seed, a n d although the alchem ists constantly stressed th a t the “seed of co rn ” dies in the earth, th e lapis de spite its seedlike n a tu re is in co rru p tib le. I t represents, ju st as m an does, a b eing th a t is forever dying yet eternal. Figure 18

3*3

T h e picture shows an initial state in w hich th e tree is unable to raise itself from the earth in spite of its cosmic n atu re. It is a 4 Ruland1 A Lexicon of Alchemy, p. 286. 5 "Epistola ad Hermannum," Theatrum chemicum, V (1660), p. 804.

Ba [But Cf. T he Hieroglyphics of Horapollo, tr. Boas, p . 57.]

case of regressive developm ent, probably d ue to the fact th a t w hile the tree has a n a tu ra l tendency to grow away from the earth in to a cosmic space filled w ith strange astronom ical and m eteorological phenom ena, this w ould m ean reaching u p into an eerie unearthly w orld and m aking contact w ith otherw orldly things w hich are terrifying to the earth b o u n d ratio n ality of the n a tu ra l m an. T h e upw ard grow th of the tree w ould n o t only endanger the supposed security of his earthly existence b u t w ould be a th reat to his m oral an d sp iritu al inertia, because it w ould carry him in to a new tim e and a new dim ension w here he could not get along w ithout m aking considerable efforts at re adaptation. T h e p atient in these cases is held back no t by m ere cowardice, b u t by a largely justifiable fear th a t warns him of the exacting dem ands of the future, w ithou t his being aware of w hat these dem ands are o r know ing the dangers of no t fulfilling them . H is anxious resistance and aversion seem q u ite g ro u n d less, and it is only too easy for him to rationalize them away and, w ith a little assistance, brush them aside like a troublesom e in sect. T h e result is just the psychic situation shown by o u r pic ture: an in tu rn e d grow th which throw s the supposedly solid earth in to increasing turm oil. Secondary fantasies th en arise w hich, according to the p a tien t’s disposition, revolve ro u n d sex uality or the pow er drive or both. T his leads sooner or later to the form ation of n eurotic symptoms and to the alm ost unavoid able tem ptation for both p atien t and analyst to take these fan tasies seriously as causative factors and thus to overlook the real task.

F igure 19

324

T h is picture, done by a different p atien t, shows th a t Figure 18 is n o t unique. It is, however, no longer a case of unconscious regression, b u t of one th a t is becom ing conscious, w hich is why th e tree has a hum an head. W e cannot tell from the p ictu re w hether the w itchlike tree nym ph is clutching at the earth or rising unw illingly from it. T h is is in com plete accord w ith the divided state of the p a tie n t’s consciousness. B ut the u p rig h t trees standing around show th a t w ithin o r outside herself she has p er ceived living exam ples of the way trees ou g h t to grow. She has 260

in te rp re te d the tree as a witch and the regressive grow th as the cause of magical effects of a sinister nature. Figure 20 3*5

T h e tree stands in isolation dom inating the top of a m o u n tain. I t is thick w ith leaves and has in its tru n k a doll swathed in m u lticoloured wrappings. T h e p ain ter was rem in d ed of the h ar le q u in m otif. T h e fool's m otley shows th at she felt she was deal ing w ith som ething crazy an d irrational. She was conscious of having thought of Picasso, whose style was ap parently suggested by the h a rle q u in ’s dress. T h e association probably has a deeper m eaning and is not ju st a superficial com bination of ideas. I t was this same im pression of irratio n ality that led to the regressive developm ent in the two previous pictures. All three cases are concerned w ith a process w hich the m odern m in d finds ex trem ely disturbing, and not a few of my patients have openly confessed th eir fear of any such autonom ous developm ent of th e ir psychic contents. In these cases it is of the greatest th era peutic value if one can dem onstrate to th em the historicity of th e ir apparently u n iq u e and unassim ilable experiences. W h en a p atien t begins to feel the inescapable n a tu re of his in n e r devel opm ent, he may easily be overcome by a panic fear th a t he is slipping helplessly in to some k ind of madness he can no longer understand. M ore than once I have had to reach for a book on m y shelves, b rin g dow n an old alchem ist, an d show my p atien t his terrifying fantasy in the form in which it appeared four h u n dred years ago. T h is has a calm ing effect, because the p a tie n t then sees that he is n o t alone in a strange w orld which nobody understands, b u t is p art of the great stream of h u m an history, which has experienced countless tim es the very things th a t he regards as a pathological proof of his craziness. Figure 21

Sa6

T h e doll in the previous p ictu re contained a sleeping h u m an figure undergoing m etam orphosis like the larva of an insect. H e re as well the tree acts as a m o th er to the h u m an figure h id den in its tru n k . T h is accords w ith the trad itio n al m atern al sig nificance of the tree.

F ig u r e 22 327

T h e d e v e lo p m e n t h a s g o n e a sta g e f u r t h e r . T h e s le e p in g fig u r e aw ak es, h a l f e m e rg e s f r o m t h e tr e e a n d m a k e s c o n ta c t w i t h th e a n i m a l w o r ld . T h e “ t r e e - b o r n ” is th u s c h a r a c te r iz e d n o t o n ly as a c h i l d o f n a t u r e b u t as a n a u t o c h t h o n o u s p r i m o r d i a l b e i n g g r o w in g t r e e l ik e o u t o f th e e a r th . T h e tr e e n y m p h is a n E v e w h o , in s te a d o f b e i n g ta k e n fr o m A d a m ’s s id e , h a s c o m e in to e x is te n c e i n d e p e n d e n t ly . T h i s s y m b o l is e v id e n tly i n t e n d e d to c o m p e n s a te n o t m e r e ly th e o n e -s id e d n e s s a n d u n n a t u r a l n e s s o f th e u ltr a - c iv iliz e d m a n b u t also , a n d i n p a r tic u la r , th e b ib lic a l m y th o f th e s e c o n d a ry c r e a tio n o f E v e .

F ig u r e 23 328

T h e tr e e n y m p h c a r r ie s th e s u n a n d is a fig u re c o m p o s e d o f lig h t. T h e w avy b a n d in th e b a c k g r o u n d is r e d , a n d c o n sis ts o f liv in g b l o o d t h a t flow s r o u n d th e g ro v e o f t r a n s f o r m a tio n . T h i s in d ic a te s t h a t th e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n is n o t j u s t a n a ir y fa n ta s y , b u t is a p ro c e ss t h a t re a c h e s d o w n i n t o th e s o m a tic s p h e r e o r e v e n a ris e s f r o m it.

F ig u r e 24 329

T h i s d r a w in g c o m b in e s v a r io u s m o tif s f r o m t h e p r e c e d in g p ic tu r e s b u t lays p a r t i c u l a r stress o n t h e lig h t- o r s u n -s y m b o l, w h ic h is r e p r e s e n t e d as a q u a t e r n i t y . I t is w a te r e d b y f o u r riv e r s e a c h d o n e i n a d i f f e r e n t c o lo u r . T h e y flow d o w n f r o m w h a t t h e p a t i e n t c a lle d f o u r h e a v e n ly o r “ m e ta p h y s ic a l” m o u n t a i n s . W e m e t t h e f o u r m o u n t a in s e a r l i e r i n F ig u r e 6 . T h e y also a p p e a r in th e d r a w i n g o f a m a le p a t i e n t w h ic h I m e n t i o n e d in P s y c h o lo g y a n d A l c h e m y ,G w h e r e th e f o u r r iv e r s a r e r e p r o d u c e d i n F ig s. 62 a n d 109. I n a ll th e s e cases I a m as l i t t l e r e s p o n s ib le f o r t h e n u m b e r f o u r as I a m f o r a ll t h e o t h e r a lc h e m ic a l, G n o s tic , a n d m y th o lo g ic a l q u a t e r n i ti e s . M y c r itic s s e e m to h a v e t h e f u n n y id e a t h a t I h a v e a s p e c ia l l i k in g f o r t h e n u m b e r f o u r a n d t h e r e f o r e f in d i t e v e ry w h e re . J u s t f o r o n c e , th e y s h o u l d lo o k i n t o a n a lc h e m ic a l tr e a tis e — b u t t h a t is e v id e n tly to o m u c h o f a n e ffo rt. S in c e “sci6 Par. 217.

en tific” criticism is n in e ty p e r c e n t p re ju d ic e , it in v a riab ly takes a v ery lo n g tim e fo r th e facts to b e recognized. 33° T h e n u m b e r fo u r, lik e th e s q u a rin g of th e circle, is n o t acci d en tal, w hich is w hy— to take an ex am p le k n o w n even to m y critics— th e re are n o t th re e or, fo r th a t m a tte r, five d irectio n s, b u t precisely fo u r. I w ill on ly m e n tio n in passing th a t, besides this, th e n u m b e r fo u r possesses special m a th em a tic al p ro p erties. T h e q u a te rn a ry elem en ts in o u r p ic tu re , as well as a c c e n tu a tin g th e light-sym bol, am p lify it in such a way th a t it is n o t difficult to see w h at is m e an t: an acceptance of w holeness by th e little fem ale figure, an in tu itiv e a p p re h e n sio n of th e self. F igure 331

A still la te r stage is show n here. T h e fem ale figure is n o lo n g e r ju s t th e re c ip ie n t o r b e a re r of th e light-sym bol b u t has b e e n d raw n in to it. T h e p erso n ality is m o re p o w erfu lly affected th a n in the prev io u s p ic tu re. T h is increases th e d a n g e r of id e n tificatio n w ith th e self— a d a n g e r n o t to be taken lightly. A nyone w ho has passed th ro u g h such a d e v e lo p m e n t w ill feel te m p te d to see th e goal of his experiences a n d efforts in u n io n w ith th e self. In d eed , th e re are suggestive p reced en ts fo r this, a n d in th e pres e n t case it is a lto g e th e r possible. B u t th e re are c e rta in factors in th e p ic tu re w h ich en ab le th e p a in te r to d istin g u ish h e r ego from th e self. She was a n A m erican w o m an w ho was in flu en ced by th e m ythology of th e P u e b lo In d ia n s: th e corn-cobs ch aracterize the fem ale figure as a goddess. She is fasten ed to th e tre e by a snake, a n d th u s form s an analogy to th e crucified C h rist, w ho, as th e self, was sacrificed fo r earth ly h u m a n ity , ju s t as P ro m e th e u s was c h a in e d to th e rock. M a n ’s efforts to achieve w holeness corres p o n d , as th e d iv in e m y th shows, to a v o lu n ta ry sacrifice of th e self to th e b o n d ag e of earth ly existence. H e re I w ill only p o in t o u t this co rresp o n d en ce w ith o u t g o in g in to it fu rth e r. 332 I n this p ic tu re, th en , th e re are so m an y elem en ts of th e d i v in e m y th th a t unless th e p a tie n t’s consciousness w ere u tte rly b lin d e d (an d th e re are n o signs of this) she c o u ld easily d iscrim in a te b etw ee n ego an d self. A t this stage it is im p o rta n t n o t to su ccu m b to a n in flatio n , such as w o u ld in ev itab ly su p erv en e w ith ’ all its very u n p le a sa n t consequences if, a t th e m o m en t w h en th e self becam e recognizable, she id e n tified w ith it a n d 263

333

thus b lin d ed herself to the insight she had attained. If the n a tu ral im pulse to identify w ith the self is recognized, one then has a good chance of freeing oneself from a state of unconsciousness. B ut if this o p p o rtu n ity is overlooked or n o t used, the situ atio n does n o t rem ain the same as before b u t gives rise to a repression coupled w ith dissociation of the personality. T h e developm ent of consciousness which the realization of the self m ight have led to turns into a regression. I m ust emphasize that this realization is n o t ju st an intellectual act b u t is p rim arily a m oral one, in com parison w ith which intellectual un d erstan d in g is of second ary im portance. For this reason, the symptoms I have described can also be observed in patients who, from inferior motives which they will not adm it, refuse a task th at has been laid u p o n them by fate. I w ould like to draw atten tio n to a fu rth e r peculiarity: the tree has no leaves, and its branches could ju st as well be roots. A ll its vitality is concentrated in the centre, in the h um an figure th a t represents its flower and fru it. A person whose roots are above as well as below is thus like a tree grow ing sim ultaneously downwards an d upw ards. T h e goal is n e ith e r height n o r depth, b u t the centre. Figure 26

334

T h e idea developed in the previous p ictu re reappears here in slightly variant form. T h is idea may truly be said to be in the process of delineating itself, for the conscious m in d of the pa tie n t follows only a vague feeling which gradually takes shape in the act of draw ing. She w ould have been q u ite u nable to form ulate beforehand, in a clear concept, w hat she w anted to express. T h e structure of the picture is a m andala divided into four, w ith the m id p o in t displaced downwards, beneath the feet of the figure. T h e figure stands in the u p p e r section and thus belongs to the realm of light. T h is m andala is an inversion of the traditional C hristian cross, whose long u p rig h t is below the cross-beam. W e m ust conclude from the picture th at the self was realized first of all as an ideal figure of light which nonetheless takes the form of an inverted C hristian cross. W hereas the Iatte r’s p o in t of intersection is n ear the top, so th at the goal of u n conscious striving towards the centre is displaced upw ards, the 264

dow nw ard glance of the figure shows th at h er goal should lie b e low. T h e short u p rig h t beam of the cross of lig h t rests on the black earth, and the figure holds in h er left hand a black fish draw n from the dark sphere. T h e mudra-like , 7 hesitant gesture of the rig h t hand, directed towards the fish com ing from the left (i.e., from the unconscious), is characteristic of the p atient, who had studied theosophy and was therefore u n d e r In d ian influ ence. T h e fish has a soteriological significance w hether conceived in C hristian o r in In d ia n term s (as the fish of M anu and as an avatar of V ishnu). T h e re is reason to conjecture (see Figure 2 9 ) th a t the p atien t was acquainted w ith the Bhagavadgita, w hich says (X, 3 1 ): “A m ong fishes I am M akara.” M akara is a dolphin or a species of L eviathan, and is one of the symbols of the svddhisthana-chakra in T a n tric yoga. T h is centre is localized in the bladder and is characterized as the w ater region by the fish and m oon symbols. As the chakras are presum ably eq uivalent to earlier localizations of consciousness (the cmdhata-chakra, for in stance, corresponding to the 4>pkves of the Greeks ) , 8 svadhisthana is probably the earliest localization of all. From this region comes the fish symbol w ith its age-old num en. W e are rem in d ed of the “days of C reation,” of the tim e w hen consciousness arose, w hen the prim ordial u n ity of being was barely d istu rb ed by the tw i light of reflection ,9 an d m an swam like a fish in the ocean of the unconscious. In this sense the fish signifies a restoration of the plerom atic paradisal state or, in the language of T ib e ta n T an trism , of the B ardo . 10 335 T h e plants at the foot of the figure are really rooted in the air. T ree, tree nym ph, and plants are all lifted up from the earth or, m ore probably, are on the p o in t of com ing down to it. T h is is also suggested by the fish as emissary of the deep. T h e situa tion is in my experience an unusual one and may be due to theosophical influences. F illing the conscious m in d w ith ideal con ceptions is a characteristic feature of W estern theosophy, b u t no t the confrontation w ith the shadow and the w orld of darkness. O ne does not become enlightened by im agining figures of light, I M u d r a (Skt.) is a r i t u a l o r m a g ic a l g e s tu r e . 8 F o r t h e c h a h r a th e o ry see A v a lo n , T h e S e r p e n t P o w e r , a n d c o n c e r n in g see O n ia n s , T h e O r ig i n s o f E u r o p e a n T h o u g h t , p p . 14SF. 8 [Cf. s u p r a , p a r . 301.] 10 Cf. E v a n s -W e n tz , T h e T i b e t a n B o o k o f t h e D e a d , p p . io if f .

265

<ppkves

b u t by m a k in g th e darkness conscious. T h e la tte r p ro ced u re, how ever, is disagreeable a n d th erefo re n o t p o p u lar. F igure 336

U n lik e th e p rev io u s p ic tu re, this o n e is th o ro u g h ly W estern , alth o u g h it comes in to th e arch ety p al category of th e g o d ’s b irth fro m th e tree o r lotus blossom . T h e arch aic p la n t w o rld o f th e carb o n ifero u s era illu strates th e m ood th e p a in te r was in w hen she in tu itiv e ly a p p re h e n d e d th e b irth of th e self. T h e h u m a n figure gro w in g o u t of th e arch aic p la n t rep resen ts th e u n io n an d qu in tessen ce of th e fo u r heads a t its base, in ag ree m en t w ith th e alchem ical view th a t th e lapis is com posed of fo u r elem ents. A w areness of th e arch ety p e im bues th e ex p erien ce w ith a p rim e val character. T h e div isio n of th e p la n t in to six segm ents, like so m u ch else in the realm of fantasy, m ay be p u re ly accidental. N evertheless, it sh o u ld n o t b e fo rg o tten th a t th e n u m b e r six (th e senarius) was considered in a n cien t tim es “aptissim us gene ra tio n i” (m ost fit fo r g e n e ra tio n ) . 11 F igure 28

337

D raw n by th e sam e p a tie n t as F ig u re 2 6 . T h e fem ale figure w earin g a tree-crow n is in a sittin g p o sitio n — again a displace m e n t dow nw ards. T h e black e a rth th a t was prev io u sly far below h e r feet is now in h e r body as a b lack ball, in th e reg io n of th e m anipura-chakra, w hich coincides w ith th e solar plexus. (T h e alchem ical p arallel to this is th e “ black s u n . ” ) 12 T h is m eans th a t th e d a rk p rin c ip le , o r shadow , has been in te g ra te d a n d is now felt as a k in d of cen tre in th e body. Possibly this in te g ra tio n is co n n ected w ith th e eu ch aristic significance of th e fish: eatin g th e fish brings a b o u t a p a rticip a tio n m ystiq u e w ith G o d . 18 338 N u m ero u s b ird s are flying ro u n d th e tree. As b ird s re p re se n t w inged tho u g h ts, we m u st co n clu d e th a t th e fem ale figure p ro gressively detach ed itself fro m th e w o rld o f th o u g h t as th e cen tre 11 P h ilo , “D e o p ifid o m u n d i” [see C o lso n /W h ita k e r 12 S yn on ym ou s w ith th e c a p u t c o rv i an d n ig re d o . fo r m a ta , p . 19, w h o says th a t in th e n ig re d o th e sw ay. T h is is ro u g h ly th e e q u iv a le n t o f w h at I c a ll 1 3 Cf. A io n , p p . 1 138:.

trans., I, p . 13]. Cf. M yliu s, P h ilo s o p h ia rea n im a m e d ia n a tu ra h o ld s th e c o lle ctiv e u n co n scio u s.

was displaced downwards, and th a t the thoughts have conse quently re tu rn e d to th e ir n atu ral elem ent. She and h er thoughts were identical before, w ith the result th a t she was raised above the earth as though she were an aerial being, w hile h er thoughts lost th eir freedom of flight, since they had to su p p o rt the whole w eight of a hum an being in the air. Figure 29

339

T h e process of separation from the w orld of th o u g h t con tinues. A m asculine daem on,14 who has obviously woken u p all of a sudden, reveals him self w ith an air of triu m p h : he is the anim us, the personification of m asculine th in k in g in a wom an (and of her m asculine side in general). T h e p a tie n t’s previous state of suspension turns o u t to have been an anim us possession, w hich is now sloughed off. D ifferentiation betw een h er fem i n ine consciousness and her anim us means lib eratio n for both. T h e sentence ‘‘I am the Gam e of the gam bler” probably refers to BhagavadgIta X, 36: “I am the game of dice.” 13 K rishna says this of himself. T h e section in which it occurs begins w ith the words (X, 20-21): “I am the self, O Gudakesha! seated in the hearts of all beings. I am the beginning and the m iddle and the end also of all beings. I am V ishnu am ong the A dityas;16 the beam ing sun am ong the shining bodies.” 34° Like K rishna, Agni is the game of dice in the ShatapathaB rahm ana of the Yajur-Veda: “H e (the A dhvaryu)17 throws dow n the dice, w ith ‘H allow ed by Svaha,18 strive ye w ith Surya’sln rays for the m iddlem ost place am ong b re th re n !’ For that gam ing ground is the same as ‘am ple A gni,’ and those dice are his coals, thus it is him (Agni) he thereby pleases.” 20 By w hich I m ean the Greek δα ίμ ω ν and not the Christian devil. Sacred Books o f the East, V III, p. 91. U nfortunately I was unable to ask the patient about the source o f this saying, b u t I know she was acquainted w ith the Bhaga vadglta. 16 Solar gods. 17 T h e priest w ho recites the prayers o f the Yajur-Veda. 18 Svaha is one o f the h oly syllables. It is uttered at the recitation of the Veda during thunderstorm s (Apastam ba, in SBE, II, p. 45) and at sacrifices to the gods (ibid., p. 48). 1® Surya = sun. 20 SBE, X LI, p. 112. 14

34 1

B o t h t e x t s r e l a t e l i g h t , s u n , a n d fire, as w e ll as t h e g o d , to t h e g a m e o f d ic e. S im ila rly th e A th a r v a -V e d a sp eak s o f th e “ b r i l l i a n c y t h a t is i n t h e c h a r i o t , i n t h e d i c e , i n t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e b u l l , i n t h e w i n d , P a r j a n y a ,21 a n d i n t h e f i r e o f V a r u n a . ” 22

T h e “ b r i l l i a n c y ” c o r r e s p o n d s t o w h a t is k n o w n i n p r i m i t i v e p s y c h o l o g y as “ m a n a , ” a n d i n t h e p s y c h o lo g y o f t h e u n c o n s c i o u s as “ lib id o in v e s tm e n t” o r “ e m o tio n a l v a lu e ” o r “ fe e lin g to n e .” In p o i n t o f e m o t i o n a l i n t e n s i t y , w h i c h is a f a c t o r o f d e c i s i v e i m p o r ta n c e fo r th e p r im it iv e c o n scio u sn e ss, th e m o s t h e te r o g e n e o u s t h i n g s — r a i n , s t o r m , fire, t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e b u l l , a n d t h e p a s s io n a te g a m e o f d ic e— ca n b e id e n tic a l. I n e m o tio n a l in te n sity , g a m e a n d g a m b le r c o in c id e . 342 T h i s tr a i n o f t h o u g h t m a y h e l p to e x p l a in th e m o o d o f th e p ic tu r e , w h ic h ex p resses lib e r a tio n a n d relief. T h e p a t i e n t e v i d e n t l y f e l t th is m o m e n t as a b r e a t h o f t h e d i v i n e n u m e n . A s t h e B h a g a v a d g i t a t e x t m a k e s c l e a r , K r i s h n a is t h e s e l f , w i t h w h i c h t h e p a t i e n t ’s a n i m u s i d e n t i f i e s . T h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is a r e g u l a r o c c u r r e n c e w h e n t h e s h a d o w , t h e d a r k s i d e , h a s n o t b e e n s u f fi c ie n tly rea lize d . L ik e e v e ry a rc h e ty p e , th e a n im u s has a J a n u s face, a n d b e s id e s th is th e l i m i t a t i o n o f b e i n g a m e r e ly m a s c u l in e p r i n c i p l e . H e is t h e r e f o r e q u i t e u n f i t t e d t o r e p r e s e n t t o t a l i t y , w h e t h e r o f G o d o r t h e self. H e m u s t b e c o n t e n t w i t h a n i n t e r m e d ia te p o sitio n . T h e g e n e ra liz a tio n s c h a ra c te ristic of I n d ia n th eo so p h y , h o w ev e r, in d u c e d th e p a tie n t, b y a k in d of p sy c h o lo g ic al s h o rt-c irc u it, to id e n tify th e a n im u s a t least p ro v is io n a lly w i t h w h o l e n e s s , a n d to p u t h i m i n t h e p l a c e o f t h e self.

F igure 343

T h e s a m e m o t i f a s i n F i g u r e 2 9 is s h o w n h e r e i n d i f f e r e n t i a te d fo rm b y th e p a i n te r o f F ig u re 2 . T h e sty liz a tio n o f th e l e a f l e s s t r e e is h i g h l y a b s t r a c t , a n d s o is t h e g n o m e l i k e f i g u r e i n a m o n k is h ro b e . T h e o u ts tre tc h e d arm s express b a la n c e a n d th e c r o s s m o t i f . T h e a m b i g u i t y o f t h e f i g u r e is e m p h a s i z e d o n t h e o n e h a n d b y t h e b i r d c o m i n g d o w n f r o m a b o v e ,23 p a i n t e d l i k e a fa n ta s tic flo w er, a n d o n th e o th e r b y th e o b v io u s ly p h a llic a r r o w risin g u p fro m th e ro o ts b elo w . T h e d a e m o n th u s re p re se n ts a n 21 R a i n - g o d .

22 S B E 1 X L I I , p . 1 1 6 . [ V a r u n a = s k y - g o d .] 2 3 C f. t h e s t o r k o n t h e t r e e , i n f r a , p a r s . 4 i s f f .

268

e q u i l i b r i u m of left a n d r i g h t as w ell as a u n i o n of in te lle c t a n d s e x u a lity , j u s t as th e a lc h e m ic a l M e r c u r iu s d u p l e x , in th e fo rm of th e lapis, is a q u a t e r n i t y c o m p o s e d of th e f o u r e le m e n ts . T h e s t r i p e d b a n d r u n n i n g d o w n th e g lo b e recalls th e m e r c u r i a l b a n d w h ic h I discussed in “A S tu d y in th e Process of I n d i v i d u a t i o n .” 24 T h e r e th e p a t i e n t h e rs e lf to o k it to b e q u ic k s ilv e r. 344 T h e c o n c e p t of th e a lc h e m ic a l M e r c u r iu s de riv e s exclusively f r o m m a s c u lin e psychology a n d sym bolizes th e ty p ic a l o p p o s i tio n in a m a n b e tw e e n N o u s a n d sex, o w in g to th e a b sen c e of th e f e m i n i n e E ro s w h ic h w o u ld u n i t e th e m . T h e a n im u s figure in t h e p i c t u r e is a piec e of p u r e l y m a s c u lin e psychology t h a t has c ry sta lliz e d o u t of a w o m a n ’s psyche d u r i n g th e process of i n d i v i d u a t io n . F ig u r e 31 E m b r o i d e r y by th e s a m e p a t i e n t as b e fo re . T h e tre e has t u r n e d i n t o a b lo s s o m in g lo tu s p la n t, w i t h th e g n o m e l ik e figure sitting-O in t h e flower,7 r e m i n d i n gO u s t h a t t h e lo tu s is th e b ir th p la c e of th e gods. E a s te r n influ e n ce s a re e v id e n t i n these tw o figures, b u t of a d iff e re n t k i n d f ro m those we m e t i n F ig u re s 28 a n d 29. I t is n o t a m a t t e r of I n d i a n t h e o s o p h y l e a r n t a n d i m i ta t e d in th e W e st, fo r t h e p r e s e n t p a t i e n t was b o r n in th e East w i t h o u t , h o w e v e r, consciously a b s o r b i n g its th eo so p h y . B u t i n w a r d ly she was p e r m e a t e d by it so t h o r o u g h l y t h a t it h a d a very d i s t u r b i n g effect o n h e r psychic b a la n c e . 346 I n th is figure th e d a e m o n has visibly ta k e n a b a c k place, b u t th e c ro w n of th e tr e e has u n d e r g o n e a r ic h d e v e lo p m e n t: leaves a n d blossom s a p p e a r , f o r m i n g a w r e a th , a c o ro n a , r o u n d a flo w erlik e c e n tr e . T h e a lc h e m ists u s e d th e t e r m corona o r diad e m a cordis t u i ( d ia d e m o f th y h e a r t) , m e a n i n g by it a sym bol of p e rf e c tio n . T h e c ro w n a p p e a r s in t h e figure as th e c r o w n in g p o i n t o r c u l m i n a t i o n of th e d e v e lo p m e n t a l process sy m b o liz e d b y t h e tree. I t has ta k e n th e f o r m of a m a n d a l a , th e “ g o ld e n flo w er” of C h in e s e a n d th e “ s a p p h i r i n e flo w er” o f W e s t e r n a l ch e m y . T h e a n i m u s n o lo n g e r u s u r p s th e p la c e o f t h e self, b u t has b e e n t r a n s c e n d e d by it.

345

p . 2Q2, P ic tu r e 3.

F igu re

347

I r e p r o d u c e t h is p ic t u r e w it h s o m e h e s it a t io n b e c a u s e , u n li k e th e o th e r s , its m a t e r ia l is n o t “ p u r e ” in th e s e n s e o f b e in g u n in f lu e n c e d b y w h a t th e p a t i e n t r e a d o r p ic k e d u p b y h e a r sa y . I t is n e v e r t h e le s s “ a u t h e n t i c ” in s o far as i t w a s p r o d u c e d s p o n ta n e o u s ly a n d e x p r e s s e s a n in n e r e x p e r ie n c e in t h e sa m e w a y as a ll t h e o th e r s , o n l y m u c h m o r e c le a r ly a n d g r a p h ic a lly b e c a u s e t h e p a t ie n t w a s a b le t o a v a il h e r s e lf o f id e a s th a t fit t e d h e r th e m e b e t t e r . C o n s e q u e n t ly , i t c o m b in e s a g r e a t d e a l o f m a t e r ia l w h ic h I d o n o t w a n t t o c o m m e n t o n h e r e , as its e s s e n t ia l c o m p o n e n t s h a v e a lr e a d y b e e n d is c u s s e d o r w ill b e f o u n d in th e r e le v a n t lit e r a tu r e . T h e a c t u a l c o m p o s i t io n o f t h e tr e e is a t a n y r a te o r ig i n a l. I r e p r o d u c e t h e p ic t u r e o n ly to s h o w w h a t k in d o f in f lu e n c e a k n o w le d g e o f t h e s y m b o lis m c a n h a v e o n s u c h c o n f ig u r a t io n s . 348 I w i l l b r in g m y p ic t u r e s e r ie s t o a c lo s e w it h a lite r a r y e x a m p le o f s p o n t a n e o u s tr e e s y m b o lis m . I n h is p o e m “ S o le il N o i r ” ( 1 9 5 2 ), N o e l P ie r r e , a m o d e r n F r e n c h p o e t w h o is p e r s o n a lly u n k n o w n to m e , h a s d e s c r ib e d a n a u t h e n t ic e x p e r ie n c e o f th e u n c o n s c io u s : J ’arrivais d e la sorte su r u n e crape D ’o ii b a illa it u n a v en em b u e. U n e fo u le c o m p a cte s’y p ressait D e s q u a tre d ir e c tio n s. J e m ’y m ela is. J e rem a rq u a is q u e n o u s r o u lio n s en sp ira le, U n to u r b illo n d a n s l ’e n to n n o ir n o u s a sp irait. D a n s l’axe, u n ca ta lp a g ig a n te sq u e O ii p e n d a ie n t Ies coeurs d es m orts, A c h a q u e fo u r c h e a v a it e lu resid en ce U n p e tit sage q u i m ’o b serv a it e n c lig n o ta n t.

J u s q u ’a u fo n d , o u s’e ta le n t Ies la g u n es. Q u e lle q u ie tu d e , au N c e u d des C hosesl S ous 1’A rb re d e m a V ie, Ie D e r n ie r F Ieuve E n to u r e u n e H e o ii s’erige D a n s Ies b ru m es u n cu b e d e roch e grise, U n e F orteresse, la C a p ita le d es M o n d e s .25 25 [From verses X X V I-X X V II; w ith kind perm ission of E ditions Pierre Seghere.

“A nd then I came upon an outcropping of rock From w h ich yawned a m ist-covered p it.

349

T h e m ain characteristics of this description are: (i) U niver sal m id p oin t of m ankind. (2) Spiral rotation.26 (3) T ree of life and death. (4) T h e heart as the centre of m an’s vitality in con ju n ction w ith the tree.27 (5) Natural wisdom in the form of a dwarf. (6) T h e island as seat o f the tree of life. (7) Cube = philosophers’ stone = treasure guarded by the tree. A d e n se c ro w d w as h a s te n in g th ith e r F r o m th e f o u r q u a r te r s . I m in g le d a m o n g th e m . I n o tic e d th a t w e w e re t u r n i n g in a s p ira l. A v o rte x in th e fu n n e l s u c k e d u s in . I n th e c e n tr e , a c o lo s s a l c a t a lp a O n w h ic h h u n g th e h e a r ts o f th e d e a d . A t e a c h f o r k h a d c h o s e n to s e ttle A littl e sag e w h o w in k e d a s h e sa w m e .

A t th e v e ry b o tto m , w h e re th e la g o o n s s p re a d o u t. W h a t q u ie tn e s s , a t t h e h u b o f th in g s ! B e n e a th th e tr e e o f m y lif e , th e la s t r iv e r S u r r o u n d s a n i s l a n d w h e r e t h e r e ris e s I n th e m is ts a c u b e o f g re y ro c k , A F o r t r e s s , t h e C a p i t a l o f t h e W o r l d s . ”] 26 O f t e n r e p r e s e n t e d b y a s n a k e . 27 C f . t h e h e a r t - s h a p e d l e a v e s a n d f l o w e r s i n F i g s . 14 , 15 , 17.

O N T H E H IS T O R Y A N D I N T E R P R E T A T I O N O F T H E T R E E SY M B O L I . THE TREE AS AN ARCHETYPAL IMAGE

35°

A fte r h av in g given som e exam ples of sp o n tan eo u sly p ro duced, m o d e rn tree sym bols in th e first p a rt of this essay, I sh o u ld like, in th e second p a rt, to say so m eth in g a b o u t th e h isto rical b ack g ro u n d of th e tree sym bol in o rd e r to ju stify m y title “T h e P hilosophical T r e e .” A lth o u g h it w ill be obvious to an y o n e ac q u a in te d w ith th e m a te ria l th a t m y exam ples are n o th in g m o re th a n special instances of a w idely d issem in ated tree sym bolism , it is nevertheless of im p o rtan ce , in in te rp re tin g th e in d iv id u a l sym bols, to know so m eth in g a b o u t th e ir h isto rical an tecedents. L ike all arch ety p al sym bols, th e sym bol of th e tre e has u n d e r g one a d ev elo p m en t of m e a n in g in th e course of th e cen tu ries. I t is fa r rem o v ed fro m th e o rig in al m e an in g of th e sh am an istic tree, even th o u g h c e rta in basic featu res p ro v e.to be u n a lte ra b le . T h e psychoid fo rm u n d e rly in g any arch ety p al im age re ta in s its ch ara cter a t all stages of d ev elo p m en t, th o u g h em p irically it is capable of endless v ariatio n s. T h e o u tw a rd form of th e tree m ay change in th e course of tim e, b u t th e richness an d v itality of a sym bol are expressed m o re in its change of m ean in g . T h e aspect of m e a n in g is th e re fo re essential to th e p h en o m en o lo g y of th e tree sym bol. T a k e n on average, th e co m m o n est associations to its m e an in g are grow th, life, u n fo ld in g of fo rm in a physical a n d s p iritu a l sense, d ev elo p m en t, g ro w th from belo w u p w ard s a n d fro m above dow nw ards, th e m a te rn a l aspect (p ro tectio n , shade, shelter, n o u ris h in g fru its, source o f life, solidity, p erm an en ce, firm -rootedness, b u t also b ein g “ro o te d to th e sp o t” ), old age, p erso n ality ,1 an d finally d e a th a n d re b irth . r In the dream of Nebuchadnezzar the king himself is a tree. There is a very 272

T h e tree b ea rs b u d s a n d w h ite blossoms. It sta n d s 011 a n is land. In th e b a c k Â g r o u n d is th e sea

Ilpl

T h e tre e stan d s on th e globe, a n d re m in d e d th e p a in te r o f th e b a o b a b w hose ro o ts b u rs t th e p la n e to id o n w h ich St. E x u p e ry â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s L ittle P rin ce d w e lt. I t also recalls th e w o rld -tre e of P h erek y d es, th e sh a m a n ic tree, a n d th e w o rld -ax is

Fig. 2

A b stract tree re p re se n te d as sev e n -b ra n ch e d c a n d e la b ru m o r C h ristm as tree. T h e lig h ts sym bolize th e illu m in a tio n a n d ex p an sio n o f consciousness

F ig . 3

M ontage in gold-foil, an alo g o u s to th e alchem ical arbor aurea a n d cosm ic tree. T h e g o lden globes are h eav en ly bodies F ig . 4

T h e tree grows in water. It bears red flowers, b u t it consists also of fire licking u p f r o m the water, a n d the branches arc t i p p e d with flame

Fig. 5

T h e tree is p a in te d b rig h t red, an d grows in th e w ater sim ultaneously upw ards an d dow nw ards

F ig. 6

T h e tree thru sts up from below and breaks through the e a rth â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface

F ig. 7

Its b ran ch es tip p e d w ith flam e, th e tree grow s o u t of th e body of a w om an. She is synonyÂ m o u s w ith e a rth a n d w ater, an e m b o d im e n t of th e id ea th a t th e tree is a process o rig in a tÂ in g in th e unconscious. Cf. th e M exican w o rld -tree w hich grow s in th e belly o f th e e a rth goddess (Lewis Spence, T h e Cods of Me x i c o, p. 58)

D raw in g by a n eleven-year-old boy

F ig . 9

U nion of opposites represented by two trees growing into one an o th er and joined by a ring. T h e crocodiles in the w ater are the separated opposites, w hich are therefore dangerous

Fig. 10

T h e vertical grow th oÂŁ the tree contrasts w ith the horizontal m ovem ent of the snake. T h e snake is ab o u t to take u p its abode in th e tree of knowledge

Fig. 11

C orresponding to th e sun in th e branches, th e snake in th e roots of the tree wears a halo, an indication o f the successful union of tree and snake

Fig. 12

T h e tree has 4 + 1 bran ch es. T h e c en tra l branch bears th e su n, th e o th e r fo u r b ear stars. T h e tree is h o llo w in sid e an d is sh u t by a d oor. T h e bird w eep s â&#x20AC;&#x153; b eÂ cause it has fo r g o tte n th e key"

F ig . 13

T h is a n d th e fo llo w in g p ic tu re com e fro m a series d e p ic tin g th e h e ro m y th . T h e h e ro is acco m p an ied by a fa m ilia r in th e form o f a sm all, g reen, cro w n ed d ra g o n . T h e tree grow s o u t of a coffer c o n ta in in g th e secret tre asu re

T h e tree clasps the coffer in its roots, a n d a flame springs o ut of a leaf as the h ero touches it

Fig. 15

D o n e by t h e same p a t i e n t at an earlier stage. In t h e roots oÂŁ the tree a s a p p h i r e lies h i d d e n

Fig. 16

D o n e la te r by the sam e p a tie n t. A blossoming tree w ith sun disk grows o u t of a magic circle enclosing th e u ro b o ro s w ith th e sa p p h ire a t the centre

Fig. 17

T h e c o sm ic t r e e is c a u g h t b y t h e e a r t h a n d c a n n o t g r o w u p w a r d s

F ig . 18

T h e sam e regressive sta te (d ep icted by a d iffe re n t p a in te r), b u t c o u p le d w ith g re a te r consciousness

Fig. 19

T h e tree has a cosmic ch arac te r, w ith a m u ltic o lo u red do ll h id d e n in its tru n k

Fig. 20

T i i e sa m e m o t i f d o n e by a d i f f e r e n t p a t i e n t . T h e s le e p in g figure is n o w visible

F ig . 21

T h e h id d e n figure aw akens a n d h a lf em erges fro m th e tree. T h e sn ak e w h isp ers in her e a r; b ird , lio n , lam b , a n d p ig c o m p le te th e p a ra d isa l scene

F ig . 22

T h e tree itself assumes hum an form and carries the sun. In the background is a wavy band of blood, surging rhythm ically ro u n d the island

Fig. 23

Done by the same p ain ter as Figures 13-17. A female figure has taken the place of the tree. T h e sun disk is now a symbol of individuation, and is characterized as such by th e q u atern ity fed by four different-coloured rivers flowing dow n from four m ountains, and flanked by four anim als. T h e scene is paradisal

Fig. 24

T h e tree is a fem ale figure encircled by a snake a n d h o ld in g tw o globes o f lig h t. T h e c a rd in a l p o in ts a re m a rk ed by corn-cobs a n d fo u r a n im als: b ird , to rto ise, lion, an d g ra ssh o p p er

F ig . 25

M ost of th e tree h a s been replaced by a fe m a le figure, th e lo w er p a r t ta k in g th e fo rm of a cross. B elow is th e e a rth , in th e sky a rain b o w

Fig. 26

T h e tree stands in a forest of prehistoric m areâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s-tails. It grows like the pistil of a flower (in six stages) from a calyx bearing four h um an heads. A w om anâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s head rises o u t of the petals

Fig. 27

D raw n by th e sam e p a tie n t as F ig u re 2 6 . T h e foliage gro w in g o u t of th e w o m a n â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s h e a d is s u rro u n d e d by flying b ird s

F ig . 28

D r a w n by the same p a t i e n t , b u t h e r e t h e tree grows o u t of a man's h e a d rising above t h e r a i n b o w

Fig. 29

P a in te d by th e sam e p a tie n t as F ig u re 2 . A stylized w o rld -tree su rm o u n tin g a g lobe w ith a m u ltic o lo u re d b a n d ru n n in g dow n it. T h e tr u n k is a d aem o n ic m ascu lin e figure w ith a b ird co m in g dow n fro m above a n d a p h a llic sym bol risin g u p fro m below

F ig . 30

M ad e by th e same p a tie n t. T h e tree has t u r n e d in to a lotus w ith a gn o m elik e figure inside. H is h ead is encircled by a m a n d a l a w ith a Ilowerlike centre, s u r Â r o u n d e d by a w r e a th o r corona F ig . 31

H ere again th e tree is p ain ted like a flower, and symbolizes the u n io n of a num ber of opposites. Below, a swan and a catlike creature; then A dam and Eve, hiding th e ir faces in shame; th en a kingfisher w ith fish an d a three-headed snake; in the centre, th e four cherubim of Ezekiel, flanked by sun an d m oon; then th e flower of light w ith a crowned boy inside; a t the top, a b ird w ith a shining egg and a crowned serpent, and two hands p o u rin g w ater o u t of a ju g

F ig. 32

351

T h i s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n is t h e d e p o s i t o f m a n y y e a r s o f r e s e a r c h in to th e s ta te m e n ts of in d iv id u a l p atien ts. E v e n th e la y m a n r e a d in g th is essay w ill b e s tr u c k b y th e a m o u n t o f m a te r ia l f r o m fairy ta le, m y th , a n d p o e try th a t a p p e a rs in th e illu stra tio n s. I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n i t is a s t o n i s h i n g h o w r e l a t i v e l y s e l d o m t h e p e r sons I in te r r o g a t e d w e re c o n s c io u s o f so u rc e s o f th is k in d . T h e m a i n r e a s o n s f o r t h i s a r e : ( i ) I n g e n e r a l , p e o p l e t h i n k l i t t l e , if a t a l l , a b o u t t h e o r i g i n s o f d r e a m i m a g e s , a n d s t i l l le s s a b o u t m y t h m o t i f s . (2) T h e s o u r c e s h a v e b e e n f o r g o t t e n . (3) T h e s o u r c e s w e r e n e v e r i n a n y s e n s e c o n s c i o u s ; t h a t is t o s a y , t h e i m ages a re n e w , a rc h e ty p a l cre atio n s.

352

T h e t h i r d p o s s i b i l i t y is m u c h l e s s r a r e t h a n o n e m i g h t s u p p o se . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t o c c u r s so f r e q u e n t l y t h a t c o m p a r a t i v e re se a rc h in to sy m b o ls b e c o m e s u n a v o id a b le in e lu c id a tin g th e s p o n ta n e o u s p r o d u c ts o f th e u n c o n s c io u s . T h e w id e ly h e l d v ie w th a t m y th o lo g e m s o r m y t h m o tif s 2 a re alw ay s c o n n e c te d w ith a tr a d itio n p ro v e s u n te n a b le , sin c e th e y m a y r e a p p e a r a n y w h e re , a t a n y tim e , a n d in a n y in d iv id u a l re g a rd le ss o f tr a d itio n . A n im a g e c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d a r c h e ty p a l w h e n it c a n b e s h o w n to ex ist in th e re c o rd s o f h u m a n h isto ry , in id e n tic a l fo rm a n d w ith t h e s a m e m e a n i n gO. T w o e x t r e m e s m u s t b e d i s t i n gO u i s h e d h e r e : (1 ) T h e i m a g e is c l e a r l y d e f i n e d a n d is c o n s c i o u s l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h a t r a d i t i o n . ( 2 ) T h e i m a g e is w i t h o u t d o u b t a u t o c h t h o n o u s, th e re b e in g n o p o ss ib ility le t a lo n e p r o b a b ility o f a tr a d i t i o n .3 E v e r y d e g r e e o f m u t u a l c o n t a m i n a t i o n m a y b e f o u n d b e tw e e n th e se tw o e x tre m e s .

353

I n c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e c o l l e c t i v e n a t u r e o f t h e i m a g e i t is o f t e n i m p o s s i b l e to e s t a b l i s h its f u l l r a n g e o f m e a n i n g f r o m t h e a s s o c i a t i v e m a t e r i a l o f a s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l . B u t s i n c e i t is o f i m p o r ta n c e to d o th is fo r p r a c tic a l th e r a p e u t i c p u rp o s e s , th e n e c e s sity o f c o m p a r a tiv e r e s e a rc h in to s y m b o ls f o r m e d ic a l p sy c h o lo g y b e c o m e s e v i d e n t o n th e s e g r o u n d s also .4 F o r th is p u r p o s e t h e ancient, indeed prim itive idea that the tree actually represents the life of a man; for instance, a tree is planted at the birth o f a child, and its and the child's fates are identical. “T h erefore the tree is the im age and mirror o f our condition" (A lciati, E m b lem a la cum commentaries, p. 888b). 2 Inclu ding figures of speech. 3 It is not always easy to prove this, because the tradition is often unconscious yet is recalled cryptom nesically. 4 T h e relation is sim ilar to that betw een com parative anatom y and hum an

investigator m u st tu r n back to those p erio d s in h u m a n h istory w hen sym bol fo rm atio n still w en t on u n im p e d e d , th a t is, w hen th e re was still no epistem ological criticism of th e fo rm a tio n of im ages, and w hen, in consequence, facts th a t in them selves w ere u n k n o w n co u ld be expressed in d efin ite visual form . T h e p erio d of this k in d closest to us is th a t of m edieval n a tu ra l philosophy, w hich reached its zen ith in th e sev en teen th cen tu ry , an d in th e eig h te e n th cen tu ry g rad u ally le ft th e field to science. It a tta in e d its m ost significant d ev elo p m en t in alchem y a n d H e rm e tic p h i losophy. H ere, as in a reservoir, w ere collected th e m ost e n d u r ing an d the m ost im p o rta n t m ythologem s of th e a n cien t w orld. I t is significant th a t H e rm e tic p h ilo so p h y was, in th e m ain , p rac tised by physicians.5 2 . TH E

354

TREE IN TH E TREATISE OF JODOCUS GREVERUS

I w o u ld now like to show how th e p h en o m en o lo g y of the tree is reflected in th e m e d iu m of th e epoch im m ed iately p reced in g the o ne ju s t m e n tio n ed . H o lm b e rg ,1 w ho w ro te a co m p re hensive study of th e tree of life, says th a t it is “m a n k in d ’s m ost m agnificent le g en d ,” thus co n firm in g th a t th e tree occupies a c en tral positio n in m ythology an d is so w id esp read th a t its ram ifi cations are to be fo u n d everyw here. T h e tree ap p ears fre q u e n tly in the m edieval alchem ical texts a n d in g en eral rep resen ts th e g row th o f the arcane substance an d its tran sfo rm a tio n in to th e philo so p h ical gold (or w h atev er th e n am e o f th e goal m ay be). W e re a d in th e treatise of Pelagios th a t Zosimos h ad said the tra n sfo rm a tio n process was like “a w ell-tended tree, a w atered p la n t, w hich, b e g in n in g to fe rm e n t because of th e p le n tifu l w ater, an d s p ro u tin g in th e h u m id ity an d w arm th of th e air, pu ts fo rth blossoms a n d fru its by v irtu e of th e g reat sweetness a n d special q u a lity ( ιτο ώ τη τι ) of n a tu re .” 2 anatom y, w ith the difference that in psychology the com parative findings have a praciical as w ell as a theoretical im portance. 5 W e can say this not only because very m any w ell-know n alchem ists were physicians, bu t also because chemistry in those days was essentially a pharm a copeia. T h e object o f the quest was not merely the au ru m p h ilo so p h icu m seu p o ta b ile, but the medicine, catholica, the panacea and alexipharm ic. 1 H olm berg, D er B au m des L eben sj p. 9. 2 B erthelot, C ollection des anciens alch im istes grecs, IV, i, 12.

355

A typical exam ple of this process is to be found in the treatise of Jodocus G reverus, w hich was first p rin te d in L eiden, 1588.3 T h e w hole opus is depicted as the sowing an d n u rtu rin g of the tree in a w ell-tended garden, in to w hich n o th in g extraneous m ight enter. T h e soil consists of purified M ercurius; S aturn, Ju p ite r, Mars, an d V enus form the tru n k (or tru n k s)4 of th e tree, and the sun an d m oon su p p ly th e ir seeds. T hese p lan etary nam es refer partly to the corresponding metals, b u t we can see w hat they m ean t from the a u th o r’s qualifying rem ark: “F o r there enters in to this w ork n o t the com m on gold, n o r th e com m on M ercurius, n o r the com m on silver, n o r an y th in g else th a t is com m on, b u t [the m etals] of the Philosophers.” R T h e in g red i ents of the w ork m ig h t therefore be anything. A t any ra te they are im aginary ones, even though they were expressed outw ardly by chem ical substances. T h e planetary nam es refer u ltim ately n o t only to m etals b u t, as every alchem ist knew, to th e (astro logical) tem peram ents, th a t is, to psychic factors. T h ese consist of instinctive dispositions w hich give rise to specific fantasies and desires and so reveal th e ir character. A varice as one of th e o rig i nal m otives of the royal a rt is still a p p aren t in th e term a u ru m non vulgi, though it is ju st h e re th a t we discern the change of m otivation and the displacem ent of the goal to an o th er plane. In the parable th a t comes at the end of the treatise the wise old m an says to the adept: “Son, lay aside the snares of w orldly ap p e tites.” 0 Even w hen, as is often u n d o u b ted ly th e case, the p ro cedure given by an a u th o r has no o th e r aim th an th e p ro d u ctio n of the com m on gold, th e psychic m ean in g of the opus n e v erth e less comes th ro u g h in the symbolic no m en clatu re he employs in spite of his conscious attitu d e . In the treatise of G reverus this stage has been overcom e a n d it is openly ad m itted th a t th e goal

3 “Secretum n ob ilissim u m et verissim um V enerabilis V iri D o m in i Iodoci Greveri Presbyteri,” as reprin ted in T h e a tru m ch em icu m , III (1659), p p . 699-722. 4 T h e tex t has: “Saturnus, Ju p iter, etc. su n t tru n ci,” w hich m ig h t m ean that there are several trunks, or th at the trunk consists of the four. E vid en tly M ichael M aier, w ho cites Greverus (Sym bola au reae m ensae, p. 269), was n ot clear ab ou t this either, for h e ascribes to Greverus the view th at M ercurius is the root, Sat urn, Jupiter, Mars, and V enus are the trunk and branches, sun and m oon the leaves and flowers o f the tree. In m y o p in io n h e correctly understands the four as the classical tetrasom ia (see infra). 5 “Secretum ,” p. 700. 8 P. 720.

of the opus is “n o t of this w o rld.” Accordingly, at the conclusion of his treatise on the “universal process of o u r w o rk ,” 7 the a u th o r avows th a t it is a “ gift of God, c o n ta in in g th e secret of the u n d iv id e d oneness of the H o ly T r in ity . O m ost excellent science, th e atre of all n a tu r e a n d its anatom y, earthly astrology,8 proof of G o d ’s om n ipo tence, testim ony to the resu rrectio n of the dead, exam ple of the rem ission of sins, infallible p ro of of the ju d g m e n t to com e and m ir r o r of eternal blessedness.” 8 356 A m o d e rn re a d e r of this h y m nlike p aea n of praise c a n n o t help feeling th a t it is exaggerated a n d o u t of key, for one c a n n o t im agine how the science of alchem y could, for instance, co n tain the H oly T r in ity . Such enthusiastic com parisons w ith the mys teries of religion had already caused offence in the M idd le Ages.10 F ar from b e in g rarities, they even becam e a le itm o tiv of certain treatises in the seventeenth century, w hich how ever had th e ir precursors in the th irte e n th a n d fo u rte e n th centuries. In my view they sh ould n o t always b e taken as spurious mystifica tion, for the au th o rs h ad so m ething definite in m in d . T h e y obviously saw a parallel betw een the alchemical process an d re li gious ideas— a parallel w hich is certainly n o t im m ediately p e r ceptible to us. A brid ge betw ee n two such very different realm s of th o u g h t can be co nstructed only w h en we take in to account th e factor co m m o n to b o th : the te r tiu m com parationis is the psychological elem ent. N a tu ra lly an alchem ist w ou ld have d e fen ded him self ju s t as in d ig n a n tly against the charge th a t his ideas a b o u t chem ical substances were fantasies as w o u ld a m e ta physician today, w ho still thinks th a t his statem ents a m o u n t to m o re th a n an th ro p o m o rp h ism s. J u s t as the alchem ist was u n a b le to distinguish b etw een things as they are a n d the notions he had a b o u t them , so the m o d e rn m etaphysician still believes th a t his views give valid expression to th e ir m etaphysical object. I t 7 P . 721. 8 “A n a to m ia ” an d “ a strologia terrestris” are sp ecifically P aracelsan concep ts. A cco rd in g ly th e te r m in u s a q u o for th e treatise is th e secon d h a lf o f the iGth cen t. “A stro lo g ia terrestris” m ig h t also be tran slated as th e “e a rth ly firm a m e n t” o f P aracelsu s. 9 . . a rg u m en tu m o m n ip o te n tia e D e i1 te stim o n iu m resu rrection is m o rtu o ru m , e x e m p lu m rem ission is p eccatoru m , in fa llib ile fu tu r i iu d ic ii e x p e r im e n tu m e t sp ec u lu m aetern ae b e a titu d in is .” “S ecretu m ,” p . 721. 10 Cf. th e refu sal o f th e B asel p rin ter, C on rad W ald k irch , to in c lu d e A u r o ra co n su rg en s I in A r tis a u rife ra e . See P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p ar. 464.

276

357

o bviously n e v e r o c c u rre d to e ith e r of th e m th a t a g re a t diversity of views c o n c e rn in g th e ir respective objects has b e e n h e ld since earliest times. B u t u n lik e m etaphysicians, a n d u n lik e th eologians in p a rtic u la r, the alchem ists displayed no polem ical tendencies; at m o st they la m e n te d th e o b scu rity of the a u th o rs w h o m they co u ld n o t u n d e r s ta n d . I t is clear to every reaso n ab le person th a t in b o th cases we are c o n c e rn e d p r im a rily w ith ideas b o r n of fantasy— w h ich is n o t to say th a t th e ir u n k n o w n o b je c t does n o t exist. N o m a tte r w h a t the ideas refer to, they a re always organized by th e sam e psychic laws, th a t is, by the archetypes. I n th e ir way the alchem ists r e a l ized this w h e n they insisted o n th e p arallelism b e tw e e n th e ir ideas a n d religious ones, as w h e n G rev eru s com pares his syn th e tic process w ith th e T r i n ity . T h e c o m m o n arch e ty p e in this case is the n u m b e r th ree. As a Paracelsist, he m u s t have b e e n a c q u a in te d w ith the P aracelsan tria d of s u lp h u r, salt, a n d M ercurius. S u lp h u r belongs to the su n or represen ts it, a n d salt stands in th e sam e r e la tio n to the m o on . H o w ev er, h e says n o t h ing a b o u t a synthesis of this k i n d .11 S un a n d m o o n sup p ly th e seeds th a t are p la n te d in the e a rth ( = M ercu riu s), a n d p r e s u m ably the fo u r o th e r p lan ets fo rm th e t r u n k of th e tree. T h e fo u r th a t are to b e u n i t e d in to o n e re fe r to th e te tra so m ia of G re e k alchem y, w here, c o rre s p o n d in g to the planets, they stan d for lead, tin, iro n , a n d c o p p e r .12 H e n c e in his process of henosis (u nification o r synthesis), as M ich ael M a ie r correctly u n d e r sto o d i t ,13 w h a t G re v e ru s h a d in m i n d was n o t th e th re e basic P aracelsan substances b u t th e a n c ie n t tetrasom ia, w h ich a t the e n d of his treatise h e co m p ares w ith the “ u n io n of persons in th e H o ly T r i n i t y . ” F o r h im th e tria d of sun, m o o n , a n d M e rc u riu s was the s ta rtin g p o in t, the in itia l m a te r ia l as it w ere, in so far as it signified th e seed of th e tree a n d th e e a rth in w h ich it was sown. T h i s is th e so-called co n i u n ct io Iriplaliva. B u t h e re he is co n c e rn e d w ith th e co n i u n ct io tetraptiva ,14 w h e re b y th e fo u r U H e d o e s m e n t i o n , h o w e v e r , g o ld , silv er, a n d m e r c u r y as i n i t i a l i n g r e d i e n t s w h i c h h a v e t o b e p r e p a r e d a n d p u r i f i e d first, so t h a t " c o m m o n s u b s t a n c e s ” (■v u l g a r i a ) m a y b e c o m e “ p h y s i c a l o n e s ” (p h y s i c a ) (p. 702). H e r e “ p h y s i c a l ” m e a n s n o n v u l g i , i.e., sy m b o l ic . 12 B e r t h c l o t , L e s O r i g i n e s d e I’a l c h i m i e , p . gg. 13 S u p r a , p a r . 355, n. 4. 1 Ί “ T r i p t a t i v a c o n i u n c t i o : i d est, T r i n i t a t i s u n i o fit e x c o r p o r e , s p i r i t u e t a n i m a . . . . Sic ista T r i n i t a s i n e s s e n t ia e st u n i t a s : q u i a c o a e t e r n a e s i m u l s u n t e t

277

are jo in e d in th e “ u n io n of perso n s.” T h is is a ch aracteristic ex am ple of the d ilem m a of th ree a n d four, w h ich plays a g reat ro le in alchem y as th e w ell-know n ax io m of M aria P ro p h etissa.15 3 . T H E T E T R A SO M IA 358

T h e aim of th e tetraso m ia is th e re d u c tio n (or synthesis) of a q u a te rn io of opposites to u n ity . T h e nam es of th e p lanets them selves in d icate two dyads, one b e n ev o len t (J u p ite r an d V enus), the o th e r malefic (S atu rn a n d M ars), an d such dyads often c o n stitu te an alchem ical q u a te rn ity .1 Zosim os gives th e follow ing d escrip tio n of th e tran sfo rm a tio n process th a t is n eed ed for th e p re p a ra tio n of th e tin c tu re : You have need of an earth formed from two bodies and a water formed from two natures to water it. W hen the w ater has been mingled with the earth . . . the sun must act on this clay and trans form it into stone. T his stone must be bu rn t, and that b urning will bring out the secret of this m atter, that is to say its spirit, which is the tincture2 sought by the philosophers.3

359

As th e te x t shows, th e synthesis d ep en d s on th e u n ificatio n of a d o u b le dyad. T h is is expressed p a rtic u la rly clearly in a n o th e r arch ety p al form of th e sam e idea: in th e stru c tu re of th e royal m arriag e, w hich follows th a t of th e cross-cousin m a rria g e .4 As a ru le , th e lapis is synthesized from th e q u a te rn ity of th e elem ents o r fro m th e ogdoad of elem ents plus q u alities (co ld /w arm , m o ist/d ry ). S im ilarly M ercu riu s, know n fro m a n cie n t tim es as quadratics, is th e arcan e substance th ro u g h w hose c o a c q u a le s . T e t r a p t iv a c o n iu n c t io d ic it u r p r in c ip io r u m c o r r c c tio .” ( T h e t h r e e f o ld c o n iu n c tio : th a t is, th e u n io n o f t h e T r in i t y is c o m p o s e d o f b o d y , s p ir it , a n d s o u l. . . . T h u s t h e T r in it y is in it s e s s e n c e a u n it y for th e y a r e c o e t e r n a l a n d c o e q u a l. T h e f o u r fo ld c o n iu n c t io is c a lle d t h e c o r r e c tio n o f t h e p r in c ip le s .) — “ S ca la p h ilo s o p h o r u m ,” A r t . a u r i f ., II, p . 138. T h e c o n i u n c t i o t e t r a p t i v a is c a lle d t h e “ n o b le s t c o n iu n c t io ” b e c a u s e it p r o d u c e s t h e la p is b y u n it i n g t h e f o u r e l e m e n ts . 15 P s y c h o l o g y a n d A l c h e m y , p a rs. 2 6 , 209. 1 “A n d in o u r o p u s t h e r e a r e tw o e a r th s a n d tw o w a t e r s .”— “ S ca la p h i l .,” A r t . a u r i f ., I I , p . 137. 2 A c c o r d in g to t h e “ B o o k o f K r a te s,'1 t h e tin c tu r e is a “ fiery a n d g a s e o u s p o is o n .”— B e r t h e lo t , L a C h i m i e a u m o y e n a g e , I I I , p . 6 7. 3 I b id ., p . 82. * C f. “ T h e P s y c h o lo g y o f t h e T r a n s f e r e n c e ,” c h . 2.

278

tra n s fo rm a tio n th e lap is, o r goal o f th e opus, is p ro d u c e d . T h u s in th e love-m agic o f A stram psychos th e in v o c atio n to H e rm e s says: Your names . . . are in the four corners of the heavens. I know also your forms, w hich are: in the East you have the form of an ibis, in the W est you have the form of a dog-headed baboon, in the N orth you have the form of a serpent, b u t in the South you have the form of a wolf. Your p la n t is the grape,s which in that place is the olive.6 I know also your wood: it is ebony, etc.7 360

T h e fo u rfo ld M e rc u riu s is also th e tre e o r its sp iritu s vegetativus. T h e H e lle n is tic H e rm e s is o n th e o n e h a n d an allen co m p assin g d eity , as th e above a ttrib u te s show , b u t o n th e o th e r h a n d , as H e rm e s T rism e g istu s, h e is th e a rc h -a u th o rity of th e alchem ists. T h e fo u r form s of H e rm e s in E g y p tian H e lle n ism are clearly d e riv e d fro m th e fo u r sons of H o ru s. A god w ith fo u r faces is m e n tio n e d as early as th e P y ra m id T e x ts of th e fo u rth a n d fifth d y n asties.8 T h e faces o b v iously re fe r to th e fo u r q u a rte rs of h eav e n — th a t is, th e god is all-seeing. B u d g e p o in ts o u t th a t in c h a p te r C X II of th e E g y p tian B ook of th e D ead th e sam e god ap p ea rs as th e ra m of M en d es w ith fo u r h e a d s.9 T h e o rig in a l H o ru s, w ho re p re s e n te d th e face of heav en , h a d lo n g h a ir h a n g in g d o w n o v er his face, a n d these stran d s of h a ir w ere associated w ith th e fo u r p illa rs of Shu, th e a ir god, w h ich s u p p o rte d th e fo u r-c o rn e re d p la te of th e sky. L a te r th e fo u r p illars becam e associated w ith th e fo u r sons of H o ru s, w ho re p la c e d th e old gods of th e fo u r q u a rte rs of heav en . H a p i co rre sp o n d e d to 5 Vitis w as th e n a m e g iv e n to th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l tree in la te a n tiq u ity , a n d th e o p u s w as c a lle d th e “v in ta g e " (v i n d e m i a ). A n O stan es q u o ta tio n in Z osim os (B e r th e lo t, A l c h . grecs, III, vi, 5) says: “ P ress th e g r a p e .” Cf. H o g h e la n d e in T h c a t r . c li c m ., I (1659), p . 180: “ M a n ’s b lo o d a n d th e red ju ic e o f th e g r a p e is ou r fire.” U v a e H e r m e t i s — “ p h ilo s o p h ic a l w a te r ” (R u la n d , L e x i c o n , p . 325). C o n ce rn in g th e " tru e v in e ” see th e in te r p r e ta tio n in A u r o r a c o n s u r g e n s II ( A rt. a urif., I, p . 186). Vintitn is a fr e q u e n t sy n o n y m for th e a q u a p e r m a n e n s . Cf. “H e r m e s th e v in ta g e r ” in B e r th e lo t, A l c h . grecs, V I, v. 3. 6 T h e o liv e is th e e q u iv a le n t o f th e g ra p e in a sm u ch as b o th are p ressed a n d y ield a p r e cio u s ju ic e . 7 P re isen d a n z, P a p y r i G raec a e M a g i c a e , II, p p . 45C 8 P y ra m id T e x t o f l’e p i I: “ H o m a g e to th ee, O th o u w h o h a st fo u r faces w h ic h rest a n d lo o k in tu rn u p o n w h a t is in K en set. . . .” (B u d g e, T h e G o d s o f t h e E g y p t i a n s , I, p. 85). K en set w as th e first n o m e (d istrict) o f a n c ie n t E g y p t, the r eg io n o f th e first cataract (ib id ., II, p. 42). 9 Ib id ., I, p . 496. For illu s tr a tio n , se e ib id ., II, p. 311.

th e N o rth , T u a m u te f to th e East, A m set to th e S outh, an d Q eb h se n n u f to th e W est. T h e y played a large ro le in th e c u lt of th e dead, w atch in g over th e life of th e dead m an in th e u n d e r w orld. H is tw o arm s co rresp o n d ed to H a p i an d T u a m u te f, his legs to A m set a n d Q eb h sen n u f. T h e E g y p tian q u a te rn ity co n sisted of tw o dyads, as is e v id en t fro m th e te x t of th e B ook of th e D ead: “ T h e n said H o ru s to R e, G ive m e tw o d iv in e b re th re n in th e city of Pe an d two d iv in e b re th re n in th e city of N ek h en , w ho [have spru n g ] from m y bo d y .” 10 T h e q u a te rn ity is in fact a le itm o tiv in th e ritu a l fo r th e dead: fo u r m e n carry th e coffin w ith the fo u r C an o p ic jars, th e re are fo u r sacrificial anim als, all in stru m e n ts a n d vessels are fo u rfo ld . F o rm u las an d prayers are re p e a te d fo u r tim es, etc.11 I t is ev id en t fro m this th a t th e q u a te rn ity was of special im p o rta n c e fo r th e dead m an : th e fo u r sons of H o ru s h a d to see to it th a t th e fo u r p arts (i.e., th e w h o le ness) of the body w ere preserved. H o ru s b eg o t his sons w ith his m o th e r Isis. T h e incest m otif, w h ich was c o n tin u e d in C h ristian tra d itio n a n d e x ten d ed in to la te m edieval alchem y, th u s begins far back in E g y p tian a n tiq u ity . T h e fo u r sons of H o ru s are o ften show n stan d in g on a lo tu s befo re th e ir g ra n d fa th e r O siris, Mesth a 12 h av in g a h u m a n head, H a p i th e h ead of an ape, T u a m u te f th e h ead of a jackal, an d Q eb h se n n u f th e h ead of a hawk. 3 61 T h e analogy w ith th e vision of Ezekiel (chapters 1 an d 10) is a t once ap p a re n t. T h e r e th e fo u r c h e ru b im h ad “ th e likeness of a m a n .” E ach of th e m h a d fo u r faces, a m a n ’s, a lio n ’s, an o x ’s, an d an eagle’s, so th a t, as w ith th e fo u r sons of H o ru s, one q u a r te r was h u m a n a n d th re e q u a rte rs an im al. In th e love-m agic of A stram psychos, on th e o th e r h an d , all fo u r form s are an im al, p ro b ab ly because of th e m agic p u rp o rt of th e in c a n ta tio n .13 362 In k eep in g w ith th e E g y p tian p re d ile c tio n for m u ltip les of fo u r, th e re are 4 x 4 faces in th e vision of E zekiel.14 M oreover 10 Ib id ., I, p. 497; c£. p . 210. i l l , p . 491. 12 A later form o f A m set. i s T h e on e h u m a n h e a d w o u ld in d ic a te con sciou sn ess o f an asp ect or fu n ctio n o f th e in d iv id u a l p sych e. H o ru s as th e r isin g su n is th e e n lig h ten er , ju st as th e vision o f E zek iel sign ifies e n lig h te n m e n t. O n th e o th e r h a n d m agic, if it is to be effective, alw ays p resu p p o ses u n con sciou sn ess. T h is w o u ld e x p la in th e absen ce o f th e h u m a n face. 1 4 Cf. th e sym b olism of th e self, w h ose to ta lity is characterized by fo u r q u a ter n ion s: A io n , p p . 242ff.

each

o£ t h e c h e r u b i m

has a w h e e l. I n

la te r c o m m e n ta rie s

th e

f o u r w h e e l s w e r e i n t e r p r e t e d a s M e r k a b a h , t h e c h a r i o t . 15 C o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e f o u r p il la r s o f S h u a n d t h e f o u r s o n s o f H o r u s as g o d s o f th e f o u r q u a r te r s , w h o b e a r u p th e flo o r o f th e sky, th e r e w as “ a f i r m a m e n t as th e c o lo u r o f te r r ib l e c ry sta l, s tr e tc h e d f o r th o v e r th e h e a d s ” o f th e c h e ru b im . O n it sto o d th e th ro n e o f h im w h o h a d “ th e a p p e a r a n c e o f a m a n ,” th e c o u n t e r p a r t o f O siris, w h o w ith th e h e lp of th e o ld e r H o ru s a n d of Set h a d c lim b e d u p to h eav en . 363

T he

f o u r w in g s o f th e c h e r u b i m

re c a ll th e

w in g e d

fe m a le

g e n i e s w h o p r o t e c t t h e c o ffin o f P h a r a o h . E a c h o f t h e H o r u s s o n s h a d a fe m a le c o u n te r p a r t w h o fu lfille d th is sa m e tu te la r y fu n c t i o n . T h e c h e r u b i m , t o o , w e r e p r o t e c t i v e g e n i e s , a s is a p p a r e n t fro m

E z e k ie l

28 : 14 a n d

i 6 . 16 T h e

a p o tro p a ic

sig n ific a n c e

t h e q u a t e r n i t y is b o r n e o u t b y E z e k i e l g : 4 , w h e r e t h e p r o p h e t , a t t h e b e h e s t o f t h e L o r d , s e t s a c r o s s 17 o n rig h te o u s to p ro te c t th e m sig n o f G o d , w h o

fro m

th e fo re h e a d s o f th e

p u n i s h m e n t . I t is e v i d e n t l y t h e

h im se lf h as th e a ttr ib u te o f q u a te rn ity . T h e

c r o s s is t h e m a r k o f h i s p r o t e g e s . A s a t t r i b u t e s o f G o d a n d a l s o sy m b o ls in th e i r o w n rig h t, th e q u a te r n ity a n d th e cross sig n ify w h o le n e s s . T h u s P a u l i n u s o f N o l a says: E x t e n d e d o n t h e f o u r a r m s o f t h e w o o d o f t h e cross, h e r e a c h e d o u t to th e f o u r q u a r t e r s o f th e w o rld , t h a t h e m i g h t d r a w to g e t h e r u n t o life th e p e o p le s fr o m ev ery sh o re ; a n d b e c a u s e C h ris t o u r G o d by th e d e a t h o f th e cross s h o w s h im s e l f a ll th i n g s to a ll m e n , t h a t life m a y c o m e i n t o b e i n g a n d e v i l b e d e s t r o y e d , A a n d Cl s t a n d b e s i d e t h e cro ss, e a c h l e t t e r b y its t h r e e s t r o k e s d i s p l a y i n g a d i f f e r e n t fig u re i n t h r e e f o l d w i s e , a s i n g l e m e a n i n g p e r f e c t e d i n t r i p l e f o r m . 18 15 T h e o ld p ag o d a s in In d ia a re a c tu a lly sto n e c h a rio ts o n w h ic h th e g ods a re e n th ro n e d . In D a n ie l η : 9, th e A n c ie n t of D ays sits o n a th ro n e . 10 “A c h e ru b s tre tc h e d o u t a n d p ro te c tin g ,” “ c o v erin g c h e ru b .” H [“ M a rk ” in D V , AV, RSV, a n d H e b re w B ib le. V u lg a te : “ sig n a T h a u . ” Cf. L a S a in te B ib le 1 tr a d u it e n fra n ca is sous la d ire c tio n d e VEcole B ib liq u e d e J e ru sa lem (P aris, 1956), w h e re th e w o rd is tra n s la te d as "c ro ix ,” w ith a n o te: " lite ra lly T a v , as V u lg a te tra n sla te s. T h is le tte r h a d , in th e a n c ie n t a lp h a b e t, ex actly th e sh a p e of a cross.”— T r a n s l a t o r .] 18 C arolina, X IX , verse 640 (M igne, P .L ., vol. 61, cols. 546L): “ Q u i cru ce d isp e n sa p e r q u a tt u o r e x tim a lig n i Q u a ttu o r a ttin g it d im e n su m p a rtib u s o rb e m U t tr a h a t a d v ita m p o p u lo s ex o m n ib u s oris E t q u ia m o rte cru c is c u n c tis d e u s o m n ia C h ris tu s

281

364

In the spontaneous symbolism of the unconscious the cross as quaternity refers to the self, to m a n ’s wholeness.10 T h e sign of the cross is thus an indication of the healing effect of wholeness, or of becom ing whole. 365 F our anim als also appear in the vision of D aniel. T h e first was like a lion and was “m ade stand upon the feet as a m an, and a m an’s heart was given to it.’’ T h e second was like a bear, the th ird like a leopard, and the fo urth was a beast “dreadful and terrib le,” w ith “great iro n teeth ” and “ten horns.” 20 O nly the special treatm ent of the lion in any way recalls the h um an q u a r ter of the tetram orph. AU four of them are beasts of prey or, in psychological terms, functions th at have succum bed to desire, lost their angelic character, and become daem onic in the worst sense. T hey represent the negative and destructive aspect of the fo u r angels of G od who, as the Book of Enoch shows, form his in n er court. T his regression has noth in g to do w ith magic (see n. 13) b u t ra th e r expresses the daem onization of m an, or of cer tain pow erful individuals. A ccordingly D aniel interprets the four beasts as four kings which shall arise ou t of the earth (7 : 17, A.V.). T h e in terp retatio n continues (7 : 18): “ B ut the saints of the most H igh shall take the kingdom , and possess the king dom for ever, even for ever and ever.” Like the lion w ith the hum an heart, this surprising in terp retatio n is based on the posi tive aspect of the quatern ity and refers to a blessed, protected state of things w hen four guardian angels reign in heaven and fo u r just kings on earth, and the saints possess the kingdom . B ut this happy state is ab o u t to disappear, for the fo u rth beast in the q u atern ity has assumed m onstrous form , has ten horns and rep resents “ the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth ” (7 : 23). In o th er words, a m onstrous lust for pow er w ill make the hum an q u a rte r unconscious again. T h is is a psychological process which can be observed only too often both individually and collec tively. It has recurred countless times in the history of m ankind. E x t a t i n e x o r t u m v i t a e f i n e m q u e m a lo r u r n , A l p h a c r u c e m c i r c u m s t a t e t SI, t r ib u s u t r a q u e v ir g is L i t t e r a d iv e r s a m t r in a r a t i o n e f ig u r a m P e r f ic ie n s , q u i a p c r f e c t u m e s t m e n s u n a , t r i p l e x v i s . ” 18 C f. " C o n c e r n i n g M a n d a l a S y m b o l i s m . ” 20 D a n i e l 7 : 4 ft.

V ia D a n ie l a n d E n o ch , th e q u a te rn ity o f G o d ’s sons p e n e tra te d very early in to C h ris tia n ideology. T h e r e are th e th re e sy n o p tic gospels a n d th e o n e gospel of St. J o h n , to Avhich tvere assigned as em b lem s th e sym bols of th e c h e ru b im . T h e fo u r gos pels are as it w ere th e p illa rs of C h ris t’s th ro n e , a n d in th e M id d le Ages th e te tra m o rp h b ecam e th e rid in g a n im al o f th e C h u rc h . B u t it was G n o stic sp e c u la tio n in p a rtic u la r th a t a p p ro p ria te d th e q u a te rn ity . T h is th e m e is so far-reach in g th a t it c a n n o t be d e a lt w ith m o re closely h ere. I w o u ld o n ly d raw a tte n tio n to th e sy n o n y m ity of C h rist, Logos, a n d H erm es,21 a n d th e d e riv a tio n of Jesu s fro m th e so-called “ second te tr a d ” 22 am o n g th e V a le n tin ia n s. “ T h u s o u r L o rd in his fo u rfo ld n ess preserves th e fo rm of th e te trak ty s a n d is com posed of (1) th e s p iritu a l, w hich com es fro m A ch am o th , (2) th e psychic, w h ich com es fro m th e w o rld -creato r, (3) th e b o d y p re p a re d w ith in effable a rt, a n d (4) th e d iv in e, th e sa v io u r.” 23 367 T h e alch em ical te tra so m ia a n d its r e d u c tio n to u n ity th e re fore have a lo n g p re h isto ry w h ich reach es b ack far b ey o n d th e P y th a g o re a n te trak ty s in to E g y p tia n a n tiq u ity . F ro m all th is we can see w ith o u t difficulty th a t we a re c o n fro n te d w ith th e a rc h e type of a totality im age d iv id e d in to jo u r. T h e r e s u lta n t co n ce p tio n s are always of a c e n tra l n a tu re , ch aracterize d iv in e figures, a n d carry o v er th o se q u a litie s to th e arca n e su b stan ces o f a l chem y. 368 I t is n o t th e task of e m p irica l psychology to sp ecu late a b o u t th e possible m e tap h y sical significance o f th is arch ety p e. W e can o n ly p o in t o u t th a t in sp o n ta n e o u s psychic p ro d u c ts such as dream s a n d fantasies th e sam e a rch e ty p e is a t w o rk a n d in p r in cip le p ro d u ces o v er a n d ov er ag ain th e sam e figures, m ean in g s, a n d values a u to c h th o n o u s ly . A n y o n e w ho stu d ies im p a rtia lly th e above series of d re a m p ic tu re s w ill b e ab le to co n v in ce h im self o f th e v a lid ity o f m y conclusions. 366

4. 3¾

T H E IM A G E O F W H O L E N E S S

A fte r this ex cu rsu s in to th e h isto ry of th e H e rm e tic q u a te r n ity , le t us tu r n back to th e im age of w holeness in alchem y. TAnd A dam as: Cf. A io n , p p . 2o8f.— E d ito rs.] H ip p o ly tu s, E len ch o s, V, 7, aqff. V I, 51, 1. 23 U sen er, D as W e ih n a c h tsfe stj p . 149. 21

22 E len ch o s,

37 °

O n e of th e com m onest an d m ost im p o rta n t of the arcana is th e aqua perm anens, th e ύ δ ω ρ B e l o v of th e G reeks. T h is, acco rd in g to the u n an im o u s testim ony of b o th the a n cien t an d the later alchem ists, is an aspect of M ercu riu s, an d of this d iv in e w ater Zosimos says in his frag m e n t irept τού B e io v OGaros : T his is the great and divine mystery which is sought, for it is the whole [τοϋτο yap ίσ η to wav]. And from it is the whole and through the same is the whole. Two natures, one substance [ούσία]. But the one [substance] attracts the one, and the one rules the one. This is the silver water, male and female, which forever flees. . . , For it is not to be ruled. It is the whole in all things. And it has life and spirit and is destructive [αναιρβτικόν]·1

371

37 ®

W ith reg ard to the cen tral significance of th e aq ita perm anens I m ust refer the re a d e r to my ea rlie r w ritin g s.2 T h e “w a te r” is ju s t as m uch th e arca n u m of alchem y as are M ercurius, th e lapis, th e filius p h ilo so p h o ru m , etc. L ik e them it is a to tality im age, and as th e above Zosimos q u o ta tio n shows, this was so even in th e G reek alchem y of th e th ird cen tu ry a . d . T h e te x t leaves no d o u b t in this respect: th e w ater is w holeness. I t is the “ silver w a te r” ( = hydrargyrum), b u t n o t th e ύδωρ άακίνητον, ‘everm oving w ater,’ i.e., o rd in ary q u ick silv er w hich in L a tin alchem y was called M ercuriu s crudus as d istin ct from M ercurius n o n vulgi. In Zosimos the q u ick silv er is a TrveBpa (sp irit).3 Zosim os’s “w hole” is a m icrocosm , a reflection of th e u n iv erse in th e sm allest p article of m atter, an d is th erefo re fo u n d in ev ery th in g organic a n d in o rg an ic. Because th e m icrocosm is id en tical w ith the m acrocosm , it attracts the la tte r a n d thus brings a b o u t a k in d of apocatastasis, a resto ratio n of all ind iv id u a to th e o rig in al w holeness. T h u s “ every g rain becom es w heat, an d all m etal gold,” as M eister E ck h a rt says; a n d th e little, single in d iv id u a l becom es th e “g reat m a n ,” th e hom o m a x im u s o r A n th ro p o s, i.e., th e self. T h e m o ral eq u iv a le n t of th e physical tra n sm u ta tio n in to go ld is self-know ledge, w h ich is a re-rem em b erin g o f th e h o m o tolus.* O lym piodorus, citin g Zosim os’s ex h o rta tio n to T h eo seb eia, says: 1 B e r th e lo t, A l c h . g re c s , I I I , ix . C L t h e p o is o n o u s t i n c tu r e , s u p r a , p a r . 3 5 8 , n . 2. 2 P s y c h o lo g y a n d A l c h e m y , p a r s . 3 3 6 L 3 B e r t h e l o t , A l c h . g r e c s , I I I , v i, 5 . C f . s u p r a , “ T h e S p i r i t M e r c u r i u s , ” p a r s . 2 6 4 L * C f. A i o n , p p . i6 a ff.

If th ou w ilt calm ly h u m b le th yself in relation to thy b ody, th ou w ilt calm th yself also in rela tio n to th e passions, and by actin g thus, th o u w ilt su m m o n the d iv in e to th yself, and in truth the d ivin e, w h ich is everyw h ere,5 w ill com e to thee. B u t w h en th ou k now est thyself, thou k now est also the G od w h o is truly o n e.6

H ipp olytus bears this ou t in his account of the Christian doc trine: B u t th ou sh a lt speak w ith G od and b e jo in t h eir w ith Christ. . . . For th ou w ilt have b ecom e G od [ y k y ov a s y a p 0eos]. For w hatever su f ferings th o u d id st u nd ergo as a m an , th o u hast show n th at th ou art a m an; b u t w h atever is ap p u rten an t to a G od, that G od has p rom ised to bestow , because th ou hast b een m ade d iv in e [θίοπονηθτ}ς], since th o u h ast b een b eg o tten im m ortal [yewrjdeis]. T h a t is the “K now th y self,” the k n o w in g o f the G od w h o m ade thee. For to h im w h o k n o w eth h im self it is g iv en to b e k n ow n o f H im by w h om he is ca lled .7 373

T h e foregoing account of the associative background of the tree, prom pted by the treatise of Jodocus Greverus, seem ed to m e a necessary prelude to a discussion of the significance of the tree in alchem y. A general survey of this kind may help the reader n ot to lose sight of the w h o le am id the unavoid ab le con fusion of alchem ical op in ion s and fantasies. U n fortu n ately my exp osition w ill n ot be rendered any easier by m y having to give num erous parallels from other fields of study. T h ese, however, cannot be dispensed w ith, because the view s o f the alchem ists were derived to a large exten t from unconscious archetypal assum ptions w hich also u n d erlie other dom ains of hum an thought. B T h e im m e d ia te ly p r e c e d in g p a ssa g e rem arks th a t G o d "is e v er y w h e r e ’’ a n d “n o t in th e sm a lle st p la c e, lik e th e d a e m o n ’’ ( ο ν κ \v τ ό χ ω e \ a \ ia r c o cts t o S a ιμ ό ν ο ιν ). T h u s o n e o f G o d ’s a ttr ib u te s is in fin ity , w h erea s the d is tin g u is h in g m ark o f th e d a e m o n is lim ita tio n in sp a ce. M a n as m icro co sm w o u ld th e n b e in c lu d e d in th e c o n c ep t o f th e d a e m o n ic , a n d p s y c h o lo g ic a lly th is w o u ld m e a n th a t th e ego, se p a r a ted a n d s p lit off from G o d , is lik e ly to b e c o m e d a e m o n ic as so o n as i t a c c e n tu a te s its in d e p e n d e n c e o f G o d b y its e g o c e n tr ic ity . T h e d iv in e d y n a m ism o f th e se lf, w h ic h is id e n tic a l w ith th e d y n a m ism o f th e cosm os, is th e n p la c ed a t th e service o f th e ego, an d th e la tte r is d a e m o n iz ed . T h is w o u ld a c c o u n t for th e m a g ic a lly e ffe c tiv e p e r so n a lity o f th o se h isto r ic a l figu res w h o m B u rck h a rd t c a lle d th e " great d e sp o ile r s.” E x e m p la s u n t o d io sa . 6 B e r th e lo t, A lc h . grecs, II, iv, 26. I E le n c h o s, X , 34, 4 (cf. L e g g e, P h ilo s o p h u m e n a , II, p . 178).

285

374

TH E NATURE AND ORIGIN OF TH E PHILO SOPHICAL TREE

In my book Psychology and A lchem y I devoted a special chapter1 to the projection of psychic contents (hallucinations, vi sions, etc.) and therefore need not dw ell here on the spontane ous production of the tree symbol am ong the alchemists. Suffice to say that the adept saw branches and twigs2 in the retort, where his tree grew and blossomed.8 H e was advised to contem plate its growth, that is, to reinforce it w ith active im agination. T h e vision was the thing to be sought (res quaerenda).4 T h e tree was “p rep ared ” in the same way as salt.5 A nd ju st as the tree grew in the water, so also it was putrefied in it, “b u rn t” or “cooled” w ith the w ater.6 It was called oak,7 vine,8 m yrtle.9 D jab ir ibn Hayyan says of the m yrtle: “ Know that the m yrtle is the leaf and the twig; it is a root yet no root. It is both a ro o t and a branch. As a root, it is unquestionably a ro o t if it be set over against the leaves and the fruits. It is separate from the tru n k and forms p art of the deep roots.” T h e m yrtle, he says, is “what M aria10 calls the golden rungs, what D em ocritus calls the green b ird . . . . I t has been so called because of its green colour and because it is like the m yrtle, in that it keeps its green colour for a 1 Pars. 342ft. 2 “ W h e n th e b od y is d issolved , th ere w ill so m e tim e s ap p ear tw o bran ch es, so m e tim es th ree, so m etim es m ore. . . .” ( T h e a tr . c h e m ., I, 1659, p p . i4 7 f.). 3 , . th a t it m ay grow w ith in th e glass lik e a tr ee ,” “it m ad e it grow up w ard in its glass w ith d isco lo u red flow ers” (R ip le y , O p e ra , p . 86). “T h e p h ilo so p h ic a l tree flo u rish ed w ith its b ra n ch es” (“ In tro itu s a p e r tu s,” M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , P- 694). 4 “S en ior, th e a u th o r o f L iliu m , says th a t th e sig h t o f it [th e vessel] is m ore to b e d esired th an th e scr ip tu r e ” (H o g h e la n d e , T h e a tr . c h e m ., I, 1659, p . 177). Cf. also P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , par. 360. 5 “T h e sa lt a n d th e tree can b e m a d e in an y m o ist a n d c o n v e n ie n t p la c e ” (“G loria m u n d i,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 216). 6 R ip le y , O p e ra , p p . 39, 46; cf. “ T r a cta tu s a u reu s de la p id e ,” M u s. h e rm ., p. 39. 7 R ip le y , O p e ra , p . 46. 8 V itis a rb o re a in R ip le y ’s Scrotvle (B r itish M u seu m , M S. S loan e 5025). " D o y o u n o t k n o w th a t a ll h o ly Scrip tu re is w r itte n in parables? For C h rist th e Son of G od fo llo w e d th is m e th o d , a n d said, I am th e tr u e v in e .” (A u r o ra c on su rgen s II, A r t. a u r if., I, p . 186.) V itis s a p ie n tu m (ib id ., p . 193, a n d “ H er m etis T r ism e g isti T r a c ta tu s a u r e u s,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV , 1659, p . 613). 8 D ja b ir ib n H ayyan , “ L e L ivre d u M ercu re o r ie n ta l, o c cid e n ta l, e t d u feu de la p ie r r e ,” in B e rth e lo t, M o y e n age, III, p p . 214L 10 M aria P rop h etissa.

375

lo n g tim e d e s p ite th e a lte r n a tio n s o f h e a t a n d c o ld .” 11 I t h as seven b r a n c h e s .12 G e r a r d D o r n says o f th e tre e : A fter n a tu re has p la n te d the ro o t of the m etallic tree in the m id st of h e r w om b, viz., th e stone w hich shall b rin g fo rth the m etals, the gem, the salt, th e alu m , th e v itrio l, the salty spring, sweet, cold, o r w arm , the tree of coral o r th e M arcasita,13 a n d has set its tru n k in the e a rth , this tru n k is d iv id ed in to different branches, whose su b stance is a liq u id , n o t a fte r th e m a n n e r of w ater, n o r of oil, n o r of clay,14 n o r of slim e, b u t is n o t to be th o u g h t of otherw ise th a n as the w ood b o rn of the e a rth , w hich is n o t e a rth a lth o u g h grow ing from it. T h e bran ch es sp read in such a way th a t the one is sep arated from the o th e r by a space of two or three clim ates a n d as m any regions: from G erm an y even as far as H u n g a ry a n d beyond. In this way the b ran ch es of d iffe re n t trees spread th ro u g h the w hole globe of the e arth , as in th e h u m a n body the veins spread th ro u g h the different lim bs, w hich are se p ara te d from one an o th er.

376

T h e f r u its o f th is tre e d r o p off, a n d th e tre e its e lf d ie s a n d v a n ishes in th e e a r th . “A fte rw a rd s , i n a c c o rd a n c e w ith n a tu r a l c o n d itio n s , a n o th e r n e w [tre e] is th e r e .” 13 I n th is te x t D o r n d ra w s a n im p re ss iv e p ic tu r e o f th e g ro w th , e x p a n s io n , d e a th , a n d r e b i r t h o f th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l tre e . Its b ra n c h e s a re v e in s r u n n i n g th r o u g h th e e a r th , a n d a lth o u g h th e y s p re a d to th e m o s t d is ta n t p o in ts o f th e e a r t h ’s s u rfa c e th e y a ll b e lo n g to th e sa m e im m e n s e tre e , w h ic h a p p a r e n tly re n e w s itself. T h e tr e e is o b v io u sly th o u g h t o f as a system of b lo o d ves sels. I t c o n sists o f a l i q u i d lik e b lo o d , a n d w h e n th is c o m e s o u t it c o a g u la te s in to th e f r u i t o f th e t r e e .16 S tra n g e ly e n o u g h , in 11 R e fe r r in g to th e v i r i d i l a s b e n e d i c t a o f L a tin a lch em y , h ere an a llu sio n to th e in c o r r u p tib ility o f th e fr u it o f th e tree. 1S " G alen sp eak s o f th e P h ilo s o p h ic a l tree, w h ic h h a s seven b r a n c h e s” {A r t. a u r if., I, p . 222). 13 “M arcasita = an im p e r fe c t m e ta llic su b s ta n c e ” (R u la n d , L e x i c o n , p . 217). In ch em istry , a c o lle c tiv e n a m e fo r v a r io u s p y r ites (L ip p n ta n n , E n t s t e h u n g u n d A u s b r e i t u n g d e r A l c h e m i e , in d ic es). L u t u n i is g y p su m or clay; m ix e d w ith h a ir, it w as u sed for se a lin g th e lid s o f vessels (L ip p m a n n , I, p . 663). 15 “D e g e n e a lo g ia m in e r a liu m ,” T h e a t r . c h e m . , I (1659), p . 574. 16 " T h e ir [th e fr u its ’] c o a g u la tio n takes p la c e in sta n ta n e o u s ly .” T h e fr u its are “se n t fo r th a t th e e x tr e m itie s o f th e locustae." L o c u s t a e are th e tip s o f th e b ra n ch es (R u la n d , p . 209: “ to p s or y o u n g sh o o ts o f tr ee s”). T h e form lu c u s t a in

287

377

ancient Persian tra d itio n the metals are connected w ith the blood of G ayom art: his blood, soaking into the earth, tu rn e d into the seven metals. D orn appends to his description of the tree a brief observa tion which I w ould n o t like to w ithhold from the reader since it affords an im p o rtan t insight into w hat is in its way the classic m ode of alchem ical thinking. H e says: T h is a n d suchlike things proceed from the true physics and from th e springs of the tru e philosophy, from w hich, by m ed itative con tem p latio n of the w ondrous works of God, the tru e know ledge of the suprem e a u th o r a n d of his powers daw ns u p o n the sp iritu a l eyes of the philosophers, even as to the fleshly eyes the lig h t is m ade visible. T o those eyes the h id d en is revealed. B u t th a t G reek Satan has im p lan te d in th e philosophic field of th e tru e wisdom the tares17 a n d th eir false seeds, nam ely A ristotle, A lbertus, A vicenna,18 R asis,19 a n d m en of th a t kidney, w ho are inim ical to the lig h t of God and the lig h t of n a tu re , an d have p erverted the w hole physical tru th from the tim e w hen they tu rn e d the nam e Sophia in to Philoso p h ia.20

378

D orn was a P latonist an d a fanatical o p p o n en t of A ristotle and, q u ite obviously, of the scientific em piricists as well. His at titu d e was essentially the same as th at of R o b ert F lu d d in respect of Jo h n K epler.21 Basically, it was the old controversy ab o u t universals, the opposition betw een realism and nom inalism , w hich in our scientific age has been decided in favour of a nom inalistic tendency. W hereas the scientific a ttitu d e seeks, on the basis of careful em piricism , to explain n a tu re in h er own term s, H erm etic philosophy had for its goal an explanation th a t in cluded the psyche in a total description of n atu re. T h e em piri cist tries, m ore or less successfully, to forget his archetypal exMS. seems to derive from lucus, ‘grove' (W alde, L ateinisches E tym ologisches W orterbu ch , I, p. 818). 17 In text, L o liu m tem u len tu m L. 1S Ibn Sina (980-1037), a physician and op p on en t o f alchem y. !9 abu-Bakr M uham m ad ibn-Zakarlya’ al-Raz! (d. 925), also nam ed Rasis or Rhazes, physician and alchem ist. K nown in the W est by his “Excerpta ex libro lum inis lu m in u m ” in Lacinius, P retiosa m argarita n o vella , pp. 167®. 20 T h eatr. chem ., I (1659), p. 574. 21 Pauli, “T h e Influence of A rchetypal Ideas on the Scientific T h eories of K epler,” in Jung and P auli, In terp re ta tio n of N a tu re a n d th e Psyche.

J>88

p la n a to ry prin cip les, th a t is, th e psychic prem ises th a t are a sine q u a n o n of th e cog n itiv e process, o r to repress th e m in the in t e r ests of “ scientific o b je ctiv ity .” T h e H e r m e tic p h ilo s o p h e r r e g a rd e d these psychic prem ises, th e archetypes, as in a lie n a b le c o m p o n e n ts of th e e m p iric a l w o rld -p ictu re. H e was n o t yet so d o m in a te d by th e o b je c t th a t h e c o u ld igno re the p a lp a b le pres ence of psychic prem ises in th e fo rm of e te rn a l ideas w hich he felt to be real. T h e e m p iric a l n o m in a list, o n th e o th e r h a n d , a lre a d y h a d th e m o d e r n a t ti t u d e tow ards th e psyche, nam ely, th a t it h a d to be e lim in a te d as s o m e th in g “s u b jectiv e,” a n d th a t its c o n te n ts w e re n o t h i n g b u t ideas f o r m u la te d a posteriori, m e re flatus vocis. H is h o p e was to b e ab le to p r o d u c e a p ic tu r e of th e w o rld th a t was e n tire ly in d e p e n d e n t of th e observer. T h i s h o p e has b e e n fulfilled o n ly in p a rt, as th e findings of m o d e rn physics show: th e o b serv er c a n n o t b e finally e lim in a te d , w hich m e an s th a t th e psychic prem ises r e m a in o perative. I n the case of D o r n w e can see ho w th e arch e ty p al tree, w h ich consisted of th e ram ifications of th e b ro n c h i, b lo o d ves sels, a n d veins of ore, was p ro je c te d u p o n th e em p iric a l w o rld a n d gave rise to a to talistic view w h ic h e m b ra c e d th e w hole of o rg an ic a n d in o rg a n ic n a t u r e a n d the “ s p ir it u a l” w o rld as well. T h e fan atical d efen c e of his s ta n d p o i n t shows th a t D o r n was g n aw ed by i n n e r d o u b t a n d was fig h tin g a lost b attle. N e it h e r h e n o r F lu d d c o u ld h o ld u p th e m a rc h of events, a n d today we see how the sp ok esm en of so-called o b je ctiv ity are d e f e n d in g th e m selves w ith sim ilar o u tb u rs ts of affect again st a psychology th a t d e m o n stra te s th e necessity o f psychic prem ises. 6.

c o r n ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

o f

th e

tre e

I n his treatise “ C o ngeries Paracelsicae ch em icae de tran sm u ta tio n e m e t a l l o r u m ” D o r n w r ite s :1 O n account of likeness alone, and not substance, the Philosophers compare their material to a golden tree with seven branches, think ing th a t it encloses in its seed the seven metals, and that these are hidden in it, for which reason they call it a living thing. Again, even as natu ra l trees bring fortli divers blossoms in their season, so 1 T h eatr. chem., I (1659), pp. 5)gff.

th e m ate ria l of the stone causes the m ost b e a u tifu l colours to a p p e a r2 w hen it puts fo rth its blossom s.3 Likewise they have said th at th e fru it of th eir tree strives u p to heaven, because o u t of th e p h ilo sophic earth there arises a certain substance, like to the branches of a loathsom e sponge.4 W hence they have p u t forw ard the o p in io n th at the p o in t ab o u t w hich the whole a rt tu rn s lies in the living things of n a tu re [m vegetabilibus naturae] an d n o t in the living things of m atte r; and also because th eir stone contains w ith in it soul, body, an d spirit, as do living things. From a likeness n o t alto g eth er rem ote they have called this m aterial v irg in ’s m ilk a n d blessed rose-coloured blood, alth o u g h th a t belongs only to th e pro p h ets an d sons of G od. F o r this reason the Sophists have supposed th a t the philosophic m atte r consists of anim al o r h u m an blood. 3Sl

D o rn th e n e n u m e ra te s th e su b sta n c e s w ith w h ic h “ friv o lo u s trifle rs ” o p e ra te , su c h as u r in e , m ilk , eggs, h a ir, a n d v a rio u s k in d s of salts a n d m eta ls. T h e s e “ S o p h ists” ta k e th e sy m b o lica l n a m e s c o n c re te ly a n d a tte m p t to m a k e th e m a g iste ry o u t o f th e m o st u n s u ita b le in g re d ie n ts . T h e y w e re o b v io u sly th e ch em ists o f th o se days, w h o , as a r e s u lt of th e ir c o n c re tis tic m is u n d e r s ta n d in g , w o rk e d w ith c o m m o n m a te ria ls , w h e re as th e p h ilo s o p h e rs called th e ir stone an im ate because, a t the final operations, by v irtu e of the pow er of this m ost noble fiery m ystery, a d a rk red liq u id , like blood, sweats o u t d ro p by d ro p from th eir m aterial a n d th eir vessel. A nd fo r this reason they have prophesied th a t in the last days a m ost p u re 5 m an, th ro u g h w hom the w orld will be freed, w ill come to e a rth an d w ill sweat bloody drops of a rosy o r red hue, w hereby the w orld w ill be redeem ed from its Fall. In like m anner, too, the blood of th eir stone w ill free the leprous m etals6 a n d also m en from th eir 2 An allusion to the m any colours o f the caudo pa vo n is (peacock’s tail), whose appearance heralds the attainm ent of the goal. 3 Cf. the aw akened dead in H ades, w h o grow like the flowers in spring. Berthelot, A lch . grecs, IV, x x , 9. 4 T h e terrestrial equivalent o f the sponge was said to be the puff-ball. Sponges could hear and were sentient. W hen to m up, they exu d ed a juice lik e blood. Cf. the mandrake, w hich shrieks w hen it is torn up. “W hen they are torn from their places, it is heard and there w ill be a great noise.” (Calid, “Liber secretorum ,” A rt. au rij., I, p. 343.) For the sponge, see M ysteriu m C oniurtctionisj p. 134 and n. 205. 5 P u tu s can also m ean ‘g e n u in e’ or ‘unadulterated.’ A rg en tu m p u tu m is u n alloyed silver. P u tu s instead of p u ru s is significant, see n ex t section. 6 Im pure m etals, oxides, and salts.

diseases .7 W h erefo re they have said, n o t w ith o u t good reason, th a t th e ir stone is a n im a te [a n im a le m ]. C o n cern in g this, M ercu riu s speaks as follow s to K in g C alid, “ T o know this m ystery is p e rm itte d only to the p ro p h ets of G o d ,’’ 8 a n d th a t is the reason why th e stone is called an im ate. F o r in th e b lo o d of this stone is h id d e n its soul. It is also com posed o f body, sp irit, a n d soul. F o r a like reason they have called it th e ir m icrocosm , because it co n tain s the sim ilitu d e of all things of this w o rld ,·a n d therefore again they say th a t it is a n i m ate, as P la to calls the m acrocosm an im ate. B u t now th e ig n o ra n t have come, w ho believe th a t the stone is th reefo ld a n d is h id d e n in th reefo ld k in d [genere], nam ely vegetable, an im al, a n d m in e ral, w hence it has com e to pass th a t they them selves have so ught for it in m in e ra ls .9 B u t this tea c h in g is fa r rem oved from th e o p in io n of the P hilosophers, w ho m a in ta in th a t th e ir stone is vegetable, an im al, a n d m in e ra l in one a n d th e sam e form . 382

T h i s r e m a r k a b le te x t e x p la in s th e tr e e as a m e ta p h o ric a l fo rm o f th e a rc a n e s u b s ta n c e , a liv in g t h in g t h a t co m es in to e x iste n c e a c c o r d in g to its o w n law s, a n d grow s, b lo sso m s, a n d b e a rs f r u i t lik e a p la n t. T h i s p l a n t is lik e n e d to th e sp o n g e , w h ic h g ro w s in th e d e p th s o f th e sea a n d seem s to h a v e a n affin ity w ith th e m a n d r a k e (n. 4 ). D o r n th e n m a k e s a d is tin c tio n b e tw e e n th e “ liv in g th in g s o f n a t u r e ” a n d th o se o f m a tte r . By th e lastn a m e d a re o b v io u s ly m e a n t c o n c re te , m a te r ia l o rg a n is m s . B u t it is n o t so c le a r w h a t th e f o r m e r a re m e a n t to b e . A sp o n g e th a t 7 H u m a n d iseases are th e e q u iv a le n t o f th e l e p r o s i t a s o f th e m e t a l s . T h e te x t h as l i b e r a b a t , b u t th e sen se r eq u ire s I i b e r a b i t j as th e p r o p h ec y is n o t y e t fu lfxlled. S T h e q u o ta tio n is n o t lite r a l. C a lid (“ L ib e r se c re to ru m ,” A r t . a u r if., I, p . 325) says: “ Y ou m u st k n o w , b r o th e r , th a t th is m a g iste ry o f o u r s c o n c e r n in g th e secret sto n e, a n d o u r h o n o u r e d office, is a g r e a t secret o f G od , w h ic h h e h a s h id d e n from h is p e o p le , an d h a s w ille d to r ev e a l to n o n e save th o se w h o h a v e fa ith fu lly d eserv ed w e ll as so n s a n d h a v e k n o w n h is g o o d n ess a n d g r ea tn ess.” D o r n in terp rets th e sp eak er, p e r h a p s r ig h tly , as H er m es (T r ism e g istu s), w h o la ter o n in th e te x t sp eak s o f “ m y o w n d isc ip le , M u sa .” M oses, w h o w as c o u n te d as an a lch em ist, w as id e n tifie d w ith M u sa io s, th e tea ch er o f O rp h e u s. 9 H e r e to o D o r n m ay b e r efe r r in g to C a lid , w h o says (ib id ., p . 342): " T a k e th is sto n e th a t is n o sto n e n o r o f th e n a tu r e o f sto n e. M oreo v er, it is a sto n e w h o se su b sta n c e is g e n e ra te d o n th e to p o f th e m o u n ta in s fin c a p it e m o ntiu rri], an d th e p h ilo s o p h e r ch ose to say ‘m o u n ta in s ’ in ste a d o f ‘liv in g th in g s ’ la n im a lia ]." (T h e te x t is c o rr u p t.) T h e sto n e is fo u n d in th e h e a d o f a sn ak e or a d ra g o n , or is th e “ h e a d -e le m e n t” itse lf, as in Z osim os. W o r ld -m o u n ta in , w o r ld -a x is, w o r ld tree, a n d h o 7>io m a x i m u s are sy n o n y m o u s. C f. H o lm b e r g , D e r B a u m d e s L e b e n s , p p . 20, 21, 25.

bleeds a n d a m a n d ra k e th a t shrieks w h en p u lle d u p are n e ith e r “ v egetabilia m a te ria e ” n o r are they fo u n d in n a tu re , a t least n o t in n a tu re as we k now it, th o u g h they m ay o ccu r in th a t m ore com prehensive, P lato n ic n a tu re as D o rn u n d e rs to o d it, th a t is, in a n a tu re th a t in clu d es psychic “ a n im a lia ,” i.e., m ythologem s a n d archetypes. Such are th e m a n d ra k e a n d sim ilar organism s. H ow concretely D o rn visualized th e m is a m o o t p o in t. A t any ra te th e “stone th a t is n o stone, n o r of th e n a tu re of sto n e ” (n. g) com es in to this category. 7- TH E

38b

R O S E -C O L O U R E D

BLOOD AND T H E

ROSE

T h e m ysterious rose-coloured b lo o d occurs in several o th e r au th o rs. I n K h u n ra th , fo r instance, th e “ lio n lu re d fo rth fro m th e S a tu rn in e m o u n ta in ” h a d rose-coloured b lo o d .1 T h is lion, signifying “ all a n d c o n q u e rin g all,” co rresp o n d s to th e πάν o r πάντα of Zosimos, i.e., to tality. K h u n ra th f u r th e r m e n tio n s (p. 276) the costly Catholick Rosy-Coloured Blood and A etheric W ater th at flows forth Azothically2 from the side of the innate Son of the G reat W orld when opened by the power of the Art. T h ro u g h the same alone, and by no other means, are Vegetable, Animal, and M ineral things, by the ablution of their im purities, raised to the highest N atural perfection, in accordance with N ature and by the Art.

384

I n th e “A q u a riu m s a p ie n tu m ” th e “son of th e g re a t w o rld ” (filius m acrocosm i, th e lapis) is co rre la te d w ith C h rist,3 w ho is th e filiu s m icrocosm i, a n d his b lo o d is th e qu in tessen ce, th e red tin c tu re . T h is is th e true and authentic duplex M ercurius or G iant4 of twofold sub stance. . . .5 God by nature, m an, hero, etc., who h a th the celestial 1 V on h y le a lisc h e n C haos, p . 93; cf. also p . 197. 2 F o r A zo th , see " T h e S p irit M ercu riu s,” su pra, par. 271. 3 M u s. h e rm ., p . 118: “C h rist is com p ared a n d a n ite d w ith th e e a rth ly sto n e . . . it is an o u ts ta n d in g ty p e an d life lik e im a g e o f th e in c a r n a tio n o f C h rist.” 4 P sa lm 1 8 : 6: "he, as a b rid egroom c o m in g o u t o f h is b rid e ch am b er, h a th re jo ic e d as a g ia n t to r u n th e w a y ” w as referred by th e C h u rch F a th ers to C h rist. 5 T h e te x t refers h e r e to M a tth . 26, o b v io u sly m e a n in g verses 26ff„ th e in s tit u tio n o f th e L ast S u p p er. [T h e p h rase “g ia n t o f tw o fo ld su b sta n c e ” (g e m in a e g ig a s su b sta n tia e ) seem s to h a v e b e e n first u sed by St. A m b rose, in lin e 19 o f h is

292

Spirit in him , w hich q u ickeneth all things . . . he is the sole and perfect H ealer of all im perfect bodies and m en, the true an d heav enly physician of the soul . . . the triu n e universal essence,8 which is called Jehovah .7 385

T h e s e p an eg y rics of th e alch em ists have o ften b e e n re g re tte d as ex am p les o f b a d taste o r rid ic u le d as e x u b e ra n t fan tasies— m ost u n fa irly , it seem s to m e. T h e y w ere serio u s p eo p le, th e a l chem ists, a n d th e y can be u n d e rs to o d o n ly w h en ta k e n seriously, h o w ev er h a r d th is m ay h it o u r ow n p reju d ices. I t was n e v e r th e ir in te n tio n to e x a lt th e ir sto n e in to a w o rld sav io u r, n o r d id they p u rp o se ly sm u g g le in to it a w h o le lo t of k n o w n a n d u n k n o w n m y th o lo g y any m o re th a n we d o in o u r d ream s. T h e y sim ply fo u n d th ese q u a litie s in th e ir id ea of a b o d y co m p o sed of th e fo u r e lem en ts a n d ca p a b le of u n itin g all opposites, a n d w ere ju s t as am azed a t th is d iscovery as an y o n e w o u ld b e w ho h a d a sin g u la rly im p ressiv e d re a m a n d th e n cam e across a n u n k n o w n m y th w h ich fitted it ex actly. N o w o n d er, th e re fo re , th a t th ey en d o w ed th e sto n e o r th e re d tin c tu re , w h ich they really b eliev ed co u ld b e p ro d u c e d , w ith all th e q u a litie s th ey h a d d isco v ered in th e ir id e a o f such a n o b je ct. T h is m akes it easier fo r us to u n d e r stan d a s ta te m e n t th a t is e n tire ly c h ara cteristic of th e alch em ical way of th in k in g . I t occurs o n th e sam e page as th e ab o v e q u o ta tio n fro m “A q u a r iu m s a p ie n tu m ’’ a n d ru n s : Even as, I say, this earthly and philosophic stone, together w ith its m aterial, has m any different names, indeed it is said alm ost a thousand, for w hich reason it is also called w onderful, even so can these and o th er afore-m entioned nam es and titles be ap p lied m uch more properly, and indeed in the highest degree, to A lm ighty G od and the Suprem e Good. C hristm iis h y m n b e g in n in g “In te n d e q u i reg is Is ra e l.” T h e re le v a n t stan za is tra n s la te d by J . M. N e a le , C o llected H y m n s , S eq u en ces a n d Carols, p . 104: ‘‘P r o ceeding fro m H is c h a m b e r f r e e ,/T h e ro y al h a ll o f c h a s tity ,/G ia n t o f tw o fo ld su b stan ce, s tr a ig h t/H is d e stin e d way H e ru n s e la te .”— A.S.B.G.] 0 T h e an o n y m o u s a u th o r o f “A q u a riu m s a p ie n tu m ” w as n o t a lto g e th e r c le a r a b o u t th e tr iu n e essence, fo r h e says it is “ of o n e, a d iv in e essence, th e n o f tw o, of G o d a n d m a n , th a t is, o f th re e p erso n s, o f fo u r, n am ely of th r e e p e rso n s a n d o ne d iv in e essence, as also o f five, o f th re e p e rso n s a n d tw o essences, n a m e ly o n e d iv in e a n d o n e h u m a n ” (p. jj2 ) . T h e Iiliiis m acro co sm i seem s to h a v e lo o sen ed u p th e d o g m a q u ite c o n sid e ra b ly . 7 “A q u a riu m s a p ie n tu m ,” p p . 11 if.

I t o b v io u sly n e v e r o c c u rre d to th e a u th o r , as w e w ith o u r p r e j u d ic e d view a re q u ic k to assum e, th a t h e h a d sim p ly tra n s fe rre d G o d ’s a ttr ib u te s to th e sto n e . 386 I t is e v id e n t fro m th is t h a t th e sto n e f o r th e a lc h e m ists was n o th in g less th a n a p r im o r d ia l re lig io u s e x p e rie n c e w h ic h , as g o o d C h ristia n s , th e y h a d to re c o n c ile w ith th e ir b eliefs. T h is a c c o u n ts fo r t h a t a m b ig u o u s id e n tity o r p a ra lle lis m b e tw e e n C h ris t as th e filius m ic ro c o sm i a n d th e lapis p h ilo s o p h o r u m as th e filius m acrocosm i, o r e v e n th e s u b s titu tio n o f th e o n e fo r th e o th e r. 387 T h e Iap is-C h rist p a ra lle l w as p re s u m a b ly th e b rid g e by w h ic h th e m y stiq u e o f th e R o se e n te r e d in to a lc h e m y . T h is is e v id e n t first of a ll fro m th e use of “ R o s a r iu m ” o r “ R o s a r iu s ” (ro se -g a rd e n er) as a b o o k title . T h e first R o s a r iu m (th e re a re sev eral), first p r in te d in 1 5 5 0 , is fo r th e g re a te r p a r t a s c rib e d to A rn a ld u s d e V illa n o v a . I t is a c o m p ila tio n w hose h is to ric a l c o m p o n e n ts h a v e n o t y e t b e e n s o rte d o u t. A r n a ld u s liv e d in th e sec o n d h a lf o f th e t h ir te e n th c e n tu ry . H e is also c re d ite d w ith th e R o s a r iu m c u m figuris_, w h e re th e rose is th e sy m b o l o f r e la tio n s h ip b e tw e e n k in g a n d q u e e n . T h e r e a d e r w ill fin d a d e ta ile d a c c o u n t of th is in m y “ P sychology o f th e T r a n s f e re n c e ,” w h ic h re p ro d u c e s th e R o s a r iu m illu s tra tio n s . 388 T h e ro se has th e sam e m e a n in g in M e c h th ild of M a g d e b u rg . T h e L o r d sp o k e to h e r, saying: “ L o o k a t m y h e a rt, a n d se e!” A m o st b e a u tif u l ro se w ith five p e ta ls c o v e re d his w h o le b re a st, a n d th e L o r d said : “ P ra ise m e in m y five senses, w h ic h a re in d i c a te d b y th is ro s e .” A s is e x p la in e d la te r, th e five senses a re th e v e h ic les of C h r is t’s lo v e fo r m a n (e.g., “ th r o u g h th e sense of s m e ll h e has alw ays a c e rta in lo v in g a ffe c tio n d ire c te d to w a rd s m an” ).8 389 I n th e s p ir itu a l sense th e rose, lik e th e h ortu s a r o m a tu m (g a rd e n o f spices ) , 9 hortu s conclusus,10 a n d rosa m ystica , 11 is a n a lle g o ry of M a ry , b u t i n th e w o rld ly sense i t is th e b e lo v e d , th e ro se o f th e p o e ts, th e “ fe d e li d ’a m o r e ” of th a t tim e . A n d ju s t as M a ry is a lle g o riz e d in St. B e r n a rd 12 as th e m e d i u m terrae 8 L tb e r gratiae sp iritu a lis (Venice, 1578), pp. 107!. 8 A lan o f Lille, E lu cid a tio in Cant. C ant. 6 (M iene, P .L., vol. 210, col. 10 Ibid., col. 82. 11 L itany of Loreto. 12 Serm o II in Festo P en tecostes (M igne, P .L ., vol. 183, col. 327).

394

o k ).

39 °

(cen tre o f th e e a rth ), in R a b a n u s M a u r u s 13 as th e “c ity ,” in G o d frey, A b b o t o f A d m o n t, as th e “ fo rtress” 14 a n d th e “ h o u se o f d i v in e w isd o m ,” 15 a n d in A la n o f L ille as th e acies ca stro ru m (arm y w ith b a n n e rs ),16 so th e rose has th e significance o f a m andala, as is clear fro m th e h eav e n ly rose in D a n te ’s Paradiso. L ik e its e q u iv a le n t, th e I n d ia n lo tu s, th e rose is d ecid ed ly fe m in in e . In M e c h th ild of M a g d e b u rg it m u s t b e u n d e rs to o d as a p ro je c tio n of h e r o w n fe m in in e E ros u p o n C h ris t.17 I t seem s as th o u g h th e ro se-co lo u red b lo o d of th e alch em ical r e d e e m e r18 was d e riv e d fro m a rose m ysticism th a t p e n e tra te d in to alchem y, a n d th a t, in th e fo rm of th e re d tin c tu re , it ex pressed th e h e a lin g o r w h o le-m a k in g effect of a c e rta in k in d of Eros. T h e stra n g e co n cre tism of th is sym bol is e x p la in e d by th e to ta l ab sen ce o f psychological concepts. D o rn was th e re fo re b o u n d to u n d e rs ta n d th e ro se-co lo u red b lo o d as a “v eg etab ile n a tu ra e ,” in c o n tra st to o rd in a ry b lo o d , w h ich was a “v eg etab ile m a te ria e .” As h e says, th e so u l o f th e sto n e is in its b lo o d . Since th e sto n e re p re se n ts th e h o m o to tu s , 19 it is o n ly lo g ical fo r D o rn to speak of th e “ p u tissim u s h o m o ” w h e n discu ssin g th e arca n e su b stan ce a n d its b lo o d y sw eat, fo r th a t is w h a t it is all a b o u t. H e is th e a rc a n u m , a n d th e sto n e a n d its p a ra lle l o r p re fig u ra tio n is C h ris t in th e g a rd e n o f G e th s e m a n e .20 T h is “ m o st p u r e ” o r “m ost tr u e ” m a n m u s t b e n o o th e r th a n w h a t h e is, ju s t as “ a r g e n tu m p u tu m ” is u n a llo y e d silver; h e m u s t b e e n tire ly m a n , a m a n w ho know s a n d possesses e v e ry th in g h u m a n a n d is n o t a d u l te ra te d by any in flu en ce o r a d m ix tu re fro m w ith o u t. T h is m a n w ill a p p e a r o n e a rth o n ly “ in th e last days.” H e c a n n o t b e C h rist, fo r C h ris t by his b lo o d has alre a d y re d e e m e d th e w o rld fro m th e co n seq u en c es of th e F a ll.21 C h ris t m ay b e th e “ p u rissi13 A l l e g o r i a e i n S a c r a i n S c r i p t u r a m ( M ig n e , P . L . , v o l. 112, c o l. 8 9 7 ). 14 H o m i l i a I I I i n D o m i n i c a m I A d v e n t u s ( M ig n e , P . L . , v o l. 174, c o l. 3 2 ).

Li H o m i l i a L X l I I i n V i g i l i a m A s s u m p t i o n i s ( ib id ., c o l. 9 3 7 ). I fi E l u c i d a t i o ( M ig n e , P . L . , v o l. 2 1 0 , c o l. 94 ). I" C f. t h e c h a p t e r o n t h e k iss o f t h e L o r d , w h e r e t h e r e is a s im ila r p r o j e c t io n ( L i b e r g r a t i a e , p . g o ). I S T h e b lo o d , t h a t is, o f t h e l io n , w h ic h is e q u a t e d w it h t h e li o n o f t h e t r ib e o f J u d a h ( = C h r is t ). 19 C f. P s y c h o l o g y a n d A l c h e m y , “ T h e L a p is -C h r is t P a r a lle l,” a n d A i o n , c h . 5. 20 L u k e 22 : 4 4 : “ . . . a n d h is s w e a t w a s as i t w e r e g r e a t d r o p s o f b lo o d f a l li n g d o w n t o t h e g r o u n d .” 21 [ T h e t e x t c o n t in u e s : “ a n d o n e h a s n e v e r h e a r d t h a t h is b lo o d w a s r o s e c o lo u r e d .” T h e r e is , h o w e v e r , a n in t e r e s t i n g r e f e r e n c e t o “ c r u o r e e j u s r o s e o

mus hom o,” b u t he is n o t “putissim us.” T h o u g h he is m an, he is also God, n o t p u re silver b u t gold as well, and therefore no t “putus.” O n no account is it a question here of a fu tu re C hrist and salvator m icrocosmi, b u t ra th e r of the alchem ical servator cosmi (preserver of the cosmos), representing th e still u n co n scious idea o f the w hole an d com plete m an, who shall b rin g about w hat the sacrificial death of C hrist has obviously left unfinished, nam ely the deliverance of the w orld from evil. Like C hrist he w ill sweat a redeem ing blood, but, as a “vegetabile n a tu ra e,” it is “rose-coloured” ; n o t n a tu ra l o r ordinary blood, b u t symbolic blood, a psychic substance, the m anifestation of a certain kind of Eros w hich unifies the individual as well as the m u ltitu d e in the sign of the rose and makes them whole, and is therefore a panacea an d an alexipharm ic. 391 T h e second half of the sixteenth century saw the b eginning of the R osicrucian m ovem ent, whose m otto— p er crucem ad rosam— was anticipated by the alchemists. G oethe caught the m ood of this Eros very well in his poem “D ie G eheim nisse.” Such movements, as also the em ergence of the idea of C hristian charity w ith its em otional overtones,22 are always indicative of a corresponding social defect which they serve to com pensate. In the perspective of history, we can see clearly enough w hat this defect was in the ancient w orld; and in the M iddle Ages as well, w ith its cruel and unreliab le laws an d feudal conditions, hum an rights an d h u m an dignity were in a sorry plight. O ne w ould th in k th a t in these circum stances C hristian love w ould be very m uch to the point. B ut w hat if it is b lin d and w ith o u t insight? Solicitude for the spiritual welfare of th e errin g sheep can ex plain even a T orquem ada. Love alone is useless if it does n o t also have understanding. A nd for the p ro p er use of u n d erstan d ing a w ider consciousness is needed, and a hig h er stan d p o in t to enlarge one’s horizon. T h a t is why C hristianity as a historical force has n o t rested content w ith adm onishing m an to love his gustando vivim us D eo ” (by tasting his rosy blood we live to God) in a very wellknow n hym n, b egin n in g “Ad coenam agni providi,” form erly attributed to St. Ambrose, but though now denied him , know n to date back to the 6th or early yth century. For centuries past it has been the liturgical hym n sung at Vespers in the Easter season in the R om an church. Cf. N eale, Collected H y m n s, p. 194. — A.S.B.G.] 22 C f. I C o r.

: 4 ff.

n e ig h b o u r, b u t has also p e rfo rm ed a h ig h er c u ltu ra l task w hich it is im possible to overestim ate. It has ed u cated m an to a h ig h e r consciousness an d responsibility. C ertainly love is needed for that, b u t a love com bined w ith in sig h t an d u n d erstan d in g . T h e ir fu n ctio n is to illu m in ate regions th a t are still d ark and to add them to consciousness— regions in the outside w orld as well as those w ith in , in the in te rio r w orld of th e psyche. T h e b lin d e r love is, the m ore it is in stinctual, an d the m ore it is atte n d ed by d estructive consequences, for it is a dynam ism th a t needs form an d d irection. T h e re fo re a com pensatory Logos has been jo in ed to it as a lig h t th a t shines in the darkness. A m an who is u n c o n scious of him self acts in a b lin d , instinctive way and is in ad d i tio n fooled by all th e illusions th a t arise w hen he sees everything th a t he is n o t conscious of in him self com ing to m eet him from outside as projections u p o n his neig h b o u r. 8 . T H E A L C H E M IC A L M IN D

392

T h e alchem ists seem to have h ad an in k lin g of this state of m ind; at any ra te it got m ixed u p w ith th e ir opus. A lready in the fo u rte e n th cen tu ry they h ad discovered th a t w hat they were searching for re m in d e d them n o t only of all m a n n e r of m ysteri ous substances, rem edies, an d poisons, b u t of various living things, plants an d anim als, and, finally, of some strange m y th o logical figure, a dw arf, earth-spirit o r m etal-spirit, o r even of som ething like a G od-m an. T h u s in the first h alf of the fo u r teen th century, P etru s Bonus of F errara w rote th a t in a certain le tte r Rhazes h ad said: W ith this red stone the philosophers exalted themselves above all others and foretold the future. They prophesied not only in general but also in particular. T hus they knew that the day of judgm ent and the end of the world must come, and the resurrection of the dead, when each soul will be united with its former body and will no more be separated from it for ever. T hen each glorified body will be changed, possess incorruptibility and brightness, and an almost un believable subtlety, and it will penetrate all solids,1 because its nature will then be of the nature of spirit as well as body. . . . It is 1 A llu sion to “T a b u la sm aragdina” : “ T h is is the strong strength o f all strength, for it w ill overcom e every su b tle th in g, and p en etra te every solid th in g ’’ (De alchem ia, p. 363).

a n a tu re w hich, w hen it is m oistened a n d left for m any nig h ts in th a t condition, is like a dead m an, an d th en th a t th in g needs the fire, u n til the sp irit of th a t body is ex tracted a n d left to stan d th ro u g h the nights, a n d falls to d u st like a m an in his grave. A nd w hen all this has hap p en ed , G od w ill give it back its soul an d its body, and take away its im perfection; th en w ill th a t th in g be stren g th en ed an d im proved, as a fter the resurrection a m an becomes stronger an d younger th a n he was in this w orld. . . . T h u s the philosophers have beheld the L ast J u d g m e n t in this art, nam ely the g erm in atio n a n d b irth of this stone, w hich is m iraculous ra th e r th an ratio n al; for on th a t day the soul to be beatified unites w ith its form er body th ro u g h the m ed ia tio n of the spirit, to e tern al glory. . . . So also the o ld philosophers of this a rt knew a n d m a in ta in e d th a t a virgin m ust conceive a n d b rin g forth, because in th e ir a rt the stone conceives of itself, becomes p reg n an t, a n d brings itself forth. . . . A nd because they beheld the m iraculous conception, preg nancy, b irth , an d n o u rish m en t of this stone, they concluded th a t a w om an who is a virgin w ill conceive w ith o u t a m an, becom e preg n a n t a n d give b irth in m iraculous wise, a n d rem a in a virgin as be fore. . . . As A lp h id iu s says, this stone is cast o u t in to the streets, is lifted u p in to the clouds, dwells in th e air, feeds in th e stream s and rests on the tops of the m o u n tain s. Its m o th er is a virgin, its fath er knows n ot w om an. . . . T h e philosophers also knew th a t G od m ust becom e m an on the last day of this a rt, w hereon is the fulfilm ent of the work; begetter a n d begotten becom e alto g eth er one; old m an an d boy, fa th e r an d son, becom e alto g eth er one; thus all old things are m ade new .2 G od him self has en tru ste d this m agistery to his philosophers a n d prophets, for whose souls he has p rep a re d a dw ell ing place in his p arad ise.3 393

A s th is te x t m ak es v e ry p la in , P e tru s B o n u s d isc o v e re d th a t th e a lc h e m ic a l o p u s a n tic ip a te d , fe a tu re fo r fe a tu re , th e sacred m y th o f th e g e n e ra tio n , b ir th , a n d r e s u r re c tio n o f th e R e d e e m e r, fo r h e was q u ite c o n v in c e d th a t th e a n c ie n t a u th o r itie s o f th e a rt, H e rm e s T ris m e g is tu s , M oses, P la to , a n d o th e rs k n e w th e w h o le process lo n g ago a n d c o n s e q u e n tly h a d p ro p h e tic a lly a n tic ip a te d th e c o m in g sa lv a tio n in C h rist. H e was n o t in an y 2 O f A lp h id iu s n o th in g is k n o w n . H e is a n o ft-cite d a u th o r, w h o m ay h ave liv e d in th e l a t h - i g t h cen ts. (Cf. K op p , D ie A lc h e m ie l II, p p . 339, 363). 3 “ P ret. m arg. n o v .,” B ib lio th e c a c h e m ic a , II, p . 30. A lleg e d d a te o f c o m p o sitio n is 1330. J a n u s L a cin iu s, w h o first p r in te d th e treatise in 1546, says (fol. 7or) th a t B o n u s “ was liv in g in th e city o f P o la in Istria a b o u t th e year 1338,” a n d (fol. 46V) th a t h e w as a con tem p orary (c o a eta n e u s) o f R a y m u n d L u lly (1 2 3 5 ^ 1 3 1 5 ). 298

w ay conscious th a t th e s itu a tio n m ig h t b e th e rev erse a n d th a t th e alch em ists w ere d ra w in g o n ecclesiastical tr a d itio n a n d s u b s e q u e n tly a p p ro x im a te d th e ir o p e ra tio n s to th e sacred leg en d . T h e d eg ree o f his u n co n scio u sn ess is m o re th a n m e re ly asto n ish in g : it is in stru c tiv e . T h is e x tra o rd in a ry b lin d n ess show s us th a t th e re m u st hav e b e e n a n e q u a lly p o w erfu l m o tiv e b e h in d it. B o n u s was n o t th e o n ly o n e to m ak e th is d e c la ra tio n , th o u g h h e was th e first; in th e n e x t th re e h u n d r e d years it b ecam e in creas in g ly w id esp read a n d cau sed offence. B o n u s was a n e ru d ite scholastic a n d , q u ite a p a r t fro m his re lig io u s beliefs, was in te l le c tu a lly w ell in a p o sitio n to reco g n ize h is erro r. B u t w h at im p e lle d h im to this view was th e fact th a t h e was in d e e d d ra w in g o n a so u rce m o re a n c ie n t th a n ecclesiastical tra d itio n : w h en c o n te m p la tin g th e c h em ica l changes th a t to o k place d u r in g th e opus, h is m in d b ecam e suffused w ith arch e ty p al, m y th o lo g ical p a ra lle ls a n d in te rp re ta tio n s , ju s t as h a d h a p p e n e d to th e o ld p a g a n alchem ists, a n d as still h a p p e n s to d a y w h en th e im a g in a tio n is given free p lay in th e o b se rv a tio n a n d in v e stig a tio n o f th e p ro d u c ts o f th e u n co n scio u s. U n d e r these c o n d itio n s form s of th o u g h t em erg e in w h ich o n e can afte rw ard s discover p arallels w ith m y th o lo g ic al m o tifs, in c lu d in g C h ris tia n ones; p arallels a n d s im ila ritie s w h ich p e rh a p s o n e w o u ld n e v e r have su sp e cted a t first sight. So it was w ith th e o ld ad ep ts w ho, n o t k n o w in g a n y th in g a b o u t th e n a tu r e o f ch em ical substances, re e le d fro m o n e p e rp le x ity to th e n e x t: w illy -n illy th e y h a d to s u b m it to th e o v e rw h e lm in g p o w e r of th e n u m in o u s ideas th a t cro w d ed in to th e em p ty d ark n ess of th e ir m in d s. F ro m these d e p th s a lig h t g ra d u a lly d a w n e d u p o n th e m as to th e n a tu r e o f th e process a n d its goal. B ecause th e y w ere ig n o ra n t o f th e laws of m a tte r, its b e h a v io u r d id n o t d o a n y th in g to c o n tra d ic t th e ir arch e ty p al c o n c e p tio n o f it. O ccasio n ally th e y m a d e c h em ica l discoveries in passing, as was o n ly to b e ex p ec ted ; b u t w h a t th e y re a lly discov ered , a n d w h a t was a n endless so u rce of fa scin a tio n to th e m , was th e sy m b o lism of th e in d iv id u a tio n process. 394 P e tru s B o n u s c o u ld n o t b u t reco g n ize th a t th e alch em ical sym bols w h ich h a d b e e n d isco v ered in a n e n tire ly d iffe re n t w ay ag re e d in a re m a rk a b le m a n n e r w ith th o se o f th e C h ris tia n story of salv atio n . I n th e ir efforts to fa th o m th e secrets o f m a tte r th e alch em ists h a d u n e x p e c te d ly b lu n d e re d in to th e u n co n scio u s, a n d th u s, w ith o u t a t first b e in g aw are o f it, th e y b ecam e th e

395

discoverers of a process which underlies C hristian symbolism am ong others. I t d id n o t take m ore than a couple of centuries for the m ore reflective am ong them to realize w hat the quest for the stone was actually about. H esitantly at first, h in t by h in t, and then w ith unm istakable clarity, the stone revealed to them its identity w ith m an himself, w ith a supraordinate factor that could actually be found w ithin him , w ith D o rn ’s “q u id ,” which today can be identified w ithout difficulty w ith the self, as I have shown elsew here.4 In th eir various ways, the alchemists struggled to come to term s w ith the Iapis-Christ parallel. T h ey did n o t find a solu tion, n o r was this possible so long as th eir conceptual language was n o t freed from projection into m atter and did not become psychological. O nly in the following centuries, w ith the grow th of n a tu ra l science, was the projection w ithdraw n from m atter an d entirely abolished together w ith the psyche. T h is develop m ent of consciousness has still n o t reached its end. N obody, it is true, any longer endows m atter w ith m ythological properties. T h is form of projection has become obsolete. Projection is now confined to personal and social relationships, to political U to pias and suchlike. N atu re has n o th in g m ore to fear in the shape of m ythological interpretations, b u t the realm of the spirit cer tainly has, m ore particularly that realm which com m only goes by the nam e of “m etaphysics.” T h e re mythologems claim ing to u tte r the absolute tru th still tum ble over one another, and any one who dresses up his m ythologem in solem n enough words believes th at he has m ade a valid statem ent, and even makes a v irtu e of n o t possessing the modesty becom ing to o u r lim ited h u m an intelligence, which knows that it does n o t know. Such people even think th at G od him self is m enaced w henever any one dares to in te rp re t th eir archetypal projections for what they are, nam ely, h u m an statem ents, which no reasonable person supposes signify nothing, seeing th a t even the m ost preposterous statem ents of the alchemists have th e ir m eaning, though n o t the one which they themselves, w ith b u t few exceptions, sought to give their symbols, b u t one which only the fu tu re could form u late. W henever we have to do w ith m ythologems it is advisable to assume th a t they m ean m ore th an w hat they appear to say. J u st as dream s do n o t conceal som ething already know n, o r ex4

A io n 1 pp. 164L

press it u n d e r a disguise, b u t try r a th e r to fo rm u la te a n as yet un co n scio u s fact as clearly as possible, so m y th s a n d alch em ical sym bols are n o t e u h e m e ris tic alleg o ries th a t h id e artificial se crets. O n th e co n tra ry , th e y seek to tra n sla te n a tu ra l secrets in to the la n g u ag e o f consciousness a n d to d eclare th e tr u th th a t is th e co m m o n p ro p e rty of m a n k in d . By b ec o m in g conscious, th e in d i v id u a l is th re a te n e d m o re a n d m o re w ith iso latio n , w h ich is nev erth eless th e sin e q u a n o n of conscious d iffe re n tia tio n . T h e g re a te r th is th re a t, th e m o re it is c o m p en sa ted b y th e p ro d u c tio n of co llectiv e an d a rc h e ty p a l sym bols w h ich are co m m o n to all m en . 396 T h is fact is ex p ressed in a g e n e ra l w ay by th e relig io n s, w h ere th e re la tio n of th e in d iv id u a l to G o d o r th e gods ensures th a t th e v ital lin k w ith th e re g u la tin g im ages a n d in s tin c tu a l pow ers o f th e u n co n scio u s is n o t b ro k e n . N a tu ra lly th is is tr u e only so lo n g as th e relig io u s ideas hav e n o t lo st th e ir n u m in o sity , i.e., th e ir th r illin g po w er. O n ce th is loss has o ccu rred , it can n e v e r b e re p la c e d by a n y th in g ra tio n a l. C o m p e n sa tin g p rim o r d ia l im ages th e n a p p e a r in th e fo rm o f m y th o lo g ic al ideas su ch as alch em y p ro d u c e d in a b u n d a n c e a n d as m ay also be fo u n d in o u r o w n d ream s. I n b o th cases, consciousness reacts to these re v e latio n s in th e sam e ch a ra c te ristic w ay: th e alch em ist re d u c e d his sym bols to th e c h em ica l su b stan ces h e w o rk e d w ith , w h ile th e m o d e rn m a n red u ces th e m to p e rso n a l ex p erien ces, as F re u d also does in h is in te r p r e ta tio n of d ream s. B o th of th e m act as th o u g h th e y knew1 to w h a t k n o w n q u a n titie s th e m e a n in g of th e ir sym bols c o u ld b e re d u c e d . A n d b o th , in a sense, a re rig h t: fo r ju s t as th e alch em ist was c a u g h t in his o w n alch em ical d re a m la n g u ag e, so m o d e rn m a n , c a u g h t in th e toils of eg ohood, uses his p erso n al psychological p ro b le m s as a fagon de parler. In b o th cases th e re p re s e n ta tio n a l m a te ria l is d eriv e d fro m a lre a d y ex ist in g conscious co n ten ts. T h e re s u lt o f this re d u c tio n , h ow ever, is n o t very satisfacto ry — so little , in fact, th a t F re u d saw h im self o b lig ed to go b ack as fa r as po ssib le in to th e past. I n so d o in g h e finally h it u p o n a n u n c o m m o n ly n u m in o u s idea, th e arch e ty p e of incest. H e th u s fo u n d so m e th in g th a t to som e e x te n t ex pressed th e re a l m e a n in g a n d p u rp o se o f sym bol p ro d u c tio n , w h ich is to b r in g a b o u t a n aw areness of those p rim o rd ia l im ages th a t b e lo n g to all m e n a n d can th e re fo re le ad th e in d iv id u a l o u t of his iso la tio n . F r e u d ’s d o g m a tic rig id ity is e x p la in e d by th e 3° i

fact th a t he succum bed to the n u m in o u s effect of the p rim o rd ial im age he had discovered. If we assume w ith h im th a t th e incest m o tif is the source of all m odern m a n ’s psychological problem s as well as of alchem ical symbolism, this gets us now here as re gards the m eaning of the symbols. O n the contrary, we have lan d ed ourselves in a b lin d alley, for we shall only be able to say th a t all symbolism, present an d future, derives from the p rim al incest. T h a t is w hat F reu d actually thought, for he once said to me: “I only w onder w hat neurotics w ill do in th e fu tu re w hen it is generally know n w hat th e ir symbols m ean .” 397 L uckily for us, symbols m ean very m uch m ore th an can be know n at first glance. T h e ir m eaning resides in the fact th at they com pensate an u n a d ap te d a ttitu d e of consciousness, an a tti tu d e th a t does n o t fulfil its purpose, an d th a t they w ould enable it to do this if they were u n d erstood.3 B u t it becomes im possi ble to in te rp re t th e ir m eaning if they are red u ced to som ething else. T h a t is why some of the later alchem ists, p articu larly in the sixteenth century, a b h o rre d all vulgar substances an d replaced them by “sym bolic” ones w hich allow ed th e n a tu re of the arche type to glim m er through. T h is does n o t m ean th a t the ad ep t ceased to w ork in the laboratory, only th a t he k ep t an eye o n the sym bolic aspect of his transm utations. T h is corresponds exactly to the situ atio n in the m odern psychology of the unconscious: w hile personal problem s are n o t overlooked (the p a tie n t h im self takes very good care of that!), the analyst keeps an eye on th e ir symbolic aspects, for h ealin g comes only from w h at leads the p a tie n t beyond him self a n d beyond his en tan g lem en t in the ego. 9. 398

VARIOUS ASPECTS OF T H E TREE

W h at the tree m eant to the alchem ists c an n o t be ascertained e ith er from a single in te rp re ta tio n o r from a single text. In o r d er to discover this, a great m any sources m ust be com pared. W e shall therefore tu rn to fu rth e r statem ents a b o u t the tree. Pic tures of the tree are often given in the m edieval texts. Some of them are rep ro d u ced in Psychology and A lch em y. Sometimes the prototype is th e tree of paradise, h u n g n o t w ith apples b u t 6 As archetypal sym bols are n u m in ou s, they have an effect even th o u g h they cannot b e grasped in tellectu ally.

w ith su n -an d -m o o n fru it, lik e th e trees in th e trea tise of M ich ael M a ie r in th e M u s a e u m h e r m e tic u m ,1 o r else it is a so rt of C h ristm a s tree , a d o rn e d w ith th e seven p la n ets a n d s u r ro u n d e d b y alleg o ries of th e seven phases of th e alch em ical process. S ta n d in g b e n e a th th e tre e are n o t A d am a n d Eve b u t H e rm e s T rism e g is tu s as a n o ld m a n a n d th e a d e p t as a y o u th . B e h in d H e rm e s T ris m e g is tu s is K in g Sol s ittin g o n a lio n acco m p a n ie d b y a fire-sp ittin g d rag o n , a n d b e h in d th e a d e p t is th e m o o n goddess D ia n a s ittin g o n a w h ale a c c o m p an ied b y a n eagle.2 T h e tre e is g e n e ra lly in le af a n d liv in g , b u t so m etim es it is q u ite a b s tra c t a n d expressly stan d s fo r th e phases of th e process.3 399 I n th e R ip le y Scro w lei th e s e rp e n t of p arad ise dw ells in th e to p of th e tre e in th e sh ap e o f M elu sin a — “ d e s in it in [anguem ] m u lie r fo rm o sa s u p e rn e .” 5 T h is is c o m b in e d w ith a m o tif th a t is n o t in th e le a st B ib lica l b u t is p rim itiv e a n d sh am an istic: a m a n , p re s u m a b ly th e a d e p t, is halfw ay u p th e tre e a n d m eets M elu sin a , o r L ilith , co m in g d o w n fro m above. T h e c lim b in g of th e m ag ical tre e is th e h eav en ly jo u rn e y o f th e sh am an , d u r in g w h ich h e e n c o u n te rs h is h eav e n ly spouse. I n m e d iev al C h ris tia n ity th e sh am an istic a n im a was tra n s fo rm e d in to Lilith,® w ho ac c o rd in g to tr a d itio n was th e s e rp e n t o f p arad ise a n d A d a m ’s first w ife, w ith w h o m h e b e g o t a h o rd e of d em o n s. I n th is p ic tu re p rim itiv e tra d itio n s cross w ith J u d a e o -C h ris tia n ones. I hav e 1 P . 702. C f. “S y m b o lu m S a tu r n i,” in M y liu s, P h il, r e /., p . 313: “ N o t far fro m th e r e I w a s c o n d u c te d to a m e a d o w , in w h ic h w as p la n te d a rem a r k a b le g a rd en w ith v a r io u s k in d s o f trees, m o st e x c e lle n t to b e h o ld . A n d a m o n g th e se trees h e sh o w e d m e se v e n th a t w ere d istin g u ish e d by n am e; a m o n g th e se I p e r ce iv e d tw o o u ts ta n d in g o n es, h ig h e r th a n th e o th e r s, o f w h ic h o n e b o r e a fr u it lik e to th e b r ig h te st a n d m o st r e fu lg e n t su n , a n d its le a v e s w e r e lik e g o ld . B u t th e o th e r b r o u g h t fo r th th e w h ite s t fr u its, m o r e b r ig h tly s h in in g th a n lilie s , a n d its lea v es w e re lik e q u ic k silv e r . T h e y w e re n a m e d by N e p t u n e th e tree o f th e su n a n d th e tree o f th e m o o n .” 2 P s y c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , F ig . 188. 3 Ib id ., F igs. 122, 221. 4 Ib id ., F ig. 257. [C f. a lso su p r a , F ig . B5.] 5 “ A b e a u tifu l w o m a n in h e r u p p e r p a rt, sh e passes in to a [sn a k e].’’ (“A n g u is" is m y a d a p ta tio n fo r “ p isc is.”) A la te H e lle n is t ic sta tu e o f Isis sh o w s h e r as a b e a u tifu l g o d d ess w e a r in g th e m u r a l cro w n a n d ca rry in g a torch , b u t w h o se lo w e r h a lf c h a n g e s in t o a u ra eu s. 6 T h e classic r e p r e se n ta tio n is to b e fo u n d in th e Scrotule o f S ir G eo rg e R ip le y , C a n o n o f B r id lin g to n , p r o b a b ly th e m o st im p o r ta n t E n g lish a lc h e m ist (1 415-90).

never come across the clim bing o£ the tree in the pictures done by my patients, and have m et it only as a dream m otif. T h e m o tif of ascent and descent occurs in m odern dream s chiefly in con n ection w ith a m o u n ta in or a b uilding , or som etim es a m achine (lift, aeroplane, etc.). 4 °° X J i e m otif of the leafless or dead tree is n o t com m on in al chemy, b u t is fo u n d in Judaeo-C hristian tra d itio n as the tree of paradise th a t d ied after the Fall. A n old English legend T reports w hat Seth saw in the G arden of Eden. In the m idst of paradise there rose a shin in g fo u n tain , from w hich fo u r stream s flowed, w atering the w hole w orld. O ver the fo u n ta in stood a great tree w ith m any branches and twigs, b u t it looked like an old tree, for it had no bark and n o leaves. Seth knew th a t this was the tree of whose fru it his parents had eaten, for w hich reason it now stood bare. Looking m ore closely, Seth saw th a t a n ak ed snake w ith o u t a skin8 had coiled itself ro u n d the tree. It was the serpent by w hom Eve had been persuaded to eat of the fo rb id d en fruit. W h en Seth took a second look a t paradise he saw th a t the tree had u n dergone a great change. I t was now covered w ith b ark an d leaves, and in its crow n lay a little new -born babe w rapped in sw addling clothes, th a t w ailed because of A dam ’s sin. T h is was C hrist, the second A dam . H e is fo u n d in the top of the tree th a t grows o u t of A dam ’s body in rep resen tatio n s of C h rist’s genealogy. 4 °1 A n o th er alchem ical m otif is the tru n c a ted tree. In the fro n tispiece to th e F rench ed itio n (1600) of Francesco C o lo n n a’s H ypn erotom achia P oliphili (Venice, 1499), it form s the co u n te rp a rt to the lion w ith cut-off paws,9 w hich appears as an al chem ical m o tif in R eu sn er’s Pandora (1588). Blaise de Vigen ere (1523-^1569), w ho was influenced by th e C abala, speaks of the “caudex arboris m o rtis” (tru n k of th e tree of death) th at sent o u t a re d death-ray.10 “T re e of d e ath ” is synonym ous w ith “coffin.” T h e strange recipe, “T a k e the tree a n d place in it a H orstm ann, Sam m lung altenglischer L egenden, I, pp. 124ft. S T h e tree’s lack of bark an d the snake’s lack of skin indicate th e id en tity be tw een them . * Psychology and A lchem y, Fig. 4. T h e m otif of m u tilatio n occurs in “A llegoriae super lib ru m T u rb a e ,” A rt. aurif., I, pp. 140, 151. T hese am p u tatio n s have n o th ing to do w ith a so-called castration com plex, b u t refer to th e m o tif of dis m em berm ent. 10 “D e igne et sale," T h ea tr. c h e m ., \ I (1661), p. 119.

m a n of g re a t ag e,” 11 s h o u ld p ro b a b ly be u n d e rs to o d in th is sense. T h is m o tif is a very a n c ie n t o n e, a n d occurs in th e a n c ie n t E g y p tia n ta le of B ata, p reserv ed in a p ap y ru s of th e n in e te e n th dynasty. T h e r e th e h e ro p la ced his so u l o n th e to p m o st blossom o f a n acacia-tree. W h e n th e tre e was c u t d o w n w ith trea ch ero u s in te n t, his so u l was fo u n d ag ain in th e fo rm of a seed. W ith th is th e d e a d B ata was re s to re d to life. W h e n h e was k ille d a second tim e in th e fo rm of a b u ll, tw o persea trees g rew o u t of th e b lo o d . B u t w h en these w ere c u t d o w n , a c h ip of th e w ood f e r ti lized th e q u e e n , w ho b o re a son: h e was th e re b o rn B ata, w ho th e n b ecam e P h a ra o h , a d iv in e bein g . I t is e v id e n t th a t th e tree h e re is a n in s tr u m e n t of tra n s fo rm a tio n . 12 V ig e n e re ’s “ c a u d e x ” is s im ila r to th e tru n c a te d tre e in P o lip h ilo . T h is im ag e p r o b a b ly goes back to C assio d o ru s, w ho allegorizes C h rist as a “ tree c u t d o w n in his p assio n .” 13 402 M ore fre q u e n tly th e tre e ap p ea rs b e a rin g flowers a n d fru it. T h e A ra b ia n alch em ist A b u Ί Q asim ( 1 3 th cen t.) describes its fo u r k in d s of blossom s as red , m id w ay b e tw e e n w h ite an d black , black, a n d m id w ay b e tw e e n w h ite a n d y ello w . 14 T h e fo u r co l o u rs re fe r to th e f o u r ele m e n ts th a t a re c o m b in e d in th e opus. T h e q u a te rn ity as a sym bol of w holeness m ean s th a t th e goal of th e o p u s is th e p ro d u c tio n of a n all-e m b ra c in g u n ity . T h e m o tif o f th e d o u b le q u a te rn ity , th e o g d o ad , is associated in sh am an ism w ith th e w o rld -tree : th e cosm ic tre e w ith e ig h t b ra n c h e s was p la n te d s im u lta n e o u sly w ith th e c re a tio n o f th e first sh am an . T h e e ig h t b ra n c h e s c o rre sp o n d to th e e ig h t g re a t gods.1B 4°3 T h e T u r b a has m u c h to say a b o u t th e fru it-b e a rin g tr e e .16 Its fru its are of a special k in d . T h e “ V isio A risle i” speaks of “ th is m o st p recio u s tree, of w hose f r u it h e w h o eats sh all n e v e r h u n g e r .” 17 T h e p a ra lle l to th is in th e T u r b a ru n s : “ I say th a t th a t o ld m a n does n o t cease to e a t o f th e fru its of th a t tre e . . . 1 1 H ogh elan d e (T h e a t r . chem ., I, 1659, p. 145), referring to T u r b a , Sermo L V III (ed. R uska, p. 161): “T ak e that w h ite tree and b u ild arou n d it a round dark house covered w ith dew, and place in it a m an of great age, a hun d red years o ld ,” etc. T h e old m an is Saturn = lead as prim a m ateria. 1 2 FIinders Petrie, E g yp tia n Tales, 2nd series, X V IIIth to X IX th dynasty, pp. 36ft. 13 A parallel to the p in e tree o f A ttis. 14 K i t a b al-’ilm al-m uk ta sa b, ed. H olm yard, p. 23. 15 E liade, Sham anism , pp. 70-187. 13 Pp. 127, 147, 162. 1I C odex Q. 584 (B erlin), fol. 2 iv (R uska, T u r b a , p. 324).

u n til th a t old m an becomes a y o u th .” 18 T h ese fru its are here eq u ated w ith the bread of life in Jo h n 6 : 35, b u t they go back beyond th a t to th e E thiopic Book of Enoch (second cen tu ry B .C .) , w here it is said th a t the fruits of the tree in the W estern L and w ill be the food of the elect.19 T h is is a clear h in t of death and renew al. I t is n o t always the fru it of the tree, b u t of the g ranum fr u m e n ti, the grain of w heat, from w hich the food of im m ortality is prepared, as in A urora consurgens I: “ For from the fruits of this grain is m ade the food of life, w hich com eth dow n from heaven.” 20 M anna, H ost, an d panacea form here an u nfathom able m ix tu re. T h e same idea of a m iraculous sp iritu al food is m en tioned in the A risleus vision. T h e re it is said th at H arforetus (H arpokrates), a “disciple of Pythagoras” an d the “a u th o r of n o u rish m e n t,” came to the h elp of A risleus and his com panions, evidently w ith the fruits of the tree th a t are m en tioned in R u sk a’s e d itio n of B erlin C odex Q. 584.21 In the Book of Enoch the fruits of the tree of w isdom are lik en ed to grapes, and this is of interest inasm uch as in the M iddle Ages the philosophical tree was som etim es called a vine,22 w ith reference to J o h n 15 : 1, “I am the tru e vin e.” T h e fru its an d seeds of the tree w ere also called sun an d m oon,23 to w hich the two trees of paradise corresponded.24 T h e sun-and-m oon fru its presum ably go back to D euteronom y 33 : 13!. (D V ): “ [Blessed] of th e L ord be his lan d . . . [for] the fruits b ro u g h t fo rth by the sun an d by the m oon . . .25 a n d [for] the fruits of the everlasting hills.” 18 S erm o L V III, R u sk a , p. 161. 10 C h arles, A p o c r y p h a a n d P s e u d e p ig r a p h a j II, p p . 204b F rom th e fr u its o f th e su n -a n d -m o o n tree is p r e p a r ed “ th e im m o r ta l fr u it, w h ic h h as lif e a n d b lo o d .” " T h e b lo o d causes a ll u n fr u itfu l trees to b ea r fr u it o f th e sa m e n a tu r e as th e a p p le ” (M yliu s, P h il, re f., p . 314). 20 A u r o r a C o n su rg en s (ed. v o n F ranz), p . 143. 21 T u r b a p . 324. C f. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p ar. 449 a n d n . 2. 22 A s in R ip le y ’s S c ro w le : “v itis a rb o rea .” 23 M aier, S y m b . a u r. m en s., p . 269, a lso th e “S e c re tu m ” o f G reveru s ( T h e a tr . c h e m ., I l l , 1659, p . 700) a n d th e “S u m m a riu m p h ilo s o p h ic u m ” o f F la m e l (M u s . h e r m ., p . 175). Cf. P ord age, S o p h ia , p . 10: “ H e r e I sa w th e fr u its a n d h erb s o f p a r a d ise , w h e r e o f m y e te r n a l m a n sh o u ld th e n c e fo r w a r d ea t, a n d liv e .” 24 T h e s e trees a lso o c cu r in th e R o m a n c e o f A le x a n d e r as th e “m o st h o ly trees o f th e su n a n d m o o n , w h ic h w ill d ecla re th e fu tu r e to y o u ” (H ilk a , D e r a ltfr a n zo s isc h e P ro s a -A le x a n d e r -R o m a n , p . 204). 25 V u lg a te : "de p o m is fr u c tu u m so lis ac lu n a e .” T h e a lch em ists n a tu r a lly took th is v ersio n as a u th o r ita tiv e . T h e o r ig in a l te x t has, as in AV: “ . . . T h e p r e cio u s fr u its b r o u g h t fo r th by th e su n , a n d th e p r e cio u s th in g s p u t fo r th by th e m o o n .” 306

L a u re n tiu s V e n tu ra 26 says: “ Sweet of sm ell is this apple, rich in co lo u r this little a p p le,” an d pseudo-A ristotle says in his “T ractatus ad A le x an d ru m M ag n u m ” :27 “ G ath er the fruits, for the fru it of this tree has led us in to the darkness an d th ro u g h the darkness.” T h is am biguous advice evidently alludes to a know l edge w hich was n o t on th e best of term s w ith th e p rev ailin g world-view. 4°4 B enedictus F igulus calls the fru it “th e golden apple of the H esperides, to be p lu c k ’t from the blest philosophic tre e ,” 28 the tree re p re se n tin g the opus an d th e fru it its results, i.e., the gold of w hich it is said: “O u r gold is n o t th e com m on gold.” 29 A special lig h t is th ro w n on the m eanin g of the fru it by a saying in “ G loria m u n d i” : “T a k e the fire, o r quicklim e, of w hich the philosophers speak, w hich grows on trees, for in th a t [fire] G od him self bu rn s w ith divine love.” 30 G od him self dwells in th e fiery glow of the sun an d appears as th e fru it of the philosophical tree an d thus as the p ro d u c t of the opus, whose course is sym bol ized by the grow th of the tree. T h is rem ark ab le saying loses its strangeness if we re m e m b er th a t the goal of the opus was to de liver th e anim a m u n d i, the w orld-creating sp irit of G od, from th e chains of Physis. H e re this idea has activated th e archetype of the tree-b irth , w hich is know n to us chiefly from the E gyptian an d M ith raic spheres of cu ltu re. A conception p rev alen t in sham anism is th a t the ru le r of th e w orld lives in th e to p of the w orld-tree,31 an d the C hristian re p resen tatio n of the R edeem er a t the top of his genealogical tree m ig h t be taken as a parallel. In F igure 27, th e w om an’s head rising “like th e pistil o f a flower” m ig h t be com pared w ith the M ithras relief from O sterb u rk en (G erm any).32 2Q T h e a tr . c h em ., I I (1659), p . 241. (“D u lce p o m u m est o d o ru m , flo rid u s h ie p o m u lu s .”) 27 Ib id ., V (1660), p . 790. {“C o llig e fru c tu s q u ia fru c tu s a rb o ris s e d u x it nos in e t p e r o b s c u ru m .”) 28 T h e title o f th is b o o k ru n s in p a r t: P a ra d isu s a u re o lu s h e r m e tic u s . . . in cu iu s . . . o ffe rtu r in s tr u c tio , q u o m o d o a u reo la H e s p e r id u m p o m a , a b arbore b en ed ic ta p h ilo so p h ic a s in t d e c e rp e n d a , etc. 29 Senior, D e ch em ia , p . 92. 30 M u s. h e rm ., p. 246. 31 E liad e, S h a m a n ism , p p . 70L 3 2 C u m o n t, T e x te s e t M o n u m e n ts fig u res re la tifs a u x m y ste re s d e M ith r a , II , p. 350, a n d E isler, W e lte n m a n te l u n d H im m e ls z e lt, II, p . g ig .

405

Som etim es the tree is small and young, som ething like the “grani tritici arb u scu la” (little trees of w heat grains),38 som e times large an d old, taking the form of an oak34 or the w orldtree, in so fa r as it bears the sun an d m oon as its fruits. 1 0 . THE HABITAT OF THE TREE

T h e philosophical tree usually grows alone and, according to A b u ’l Q asim , “ on the sea” in the W estern L and, w hich presum ably m eans on an island. T h e secret m oon-plant of the adepts is “like a tree p la n te d in the sea.” 1 In a parable in M ylius2 the sunand-m oon tree stands on an island in the sea and grows o u t of the w onderful w ater th a t is extracted by the pow er of the m ag n e t from the rays of the sun an d m oon. K h u n ra th says: “ From this little salty fo u n tain grows also the tree of the sun an d m oon, the re d a n d w hite coral tree of o u r sea.” 8 Salt an d sea-water signify in K h u n ra th am ong o th e r things th e m atern al Sophia from whose breasts the filii Sapientiae, th e philosophers, d rin k . A b u ’l Q asim m ig h t well have been acq u ain ted w ith P ersian tra ditions (his surnam e al-Iraqi also brings h im geographically n e arer to Persia), an d m ore particu larly w ith the legend of th e tree in the B undahish th a t grows in the sea nam ed V ourukasha, or of the tree of life th a t grows in the fo u n ta in of A rdvI Sura A n a h ita .4 407 T h e tree (or w onderful plant) also has its h a b ita t on the m ountains. Since th e im agery of the B ook of Enoch was often taken as a m odel, it should be m en tio n ed th a t th ere the tree in the W estern L a n d stood on a m o u n ta in .0 In the “ Practica M ariae Prophetissae” 6 the w onderful p la n t is described as

406

“Instructio de arbore solari,” Theatr. chetn., VI (1661), p. 168. Bernardus Trevisanus, Theatr. chem., I (1659), p. 706. 1 "Allegoriae super Iibrum Turbae,” A rt. aurif., I, p. 141. Evidently a reference to the tree of the Hesperides on an island, where also the fount of ambrosia and the dragon are found. Cf. the coral tree (ibid., p. 143) and Psychology and A lchem y, par. 449, n. 6. In the L ivre d ’H eures du D ue de Berry, Paradise is shown as a round island in the sea. 2 Phil, re}., p. 313. 3 H yl. Chaos, p. 270. 4 Windischmann, Zoroastrische Studien, pp. 90, 171. 5 Perhaps in remembrance of the shrines of the Semitic Astarte on mountains. Cf. Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, II, pp. 204!. 6 A rt. aurif., I, p. 321.

33 84

“grow ing on hills.” T h e A rabic treatise of O stanes in th e “ K itab el F c ^ u l” 7 says: “I t is a tree th a t grows on th e tops of m o u n tains.” T h e re la tio n of tree to m o u n ta in is n o t accidental, b u t is d u e to the o riginal an d w idespread id en tity betw een them : b o th are used by the sham an for the purpose of his heavenly jo u rn e y .8 M o u n tain an d tree are symbols of the personality an d of the self, as I have show n elsew here: C hrist, for instance, is sym bolized by the m o u n ta in 9 as well as by the tree.10 O ften the tree stands in a garden, as an obvious re m in d e r of Genesis. T h u s the trees of th e seven planets grow in the “ p rivate g ard en ” of the blessed isles.11 In N icolas Flam el (i3 3 o ? -? i4 i8 ) th e “m ost highly praised tre e ” grows in the garden of the p hilosophers.12 4°8 As we have seen, the tree has a special connection w ith w ater, salt, a n d sea-water, an d thus w ith the aqua perm anens, th e tru e arcan u m of the adepts. T h is as we know is M ercurius, w ho is n o t to be confused w ith H g, the m ercurius crudus sive v u l garis.^ M ercurius is th e tree of the m etals.14 H e is the p rim a m a te ria ,15 or else its source.16 T h e god H erm es ( = M ercurius) “w atered his tree w ith th a t w ater, a n d w ith his glass m ade the flowers grow h ig h .” 17 I cite this passage because it expresses th e su b tle alchem ical idea th a t th e artifex an d the arcan u m are one an d the same. T h e w ater th a t makes the tree grow b u t also con sumes it18 is M ercurius, w ho is called “ d u p le x ” because he B erth elot, M o y e n age, III, p. 117. 8 EIiade, S h am a nism , p p . 266L 8 E p ip h an iu s, A n co ra tu s1 40; St. A m brose, D e in te rp e lla tio n e J ob et D a v id , I, iv, 17 (M igne, P.L., vol. 14, col. 818): “A m ou n ta in sm all and great.” 10 St. Gregory th e Great, M ora lia in Job, X IX , 1 (M igne, P.L., vol. 76, col. g7): “A fru itfu l tree to be cu ltivated in ou r hearts.” 11 "Sym posium Satu rn i,” in M ylius, Phil, re/., p. 313. Cf. the hym n for St. Paul o f C on stan tin op le in T h e o d o re th e Studite: “O m ost blessed on e, from the cradle thou did st flourish lik e a com ely p la n t in the ascetic garden; th ou gavest forth a p leasant odour, bow ed dow n w ith th e finest ap p les o f the H oly S p irit” (Pitra, A n a lecta sacra, I, p. 337). 12 M us. h e r m ., p. 177. 13 Cf. " T h e Spirit M ercurius,” supra, par. 255. 14 F la m el, M us. h erm ., p . 177, also p . 175. 15 " T h e Sp irit M ercurius,” supra, pars. 282ff. I* A b u ’l Q asim , K it a b al-’il m al-m uktasab, ed. H olm yard , p . 23. 17 R ip ley, “D uod ecim p o rta ru m ,” T h e a tr. ch em., II (1659), p . 113, and O pera om nia, p. 86. i s T h e tree o f H erm es is b u rn t to ashes w ith th e “h u m id ita s m a x im e perm anens,” as R ip ley says (ibid., p. 39). Cf. p. 46: “T h a t w ater has fire w ith in it .” 7

unites the opposites in him self, bein g b o th a m etal an d a liq u id . H ence he is called b o th w ater an d fire. As the sap of the tree he is therefore also fiery (cf. Fig. 15), th a t is to say th e tree is of a w atery a n d a fiery n a tu re . In G nosticism we e n co u n ter the “great tre e ” of Sim on M agus, w hich consists of “supracelestial fire.” “ From it all flesh is fed.” 19 I t is a tree like th e one th a t appeared to N ebuchadnezzar in a dream . Its branches an d leaves are consum ed, b u t “ the fru it, w hen it is ready form ed a n d has received its shape, is b ro u g h t in to a b arn a n d n o t cast in to the fire.” 20 T h is im age of the “supracelestial fire” accords on the one h a n d w ith the m uch earlier “ ever-living fire” of H eraclitus, an d on the o th er w ith the m uch later in te rp re ta tio n of M ercuriu s as fire an d as the spiritus vegetativus th a t pervades th e w hole of n a tu re , b o th an im a tin g an d destructive. T h e fru it th a t is “n o t cast in to the fire” is n atu rally the m an w ho has stood the test, th e “ p n e u m atic ” m an of the Gnostics. O ne of th e synonyms for th e lapis, w hich likewise signifies th e in n er, in teg rated m an, is “ fru m en tu m n o stru m ” (our grain).21 4°9 T h e tree is often rep resen ted as m etallic,22 usually golden.23 Its connection w ith the seven m etals im plies a co n n ectio n w ith th e seven planets, so th a t th e tree becom es th e w orld-tree, whose shin in g fruits are the stars. M ichael M aier a ttrib u te s the w oody parts to M ercurius, the (fourfold) flowers to Saturn, J u p iter, V enus, an d M ars, a n d the fru its to Sol an d L u n a .24 T h e tree w ith seven branches ( = seven planets) is m e n tio n e d in A urora consurgens II 25 a n d identified w ith the L u n atica or Berissa,20 “whose ro o t is th e m etallic earth, its tru n k re d tinged 19 H ip p olytu s, E lencliosj VI, 9, 8ff. (Legge, II, p. 5). 20 Ibid. Cf. the Indian p arallel in Coomaraswamy, “T h e Inverted T r e e,” p. 126: “T h e tree is a fiery p illa r as seen from below , a solar p illa r as seen from above, and a p n eu m atic p illa r throughout; it is a tree o f lig h t.” T h e reference to the m o tif o f the p illa r is significant. 21 “G loria m u n d i,” M u s. h erm ., p. 240. 22 M ercurius is nam ed “arbor m eta llo ru m .” For an in terp retation o f th is sym bol see D orn, “C ongeries Paracelsicae,” T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p. 508. 2 3 A rb o r aurea in “Scriptum A lb erti,” ib id ., II (1659), p. 456; also A b u ’l Q asim , ed. H olm yard, p. 54, an d "C onsilium co n iu g ii,” A rs ch em ica, p. 211. 24 Sym b. aur. m ens., p. 269, w ith reference to Greverus. 2 5 A r t. auirif., I, p . 222. 2 5 T h is p lan t derives u ltim a tely from th e H om eric μώλυ (see M y steriu m C oniunctio n is, p . 133 and n. 200). Cf. R ah n er, “D ie seelen h eilen d e B lu m e,” EranosJahrbuch X II (1945), 117ft

w ith a c ertain blackness; its leaves are like th e leaves of M ar joram , an d are th irty in n u m b e r according to the age of the m oon in its w axing an d w aning; its flower is yellow .” I t is clear from this descrip tio n th a t the tree symbolizes th e w hole opus. A ccordingly D o rn says:27 “L e t th erefo re the tree [of th e planets o r m etals] be p la n te d a n d its ro o t be ascribed to S atu rn , a n d let th a t inconstant M ercurius an d V enus, arising in the tru n k an d branches, offer to M ars28 th e leaves an d fru it-b earin g flowers.” T h e re la tio n to the w orld-tree is also a p p a re n t w h en D o rn says th a t “n a tu re has p la n te d th e ro o t of the [m etallic] tree in the m idst of h e r w om b.” 29

I I . THE

IN V E R T E D T R E E

T h e tree is freq u en tly called th e “in v erted tre e ” (arbor inversa).1 L a u re n tiu s V e n tu ra (16th cent.) says: “ T h e roots of its ores are in the a ir an d the sum m its in the earth. A n d w hen they are to rn from th e ir places, a te rrib le sound is h eard an d th ere follows a great fear.” 2 V e n tu ra is obviously th in k in g of th e m an drake, w hich, w hen tied to th e tail of a black dog, shrieks w hen it is to rn o u t of the earth. T h e “ G lo ria m u n d i” likew ise m en tions th a t th e philosophers had said th a t “ th e ro o t of its m inerals is in th e a ir an d its head in the e a rth .” 3 Sir G eorge R ipley says th a t the tree has its roots in the air and, elsew here, th a t it is ro o te d in the “glorified e a rth ,” in the earth of paradise or in th e fu tu re w orld. 4 11 Sim ilarly, V igenere states th a t a “ R ab b i, the son of Josephus C arn ito lu s,” h ad said: “T h e fo u n d a tio n of every low er stru c tu re is affixed above an d its su m m it is h ere below , like an in v erted 41°

27 “D e te n e b ris c o n tra n a tu r a m ,” T h e a tr . c h em ., I (1659), p . 470. (“ P la n te tu r ita q n e a rb o r ex eis [p la n e tis s. m e tallis], c u iu s ra d ix a d s c r ib a tu r S a tu rn o , p e r q u a m v a riu s ille M e rc u riu s ac V en u s tr u n c u m e t ra m o s ascen d en tes, fo lia floresque fr u c tu m fe re n te s M a r ti p r a e b e n t.”) 2S T h a t is, to A ries, w h o se r u le r is M ars; h e n c e to th e first sp rin g zo d io n . 29 “D e g en e a lo g ia m in e ra liu m ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), P- 5741 P re s u m a b ly D a n te m e an s th is in P u rg a to rio , X X II, ig iff. 2 “ R a d ic e s s u a ru m m in c ra r u m s u n t in a e re e t su m m ita te s in te rra . E t q u a n d o e v e llu n tu r a suis locis, a u d it u r so n u s te rrib ilis e t s e q u itu r tim o r m a g n u s .” (“ D e ra tio n e con ficien d i la p id is ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., II, 1659, p . 226.) 3 M u s . h e rm ., p p . 240, 270.

tree.” 4 V igenere h ad some know ledge of the C abala and is here com paring the philosophical tree w ith th e tree of the Sefiroth, w hich is actually a m ystical w orld-tree. B u t fo r h im this tree also signifies m an. H e substantiates the singular idea th a t m an is im plan ted in paradise by the roots of his h a ir w ith a reference to Song of Songs 7 : 5 (D V ): “T h y head is like C arm el, an d the hairs of thy head as the p u rp le of the king b o u n d in th e ch an nels” (. . . comae capitis tu i sicut purp u ra R egis vin cta 5 canalibus). T h e “canales” are little tubes, perhaps some k in d of head o rn am en t.6 K n o rr von R osenroth is of th e o p in io n th a t th e “great tre e ” refers to T ife re th , the b rid eg ro o m of M alch u th .7 T h e u p p e r Sefira B inah is nam ed the “ro o t of th e tree,” 8 an d in B inah is rooted the tree of life. Because this stood in th e m id dle of the garden, it was called the linea m edia (m iddle line). T h ro u g h this m iddle line, which was as it w ere the tru n k of the Sefiroth system, it b ro u g h t life dow n to earth from B in ah .9 4 1¾ T h e idea th a t m an is an inv erted tree seems to have been c u rre n t in the M iddle Ages. T h e h u m an ist A nd rea A lciati (d. 1550) says in his E m blem ata cum com m en ta riis: “I t pleased th e Physicists to see m an as a tree standing upside dow n, fo r w hat in th e one is the root, tru n k , an d leaves, in th e o th e r is the head an d the rest of the body w ith the arm s an d feet.” 10 T h e lin k w ith In d ia n conceptions is provided by P lato .11 K rishna says in th e B hagavadgita (ch. 15): “I am the H im alaya am ong m o u n tains a n d th e ashvattha am ong trees.” T h e ashvattha (Ficus reli* "R abbi Josephi C arnitoli filius . . . in q u it: fu n d am en tu m om n is structurae inferioris supra est affixum et eius cu lm en h ie infra est sicut arbor inversa.” ("De ign e et sale," T h e a tr. ch em ,, VI, 1661, p. 39.) It is also said in the P ro d ro m u s R h o d o sta u ro ticu s (fol. V t) th at the ancients called m an an inverted tree. B T h e text has, erroneously, “iu n cta ” for " vincta.” e M ore accurate translation, as in RSV: “your flow ing locks are like pu rp le; a k in g is h eld captive in the tresses.” 7 C abbala d en u d a ta , I, p. 166. 8 Ibid., p . 77. 9 Ibid., p. 629. 10 P. 888: “Inversam arborem stantem vid eri h o m in em p lacet Physicis, q u od en im rad ix ib i, truncus e t frondes, h ie cap u t est et corpus reliq u u m cum brachiis et p ed ib u s.” 11 Cf. C hw olsohn, D ie Ssabier u n d d e r Ssabism us, II, p. 373. T tm a e u s goA: ". . . seein g th at w e are n o t an earthly b u t a h eaven ly p la n t.” V ettiu s V alens, A n th o lo g ia ru m IX , p. 330, 23. O rphic fragm ent, Kern, N o . 228a: "B ut the sou l in m an is rooted in th e aeth er.”

giosa) p o u rs d o w n fro m ab o v e th e d rin k o f im m o rta lity , so m a.12 T h e B h ag av a d g ita c o n tin u e s: T h e re is a fig tree In ancient story, T h e gian t A shvattha, T h e everlasting, R ooted in heaven, Its branches earthw ard; Each of its leaves Is a song of the Vedas, A nd he who knows it Knows all the Vedas. Downtvard and upw ard Its branches bending Are fed by the gunas, T h e buds it puts forth Are the things of the senses, R oots it has also R eaching dow nw ard In to this w orld, T h e roots of m a n ’s action.13 4*3

T h e alch em ical illu s tra tio n s sh o w in g th e o p u s as a tre e a n d its phases as th e leaves14 are v ery re m in is c e n t of th e I n d ia n co n c e p tio n o f d e liv e ra n c e th r o u g h th e V eda, i.e., th ro u g h k n o w l edge. I n H in d u lite r a tu r e th e tre e grow s fro m ab o v e d o w n w ards, w h ereas in alch em y (at least a c c o rd in g to th e p ic tu res) it grow s fro m b elo w u p w ard s. I n th e illu s tra tio n s to th e P retiosa m argarita' n o v e lla of 1546,15 it looks very lik e a n asp arag u s p la n t. F ig u re 27 in m y p ic tu re series c o n ta in s th e sam e m o tif, a n d in d e e d th e u p th r u s tin g stalks of asp arag u s are a g ra p h ic r e p re s e n ta tio n of th e w ay p rev io u sly u n co n scio u s c o n te n ts p u sh in to consciousness. I n E ast a n d W e st alik e, th e tre e sym bolizes 1 2 C hhandogya U p an ish ad , V III, 5, 3 (SBE, I, p. 131). Shatapatha-B rahm ana (SBE, X LIV , p. 317): “T h e N yagrodha w ith cups— for w h en th e gods were p erform ing sacrifice, they tilted over those Soma cups, and tu rned dow nw ards they took root, w h en ce the N yagrodhas, w hen turned dow nw ards (nyak) take root (roha)." T h e a sh vatth a is th e seat of the gods (H y m n s of th e A th a rv a -V e d a , V , 4; SBE, X L II, p. 4). Cf. Coom arasw am y, “T h e Inverted T r e e ,” p p . 122L 12 T h e Song of G o d (trans. P rabham ananda an d Isherw ood), pp. 146L 14 Psych ology a n d A lc h e m y , Figs. 122 and 221. 1^ Fol. **vfif.

4*4

a living process as w ell as a process of e n lig h te n m en t, w hich, though it may be grasped by th e intellect, should n o t be con fused w ith it. T h e tree as g u ard ian of the treasure appears in the alchem i cal fairytale of “T h e S pirit in the B o ttle.” As it contains the treasure w hich appears in its fru it, th e tree is a symbol of the chrysopoea (goldrtiaking) or ars aurifera in general, in accord ance w ith the p rinciple laid dow n by “H ercu les” :16 “ T h is magistery arises in the b eg in n in g from one root, w hich afterw ards expands in to several substances and th e n re tu rn s to the o n e.” 17 R ipley likens the artifex to N oah cu ltiv atin g the v in e,18 in D jab ir th e tree is th e “mystic m y rtle,” 19 an d in H erm es the “vine of the wise.” 20 H oghelande says: “B u t the fruits go fo rth from th e m ost perfect tree in early spring a n d flower a t th e b e g in n in g of the en d .” 21 I t is clear from this th a t the life of the tree represents the opus, w hich as we know coincides w ith the seasons.22 T h e fact th a t the fruits ap p ear in th e spring a n d the flowers in the a u tu m n may be connected w ith the m o tif of re versal (arbor inversa!) an d the opus contra naturam . T h e “Allegoriae sapientum supra lib ru m T u r b a e ” give the follow ing recipe: “A gain, p la n t this tree on the stone, th a t it fear n o t the buffetings of the w inds; th a t the birds of heaven m ay com e an d m u ltip ly on its branches, for thence com eth w isdom .” 23 H ere 16 T h e Byzantine emperor Heraclius (610-641). 17 Morienus, "De transmutatione m etallorum ,” A rt. aurif., II, pp. 2gf. “Hoc

autem magisterium ex una primum radice procedit, quae postm odum in plures res expenditur et iterum ad unam revertitur.” 18 Opera omnia, p. 46. 10 Berthelot, M oyen dge, III, pp. 214L 20 Cited in Hoghelande, Theatr. chem., I (1659), p. 147. T h e “vintage of Hermes” (vindem ia H erm etis) goes back to an Ostanes quotation in Zosimos (Berthelot, Alch. grecs, III, vi, 5). 21 Loc. cit. “Quidem fructus exeunt a perfectissima arbore primo vere et in exitus initio florent.” Hoghelande is referring to the Turbaj Sermo LVIII, where Balgus is asked: “W hy have you ceased to speak of the tree, of which he who eats its fruit shall never hunger?” 22 T he opus begins in the spring, when the conditions are most favourable (cf. “Paracelsus as a Spiritual Phenomenon," supra, pars, igoff.) and the “element of the stone is most abundant” (Ventura, T heatr. chem ., II, 1659, p. 253). The relation of the opus to the zodiac is shown in Psychology and A lchem y, Fig. 92. 23 T heatr. chem., V (1660), p. 61. “Item planta hanc arborem super lapidem, ne ventorum cursus timeat, ut volatilia coeli veniant et supra ramos eius gignant, inde enim sapientia surgit.”

to o th e tre e is th e tr u e fo u n d a tio n a n d a rc a n u m of th e op u s. T h is a rc a n u m is th e m u c h -p ra ise d thesaurus th e sa u ro ru m . J u s t as th e tre e of th e m e tals has seven b ran ch es, so also has th e tre e of c o n te m p la tio n , as a tre a tise e n title d "D e a rb o re c o n tem p la tio n is ” show s.24 T h e r e th e tre e is a p a lm w ith seven b ra n c h e s a n d o n each b ra n c h sits a b ird : “ pavo, [illeg ib le w o rd ], cig n u s, [h ja rp ia , filo m en a, h y ru n d o , f e n ix /' a n d o n each a flow er: “viola, g la d io la , liliu m , rosa, crocus, so lseq u iu m , flos [. . . ?],” all of w h ich h av e a m o ra l significance. T h e s e ideas a re very m u c h lik e those o f th e alch em ists. T h e y c o n te m p la te d th e ir tre e in th e re to r t, w h ere, a c c o rd in g to th e C h y m ic a l W e d d in g , it was h e ld in th e h a n d of a n a n g e l.25 1 2 . BIRD A N D SNAKE 4*5

4 l6

B irds, as I h av e said, h av e a special re la tio n to th e tree. T h e “ S c rip tu m A lb e r ti” says th a t A le x a n d e r, o n his g re a t jo u rn e y , fo u n d a tre e w h ic h h a d its “g lo rio u s g reen n e ss” (viriditas gloriosa) w ith in . O n th is tre e sat a sto rk , a n d th e re A le x a n d e r b u ilt a g o ld e n p alace to “set a fittin g e n d to his trav els.” 1 T h e tre e w ith th e b ir d stan d s fo r th e o p u s a n d its c o n su m m a tio n . T h e m o tif also ap p e a rs in p ic tu re fo rm .2 T h e fact th a t th e leaves o f th e tre e (th e viriditas gloriosa) grew in w ard s is a n o th e r in sta n c e of th e o p u s co ntra n a tu r a m a n d a t th e sam e tim e a co n c re te ex p ressio n o f in tro v e rs io n in th e c o n te m p la tiv e state. T h e snake, too, w ith o b v io u s re fe re n c e to th e B ib le sto ry , is c o n n e c te d w ith th e tre e , first of all in a g e n e ra l w ay since it is p ro p e rly sp e a k in g th e m e rc u ria l s e rp e n t w h ich , as th e c h th o n ic s p ir itu s veg e ta tiv u s, rises fro m th e ro o ts in to th e b ran ch e s, a n d th e n m o re specifically b ecau se it re p re se n ts th e tre e -n u m e n a n d a p p e a rs as M e lu s in a .3 T h e m e rc u ria l s e rp e n t is th e arca n e su b stan ce th a t tra n sfo rm s itse lf in sid e th e tre e a n d th u s c o n stitu te s its life. T h is is s u b s ta n tia te d by th e “ S c rip tu m A lb e r ti.” T h e te x t is p ro b a b ly a c o m m e n ta ry o n a p ic tu r e w h ich u n f o r tu n a te ly 2 i MS. in B asel U n iversity Library, A X . 128b. 25 Cf. supra, “Paracelsus as a Sp iritu al P h en o m en o n ,” par. 228. 1 T h e a tr. chem ., II (1659), p. 458. 2 P sych ology a n d A lc h e m y , Fig. 231, and M u s. h erm ., p. 201. 3 P sych ology a n d A lc h e m y , par. 537, n. 58, and Figs. 10-12, 157, 257. Cf. also Jafl^, ‘'B ilder u n d Sym bole aus E. T . A . H offm an n s M archen ‘D er G oldene T o p f / " p. gooff.

is n o t given in the ed itio n of 1602. I t begins w ith th e statem ent: “T h is is a pictu re of heaven, w hich is n am ed th e heavenly sphere, and contains eight m ost n o b le figures, viz., the first fig ure, w hich is nam ed th e first circle an d is th e circle of the D eity,” etc.4 I t is clear from this th a t it was a p ictu re of concen tric circles. T h e first, outerm ost, circle contains the “verba div initatis,” the divine w orld order; the second th e seven planets; the th ird the “c o rru p tib le ” an d “creative” elem ents (generabilia); the fo u rth a raging dragon issuing from the seven p lan ets; the fifth “the head and the d e a th ” of the dragon. T h e head of the dragon “lives in etern ity ,” is nam ed the “vita gloriosa,” and “ the angels serve it.” T h e caput draconis is h ere obviously identified w ith C hrist, for the words “the angels serve it” refer to M atthew 4 : 11, w here C hrist has ju st re p u d ia ted Satan. B ut if the dragon’s head is identified w ith C hrist, th en the d rag o n ’s tail m ust be identical w ith A n tich rist o r the devil. A ccording to o u r te x t the w hole of the dragon’s body is absorbed by th e head, so th a t the devil is integrated w ith C hrist. For th e dragon fo u g h t against th e im ago Dei, b u t by the pow er of G od it was im p la n te d in th e dragon and form ed its head: “T h e w hole body obeys the head, an d the head hates th e body, an d slays it b eg in n in g from the tail, gnaw ing it w ith its teeth, u n til th e w hole body enters in to th e head a n d rem ains th ere fo r ever.” 3 T h e sixth circle contains six figures an d two birds, nam ely storks. T h e figures are presum ably h u m an , for th e te x t says one of them looked like an Ethiopian.® It appears th a t th e stork is a vas circulatorium (a vessel for circular distillation), like the P elican.7 Each of the six figures represents three phases of tran sfo rm atio n and together w ith the two birds they form an ogdoad as a sym bol of the transform ation process. T h e seventh circle, says th e text, shows th e relatio n of the “ verba d iv in itatis” and the seven p la n ets to the eighth circle, w hich contains th e golden tree. T h e a u th o r states he w ould ra th e r keep q u ie t a b o u t th e co n ten t of th e seventh circle, because this is w here the great secret begins, * Theatr. chem., II (1659), p. 456. 6 Ibid., p. 457. 6 Cf. von Franz, “Passio Perpetuae,” pp. 46gff. 1 For the importance of the vessel in alchemy see Psychology and Alchem y, index, s.v. vas/vessel. T h e ciconia vel storca was a kind of retort (Rhenanus, Solis e pu teo em ergentis, Lib. I, 22). [Cf. supra, Fig. B7.]

316

w h ic h can b e rev ea led o n ly b y G od h im se lf. H e r e is fo u n d th e sto n e w h ic h th e k in g w ears in h is crow n . “W ise w o m e n h id e it, fo o lish v irg in s sh ow it in p u b lic , b ecau se they w ish to b e p lu n d e r e d .” “ P op es, certa in p riests, an d m o n k s r e v ile it, b ecau se it was so c o m m a n d e d o f th em b y G o d ’s la w .” 4 17 T h e g o ld e n tree in th e e ig h th circle sh in es “lik e lig h tn in g .” L ig h tn in g in a lch em y, as in Jak ob B o h m e, sign ifies su d d en rap tu r e an d illu m in a tio n .8 O n th e tree sits a stork. W h ereas the tw o storks in th e six th circle rep resen t th e d is tillin g apparatus for tw o tran sfo rm a tio n s o f th ree phases each, th e stork s ittin g on th e g o ld e n tree has a far w id e r sign ifican ce. S in ce a n c ie n t tim es it was h e ld to b e the “p ia a v is” (d e v o u t b ird ), an d appears as such in H a g g a d ic tr a d itio n ,9 d esp ite b e in g listed a m o n g th e u n c le a n beasts in L e v itic u s 11 : 19. Its p ie ty m ay go back to Jere m ia h 8 : 7 : "Yea, th e stork in th e h ea v en k n o w e th her a p p o in te d tim es . . . b u t m y p e o p le k n o w n o t the ju d g m e n t o f th e L o r d .” In im p e r ia l R o m e th e stork w as an alleg o ry o f p iety , an d in C h ristia n tra d itio n it is an a lle g o r y o f C h rist the ju d g e, because it destroys snakes. Ju st as th e snake or dragon is th e c h th o n ic n u m e n o f th e tree, so th e stork is its sp iritu a l p r in c ip le a n d th u s a sy m b o l o f th e A n th r o p o s.10 A m o n g th e foreru n n ers o f th e a lch em ica l stork m u st b e c o u n te d th e stork A d eb a r in T e u t o n ic m y th o lo g y , w h ic h b rin gs back to earth th e sou ls o f th e d ead that w ere r e n e w e d in th e fo u n ta in o f H u ld a .11 T h e a ttr ib u tio n o f th e “S c r ip tu m ” to A lb e r tu s M agnus is h ig h ly q u e stio n a b le . T o ju d g e b y its style, its d iscu ssio n o f th e p h ilo so p h ic a l tree can h ard ly b e d a ted earlier th a n th e six te e n th cen tu ry. 13. 4 18

THE

F E M IN IN E T R E E -N U M E N

A s th e seat o f tran sform ation and ren ew a l, th e tree has a fe m in in e a n d m atern al sig n ifica n ce. W e h ave seen from R ip le y ’s Scroivle th a t th e tre e -n u m en is M e lu sin a . In P a n d o r a th e tru n k o f th e tree is a cro w n ed , n a k ed w o m a n h o ld in g a torch in each hand , w ith an ea g le sittin g in th e b ran ch es o n her h e a d .1 O n 8 Cf. “A Study in the Process o f In d iv id u a tio n ,” pp. 2g5ff. 8 G riinbaum , J iidisch -d eu tsch e C h resto m a th ie, p. 174. 18 P icin ellu s, M u n d u s sym b o lic u s, I, p. 281. 1 1 W iin sch e, “D ie Sagen vom L ebensbaum u n d Lebensw asser,” p p . 85L 1 P sych ology a n d A lch e m y , Fig. 231.

H e lle n is tic m o n u m e n ts Isis has th e fo rm of M e lu sin a a n d o n e of h e r a ttrib u te s is th e to rch . O th e r a ttrib u te s a re th e v in e a n d th e p alm . L e to a n d M ary 2 b o th gave b ir th u n d e r a p alm , a n d M aya a t th e b ir th of th e B u d d h a was sh ad ed by th e ho ly tree. A d am , “so th e H eb rew s say,” was c re a te d o u t o f th e “ e a rth of th e tre e of life ,” th e “re d D am ascen e e a r th .” 3 A cc o rd in g to this leg en d , A d am stood in th e sam e re la tio n to th e tre e of life as B u d d h a to th e B o d h i tree. 4*9 T h e fe m in in e -m a te rn a l n a tu re of th e tre e ap p ea rs also in its re la tio n to S ap ie n tia. T h e tre e of k n o w led g e in G enesis is in th e B ook of E n o ch th e tre e of w isdom , w hose f r u it resem b les th e g ra p e .4 In th e teach in g s of th e B arb elio ts, re p o rts Ire n a e u s ,5 th e A u to g en es finally c re a te d “ th e m a n p e rfe c t a n d tru e , w h o m th e y also c alled A d am as.” W ith h im was c re a te d p e rfe c t k n o w led g e: “ F ro m [th e perfect] m a n a n d gnosis is b o rn th e tree , w h ich th ey also call gnosis.” 6 H e re we fin d th e sam e c o n n e c tio n o f m a n w ith th e tree as in th e case o f A d am a n d th e B u d d h a . A sim ila r c o n n e c tio n is fo u n d in th e A c ta A r c h e la i: “ B u t th a t tre e w h ich is in p arad ise, w h ereb y th e g o o d is k n o w n , is Jesu s a n d th e k n o w led g e of h im w h ich is in th e w o rld .” 7 “ F o r th e n c e [i.e., fro m th e tree] co m e th w isd o m ,” says th e “A lle g o riae sapientu m .” 8 420 S im ila r ideas o f th e tre e a re fo u n d in alchem y. W e h av e a l re a d y m e t th e c o n c e p tio n o f m a n as a n in v e rte d tree, a view fo u n d also in th e C ab ala. T h e P ir k e de R a b b i E liezer9 says: “ R . Z eh ira said, O f th e f r u it o f th e tr e e ’— h e re ‘tr e e ’ o n ly m ean s m a n , w h o is c o m p a re d to th e tree , as it is said, ‘F o r m a n is th e tre e of th e field ’ (D e u te ro n o m y 20 : 19).” I n th e gnosis o f J u s tin th e trees in th e G a rd e n of E d e n are angels, w h ile th e tre e of k n o w led g e o f g o o d a n d ev il is th e th ir d o f th e m o th e rly angels, 2 C f. K o r a n , S u r a X I X . s S te e b , C o e lu m S e p h ir o tic u m , p . 49. 4 C h a r le s , A p o c r y p h a a n d P s e u d e p ig r a p h a j I I , p . 2 0 η . 5 A d v e r s u s h a e r e s e s , L ib . I , g g , 3 . e “ E x A n th r o p o a u t e m e t G n o s i n a t u m lig n u m , q u o d e t ip s u m G n o s in v o c a n t.” I “ I lia J esu s

a u tem et

arbor q u ae

s c ie n d a

e iu s

e st in

quae

est

p a r a d is o , in

m u n d o .”

qua

a g n o s c itu r

H e g e m o n iu s ,

b o n u m , ip s e

A c ta

A r c h e la i

est (e d .

B e e s o n ), p . 18, lin e s ig ff. 8 T h e a t r . c h e m ., V (1 6 6 0 ), p . 6 1 . 8 T r a n s , a n d e d . F r ie d la n d e r , p . 150. T h e P ir k e d a te s fr o m 7 t h - 8 t h c e n ts . E lie z e r (b en H y r c a n u s) liv e d in th e 2 n d c e n t.

th e N a a s .10 T h i s d iv is io n o f th e tre e -s o u l i n t o a m a s c u lin e a n d a f e m i n i n e fig u r e c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e a lc h e m ic a l M e r c u r i u s as th e lif e p r i n c i p l e o f t h e t r e e , f o r as a n h e r m a p h r o d i t e h e is d u p l e x . 11 T h e p i c t u r e i n P a n d o r a , w h e r e t h e tr e e t r u n k is a w o m a n ’s b o d y , r e f e r s to M e r c u r i u s i n h is f e m i n i n e r o le o f w is d o m , w h o in h is m a s c u l i n e a s p e c t is s y m b o liz e d b y t h e fig u re o f M e r c u r i u s S en ex o r H e rm e s T ris m e g is tu s . 14.

THE

T R E E AS T H E

L A P IS

481

J n s t as t h e t r e e a n d m a n a r e c e n t r a l s y m b o ls i n a lc h e m y , so a ls o is th e la p is i n its d o u b l e s ig n ific a n c e as th e p r i m a a n d u l t i m a m a t e r ia . T h e a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d q u o t a t i o n f r o m t h e “ A lle g o r ia e s a p i e n t u m ”— “ P l a n t th is tr e e o n th e s to n e , t h a t i t f e a r n o t th e b u f f e tin g s o f t h e w i n d s ” — s e e m s to b e a n a l l u s i o n to t h e p a r a b l e o f t h e h o u s e t h a t w as b u i l t o n s a n d a n d f e ll w h e n th e flo o d s c a m e a n d th e w in d s b le w ( M a tt h e w 7 : 2 6 -2 7 ) . T h e s to n e m i g h t th e r e f o r e m e a n s im p ly t h e s u r e f o u n d a t i o n a f f o r d e d b y th e r i g h t p r i m a m a t e r ia . B u t th e c o n t e x t p o i n t s to t h e s y m b o lic s ig n ifi c a n c e o f t h e s to n e , as t h e p r e c e d i n g s e n te n c e m a k e s c le a r: “ T a k e w is d o m w i t h a ll t h y p o w e r, f o r f r o m i t t h o u s h a l t d r i n k e t e r n a l life , u n t i l t h y [s to n e ] is c o n g e a le d a n d th y s lu g g is h n e s s d e p a r t , f o r th e n c e c o m e t h l i f e .” 1 488 “ T h e p r i m a m a t e r i a is a n o ily w a te r a n d is t h e p h ilo s o p h ic s to n e , f r o m w h ic h b r a n c h e s m u l t i p l y i n t o i n f i n i t y ,” says M y liu s .2 H e r e t h e s to n e is its e lf t h e t r e e a n d is u n d e r s t o o d as t h e “ fie ry s u b s t a n c e ” ( t h e vypa ουσία o f t h e G n o s tic s ) o r as t h e “ o ily w a te r .” A s w a te r a n d o il d o n o t m ix , th is r e p r e s e n ts t h e d o u b l e o r c o n tra ry n a tu r e o f M e rc u riu s . 483 S im ila r ly th e “ C o n s il i u m c o n i u g i i , ” c o m m e n t i n g o n S e n io r , says: “ T h u s t h e s to n e is p e r f e c te d o f a n d i n its e lf. F o r i t is t h e t r e e w h o s e b r a n c h e s , le a v e s, flo w e rs, a n d f r u it s c o m e f r o m i t a n d 10 H ip p o ly tu s, E len ch o s, V, 26, 6. N aas, th e se rp e n t, is th e p rim a m a te ria oE th e N aassenes, a “m o ist su b sta n c e ” lik e T h a le s ’ w a te r. I t is s u b s ta n tia l to a ll th in g s a n d c o n ta in s a ll th in g s. I t is lik e th e riv e r o f E d e n , w h ich d iv id es in to fo u r stream s {V, g, 13!!.). u Cf. “T h e S p irit M e rc u riu s,” su p ra , p a rs. 268£. 1 “ Ite m accipe sa p ie n tia m vi in ten sissim afin ] e t e x ea v ita m h a u rie s a e te rn a m , d o n ee tu u s [lapis] c o n g e le tu r ac tu a p ig re d o e x eat, tu n c in d e v ita fit” (T h e a tr . ch em ., V, 1660, p . 61). 2 P h il. ref., p . 260. F o r “ra m i in fin iti m u ltip lic a n tu r ” I re a d “in fin ite .”

thro u g h it and for it, an d it is itself w hole o r the w hole [tota vel to tu m ] an d n o th in g else.” 3 H ence the tree is identical w ith the stone and, like it, a sym bol of wholeness. K h u n ra th says: O f itself, from , in , a n d th ro u g h itself is m ad e a n d p erfected the stone of th e wise. F o r it is one th in g only: like a tree (says Senior), whose roots, stem , branches, twigs, leaves, flowers, a n d fru it are of it a n d th ro u g h it a n d from it a n d on it, a n d all come from one seed. I t is itself everything, a n d n o th in g else m akes i t .4

424

In the A rabic “Book of O stanes” th ere is a description of the arcane substance, o r the w ater, in its various form s, first w hite, th en black, th en red, an d finally a com bustible liq u id o r a fire w hich is struck from certain stones in Persia. T h e text con tinues: I t is a tree th a t grows o n the tops of th e m o u n ta in s, a y o u n g m an b o rn in E gypt, a p rin c e from A n d alu sia, w ho desires th e to rm e n t of th e seekers. H e has slain th e ir leaders. . . . T h e sages are pow erless to oppose him . I can see n o w eapon ag ain st h im save resig n atio n , no charger b u t know ledge, no b u c k le r b u t u n d e rsta n d in g . If th e seeker finds him self before h im w ith these th ree w eapons, a n d slays him , h e [the prince] w ill com e to life again a fter his d e a th , w ill lose a ll pow er against him , a n d w ill give the seeker th e h ig h est pow er, so th a t h e w ill arrive a t his desired g o al.5

425

426

T h e ch ap ter in w hich this passage occurs begins w ith the words: “T h e sage has said, w hat the stu d en t needs first of all is to know the stone, the object of the aspirations of the ancients.” T h e w ater, the tree, the young Egyptian, an d the A ndalusian prin ce all refer to the stone. W ater, tree, an d m an ap p ear here as its synonyms. T h e prin ce is an im p o rta n t sym bol th a t needs a little elucidation, for it seems to echo an archetypal m o tif th a t is fo u n d in the G ilgam esh epic. T h e re E n k id u , th e ch th o n ic m an and shadow of Gilgam esh, is created by th e gods a t th e behest of the insulted Ishtar, so th a t he may kill the hero, In the same way the prin ce “ desires th e to rm en t of th e seekers.” H e is th e ir enem y an d “has slain th e ir leaders,” th a t is, the m asters an d a u thorities of th e art. T h is m o tif of the hostile stone is fo rm u lated in th e “ Alle3 A r s c h e m ic a , p . 160. 4 H y L C h aos, p p . 2of. 5 B e r th e lo t, M o y e n a g e , II I, p . 117.

goriae s a p ie n tu m ” as follows: “ U nless thy stone shall be an enem y, th o u w ilt n o t a tta in to thy d esire.” 6 T h is enem y a p pears in alchem y in th e guise of th e poisonous o r fire-spitting d rag o n an d also as th e lion. T h e lio n ’s paws m u st be cu t off,7 an d the d rag o n m u st be killed, o r else it kills o r devours itself on th e p rin c ip le of D em o critu s: “ N a tu re rejoices in n a tu re , n a tu re ru les over n a tu re , a n d n a tu re conquers n a tu re .” 8 427 T h e slaying of the alchem ical a u th o ritie s c an n o t fail to re m in d us of the in trig u in g p ic tu re in P andora of M elusina stab b in g C h rist’s side w ith a lance.8 M elusina corresponds to the E d em of th e G nostics an d rep resen ts th e fe m in in e aspect of M ercurius, i.e., the fem ale N ous (Naas of th e Naassenes), w hich in the form of the se rp en t seduced o u r first parents. A p arallel to this w o u ld be the a fo re m e n tio n e d q u o ta tio n from th e “T ractatus ad A le x an d ru m M a g n u m ” : “ G a th e r the fruits, fo r th e fru it of th e tree has le d us in to th e darkness an d th ro u g h th e d a rk ness.” 10 As this a d m o n itio n clearly co n trad icts th e a u th o rity of the B ible an d th e C h u rch , one can only suppose th a t it was u t te re d by som eone w ho was consciously opposed to th e ecclesias tical tra d itio n . 428 T h e c o n n ectio n w ith th e G ilgam esh epic is of in te re st b e cause O stanes was th o u g h t to be a P ersian a n d a c o n tem p o rary of A le x an d e r th e G reat. As a fu rth e r p arallel to the in itia l hos tility of E n k id u a n d th e A n d alu sian p rin c e a n d of th e stone in g en eral we m ig h t cite th e K h id r leg en d .11 K h id r, th e m essenger of A llah, at first frig h ten s Moses by his m isdeeds. C o n sid ered as a visionary ex p erien ce o r as a d id actic tale, th e leg en d sets fo rth th e re la tio n of Moses on the one h a n d to his shadow , his servant Jo sh u a b e n N u n , an d on the o th e r h a n d to th e self, K h id r.12 T h e lapis a n d its synonym s are likew ise sym bols of th e self. Psy chologically, this m eans th a t a t th e first m e etin g w ith th e self all 6 "N isi iapis tuus fu e rit inim icus, ad o p ta tu m n o n perv cn ies” (T h e a tr . chem ., V, 1660, p. 59). 7 See illu stra tio n in R e u sn e r’s P andora, p. 227. Also Psychology and A lc h em y, Fig. 4. ®Ή

y a p φ ν σ ις rr)v φ ύ σ ιν r e p x e t , κ α ί η φ ν σ ι ϊ τ η ν φ ύ σ ιν KpareZ κ α ί η φ ύ σ ι τ τ ή ν φ ύ ο ’ίν

νικά (B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I, iii, 12). 8 See su p ra, Fig. Β4. !8 T h e a tr . chem ., V (1660), p. 79 0 · η K oran, Sura X V III. 12CE. “ C oncerning R e b irth ,” p p . 1355.

those negative qualities can ap p ear w hich alm ost in variably characterize an u n ex p ected en co u n te r w ith th e unconscious.13 T h e d anger is th a t of an in u n d a tio n by th e unconscious, w hich in a bad case m ay take the form of a psychosis if the conscious m in d is u n a b le to assim ilate, e ith e r in tellectu ally or m orally, the invasion of unconscious contents. 1 5 . T H E DANGERS O F T H E ART 429

A urora consurgens I says in reg ard to the dangers w hich th re a te n the artifex: “ O how m any u n d e rsta n d n o t th e say ings of the wise; these have perished because of th e ir foolish ness, for they lacked s p iritu al u n d e rstan d in g .” 1 H o g h elan d e is of the o p in io n th a t “ the whole a rt is rig h tly to be h eld b o th difficult a n d dangerous, a n d anyone w ho is n o t im p ro v id en t w ill eschew it as m ost p ernicious.” 2 A egidius de Vadis feels the same w hen he says: “ I shall keep silent a b o u t this science, w hich has led most of those w ho w ork in it in to confusion, because th e re are few indeed w ho find w hat they seek, b u t an in fin ite n u m b e r w ho have p lu n g ed to th e ir r u in .” 3 H oghelande, c itin g H aly, says: “ O u r stone is life to him w ho knows it and how it is m ade, and he w ho knows n o t an d has n o t m ade it an d to w hom n o assur ance4 is given w hen it w ill be b o rn , o r w ho thinks it a n o th er stone, has already p rep ared him self fo r d e ath .” 6 H o g h elan d e m akes it clear th a t it is n o t ju st th e dan g er of p o isoning 6 o r of A io n j pp. 8ff. 1 A urora Consurgens (ed. von Franz), p. 117. “T h is is th erefo re a g reat sign, in the investigation of w hich some have p erish ed ” (A r t. aurif., II, p . 264). “ Know ye, w ho seek after w isdom, th a t the fo u n d atio n of this art, on account of w hich m any have perished, is a th in g stronger a n d m ore sublim e th a n all o th e r th in g s” (“T u rb a ,” in A rt. aurif., I, p. 83). 2 “D e alchim iae difficultatibus,” T heatr. chem ., I (1659), p. 131, 3 “Dialogue in te r n a tu ra m et filium p h ilo so p h o ru m ,” ibid., II (1659), p . 104. Cf. D u Cange, Glossarium, II, p. 275, “certificatio.” 5 “L apis n oster est v ita ei q u i ipsum scit e t eius factum e t q u i nesciverit e t n o n fecit et n on certificabitur q u an d o nascetur a u t p u ta b it aliu m lapidem , iam p ara v it se m o rti” (H oghelande, T h ea tr. chem ., I, 1659, p. 182). β T h is danger was well know n. “Because of th e fires an d su lp h u ro u s exhalations i t brings w ith it, th e opus is highly dangerous” (Dee, “ M onas hieroglyphica,” T h ea tr. chem ., II, 1659, P- 196). “I [the divine w ater] give th em a blow in th e face, th a t is a w ound, w hich makes them toothless, an d brings ab o u t m any in firm ities th ro u g h th e sm oke” (“R osinus ad S arra tan tam ,” A rt. aurif., I, p . 293). !3

322

43 °

431

possible explosions b u t of m e n ta l ab erratio n s: “ L e t h im take care to recognize an d g u ard against th e deceptions of th e devil, w ho often insinuates him self in to th e chem ical operatio n s, th a t h e m ay h o ld u p the lab o ran ts w ith vain an d useless things to the n eglect of the works of n a tu re .” 7 H e au th en ticates this d an g er by a q u o ta tio n from A lp h id iu s: “T h is stone proceeds fro m a sub lim e a n d m ost gloripus place of great terro r, w hich has given o ver m any sages to d e a th .” 8 H e also cites Moyses: “T h is w ork comes a b o u t as suddenly as the clouds com e from heaven,” a d d ing a q u o ta tio n from M icreris: “ If you should suddenly see this tran sfo rm atio n , w onder, fear, a n d tre m b lin g w ill b efall you; th erefo re w ork w ith c a u tio n .” 9 T h e d an g er of daem onic agencies is likew ise m e n tio n e d in th e “L ib e r P latonis q u a rto ru m ” : “A t a certain h o u r d u rin g th e p re p a ra tio n c ertain kinds of spirits w ill oppose th e w ork, an d at a n o th e r tim e this o p p o sition w ill n o t be p re sen t.” 10 T h e clear est of all is O lym piodorus (sixth century): “A nd all the w hile the dem on O phiuchos instils negligence, im p ed in g o u r in te n tions; everyw here he creeps ab o u t, w ith in an d w ith o u t, causing oversights, fear, an d u n p reparedness, a n d at o th e r tim es he seeks by harassm ents a n d in ju ries to m ake us a b an d o n th e w ork.” 11 H e also m en tio n s th a t lead is possessed of a d em o n w hich drives m en m a d .12 T h e m iracle of the stone w hich th e alchem ist expected or exp erien ced m u st have been intensely n u m in o u s, a n d this w ould ex p lain his holy d read of p ro fa n in g the m ystery. “N o one can disclose the nam e of the stone w ith o u t d a m n in g his soul, for “From th e b eg in n in g th e opus is lik e a d ea th -d ea lin g p o iso n ” (V entura, “D e ration e con ficien d i la p id is,” T h ea tr. ch em ., II, 1659, p. 258). T h e alchem ists seem to have know n a b o u t m ercurial p oison in g. 7 “C autus sit in d ia b o li illu sio n ib u s d ignoscendis et praecavendis, q u i se chem isticis op eration ib u s saepius im m iscet, u t operantes circa vana e t in u tilia d etin ea t praeterm issis natu rae o p erib u s” (H ogh elan d e, p. 126). A u ro ra C onsurgens (ed. von Franz, p. 51) speaks o f th e “ev il odours and vapours th at in fect th e m in d o f the lab oran t.” 8 H og h ela n d e, p. 160. “H ie lapis a loco gloriosissim o su b lim i m a x im i T erroris p rocedit, q u i m u lto s sap ien tes neci d ed it.” 9 Ibid., p. 181. 10 T h e a tr. c h e m ., V (1660), p. 126. 11 B erth elot, A lch . grecs, II, iv, 28. 12 Ib id ., II, iv, 43 and 46.

he can n o t justify him self before G od,” says H o g h elan d e.13 T h is conviction should be taken seriously. H is treatise is the w ork of an honest an d reasonable m an, and differs very m uch to its ad vantage from the p reten tio u s obscurantism of o th e r treatises, p articu larly those of Lully. Since the stone h a d “a tho u san d nam es,” one only w onders w hich of them it was th a t H oghelande d id n o t wish to disclose. T h e stone was indeed a great em barrassm ent to the alchem ists, for since it had never b een m ade no one could say w hat it really was. T h e m ost p ro b ab le h y p o th e sis, it seems to me, is th a t it was a psychic experience, w hich w ould account for the repeatedly expressed fear of m en tal dis turbance. 43* W ei Po-yang, the oldest C hinese alchem ist know n to us ( 2 n d cent, a .d .), gives an instructive account of the dangerous conse quences of m aking m istakes d u rin g the opus. A fter a b rief resumd of the la tte r he describes the chen-yen, th e tru e o r com plete m an, w ho is the b eg in n in g an d en d of th e w ork: “ H e is an d he is not. H e resem bles a vast pool of w ater, suddenly sink in g and suddenly floating.” H e appears as a m aterial substance, like D o rn ’s veritas/ 4 an d in it are “m ix ed th e squareness, the roundness, the diam eter, and th e dim ensions, w hich restrain one another, having been in existence before the b eg in n in g of the heavens an d the earth : lordly, lordly, h ig h an d rev ered .” 15 T h is again conveys th a t im pression of extrem e nu m in o sity w hich we fo u n d in W estern alchem y. 433 T h e a u th o r goes on to speak of a reg io n “closed o n all sides, its in te rio r m ade u p of in terco m m u n icatin g labyrinths. T h e p ro tection is so com plete as to tu rn back all th a t is devilish and u n desirable. . . . C essation of th o u g h t is desirable an d w orries are preposterous. T h e divine ch’i (air, sp irit, eth ereal essence) fills the q u arters a n d it cannot be h eld back. W hoever retains it w ill prosper and he w ho loses it, w ill perish .” F o r th e la tte r w ill em ploy the “false m e th o d ” : he w ill d irect him self in all things by th e course of the sun an d the stars, in o th e r w ords w ill lead a ratio n ally ordered life in accordance w ith th e ru les of Chinese conduct. B u t this is n o t pleasing to the tao of the fem in in e prinT h ea tr. chern., I (1659), P· 1^o. "N om en Iapidis patefacere nem o p otest sub an im ae suae cond em n ation e, q u ia coram D eo rationem reddere non posset." 1i A io n , pp. i6 iif . 1 5 W ei Po-yang, “A n A n cien t C hinese T reatise on A lch em y,” pp. 237¾. 13

cip le (y i n ), o r, as w e s h o u ld say, th e o rd e rin g p rin c ip le s o f c o n sciousness are n o t in h a rm o n y w ith th e u n co n scio u s (w hich in a m a n has a fe m in in e ch a ra c te r). I f th e a d e p t a t th is p o in t o rd e rs h is life a c c o rd in g to r u le s tra d itio n a lly re g a rd e d as r a tio n a l he b rin g s h im se lf in to d a n g e r. “D isaster w ill co m e to th e b lack m ass.” T h e b la ck m ass is th e massa Confusaj th e chaos o r n ig r e d o o f W e s te rn alch em y , th e p rim a m a te ria , w h ich is b lack o u tsid e a n d w h ite in sid e , lik e le ad . I t is th e chen-yen h id d e n in th e d a r k ness, th e w h o le m a n , w h o is th re a te n e d by th e ra tio n a l a n d c o r re c t c o n d u c t of life, so th a t in d iv id u a tio n is h in d e re d o r d eflected in to th e w ro n g p a th . T h e c h ’i, th e q u in tesse n ce (th e ro se-co lo u red b lo o d of W e s te rn alch em y ) c a n n o t b e “ h e ld b a c k ” : th e self s tru g gles to m ak e itself m a n ife s t a n d th re a te n s to o v e rp o w e r c o n sciousness.16 T h is d a n g e r was p a rtic u la rly g re a t fo r th e W e ste rn alch em ist, b ecau se th e id e a l o f th e i m i ta t io C h ris ti led h im to re g a rd th e sw e atin g o u t of th e so u l-su b stan ce in th e fo rm o f th e ro se-co lo u red b lo o d as a task th a t h a d a c tu a lly b e e n e n jo in e d u p o n h im . H e fe lt m o ra lly o b lig e d to realize th e d e m a n d s o f th e self reg ard less o f w h e th e r th ese d e m a n d s ta x e d h im to o h ig h ly . I t seem e d to h im th a t G o d a n d h is h ig h e st m o ra l p rin c ip le s r e q u ir e d this self-sacrifice. I t is in d e e d a self-sacrifice, a tr u e θυσία of th e self, w h e n a m a n gives w ay to th e u rg e n c y o f these d e m a n d s a n d perish es, fo r th e n th e self has lost th e g am e as w ell, h a v in g d e stro y ed th e h u m a n b e in g w ho s h o u ld h av e b e e n its vessel. T h is d a n g e r, as th e C h in e se M aster rig h tly observes, oc cu rs w h e n th e tr a d itio n a l, m o ra l, a n d r a tio n a l p rin c ip le s o f c o n d u c t a re p u t in to fo rce a t a m o m e n t w h e n so m e th in g o th e r th a n social life is in q u e s tio n , n am ely , th e in te g ra tio n o f th e u n c o n scious a n d th e process o f in d iv id u a tio n . 434 W ei P o-yan g gives a g ra p h ic d e s c rip tio n of th e p h y sio lo g ical a n d psychic co n seq u en ces o f e rro r: “ G ases fro m fo o d c o n su m e d w ill m a k e noises in s id e th e in te stin e s a n d sto m ach . T h e r ig h t essence (c h ’i ) w ill b e e x h a le d a n d th e evil o n e in h a le d . D ays a n d n ig h ts w ill b e passed w ith o u t sleep, m o o n a fte r m o o n . T h e body w ill th e n b e tir e d o u t, g iv in g rise to a n a p p e a ra n c e o f in sanity. T h e h u n d r e d p u lses w ill s tir a n d b o il so v io le n tly as to d riv e aw ay peace o f m in d a n d b o d y .” N o r w ill it b e o f an y av ail (fo llo w in g conscious m o ra lity ) to b u ild a te m p le , to w atch d ili g en tly a n d b r in g g ifts to th e a lta r m o r n in g a n d n ig h t. “ G h o stly W A ion, p p . 23(!.

things w ill m ake th e ir appearance, a t w hich he w ill m arvel even in his sleep. H e is th e n led to rejoice, th in k in g th a t he is assured of longevity.17 B u t all of a sudden he is seized by an u n tim ely d e ath .” T h e a u th o r adds the m oral: “A slight e rro r has thus led to a grave disaster.” T h e insights of W estern alchem y d id n o t p e n etrate to these depths. N evertheless, th e alchem ists w ere aware of the subtle dangers of the w ork, an d they knew th a t high dem ands w ere m ade n o t only on th e intelligence of th e ad ep t b u t also on his m oral qualities. T h u s the in v ita tio n to th e royal m arriage in C hristian R osencreutz18Tuns: Keep watch, and ward, Thyself regard; Unless with diligence thou bathe, T he W edding can’t thee harmless save; H e’ll damage have that here delays; Let him beware, too light that weighs. 435

I t is clear from w hat happens in th e Chymical W e d d in g th a t it was n o t concerned solely w ith the tran sfo rm atio n an d u n io n of the royal pair, b u t also w ith the in d iv id u a tio n of th e adept. T h e u n io n w ith the shadow an d the an im a is a difficulty n o t to be taken lightly. T h e pro b lem of opposites th a t th en makes its appearance an d the unansw erable questions th a t this entails lead to the constellation of com pensating archetypal contents in the form of n u m in o u s experiences. W h a t com plex psychology dis covered only late was know n long ago to the alchem ists— symbolice— despite th e ir lim ited in tellectu al e q u ip m e n t. L a u re n tiu s V e n tu ra expresses this insight in a few succinct words: “T h e p erfection of th e w ork does n o t lie in th e pow er of th e artifex, b u t G od the m ost m erciful him self bestows it u p o n w hom he w ill. A nd in this p o in t lies all the d an g er.” 19 W e m ig h t add th a t the w ords “the m ost m ercifu l” should pro b ab ly be tak en as an apotropaic euphem ism . 17 T h is is a typical sym ptom o f in flation . A person w ith a fam ou s n a m e once assured m e h e w o u ld liv e a very lo n g time; h e need ed at least 150 years. A year la ter h e was dead. In this case th e in flation was obvious even to a laym an. 18 T h e C h ym ical W e d d in g (trans. Foxcroft), p. 6. i s “(O peris perfectio) n o n est en im in potestate artificis, sed cu i v u lt ipse D eus clem entissim us largitur. E t in h o c p u n cto totum est p ericu lu m .” T h e a tr. chem ., I I (1659), p . 296.

l6 .

U N D ER STAN DING AS A M E A N S O F D EFE N C E

A fter this discussion of th e dangers th a t th re a ten the adept, let us tu rn back to the O stanes q u o ta tio n in section 1 4 . T h e adepts knew th a t they could offer no resistance to the lapis in the form of the A n d alu sian prince. I t seem ed to be stro n g er th an they, an d the te x t says th a t they h a d only th ree w eapons— "resig n a tio n ,” th e charger of "know ledge,” an d the b u ck ler of “u n d e rstan d in g .” I t is ev id en t from this th a t on th e one h a n d they th o u g h t them selves w ell advised to ad o p t a policy of nonresistance, w hile o n the o th e r they sought refuge in intelligence a n d u n d erstan d in g . T h e su p erio r pow er of the lapis is attested by th e saying: “T h e philo so p h er is n o t th e m aster of th e stone, b u t ra th e r its m in iste r.” 1 O bviously they had to su b m it to its pow er, b u t w ith a reserve of u n d e rsta n d in g w hich w ould finally enable th em to slay th e p rince. W e shall pro b ab ly n o t go w rong if we assum e th a t the adepts tried as best they could to u n d e r stand th a t ap p aren tly in v in cib le th in g a n d th ereb y break its pow er. I t is n o t only a w ell-know n fairytale m o tif (R um pelstiltskin!) b u t also a very a n cien t p rim itiv e b elief th a t he w ho can guess the secret nam e has pow er over its possessor. In psycho therapy it is a w ell-know n fact th a t n e u ro tic sym ptom s w hich seem im possible to attack can often be re n d e re d harm less by conscious u n d e rsta n d in g an d experience of th e contents u n d e r lying them . T h is is obvious enough, because th e energy w hich m a in ta in ed th e sym ptom is th en p u t a t th e disposal of conscious ness, causing a n increase of vitality on th e one h a n d an d a red u c tio n of useless in h ib itio n s an d suchlike distu rb an ces on the other. 437 In o rd e r to u n d e rstan d the O stanes text, one m u st b ear such experiences in m ind. T h e y occur w henever previously u n c o n scious, n u m in o u s contents em erge in to consciousness e ith e r spontaneously o r th ro u g h th e ap p licatio n of a m eth o d . As in all m agic texts, it is supposed th a t th e pow er of the co n q u ered dae m on w ill pass in to the adept. O u r m o d ern consciousness can hard ly resist th e te m p ta tio n to th in k in th e sam e way. W e read ily assum e th a t psychic contents can be com pletely disposed of by insight. T h is is tru e only of contents th a t do n o t m ean very 436

1 “P h ilosop h u s n on est m agister lapidis, sed p o tiu s eius m in ister.” Ros. p h il . in A rt. aurif., II, p p . 356L

S27

438

m uch anyway. N u m in o u s com plexes of ideas m ay be in d u ced to change th e ir form , b u t since th e ir c o n ten t can take any n u m b e r of forms it does n o t vanish in the sense of being re n d e re d w holly ineffective. I t possesses a certain autonom y, an d w hen it is re pressed o r system atically ignored it reappears in a n o th e r place in a negative an d destructive guise. T h e devil w hom the m agician fancies he has b o u n d to his service fetches h im in the end. I t is a waste of effort to try to use the daem on as a fam iliar fo r o n e ’s own purposes; on the contrary, the autonom y of this am b iv alen t figure should be religiously borne in m ind, for it is th e source of th a t fearful pow er w hich drives us tow ards in d iv id u atio n . C on sequently the alchem ists d id n o t hesitate to endow th e ir stone w ith positively divine a ttrib u tes an d to p u t it, as a m icrocosm an d a m an, on a p a r w ith C hrist— “and in this p o in t lies all the danger.” W e n e ith e r can n o r should try to force this n u m in o u s being, a t the risk of o u r own psychic d estruction, in to o u r n a r row h u m a n m ould, for it is greater th a n m a n ’s consciousness an d g reater th an his w ill. J u s t as the alchem ists occasionally betrayed a tendency to use the symbols produced by the unconscious as sp ellb in d in g nam es, so does m o d ern m an m ake analogous use of in tellectu al concepts for the opposite purpose of denying th e unconscious, as th o u g h w ith reason and intellect its autonom y could be co n ju red o u t of existence. C uriously enough, I have critics w ho th in k th a t I of all people w ant to replace the living psyche by in tellectu al con cepts. I do n o t u n d e rstan d how they have m anaged to overlook the fact th a t my concepts are based on em pirical findings an d are n o th in g b u t nam es for certain areas of experience. Such a m is u n d erstan d in g w ould be com prehensible if I h ad o m itted to present the facts on w hich I base my statem ents. My critics assid uously overlook the obvious tru th th a t I speak of the facts of the living psyche an d have no use for philosophical acrobatics. 1 7 . T H E M O T IF OF TORTURE

439

T h e O stanes tex t gives us valuable insight in to the p h en o m enology of the in d iv id u a tio n process as the alchem ists ex p eri enced it. T h e reference to the “ to rm e n t” w hich the prince desires for th e artifex is p articu larly interesting. T h is m o tif ap pears in th e W estern texts b u t in inverse form , th e to rm en ted 328

44 °

44*

one b ein g n o t the a rtife x b u t M ercurius, o r the lapis o r tree. T h e reversal o£ roles shows th a t the artifex im agines he is th e to rm e n to r w hereas in fact he is th e to rm en ted . T h is becom es clear to h im only later, w hen he discovers the dangers of th e w ork to his ow n cost. A typical exam ple of th e p ro jected to rtu re is the vision of Zosimos.1 T h e T u r b a says: “T a k e th e old black sp irit a n d destroy an d to rtu re 2 w ith it th e bodies, u n til they are changed.” 3 E lsew here a p h ilo so p h er tells th e assem bled sages: “T h e to rtu re d thing, w hen it is im m ersed in the body, changes it in to an u n a lte ra b le an d in d e stru ctib le n a tu re .” 4 M u n d u s in Serm o X V III says: “ H ow m any there be w ho search o u t these applicatio n s5 a n d [even] find some, b u t yet c an n o t e n d u re the to rm en ts.” 6 T h e se q u o tatio n s show th a t th e concept of to rtu re is an am biguous one. In the first case it is the bodies, th e raw m aterials of the w ork, th a t are to rm en ted ; in the second case th e to rm en te d th in g is w ith o u t d o u b t th e arcane substance, w hich is often called res; an d in the th ird case it is the investigators them selves w ho c an n o t e n d u re the torm ents. T h is a m b ig u ity is n o accident an d has its d e ep e r reasons. In th e o ld texts th a t are co ntem p o ran eo u s w ith th e L a tin tra n slatio n of th e T u r b a th e re are gruesom e recipes in th e m an n e r of th e M agic Papyri, as for instance th e disem bow elling7 or p lu ck in g of a live cock,8 th e d rying of a m an over a h eated stone,9 the c u ttin g off of hands an d feet,10 etc. H e re th e to rtu re is ap p lied to th e body. B u t we find a n o th er version in the equally old “ T ra c ta tu s M icreris.” 11 T h e re it is said th a t ju s t as the C re ato r separates souls from bodies an d judges a n d rew ards them , “so we also m u st use flattery [adulatio uti\ 12 on these souls 1 C f. su p r a , p ars. 8 6 -8 7 . 2 “ D ir u ite e t c r u c ia te .” 3 E d . R u sk a , p . 152. 4 Ib id ., p . 168. B B y “ a p p lic a t io n e s ” are m e a n t th e a r ca n e su b sta n c es, su c h as th e “g u m m a ” ( = a q u a p e r m a n e n s ) m e n tio n e d in th e te x t. b P o e n a s , c o r r e s p o n d in g to th e κο\άσει$ in Z osim os; su p r a , p ar. 86 (III, i, 2). I P re isen d a n z, P a p . G r a ec . M a g . , I, p . 79. 5 “A lle g o r ia e s a p ie n tu m ,” A r t . a u r if ., I, p . 140. 8 Ib id ., p . 139. 10 “V is io A r islei," ib id ., p . 151. H " M icr er is” is a c o r r u p tio n o f “ M e r c u r iu s” d u e to A r a b ic tr a n slite r a tio n . 12 A d u l a t i o u s u a lly refers to th e lo v e -p la y o f th e r o y a l m a r r ia g e . H e r e it serves to e x tr a c t th e sou ls.

and condem n them to the heaviest punishm ents [p o en is, w ith m arginal note: laboribus]." A t this p oin t an in terlocu tor raises the dou bt as to w hether the soul can be treated in this way, since it is “ten u ou s” and n o longer inhabits the body. T h e Master replies: “It m ust be torm ented w ith the m ost su b tle spiritual thing, nam ely w ith the fiery nature w hich is akin to it. For if its body were torm ented, the soul w o u ld n o t be torm ented, and the torm ent w ou ld n ot reach it; for it is o f sp iritu al nature, to be touched on ly by som ething sp iritu al.” 13 442 H ere it is n o t th e raw m aterial that is tortured b u t the soul w hich has been extracted from it and m ust now suffer a spiritual martyrdom. T h e “sou l” corresponds as a ru le to the arcane sub stance, either the prim a m ateria or th e m eans by w h ich it is transformed. Petrus B onus, w ho, as we have seen, was o n e o f the first m edieval alchem ists to w onder ab ou t the scope o f his art, says that just as G eber m et w ith difficulties “w e also were p lu n ged in to stupor [in s tu p o rem addu cti] for a lo n g tim e and w ere hid d en under the cloak of despair. B ut w hen we cam e back to ourselves and torm ented our thoughts w ith the torm ent of u n lim ited reflection, we beh eld the substances.” H e then cites A vicenna, w ho had said that it was necessary for us “to discover this operation [the solu tio ] through ourselves [per nos ipsos].” “T h ese things were know n to us before the experim ent, as a consequence o f long, intense, and scrupulous m ed ita tio n .” 14 443 Petrus B onus puts the suffering back in to the investigator by stressing his m ental torm ents. In this h e is right, because the m ost im portant discoveries o f the alchem ists sprang from their m ed itation s on th eir ow n psychic processes, w hich, projected in archetypal form in to the chem ical substances, dazzled their m inds w ith u n lim ited possibilities. T h e same prior know ledge o f th e results is generally adm itted, as w hen D orn says: “It is n ot possible for any m ortal to understand this art unless he is previ ously en ligh ten ed by the d ivin e lig h t.” 15 444 T h e torm en tin g o f the substances also occurs in Sir George R ipley: “T h e unnatural fire m ust torm ent the bodies, for it is the dragon v io len tly b u rning, lik e the fire of h e ll.” 16 W ith T h ea tr. chem ., V (1660), p . 93. 14 L acinius, P re t. m arg. nov., fol. 457. “ Phy si Ca T rism eg isti,” T h e a tr. c h e m ., I (1659), P- 366. 1 « “Ignis contra naturam d eb et excruciare corpora, ip se est draco vio len ter com burens, u t ign is in fern i’’ (“D u od ecim p ortaru m ,” T h e a tr. chem ., II, 1659, p . 113). 13

445

R ipley the p ro je c tio n of the to rm en ts of hell is ex p licit an d com plete, as w ith so m any others. O nly w ith the au th o rs of th e six teen th an d seventeenth centuries does th e insight of P etru s B onus break th ro u g h again. D o rn ’s view is em phatic: “W h ere fore th e Sophists . . . have persecuted this M ercurius w ith v ar ious torm ents, some w ith sublim ations, coagulations, p re c ip ita tions, m e rcu rial aquae fortes, etc., all of w hich are m istaken courses to be av o id ed .” 17 A m ong the Sophists he reckons also G eber an d A lb ertu s, “su rn am ed the G re a t,” as he m ockingly adds. In his “ Physica T rism e g isti” he even declares th a t th e timeh o n o u re d blackness (m elanosis, nigredo) is a p ro jectio n : “For H erm es saith, ‘From thee shall all obscurity flee aw ay,’ 18 he saith n o t ‘from the m etals.’ By obscurity n a u g h t else is to be u n d ersto o d save th e darkness of disease, a n d sickness of body and m in d .” 19 M any passages in A u ro ra consurgens I are significant in this respect. In the “ B ook of O stanes” th e philosophers shed tears over the stone, w hich is enclosed in a n o th e r stone, so that, be dew ed by th e ir tears, it loses its blackness an d becom es w hite as a p e a rl.20 A G ra tia n u s q u o ta tio n in th e R o sa riu m says: “ In al chem y th ere is a c ertain n o b le substance . . . in th e b eg in n in g w hereof is w retchedness w ith vinegar, b u t in the en d joy w ith gladness.” 21 T h e “C o nsilium co n iu g ii” equates th e nigredo w ith m e lan ch o lia.22 V igenere says of the S atu rn in e lead: “ L ead signifies the vexations an d aggravations w ith w hich G od afflicts us an d tro u b les o u r senses.” 23 T h is a d ep t was aw are th a t lead, w hich h ad always been considered an arcane substance, was id en tical w ith the subjective state of depression. Sim ilarly, th e personified p rim a m a te ria in th e “A u re lia o ccu lta” says of h er b ro th e r S atu rn th a t his sp irit was “ overcom e by th e passion of m elancholy.” 24 “ C o n g er ies P a r a c e lsic a e ,” ib id ., I (1659), p . 516. 1S Q u o ta tio n fr o m " T a b . sm arag." 19 “ (H er m es) d ic it e n im ‘a te fu g ie t o m n is o b s c u r ita s / n o n d ic it ‘a m e ta llis .’ P e r o b s c u r ita te m n ih il a liu d in t e llig it u r q u a m te n e b r a e m o r b o r u m e t a e g r itu d in e m c o rp o ris a tq u e m e n tis .” ( T h e a t r . c h e m . , I, 1659, p . 384.) 20 B e r th e lo t, M o y e n a ge, II I, p . 118. 21 “In A Ich im ia est q u o d d a m c o rp u s n o b ile , . . . in c u iu s p r in c ip io e r it m ise ria c u m a c eto , sed in fin e g a u d iu m c u m la e t it ia ” { A r t. a u r if., II, p . 278). 22 A r s c h e m i c a , p p . 125L 2 3 T h e a t r . c h e m . , V I (1661), p . 76. 2 4 Ib id ., IV (1660), p . 505.

440

447

In this co n tex t of th o u g h t, w here suffering a n d sadness play so great a role, it is n o t su rp risin g th a t the tree was b ro u g h t in to connection w ith th e cross of C hrist. T h is analogy was su p p o rte d by the old legend th a t the w ood of th e cross cam e from th e tree o f paradise.23 A n o th e r th in g th a t c o n trib u te d to it was th e quate rn ity , whose sym bol is the cross;26 fo r the tree possesses a q u a te rn a ry q u a lity by reason of th e fact th a t it rep resen ts th e p ro c ess by w hich the fo u r elem ents are u n ite d . T h e q u a te rn ity of the tree goes back beyond the C h ristia n era. I t is fo u n d in Zarathustr a ’s vision of the tree w ith fo u r branches m ad e of gold, silver, steel, a n d “ m ixed iro n .” 27 T h is im age reap p ears la te r in the alchem ical tree of the m etals, w hich was th en co m pared w ith th e cross of C hrist. In R ipley th e royal pair, th e su p rem e opposites, are crucified fo r the purp o se of u n io n an d re b irth .28 “ I f I be lifted up, [as C hrist says,] th e n I w ill draw all m en u n to m e. . . . From th a t tim e forw ard, w hen b o th parts, h av in g been crucified an d exanim ated, are espoused, m a n a n d w om an shall be b u rie d to g eth er an d are afterw ard q u ic k en e d ag ain by th e sp irit of life.” 29 T h e tre e also appears as a sym bol of tra n sfo rm a tio n in a pas sage in D o rn ’s "Speculativa p h ilo so p h ia,” w hich is very in te r esting from th e p o in t o f view of the psychology of relig io n : “ [God] h a th d e te rm in e d to snatch th e sw ord o f his w ra th fro m the hands of th e angel, su b stitu tin g in place th ereo f a th re e p ro n g ed hook o f gold, h a n g in g the sxvord o n a tree: a n d so G o d ’s w rath is tu rn e d in to love.” 30 C h rist as Logos is th e twoedged sw ord, w hich symbolizes G o d ’s w rath, as in R ev elatio n i : 16 . 25 Zockler, T h e Cross o f C h rist, an d B ezold, D ie S ch atzh oh le, p p . 5, 35. 2β D ee, T h e a tr. ch em ., II (1659), p. 202. 27 R eitzen stein an d Schaeder, S tu d ien zu m a n tik e n S y n k retism u s a u s Ira n u n d G riech en la n d , p. 45. 28 Cf. th e oak in th e fo u n t o f ren ew al in T revisan u s, “ D e ch em ico m iraculo," T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), pp. 683ff. [M ysteriu tn C o n iu n ctio n is, pp. 70L] 29 R ip ley , O p era o m n ia , p. S i. "Si e x a lta tu s fu ero, tu n c om n es ad m e traham . A b eo tem pore, q u o p artes su n t desp on satae, q u a e su n t crucifixae e t ex a m m a ta e co n tu m u la n tu r sim u l m as et fo em in a et p ostea revivifican tu r sp iritu v ita e.” 30 T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p. 254. “ (D eus) co n clu sit an gelo g la d iu m irae suae de m an ib u s eripere, cu iu s loco trid en tem h am u m su b stitu it au reu m , g la d io ad arborem suspenso: et sic m u tata est ira D ei in am orem .”

448

449

T h e 31 som ew hat u n u su al allegory o f Christ as the sword h an gin g on a tree is alm ost certainly an analogy o f the serpent han gin g on the cross. In St. A m brose32 the “serpent h u n g on the w o o d ” is a “typus C hristi,” as is the “brazen serpent on the cross” in A lbertus M agnus.33 C hrist as Logos is synonym ous w ith the Naas, the serpent of the N ou s am ong the O phites. T h e A gathod aim on (good spirit) had the form o f a snake, and in P h ilo the snake was considered the “m ost sp iritu al” anim al. O n the oth er hand, its cold b lood and inferior brain-organization do n ot suggest any n o ticea b le degree of conscious d evelopm en t, w h ile its unrelatedness to m an makes it an alien creature that arouses his fear and yet fascinates him . H en ce it is an ex cellen t sym bol for the tw o aspects of the unconscious: its cold and ru th less in stin ctu ality, and its Sophia q u a lity or natural w isdom , w hich is em b o d ied in the archetypes. T h e Logos-nature of Christ represented by the ch th on ic serpent is the m aternal w is dom o f the d iv in e m other, w hich is prefigured by Sapientia in the O ld T estam en t. T h e snake-sym bol thus characterizes Christ as a personification o f the unconscious in all its aspects, and as such he is h u n g on the tree in sacrifice (“w oun d ed by the spear” like O din). Psychologically, this snake sacrifice m ust be understood as an overcom in g of unconsciousness and, at the sam e tim e, of the at titu d e of the son w ho u n con sciou sly hangs on his m other. T h e alchem ists used the same sym bol to represent the transform ation of M ercurius,34 w ho is q u ite d efin itely a personification of the unconscious, as I have sh ow n .35 I have com e across this m o tif several tim es in dreams, on ce as a crucified snake (w ith con scious reference to Joh n 3 : 14), then as a black spider h u n g on a pole w hich changed in to a cross, and finally as the crucified body of a naked w om an. Si [In the Swiss edn., this an d the fo llo w in g par. w ere given at the en d o f sec. 1 8 .— E

d it o r s

32 D e X L I I M a n s io n ib u s F ilio ru m Israel, X X X V (M igne, P.L., vol. 17, col. 34). 33 In h is hym n to the M oth er o f G od: “A ve praeclara m aris S tella .” Cf. Gourm on t, L e L a tin m y s tiq u e , p . 150. [Also Psychology an d A lc h e m y , par. 481 and Fig. 217.] 34 See illu stration in Eleazar, Uraltes chymisches W erck, facing p. 26. T h e book is a forgery o f F la m el’s " R in d en b u ch .” [Cf. M y s te r i u m Coniunctionis, p. 410.] 3 5 “T h e Sp irit M ercurius,” pars. 284ff.

l 8 . T H E R E L A T IO N

O F S U F F E R IN G T O T H E

C O N IU N C T IO

45°

In the above q u o ta tio n from D orn, the three-pronged hook of gold refers to C hrist, for in m edieval allegory the hook w ith w hich G od the F a th e r catches the L eviathan is the crucifix. T h e golden trid e n t is, of course, an allusio n to the T rin ity , an d the fact th a t it is “g o ld en ” is an alchem ical sous-entendu, ju st as th e idea of G od’s transform ation in this strange allegory of D o rn ’s is intim ately b o u n d u p w ith th e alchem ical m ysteriu m . T h e n o tio n of G od th row ing o u t a hook is of M anichaean o ri gin: he used the P rim o rd ial M an as a b a it fo r catching the pow ers of darkness. T h e P rim o rd ial M an was nam ed “ Psyche,” and in T itu s of Bostra he is the w orld soul {ψ υ χ ή α π ά ντ ω ν) . 1 T h is psyche corresponds to th e collective unconscious, w hich, itself of u n ita ry n atu re, is represented by the u n ita ry P rim o rd ial M an. 451 T hese ideas are closely re la ted to the G nostic conception of Sophia-A cham oth in Irenaeus. H e rep o rts th a t the Ένθύμησις [reflection] of the Sophia who dwells above, compelled by necessity, departed with suffering from the Pleroma into the dark ness and empty spaces of the void. Separated from the light of the Pleroma, she was w ithout form or figure, like an untimely birth, because she comprehended nothing [i.e., became unconscious]. But the Christ dwelling on high, outstretched upon the cross, took pity on her, and by his power gave her a form, bu t only in respect of substance, and not so as to convey intelligence [i.e., consciousness]. Having done this, he withdrew his power, and returned [to the Pleroma], leaving Achamoth to herself, in order that she, becoming sensible of the suffering caused by separation from the Pleroma, m ight be influenced by the desire for better things, while possessing in the meantime a kind of odour of immortality left in her by Christ and the Holy Spirit.2 452

A ccording to these G nostics, it was n o t th e P rim o rd ia l M an w ho was cast o u t as a b a it in to the darkness, b u t th e fem inine figure of W isdom , Sophia-A cham oth. I n this way th e m asculine e lem ent escaped th e d an g er of b ein g swallowed by the d a rk pow ers an d re m a in ed safe in th e p n eu m atic realm of light, w hile Sophia, partly by an act of reflection an d p artly d riv en by neces sity, en tered in to re la tio n w ith th e o u te r darkness. T h e suffer1 Bousset, H au ptproblem e 2 Adversus haereses, I, 4.

der Gnosis, p. 178.

ings th a t b e fe ll h e r to o k th e fo rm of v ario u s em o tio n s— sadness, fear, b e w ild e rm e n t, c o n fu sio n , lo n g in g ; n o w she la u g h e d a n d n o w sh e w ep t. F ro m th ese affects (βιαθεσαχ) arose th e e n tire c re a te d w orld. 453 T h is s tra n g e c re a tio n m y th is o b v io u sly “ p sy ch o lo g ical” : it describes, in th e fo rm o f a cosm ic p ro je c tio n , th e s e p a ra tio n of th e fe m in in e a n im a fro m a m a sc u lin e a n d s p iritu a lly o rie n te d consciousness th a t striv es fo r th e final a n d a b so lu te v icto ry of th e s p irit o v er th e w o rld of th e senses, as w as th e case in th e p ag an p h ilo so p h ie s of th a t ep o ch n o less th a n in G n o sticism . T h is d e v e lo p m e n t a n d d iffe re n tia tio n o f consciousness le ft a lite ra ry d e p o sit in th e M e ta m o r p h o s e s of A p u le iu s, a n d m o re p a rtic u la rly in h is ta le o f A m o r a n d Psyche, as E ric h N e u m a n n has sh o w n in his stu d y o f th a t w ork. 454 T h e e m o tio n a l state of S o p h ia su n k in u n co n scio u sn ess (ayvoLa), h e r form lessness, a n d th e p o ssib ility of h e r g e ttin g lost in th e d ark n ess ch a ra c te riz e v ery clearly th e a n im a of a m a n w h o id e n tifies h im se lf a b so lu te ly w ith his re a so n a n d h is s p iritu a lity . H e is in d a n g e r o f b e c o m in g d isso ciated fro m his a n im a a n d th u s lo sin g to u c h a lto g e th e r w ith th e c o m p e n sa tin g pow ers o f th e u n conscious. I n a case lik e th is th e u n co n scio u s u su a lly resp o n d s w ith v io le n t em o tio n s, irrita b ility , lack o f c o n tro l, arro g an ce , feelings o f in fe rio rity , m o o d s, d ep ressio n s, o u tb u rs ts of rage, etc., c o u p le d w ith lack o f self-criticism a n d th e m isju d g m e n ts, m is takes, a n d d elu sio n s w h ic h th is en tails. 455 I n su ch a state a m a n soon loses to u c h w ith re a lity . H is s p irit u a lity becom es ru th le ss, a rro g a n t, a n d ty ra n n ic a l. T h e m o re u n a d a p te d h is id eo lo g y is, th e m o re it d e m a n d s re c o g n itio n a n d is d e te rm in e d to g a in it if necessary b y force. T h is sta te is a d e fin ite ■jrados, a su ffe rin g o f th e so u l, th o u g h a t first it is n o t p erce iv ed as su ch b ecau se of lack o f in tro sp e c tio n , a n d o n ly g ra d u a lly com es to consciousness as a v ag u e m alaise. E v e n tu a lly th is feel in g forces th e m in d to reco g n ize th a t so m e th in g is w ro n g , th a t o n e is in d e e d su fferin g . T h is is th e m o m e n t w h e n p h y sical o r psychological sy m p to m s a p p e a r w h ich can n o lo n g e r b e b a n ish e d fro m consciousness. E x p ressed in th e la n g u ag e of m y th , C h ris t (th e p rin c ip le of m a sc u lin e s p iritu a lity ) p erceiv es th e su fferin g s o f S o p h ia (i.e., th e psyche) a n d th e re b y gives h e r fo rm a n d ex ist ence. B u t h e leaves h e r to h e rse lf so th a t she s h o u ld feel th e fu ll force o f h e r sufferings. W h a t th is m ean s p sy ch ologically is th a t

456

457

the m asculine m in d is c o n ten t m erely to perceive psychic suffer ing, b u t does n o t m ake itself conscious of th e reasons b e h in d it, an d sim ply leaves the anim a in a state of agnoia. T h is process is typical an d can be observed today n o t only in all m asculine neuroses b u t am ong so-called norm al people w ho have com e in to conflict w ith the unconscious thanks to th e ir one-sidedness (usu ally intellectual) and psychological blindness. A lthough, in this psychologem, the P rim o rd ia l M an (C hrist) is still the m eans for co n q u erin g the darkness, he nevertheless shares his role w ith a fem inine being, Sophia, w ho coexisted w ith h u n in the Plerom a. M oreover, the C rucified no lo n g er appears as the b a it on G od’s fishing rod; instead, he “ takes p ity ” on the formless fem inine half, revealing him self to h e r o u tstretch ed u p o n the cross. T h e G reek tex t uses here a stro n g expression: έ τ ε κ τ α θ ε ν τ α , w hich lays p a rtic u la r em phasis o n stretch in g an d ex tension. T h is im age of to rm en t is h eld before h e r so th a t she may recognize his sufferings, an d he hers. B u t before this reco g n itio n can take place, C h rist’s m asculine sp iritu a lity w ithdraw s in to the w orld of light. T h is d e n o u em e n t is typical: as soon as the lig h t catches a glim pse of th e darkness a n d th ere is a possibility of u n itin g w ith it, the pow er drive th a t is in h e re n t in th e lig h t as well as in the darkness asserts itself an d w ill n o t budge from its position. T h e one w ill n o t darken its radiance, a n d the o th e r w ill n o t give u p its gratifying em otions. N e ith e r of them notices th a t th e ir suffering is one and th e same an d is d u e to th e process of becom ing conscious, w hereby an o rig in al u n ity is sp lit in to two irreconcilable halves. T h e re can be n o consciousness w ith o u t this act of discrim ination, n o r can th e re su lta n t d u ality be reunified w ith o u t the ex tin ctio n of consciousness. B ut th e origi n al wholeness rem ains a desideratum (όρεχθτ} τ ω ν δ ια φ ερ ό ν τ ω ν ) for w hich Sophia longs m ore th a n does th e G nostic C hrist. I t is still the case today th a t discrim in atio n an d d ifferen tiatio n m ean m ore to the ratio n alistic in te lle ct th a n w holeness th ro u g h the u n io n of opposites. T h a t is w hy it is th e unconscious w hich p ro duces th e symbols of w holeness.3 T h ese symbols are usually q u a te rn a ry an d consist of two pairs of opposites crossing one an o th er (e.g., le ft/rig h t, ab o v e/ below). T h e fo u r points dem arcate a circle, w hich, a p a rt from 3 P sychology a n d A lc h e m y, pars. i 2 2 ff., and "A Study in th e Process o f In d iv id u a tion .”

the p o in t itself, is th e sim plest sym bol of wholeness a n d th e re fore th e sim plest G od-im age.4 T h is reflection has some b e arin g o n th e em phasis laid on the cross in o u r text, since the cross as w ell as the tree is the m e d iu m of co n ju n ctio n . H en ce St. A ugus tin e lik en ed th e cross to a b rid a l bed, a n d in th e fairytale the h e ro finds his b rid e in the top of a great tree,5 w here also th e sham an finds his heavenly spouse, as does the alchem ist. T h e c o n iu n ctio is a c u lm in a tin g p o in t of life an d at th e same tim e a d eath , fo r w hich reason o u r te x t m entio n s the “fragrance of im m o rtality .’’ O n th e one h a n d the anim a is th e co n n ectin g lin k w ith the w orld beyond an d th e e tern al images, w hile o n the o th e r h a n d h e r em o tio n ality involves m an in th e ch th o n ic w o rld a n d its transitoriness. ig .

458

THE

T R E E AS M A N

L ike th e vision of Z arathustra, the d ream of N eb u ch ad n ez zar, a n d the re p o rt of Bardesanes ( a . d . 154-222) on th e god o f the In d ia n s,1 th e old R a b b in ic idea th a t th e tree of paradise was a m a n 2 exem plifies m a n ’s re la tio n sh ip to the philosophical tree. A ccording to an cie n t tra d itio n m en cam e from trees o r p lan ts.3 T h e tre e is as it w ere an in te rm e d ia te form of m an, since on the one h a n d it springs from the P rim o rd ial M an an d on th e o th e r h a n d it grows in to a m an .4 N a tu ra lly the p atristic * “ G od is a circle w h o se c e n tre is ev ery w h e re a n d th e circ u m fe re n c e n o w h e re .” [Cf. M y s te r iu m C o n iu n c tio n isj p . 47.] 6 [Cf. “T h e P h e n o m e n o lo g y o f th e S p irit in F a iry ta le s ,” p p . 231 fF.] 1 S to b aeu s, I, 3 (ed. W a c h s m u th , I, p p . 67!.), re f e rrin g to a w o o d en s ta tu e in a cave, w ith o u ts tre tc h e d a rm s (lik e o n e c ru cified ), th e r ig h t sid e m ale, th e le ft sid e fem ale. I t co u ld sw eat a n d b leed . 2 “ O f th e f r u it o f th e tr e e ’— h e re tre e o n ly m e a n s m a n , w h o is c o m p a re d to a tre e ” (P irk e d e R a b b i E lie ie r 1 tra n s. F rie d la n d e r, p . 150). “A s is a tre e , ju s t su ch as is th e L o rd o f T re e s, so in d e e d is m a n ” (C o o m arasw am y , “T h e In v e r te d T r e e ,” p. 138). 3 I n I r a n ia n tr a d itio n th e seven m e ta ls flow ed in to th e e a r th fro m th e b o d y o f G a y o m a rt, th e P rim o rd ia l M a n . O u t o f th e m g rew th e reivas p la n t, fro m w h ic h th e first m e n , M a h ry a a n d M ay ry a n a , sp ra n g . (Cf. Ask a n d E m b la , th e first m e n in th e E d d a.) C h ris te n se n , L es T y p e s d u p r e m ie r h o m m e et d u p r e m ie r ro t d a n s V histoire leg e n d a ire des Ir a n ie n sj p . 35. I n th e G ilb e r t Isla n d s, m e n a n d gods com e fro m th e p rim o rd ia l tre e . 4 Ib id ., p . 18, a n d th e B u n d a h is h , 15, 1. T h e c e d a r a n d p e rse a tre e p la y th e sam e ro le in th e a n c ie n t E g y p tia n ta le o f B a ta . C f. J a c o b s o h n , D ie d o g m a lisc h e S te llu n g des K o n ig s in d e r T h e o lo g ie d e r a lte n A e g y p te r , p . 13. I t is to b e re g r e tte d th a t

con cep tion o f C hrist as a tree or v in e 5 exerted a very great influ ence. In Pandora, as we have said, the tree is represented in the form of a w om an, in agreem ent w ith the pictures reproduced in the first part o f this essay, w hich, u n lik e the alchem ical pictures, were done m ostly by w om en. T h is raises the q u estion of how the fem in in e tree-num en should be interpreted. T h e results of our investigation of the historical m aterial have shown that the tree can be interpreted as the A nthropos or self. T h is interpretation is particularly obvious in the sym bolism of the “Scriptum A l b erti” e and is confirm ed by th e fantasy m aterial expressed in our pictures. T h e interpretation o f the fem in in e tree-num en as the self therefore holds good for w om en, b u t for the alchem ists and hum anists the fem in in e representation o f the tree is an ob vious projection o f the anim a figure.7 T h e anim a personifies the fem in in ity o f a man b u t not the self. C orrespondingly, the pa tients w ho drew Figures 29 and 30 d epict the tree-num en as the anim us. In all these cases the contrasexual sym bol has covered up the self. T h is is w hat regularly happens w hen the m an’s fem in in ity, the anim a, or the w om an’s m asculinity, the anim us, is n o t differentiated enough to b e integrated w ith consciousness, so that the self is only p oten tially present as an in tu itio n b u t is n o t yet actualized. 459 In so far as the tree sym bolizes the opus and the transform a tion process ‘‘tam ethice quam physice” (both m orally and phys ically), it also signifies the life process in general. Its identity w ith M ercurius, the spiritu s vegetativus, confirm s this view . Since the opus is a life, death, and rebirth mystery, the tree as w ell acquires this significance and in ad d ition the quality o f w is dom , as w e have seen from the view o f the Barbeliots reported in Irenaeus: “From m an [ = A nthropos] and gnosis is born the these transform ation processes, w hich are o f great interest as regards th e psy chology of religion , are om itted in P ritchard’s recension o f the B ata fairytale in h is A n c ie n t N e a r E astern T e x ts. 5 "Fruitful tree” in St. Gregory the Great, S u p er C an t. C an t., II, 4 (M igne, P .L ., vol. 79, col. 495). Cf. also supra, par. 407, n. 10. A s v in e in J o h n 15 : 1. T h e B u d dha, lik e C hrist (supra, par. 419), w as nam ed the tree of paradise {B u ddh a-C arita o f A shvaghosha: SBE1 X L IX , p . 157). ®Supra, section i z . I Cf. A ldrovandus (1522-1605) and h is in terp retation o f the “E nigm a o f B o logn a” (D en drologia, I, p . 211), in M y ste riu m C on iu n ctio n is, p p . 68ff.

tre e , w h ic h th e y also call g n o sis.” 8 In th e G nosis o f J u s tin , th e an g el B a ru c h , n a m e d th e “ w o o d of life ,” 9 is th e an g el of re v e la tio n , ju s t as th e su n -an d -m o o n tre e in th e R o m a n c e of A le x a n d e r fo re te lls th e f u tu r e .10 H o w e v er, th e cosm ic asso ciatio n s o f th e tre e as w o rld -tre e a n d w o rld-axis tak e second place am o n g th e alch em ists as w ell as in m o d e rn fantasies, b ecau se b o th a re m o re c o n c e rn e d w ith .the in d iv id u a tio n process, w h ic h is n o lo n g e r p ro je c te d in to th e cosm os. A n e x c e p tio n to th is r u le m ay b e fo u n d in th e ra r e case, re p o r te d by N e lk e n ,11 o f a schizo p h re n ic p a tie n t in w hose cosm ic system th e F a th e r-G o d h a d a tre e o f life g ro w in g o u t of his b reast. I t b o re re d a n d w h ite fru its, o r spheres, w h ich w ere w orlds. R e d a n d w h ite are a lc h e m ical colours, re d sig n ify in g th e s u n a n d w h ite th e m o o n . O n th e to p o f th e tre e sat a dove a n d an eagle, re c a llin g th e sto rk o n th e su n -an d -m o o n tre e in th e “ S c rip tu m A lb e r ti.” A n y k n o w led g e o f th e a lch em ical p a ra lle ls was q u ite o u t of th e q u e s tio n in th is case. 46° O n th e ev id en ce of th e m a te ria l w e h av e co llected , we can see th a t th e sp o n ta n e o u s p ro d u c ts o f th e u n co n scio u s in m o d e rn m a n d e p ic t th e arc h e ty p e of th e tre e in a w ay th a t b rin g s o u t q u ite p la in ly th e h isto ric a l p arallels. So fa r as I c a n ju d g e , th e o n ly h isto ric a l m o d els of w h ich m y p a tie n ts m ig h t h av e m a d e conscious use a re th e B ib lic a l tre e o f p a ra d ise a n d o n e o r tw o fairy tales. B u t I c a n n o t re c a ll a sin g le case in w h ic h it was sp o n ta n eo u sly a d m itte d th a t th e p a tie n t was consciously th in k in g of th e B ib le story. I n every case th e im ag e of th e tre e p re s e n te d itse lf sp o n tan eo u sly , a n d w h e n e v e r a fe m in in e b e in g a tta c h e d itse lf to th e tree, n o n e o f th e p a tie n ts associated it w ith th e snake o n th e tre e of k n o w led g e. T h e p ic tu re s show m o re o f a n affinity w ith th e a n c ie n t id e a of th e tre e n y m p h th a n w ith th e B ib lica l p ro to ty p e . I n Je w ish tr a d itio n th e sn ak e is also in te r p r e te d as L ilith . T h e r e is a stro n g p re ju d ic e in fa v o u r of th e assu m p tio n th a t c e rta in fo rm s of ex p ressio n e x ist o n ly becau se a p a tte r n fo r th e m m ay b e fo u n d in th e resp ectiv e sp h e re of c u ltu re . I f th a t w ere so in th e p re s e n t in stan ce, all ex p ressio n s o f th is ty p e 8 A d versu s haereses, I, 29, 3. T h e fire-tree o f Sim on M agus is a sim ilar con cep tion (H ip p olytu s, E lench os, V I, g, 8). » Ibid., V , 26, 6. 19 See supra, par. 403, n. 24. n “A n alytisch e B eob ach tu n gen uber P h an tasien ein es S ch izop h ren en ,” p . 541.

w ould have to be m odelled on the tree of paradise. B u t th at, as we have seen, is n o t the case: th e long obsolete concept of the tree nym ph predom inates over the tree of paradise or C hristm as tree; in fact there are even allusions to the equally obsolete cos m ic tree an d even to the arbor inversa, w hich, alth o u g h it fo u n d its way in to alchem y via the C abala, now here plays a role in o u r c u ltu re. O u r m aterial is, how ever, fully in accord w ith the w ide spread, prim itiv e sham anistic conceptions of the tree an d the heavenly b rid e ,12 who is a typical anim a pro jectio n . She is the ayam i (fam iliar, protective spirit) of the sham an ancestors. H e r face is h alf black, half red. Som etim es she appears in th e form of a w inged tiger.13 S p itteler also likens the “L ady Soul” to a tig er.14 T h e tree represents the life of th e sh am an ’s heavenly b rid e ,15 an d has a m a te rn al significance.18 A m ong th e Y akuts a tree w ith eig h t branches is the birth p lace of th e first m an. H e is suckled by a w om an th e top p a rt of whose body grows o u t of the tru n k .17 T h is m o tif is also fo u n d am ong m y exam ples (Figure 2 2 ).

46»

As well as w ith a fem inine being, the tree is also connected w ith the snake, th e dragon, an d o th e r anim als, as in the case of Yggdrasil,18 th e Persian tree G aokerena in th e lake of V ourukasha, o r the tree of the H esperides, n o t to m e n tio n th e holy trees of In d ia, in whose shadow m ay often be seen dozens of naga ( = snake) stones.19 46a T h e in v erted tree plays a great ro le am ong the East S iberian sham ans. K agarow has p u b lish ed a ph o to g rap h of one such tree, n a m ed Nakassa, from a specim en in th e L e n in g ra d M useum . T h e roots signify hairs, an d o n th e tru n k , n e a r th e roots, a face has been carved, show ing th a t the tree represents a m an .20 Pre12 Eliade, Shamanism, 13 Ibid., p. 72.

pp. 7gf., 142, 344, 346.

Prom etheus and E pim etheus (trails. Muirhead), p. 38. (Cf. Psychological T ypes, trans. Baynes, p. 212.) In China, the tiger is a symbol of yin. 15 Eliade, p. 75. 15 Pp. 117-18. 17 P. 272. 18 Squirrel, stag. Yggdrasil means “O din’s horse.” (Ninck, G otter und Jenseitsglauben d er Germ anen, p. 191.) For the fem inine significance of Yggdrasil see Symbols of Transform ation, p. 296. 19 For instance, before the gate of the fort at Seringapatam. Cf. Fergusson, Tree and Serpent W orship. 20 Kagarow, “Der umgekehrte Schamanenbaum," p. 183.

s u m a b ly th is is th e s h a m a n h im self, o r h is g re a te r p e rso n a lity . T h e sh a m a n clim b s th e m ag ic tre e in o rd e r to fin d h is tr u e self in th e u p p e r w o rld . E lia d e says in his e x c e lle n t stu d y of sh a m a n ism : “ T h e E sk im o sh a m a n feels th e n e e d fo r th ese ecstatic j o u r neys b ecau se it is ab o v e a ll d u r in g tra n c e th a t h e b eco m es tr u ly h im self: th e m y stical e x p e rie n c e is necessary to h im as a c o n s tit u e n t o f his tr u e p e rs o n a lity .” 21 T h e ecstasy is o fte n a cc o m p a n ie d b y a sta te in w h ic h th e sh am an is “ possessed” by h is fa m il iars o r g u a rd ia n sp irits. B y m ean s o f th is possession h e ac q u ire s his “ ‘m ystical o rg an s,’ w h ich in som e so rt c o n s titu te h is tr u e a n d c o m p le te s p ir itu a l p e rs o n a lity .” 22 T h is co n firm s th e psy ch o lo g ical in fe re n c e th a t m ay b e d ra w n fro m sh am an istic sym bolism , n a m e ly th a t it is a p ro je c tio n o f th e in d iv id u a tio n process. T h is in fe re n c e , as w e h av e seen, is tr u e also of alch em y , a n d in m o d e r n fan tasies o f th e tre e it is e v id e n t th a t th e a u th o rs of su ch p ic tu re s w ere try in g to p o rtra y a n in n e r process o f d e v e lo p m e n t in d e p e n d e n t of th e ir consciousness a n d w ill. T h e process u su ally consists in th e u n io n o f tw o p airs of o p p o sites, a lo w e r (w ater, blackness, a n im a l, snake, etc.) w ith a n u p p e r (b ird , lig h t, h ead , etc.), a n d a le ft (fe m in in e ) w ith a r ig h t (m ascu lin e). T h e u n io n of o p p o sites, w h ic h plays su ch a g re a t a n d in d e e d decisive ro le in alch em y , is o f e q u a l sig n ifican ce in th e psychic process in itia te d b y th e c o n fro n ta tio n w ith th e u n co n scio u s, so th e oc c u rre n c e of sim ila r o r ev en id e n tic a l sym bols is n o t su rp risin g . 2 0 . T H E IN T ER PR E T A T IO N A N D IN TEG RATIO N OF T H E U NCONSCIO US

463

I t has n o t y e t b e e n u n d e rs to o d in m a n y q u a rte rs — n o r, I am sorry to say, by m y m e d ical co lleag u es— how a series of fan tasies such as I h av e d e sc rib e d com es in to ex isten ce in th e first place, a n d secondly w hy I c o n c e rn m yself so m u c h w ith co m p a ra tiv e research in to a sy m b o lism th a t is u n k n o w n to th em . I a m a fra id th a t all sorts of u n c o rre c te d p re ju d ic e s still im p e d e u n d e r s ta n d ing, ab o v e all th e a r b itr a r y a ssu m p tio n th a t n eu ro ses as w ell as d ream s co n sist o f n o th in g b u t rep ressed in fa n tile m e m o ries a n d w ishes, a n d th a t psychic c o n te n ts a re e ith e r p u re ly p e rso n a l o r, if im p e rso n a l, are d e riv e d fro m th e co llectiv e consciousness. 21 Shamanism ., p. 22 Ibid., p . 3 2 8 .

293

464

Psychic disturbances, like som atic disturbances, are highly com plex p h en o m en a w hich cannot be e x p lain ed by a pu rely aetiological theory. Besides th e cause an d th e u n k n o w n X of the in d iv id u a l’s disposition, we m ust also take in to account the teleological aspect of fitness in biology, w hich in th e psychic realm w ould have to be form ulated as m eaning. In psychic d istu rb ances it is by no m eans sufficient in all cases m erely to b rin g th e supposed o r real causes to consciousness. T h e tre a tm e n t involves th e in te g ra tio n of contents th a t have becom e dissociated from consciousness— n o t always as a re su lt of repression, w hich very often is only a secondary p henom enon . In d eed , it is usually th e case th a t, in the course of d evelopm en t follow ing p u b erty , con sciousness is co n fro n ted w ith affective tendencies, im pulses, and fantasies w hich for a variety of reasons it is n o t w illin g o r n o t able to assim ilate. It then reacts w ith repression in various form s, in the effort to get rid of th e tro u b leso m e in tru d ers. T h e g eneral ru le is th a t th e m ore negative the conscious a ttitu d e is, a n d the m ore it resists, devalues, and is afraid, the m ore re p u l sive, aggressive, a n d frig h ten in g is the face w hich th e dissociated c o n ten t assumes. 465 Every form of com m unication w ith th e split-off p a rt of th e psyche is therapeutically effective. T h is effect is also b ro u g h t a b o u t by the re a l or m erely supposed discovery of the causes. E ven w hen the discovery is no m ore th a n an assum ption o r a fantasy, it has a healin g effect a t least by suggestion if th e analyst him self believes in it a n d /n ak es a serious a tte m p t to u n d erstan d . If on the o th e r h a n d he d o ubts his aetiological theory, his chances of success sink a t once, an d h e th e n feels com pelled to look at least for real causes w hich w ould be convincing to an in te llig e n t p a tie n t as w ell as to him self. If he is in c lin e d to be critical, this task m ay becom e a heavy b u rd en , a n d o ften he w ill n o t succeed in overcom ing his doubts. T h e success of th e tre a t m e n t is th e n in jeopardy. T h is dilem m a explains th e fanatical d o ctrin airism of F re u d ia n orthodoxy. 466 I w ill illu strate the p ro b lem by m eans of an exam ple w hich I cam e across recently. A certain M r. X , w ho was u n k n o w n to me, w rote th a t he h a d read m y book A n sw er to J o b , w hich h a d in te r ested him very m u ch an d p u t him in a great com m otion. H e h ad given it to his frie n d Y to read, an d Y h ad th e re u p o n h ad th e follow ing dream : H e was back in th e concentration cam p and

saw a m ig h ty eagle circling above it, looking for prey. T h e situa tion became dangerous and frightening, and Y w ondered how he was to protect himself. H e tho u g h t he m ig h t be able to fly u p in a rocket-propelled aircraft an d shoot dow n the eagle. X d e scribed Y as a ratio n alistic in tellectu al w ho h ad sp en t a long tim e in a co n ce n tra tio n cam p. X an d Y b o th re fe rre d th e d ream to th e affects th a t h a d been released by th e read in g of m y book o n the previous day. Y w ent to X for advice a b o u t the dream . X was of th e o p in io n th a t the eagle spying on Y re fe rre d to h im self, w h ereu p o n Y re jo in e d th a t he d id n ’t believe it, b u t th o u g h t the eagle re fe rre d to m e, th e a u th o r of the book. 467 X now w anted to h e a r m y op in io n . I t is in general a tricky business to try to in te rp re t the dream s of people one does n o t know personally, an d in the absence of am plificatory m aterial. W e m ust therefore c o n te n t ourselves w ith asking a few questions w hich are suggested by w hat m aterial th e re is. W hy, for in stance, sh ould X th in k he knew th a t the eagle re fe rre d to h im self? F ro m w h at I co u ld g ath er from th e letter, it ap p eared th a t X h a d im p a rte d a certain a m o u n t of psychological know ledge to his frie n d an d therefore felt him self in th e role of a m e n to r who could, as it w ere, see th ro u g h his frie n d ’s gam e from above. A t any ra te he was toying w ith the idea th a t it was disagreeable for Y to be spied u p o n by h im , th e psychologist. X was thus in the p o sition of a psychotherapist w ho by m eans of th e sexual theory know s in advance w hat is lu rk in g b e h in d neuroses a n d dream s, an d w ho, from the lofty w atch-tow er of su p erio r insight, gives th e p a tie n t th e feeling th a t he is b e in g seen th ro u g h . I n th e dream s of his p a tie n t he always expects him self to a p p ea r in w hatever disguise m ay be in v e n te d by the m ystic “censor.” In this way X readily cam e to conjecture th a t he was th e eagle. 468 Y was 0 f a d ifferen t o p in io n . H e seems n o t to have been con scious of b ein g in v igilated or seen th ro u g h by X , b u t, reasonably enough, w en t back to th e obvious source of his dream , nam ely m y book, w hich h a d evidently m ade an im pression o n him . F o r this reason he n am ed m e the eagle. W e can conclude from this th a t h e felt h e was b ein g som ehow m ed d led w ith, as th o u g h som eone h ad fo u n d h im out, o r h a d p u t his finger on a sore spot in a way th a t w asn’t en tire ly to his likin g . T h e re was n o n eed for h im to be conscious of this feeling, for otherw ise it w o u ld hard ly have b een rep resen ted in a dream .

4^9

H e re in te r p r e ta tio n clashes ag ain st in te r p r e ta tio n , a n d th e o n e is as a rb itr a r y as th e o th e r. T h e d re a m itse lf does n o t give th e least in d ic a tio n in e ith e r d ire c tio n . O n e m ig h t p e rh a p s haz a rd th e view th a t Y was r a th e r a fra id o f th e s u p e rio r in s ig h t of his frie n d a n d th e re fo re d isg u ised h im u n d e r th e fagade o f th e eagle so as n o t to reco g n ize h im . B u t d id Y h im se lf m ak e his d ream ? F re u d supposes th e ex isten ce of a cen so r w ho is re s p o n sib le fo r these tran sm o g rifica tio n s. As ag ain st th is I tak e th e view , re in fo rc e d by e x p e rie n c e , th a t a d re a m is q u ite cap ab le, if it w ants to, o f n a m in g th e m o st p a in fu l a n d d isag ree ab le th in g s w ith o u t th e least re g a rd fo r th e feelin g s of th e d re a m e r. If th e d re a m does n o t in fact d o so, th e re is n o sufficient reaso n fo r su p p o sin g th a t it m e an s so m e th in g o th e r th a n w h a t it says. I th e re fo re m a in ta in th a t w h e n o u r d re a m says "e a g le ” it m ean s a n eagle. T h u s I in sist o n th e very asp ect o f d ream s w h ich m akes th e m a p p e a r so n o n sen sical to o u r reaso n . I t w o u ld b e so m u c h s im p le r a n d m o re rea so n a b le if th e eagle m e a n t M r. X . 47° I n m y view , th e n , th e task of th e in te r p r e ta tio n is to fin d o u t w h a t th e eagle, aside fro m o u t p e rso n a l fantasies, m ig h t m e a n . I w o u ld th e re fo re advise th e d re a m e r to s ta rt in v e stig a tin g w h at th e eagle is qu a eagle, a n d w h a t g e n e ra l m e an in g s m a y b e a ttr ib u te d to it. T h e so lu tio n o f th is task leads s tra ig h t in to th e h isto ry of sym bols, a n d h e re w e fin d th e c o n cre te reaso n w hy I co n c e rn m yself w ith research es w h ich are a p p a re n tly so re m o te fro m th e d o c to r’s c o n s u ltin g ro o m . 471 O n ce th e d re a m e r has estab lish ed th e g e n e ra l m e an in g s of th e eagle w h ich a re n e w a n d u n k n o w n to h im (fo r h e w ill hav e b e e n fa m ilia r w ith m a n y o f th e m fro m lite r a tu r e a n d co m m o n speech), h e m u s t in v e stig ate in w h a t re la tio n s h ip th e e x p e rie n c e o f th e p re v io u s day, n a m e ly th e re a d in g o f m y bo o k , stan d s to th e sym bol of th e eagle. T h e q u e s tio n is: w h a t was it th a t affected h im so m u c h th a t it gave rise to th e fairy tale m o tif o f a g re a t eagle ca p a b le o f in ju r in g o r m a k in g off w ith a g ro w n m an? T h e im age o f a n o b v io u sly g ig a n tic (i.e., m y th ical) b ird , c ir c lin g h ig h in th e sky a n d su rv ey in g th e e a rth w ith all-seeing eye, is in d e e d suggestive in v iew of th e c o n te n t of m y b o o k , w h ich is co n c e rn e d w ith th e fa te o f m a n ’s id e a o f G od. 47» I n th e d re a m Y is b a c k in th e c o n c e n tra tio n cam p , w h ic h is su p erv ised by a n "eag le eye.” T h is p o in ts c learly e n o u g h to a s itu a tio n w h ich is fe a re d b y th e d re a m e r a n d w h ich m akes his

473

474

475

energetic defence m easures seem plausible. In o rd e r to shoot dow n th e m ythical b ird , he w ants to em ploy th e m ost advanced technological in v e n tio n — a rocket-propelled aircraft. T h is is one of th e greatest triu m p h s of th e ratio n alistic in te lle ct a n d is d ia m etrically opposed to the m ythical b ird , whose m en acin g pres ence is to be averted w ith its help. B u t w hat k in d of d an g er lurks in m y book fo r such a personality? T h e answ er to this is n o t difficult w hen one know s th a t Y is a Jew . A t all events a d o o r is o pened to p roblem s th a t lead in to regions th a t have n o th in g to do w ith personal resentm ents. I t is ra th e r a q u estio n of those principles, dom inants, o r ru lin g ideas w hich re g u late o u r a tti tu d e to life a n d the w orld, of convictions an d beliefs w hich, as experience shows, are indispensable psychic p h en o m en a. In d eed they are so indispensable th a t w hen the old systems of th o u g h t collapse new ones in stantly take th e ir place. N euroses, lik e all illnesses, are sym ptom s of m alad ju stm en t. Because of som e obstacle— a c o n stitu tio n al weakness o r defect, w rong ed ucation, b a d experiences, an u n su ita b le a ttitu d e , etc.— one shrinks from the difficulties w hich life brings an d thus finds oneself back in the w o rld of th e in fan t. T h e unconscious com pensates this regression by p ro d u cin g symbols w hich, w hen u n derstood objectively, th a t is, by m eans of com parative research, reactivate general ideas th a t u n d e rlie all such n a tu ra l systems of th o u g h t. In this way a change of a ttitu d e is b ro u g h t a b o u t w hich bridges the dissociation betw een m an as he is an d m an as he o u g h t to be. S om ething of the sort is ta k in g place in o u r d ream : Y m ay w ell be suffering from a dissociation betw een a highly ra tio n alistic, in tellectualized consciousness a n d an eq u ally irra tio n a l b ack g ro u n d w hich is anxiously repressed. T h e an x iety appears in th e dream an d should be acknow ledged as a real fact b elo n g in g to th e personality, for it is nonsense to assert th a t one has n o an x iety only because one is incapable of discovering th e reason fo r it. Yet th a t is w hat one generally does. If the an x iety co u ld b e accepted, th e re w o uld also be a chance of discovering an d u n d e rsta n d in g th e reason. T h is reason is vividly p o rtray ed by the eagle in th e dream . A ssum ing th a t the eagle is a n archaic G od-im age whose p ow er a person c an n o t escape, th e n it m akes very little differ ence in practice w h e th er he believes in G od o r n o t. T h e fact th a t

h is p s y c h e is s o c o n s t i t u t e d a s t o p r o d u c e s u c h p h e n o m e n a s h o u l d b e e n o u g h f o r h i m , f o r h e c a n n o m o r e g e t r i d o f h is p s y c h e t h a n h e c a n g e t r id o f h is b o d y , n e i t h e r o f w h i c h c a n b e e x c h a n g e d f o r a n o t h e r . H e is a p r is o n e r o f h is o w n p s y c h o p h y s i c a l c o n s t i t u t i o n , a n d m u s t r e c k o n w i t h t h is fa c t w h e t h e r h e w i l l o r n o . O n e c a n o f c o u r s e l i v e i n d e f ia n c e o f t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e b o d y a n d r u i n itg h e a l t h , a n d t h e s a m e c a n b e d o n e i n r e g a r d to t h e p s y c h e . A n y o n e w h o w a n t s t o l i v e w i l l r e f r a in f r o m t h e s e tr ic k s a n d w i l l a t a ll t im e s c a r e f u l ly i n q u i r e i n t o t h e b o d y ’s a n d t h e p s y c h e ’s n e e d s . O n c e a c e r t a in l e v e l o f c o n s c io u s n e s s a n d i n t e l l i g e n c e h a s b e e n r e a c h e d , i t is n o lo n g e r p o s s ib le t o l i v e o n e s id e d ly , a n d t h e w h o l e o f t h e p s y c h o s o m a t ic in s t in c t s , w h ic h s t i l l f u n c t i o n i n a n a t u r a l w a y a m o n g p r i m it iv e s , m u s t c o n s c io u s ly b e ta k en in to a c c o u n t. 476 I n th e sa m e w a y th a t th e b o d y n e e d s fo o d , a n d n o t ju st an y k i n d o f f o o d b u t o n l y t h a t w h i c h s u it s it , t h e p s y c h e n e e d s to k n o w t h e m e a n i n g o f it s e x i s t e n c e — n o t j u s t a n y m e a n in g , b u t t h e m e a n i n g o f t h o s e im a g e s a n d id e a s w h ic h r e f le c t it s n a t u r e a n d w h i c h o r i g i n a t e i n t h e u n c o n s c i o u s . T h e u n c o n s c io u s s u p p l i e s as i t w e r e t h e a r c h e t y p a l f o r m , w h ic h i n i t s e l f is e m p t y a n d ir r e p r e s e n t a b le . C o n s c io u s n e s s i m m e d i a t e l y f ills i t w i t h r e la t e d o r s im il a r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s o t h a t i t c a n b e p e r c e iv e d . F o r t h is r e a s o n a r c h e t y p a l id e a s a r e lo c a lly , t e m p o r a lly , a n d i n d iv id u a lly c o n d itio n e d . 477 T h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s ta k e s p la c e s p o n t a n e o u s ly o n l y i n r a r e c a se s. A s a r u l e s p e c ia l e ffo r ts a r e n e e d e d i n o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e c o n t e n t s s p o n t a n e o u s ly p r o d u c e d b y t h e u n c o n s c io u s . W h e r e c e r t a in g e n e r a l id e a s , w h i c h a r e r e g a r d e d as v a l i d o r a r e s t i l l e ffic a c io u s , a lr e a d y e x i s t , t h e y a c t as a g u i d e t o u n d e r s t a n d in g , a n d t h e n e w l y a c q u ir e d e x p e r i e n c e is a r t ic u la t e d w i t h o r s u b o r d in a te d to th e e x is t in g sy stem o f th o u g h t. A g o o d e x a m p le o f t h is is a f f o r d e d b y t h e l i f e o f t h e p a t r o n s a in t o f S w it z e r la n d , N i k l a u s v o n d e r F l u e , w h o , b y d i n t o f l o n g m e d i t a t i o n a n d w i t h t h e h e l p o f a l i t t l e b o o k w r it t e n b y a G e r m a n m y s tic , g r a d u a lly t u r n e d h is t e r r i f y in g v i s i o n o f G o d i n t o a n im a g e o f t h e T r i n i t y . O r a g a in , t h e t r a d i t i o n a l s y s t e m m a y b e u n d e r s t o o d i n a n e w w a y as a r e s u l t o f t h e n e w e x p e r ie n c e s . 478 I t g o e s w i t h o u t s a y in g t h a t a l l p e r s o n a l a ffe c ts a n d r e s e n t m e n t s p a r t ic ip a t e i n t h e m a k i n g o f a d r e a m a n d c a n t h e r e f o r e b e r e a d f r o m it s im a g e r y . T h e a n a ly s t , e s p e c ia lly a t t h e b e g i n n i n g

o f a t r e a tm e n t, w ill h a v e to b e sa tisfie d w ith th is , s in c e i t seem s r e a s o n a b le to th e p a t i e n t t h a t h is d re a m s c o m e f ro m h is p e rs o n a l p sy c h e. H e w o u ld b e c o m p le te ly b e w ild e r e d if th e c o lle c tiv e as p e c t o f h is d re a m s w e re p o i n te d o u t to h im . F r e u d h im s e lf, as w e k n o w , t r i e d to r e d u c e m y th m o tifs to p e rs o n a l p sy c h o lo g y , in d e fia n c e o f h is o w n in s ig h t t h a t d re a m s c o n ta in a rc h a ic re s id u e s . T h e s e a re n o t p e rs o n a l a c q u is itio n s , b u t v e stig e s o f a n e a r lie r c o lle c tiv e p sy c h e. T h e r e a re , h o w e v e r, n o t a few p a tie n ts w h o , as if to p r o v e th e r e v e r s ib ility o f p s y c h o lo g ic a l r u le s , n o t o n ly u n d e r s ta n d th e u n iv e r s a l s ig n ific a n c e o f t h e i r d r e a m s y m b o ls b u t a lso fin d i t th e r a p e u tic a lly e ffe c tiv e. T h e g r e a t p sy c h ic system s of h e a lin g , th e r e lig io n s , lik e w is e c o n s is t o f u n iv e rs a l m y th m o tifs w h o se o r ig in a n d c o n te n t a r e c o lle c tiv e a n d n o t p e rs o n a l; h e n c e L e v y -B ru h l r ig h t ly c a lle d su c h m o tifs r e p r e s e n ta t i o n s c o lle c tives. T h e c o n s c io u s p sy c h e is c e r ta in ly o f a p e rs o n a l n a tu r e , b u t i t is b y n o m e a n s th e w h o le o f th e p sy c h e. T h e f o u n d a t i o n o f c o n sc io u sn e ss, t h e p sy c h e p e r se, is u n c o n s c io u s , a n d its s tr u c tu r e , lik e t h a t o f th e b o d y , is c o m m o n to a ll, its in d iv i d u a l fe a tu r e s b e in g o n ly in s ig n ific a n t v a ria n ts . F o r th e s a m e re a s o n it. is d iffic u lt o r a lm o s t im p o s s ib le f o r th e i n e x p e r ie n c e d eye to re c o g n iz e in d iv i d u a l faces in a c ro w d o f c o lo u r e d p e o p le . 479 W h e n , as i n t h e d r e a m o f th e ea g le , s y m b o ls a p p e a r w h ic h h a v e n o t h i n g a b o u t th e m t h a t w o u ld p o i n t to a p a r t i c u l a r p e r so n , th e r e is n o g r o u n d f o r a s s u m in g t h a t s u c h a p e rs o n is b e in g d is g u is e d . O n th e c o n tr a ry , it is m u c h m o r e p r o b a b le t h a t th e d r e a m m e a n s j u s t w h a t i t says. So w h e n a d r e a m a p p a r e n tly d is g u ise s s o m e th in g a n d a p a r t i c u l a r p e rs o n th e r e f o r e seem s i n d i c a te d , th e r e is a n o b v io u s te n d e n c y a t w o r k n o t to a llo w th is p e rs o n to a p p e a r , b e c a u s e , i n th e se n se o f th e d r e a m , h e r e p r e s e n ts a m is ta k e n w a y o f a c tin g o r th in k in g . W h e n , f o r in s ta n c e , as n o t in f r e q u e n t ly h a p p e n s in w o m e n ’s d re a m s , th e a n a ly s t is r e p r e s e n te d as a h a ir d r e s s e r (b e c a u s e h e “ fix es” th e h e a d ), th e a n a ly s t is b e in g n o t so m u c h d is g u is e d as d e v a lu e d . T h e p a ti e n t, i n h e r c o n sc io u s life , is o n ly to o r e a d y to a c k n o w le d g e a n y k i n d o f a u th o r i ty b e c a u s e sh e c a n n o t o r w ill n o t u se h e r o w n h e a d . T h e a n a ly s t (says th e d r e a m ) s h o u ld h a v e n o m o r e s ig n ific a n c e th a n th e h a ir d r e s s e r w h o p u ts h e r h e a d r ig h t so t h a t s h e c a n t h e n u s e i t h e rs e lf. 480 I f, th e r e f o r e , in s te a d o f r e d u c i n g th e d r e a m s y m b o ls to c ir c u m s ta n c e s , th in g s , o r p e rs o n s w h ic h th e a n a ly s t p re s u m e s to

know in advance, we regard them as real symbols pointing to som ething unknown, then the w hole character o£ analytical therapy is altered. T h e unconscious is then no longer reduced to known, conscious factors (this procedure, incidentally, does not abolish the dissociation between conscious and unconscious) but is recognized as in fact unconscious, and the symbol is not reduced either but is amplified by means of the context which the dreamer supplies and by comparison with similar mythologems so that we can see what the unconscious intends it to mean. In this way the unconscious can be integrated and the dissocia tion overcome. T h e reductive procedure, on the other hand, leads away from the unconscious and merely reinforces the one sidedness of the conscious mind. T h e more rigorous of Freud’s pupils have failed to follow up the Master’s lead with a deeper exploration of the unconscious and have rem ained satisfied w ith reductive analysis. 4gi As I have said, the confrontation with the unconscious usu ally begins in the realm of the personal unconscious, that is, of personally acquired contents which constitute the shadow, and from there leads to archetypal symbols which represent the col lective unconscious. T h e aim of the confrontation is to abolish the dissociation. In order to reach this goal, either nature herself or medical intervention precipitates the conflict of opposites w ithout w hich no union is possible. T h is means not only bring ing the conflict to consciousness; it also involves an experience of a special kind, namely, the recognition of an alien “other” in oneself, or the objective presence of another w ill. T h e alche mists, w ith astonishing accuracy, called this barely understand able thing Mercurius, in which concept they included all the statements which mythology and natural philosophy had ever made about him: he is God, daemon, person, thing, and the in nermost secret in man; psychic as well as somatic. H e is him self the source of all opposites, since he is duplex and utriusque capax (“capable of both”). T h is elusive entity symbolizes the un conscious in every particular, and a correct assessment of sym bols leads to direct confrontation w ith it. 488 As well as being an irrational experience, this confrontation is a process of realization. Accordingly the alchemical opus con sisted of two parts: the work in the laboratory, w ith all its em o tional and daemonic hazards, and the scientia or Iheoriaj the

g u id in g p rin c ip le of the opus by w hich its results w ere in te r p re te d an d given th e ir p ro p e r place. T h e w hole process, w hich today we u n d e rsta n d as psychological developm ent, was desig n a te d th e “ philosophical tre e ,” a “p o etic” com parison th a t draw s an a p t analogy betw een th e n a tu ra l grow th of th e psyche an d th a t of a p lan t. F or this reason it seem ed to m e desirable to discuss in some detail the processes w hich u n d e rlie b o th alchem y an d th e m o d e rn psychology of th e unconscious. I am aw are, a n d hope I have also m ade it clear to the read er, th a t m erely in tellec tu a l u n d e rsta n d in g is n o t sufficient. It supplies us only w ith v erbal concepts, b u t it does n o t give us th e ir tru e c o n ten t, w hich is to be fo u n d in th e liv in g experience of the process as ap p lied to ourselves. W e w o u ld do w ell to h a rb o u r n o illusions in this respect: no u n d e rsta n d in g by m eans of words an d n o im ita tio n can replace actu al experience. A lchem y lost its v ital substance w hen some of th e alchem ists ab an d o n ed th e la b o ra to riu m for the o ra to riu m , th e re to b efu d d le them selves w ith an ever m ore n eb u lo u s m ysticism , w hile others con v erted th e o ra to riu m in to a la b o ra to riu m an d discovered chem istry. W e feel sorry for the form er an d adm ire the la tte r, b u t no one asks a b o u t th e fate of th e psyche, w hich th e re a fte r vanished from sight fo r several h u n d re d years.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY T h e item s of the bibliography are arranged alphabetically u n d er two headings: A. A ncient volum es containing collections of alchem ical tracts by various authors; B. G eneral bibliography, inclu d in g crossreferences to the m aterial in section A. Short titles of the an cient vol umes are p rin te d in capital letters. A.

C O L L E C T I O N S OF A L C H E M I C A L T R A C T S BY V A R I O U S A U T H O R S

A R S C H E M IC A j qu od sit licita recte exercentibus, probationes doctissimorum iurisconsultorum. . . . A rgentorati [Strasbourg], 1566. Contents quoted in this volume: i

Septem tractatus seu cap itu la H erm etis Trism egisti aurei [pp. 7-31; usually referred to as “T ractatu s aureus”] ii H o rtu la n u s: C om m entariolum in T ab u Iam Sm aragdinam [pp· 33- 47] iii Studium Consilii coniugii de massa solis et lunae [pp. 4 8 263; usually referred to as “C onsilium coniugii”] A R T I S A U R I F E R A E quam chemiam vacant. . . . Basileae [Basel], [>593]· 2 vols· Contents quoted in this volume: VOLUM E

i ii iii iv v vi v ii

A llegoriae super lib ru m T u rb a e [pp. 139-45] A enigm ata ex visione Arislei philosophi et allegoriis sapientum [pp. 146—54; usually referred to as “Visio A rislei”] In T u rb a m p h ilosophorum exercitationes [pp. 154-82] A urora consurgens, quae d ic itu r A urea h o ra [pp. 185-246] [Zosimos:] Rosinus ad S arratantam episcopum [pp. 2773 *9] M aria Prophetissa: Practica . . . in artem alchem icam [pp. 319-24] C alid: L iber secretorum alchem iae [pp. 325-51]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

viii ix x

Opusculum authoris ignoti [pp. 389—92] Tractatulus Avicennae [pp. 405—37] Liber de arte chymica [pp. 575-632] V O L U M E 11

Morienus Romanus: Sermo de transmutatione metallorum

[PP- 7-54] xii Scala philosophorum [pp. 107-70] xiii Rosarium philosophorum [pp. 204-384] xiv Arnold of Villanova: Flos florum [pp. 470-88] AUREUM VELLUS, oder Güldin Schatz und Kunsthammer von dem . . . bewehrten Philosopho Salomone Trismosino. schach, 1598. Contents quoted in this volume:

. , . Ror-

i ii

Trismosin: Splendor solis [Tract. I l l , pp. 3-59] Melchior, Cardinal Bishop of Brixen; Vom dem Gelben und Roten Mann [Tract. I l l , pp. 177-91] DE ALCHEMIA. Nuremberg, 1541. Contents i ii iii

quoted in this

volume:

Geber: Summae perfectionis metallorum sive perfecti magisterii libri duo [pp. 20-205] Tabula smaragdina [p. 363] Hortulanus: Super Tabulam Smaragdinam Commentarius [pp. .364-73]

DE ALCHIMIA

opuscula complura. Contents

Frankfurt a. M., 1550. 2 vols.

quoted in this

volume:

V O L U M E 11

Rosarium philosophorum [whole volume] (ed.). BIBLIO THECA CHEMICA CTJRIOSA, seu Rerum ad alchemiam pertinentium thesaurus instructissimus, . . , Geneva, 1702. 2 vols.

MANGETUS, JOHANNES JACOBUS

Contents

quoted in this

volume:

VOLUME 1

i ii

Hermes Trismegistus: Tractatus aureus [pp. 400-45] Dicta Belini [pp. 478-79] 354

iii iv v

L u lly : C o dicillus seu v ad e m ecum a u t C a n tile n a [pp. 8 8 0 9 11] B raceschus: L ig n u m v ita e [pp. 911—38] [A ltus:] M u tu s lib e r [pp. 938—53]

vi v ii

B onus: M a rg a rita p re tio sa no v ella correctissim a [pp. 1—80] R o sa riu m p h ilo so p h o ru m [pp. 8*7-119; a second version, p p .

V O L U M E II

v iii

Sendivogius: P a ra b o la , seu A enigm a p h ilo so p h icu m 474- 75]

[pp.

M U S A E U M H E R M E T I C U M r e fo r m a tu m et arnplificaturn . . . c o n tin e n s tractatus chim icos X X l praestantissim os . . . Francof u rti [F ra n k fu rt a. M .], 1678. F o r tra n sla tio n , see A r t h u r E d w a r d W a i t e (ed. a n d trans.). T h e H e r m e tic M u s e u m restored a n d en larged. L o n d o n , 1893. 2 vols. C o n te n ts q u o te d in this v o lu m e : (T h e en tries in paren th eses show th e title a n d p a g in a tio n of the treatises in th e W a ite tra n sla tio n ) i [H erm es T rism e g istu s:] T ra c ta tu s a u re u s de la p id e p h ilo s o p h o ru m [pp. 1-52] (“T h e G o ld e n T r a c t," I, 7-50) ii [S iebm acher:] H y d ro lith u s sophicus, seu A q u a riu m sapientu m [pp. 73-144] (“T h e Sophie H y d ro lith ,” I, 71-120) iii F lam el: T ra c ta tu s brevis seu S u m m a riu m p h ilo so p h icu m [pp. 172-79] (“A S h o rt T r a c t, o r P h ilo so p h ic al Sum m ary ,” I, 141-47) iv V ia v e ritatis u n ica e [pp. 181—202] (“T h e O n ly T r u e W ay,” I, 151-64) v [B arcius (F. von S ternberg):] G lo ria m u n d i [pp. 203-304] (“ T h e G lory of th e W o rld ,” I, 167-243) v i L am b sp rin g k : D e la p id e p h ilo so p h ico figurae e t em b le m a ta [PP- 337~72] (“T h e B ook of L a m b sp rin g ,” I, 273—306) v ii B asilius V a le n tin u s: P ra ctica [pp. 377-432] (“ P ra ctica ,” I, v iii ix

3 12- 57) N o rto n : C rede m ih i, seu O rd in a le [pp. 433-532] (“ BelieveM e, o r T h e O rd in a l of A lchem y,” II, 2-67) Sendivogius: N o v u m lu m e n ch em icu m [pp. 545-600] (“T h e N ew C hem ical L ig h t,” II, 81—158)

P h ilaleth es: In tro itu s ap ertu s [pp. 647—700] (“A n O p e n E n tran ce to th e Closed Palace of the K in g ,” II, 163—98) x i M aier: S ubtilis allegoria su p er secreta chym iae [pp. 701-40] (“A S ubtle A llegory C o n c e rn in g th e Secrets of A lchem y," II, 201-23) x ii P h ilaleth es: M e ta llo ru m m etam o rp h o sis [pp. 741-74] (“T h e M etam orphosis of M etals,” II, 225-45) x iii P h ilaleth es: Brevis m a n u d u c tio . ad r u b in u m caelestem [pp. 775-98] (“ A B rief G u id e to th e C elestial R u b y ,” II, 24660) x iv P h ilaleth es: Fons chym icae v e ritatis [pp. 799-814] (“T h e F o u n t of C hem ical T r u t h ,” II 261-69) T H E A T R U M C H E M I C U M , praecipuos selectorum a u c to r u m tractatus . . . continens. A rg e n to ra ti [Strasbourg], Vols. I-I V , 1659; Vol. V, 1660; Vol. V I, 1661. C ontents q u o ted in this v o l u m e : VO LUM E I

i ii iii iv v vi v ii v iii ix x xi x ii

H o g h e la n d e: D e alchem iae difficultatibus [pp. 109-91] D o rn : S peculativa p h ilo so p h ia [pp. 228-76] D orn: P hysicagenesis [pp. 326—61] D o rn : Physica T rism e g isti [pp. 362—87] D o ra : Physica T r ith e ra ii [pp. 388-99] D o rn : P h ilo so p h ia chem ica [pp. 418-57] D o rn : D e ten eb ris c o n tra n a tu ra m e t v ita brevi [pp. 457—72] D orn: D u e llu m a n im i cum corpore [pp. 472-85] D o rn : C ongeries Paracelsicae chem icae [pp. 491—568] D orn: D e genealogia m in e ra liu m [pp. 5 6 8 -g i] P enotus: D e m e d ic a m e n tis chem icis [pp. 592-682] B e rn a rd u s T re v isa n u s: D e chem ico m ira c u lo (De alch im ia) [pp. 683-709]

x iii

A egidius de V adis: D ialogus in te r n a tu ra m et filium p h ilo sophiae [pp. 85-109] P enotus: T a b le of Sym bols [facing p. 109] R ipley: D u o d ecim p o rta ru m a x io m a ta p h ilo so p h ica [pp. 109-23] Dee: M onas h iero g ly p h ica [pp. 192-215]

VO LUM E II

x iv xv x vi

BIBLIOGRAPHY

xvii xviii xix

Ventura: De ratione conficiendi lapidis (De lapide philosophico) [pp. 215-312] Albertus Magnus: De alchemia [pp. 423-58] Albertus Magnus: Scriptum super arborem Aristotelis [in ibid.] VOLUME

xx xxi

Jodocus Greverus: Secretum nobillisimum et verissimum [pp. 699-722] Melchior Cibinensis: Addam et processum sub forma missae [pp. 758-61] VOLUME

xxii xxiii xxiv

III

Artefius: Clavis maioris sapientiae [pp. 198-213] Happelius: Aphorismi Basiliani [pp. 327—30] Sendivogius: Dialogus Mercurii alchymistae et naturae [pp.

449-5 6 ] xxv xxvi xxvii

Aenigma philosophorum sive symbolum Saturni [pp. 4 5 7 61] [Beatus:] Aurelia occulta [pp. 462-512] Hermes Trismegistus: Tractatus aureus cum scholiis [pp. 592-705] VOLUME

xxviii xxix xxx xxxi xxxii

VOLUME

xxxiii xxxiv xxxv

Allegoriae sapientum supra librum Turbae [pp. 57—89] Tractatus Micreris [pp. 90-101] Platonis liber quartorum [pp. 101—85] Tractatus Aristotelis alchymistae ad Alexandrum magnum [pp. 787-98] Epistola ad Hermannum [pp. 799-805] VI

Vigenerus: De igne et sale [pp. 1—139] Anonymi Galli Instructio de arbore solari [pp. 166—94] Orthelius: Epilogus et recapitulatio in N o v u m lumen chymicum Sendivogii [pp. 430—58]

THEATRUM CHEMICUM BRITANNICUM. Containing Severall Poeticall Pieces of Our Famous English Philosophers, Who Have Written the Hermetique Mysteries in Their Owne Ancient Language. Collected with annotations by Elias Ashmole. London, 1652.

357

Contents quoted in this volum e: i ii

N orton: T h e O rd in all of Alchemy [pp. 1-106] Ripley: Verses belonging to an Em blem aticall Scrowle [pp. 375 - 79 ]

iii

Ripley: Preface to “M edulla” [pp. 389-92] B.

G E N E R A L

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

M u h a m m a d i b n A h m a d a l -‘1 r a q l K itab al-’ilm alm uktasab (Book of knowledge acquired concerning the cultiva tion of gold). E dited an d translated by E. J. H olm yard. Paris,

A b u ’l Q a s i m

1923·

Acta S. H ildegardis. In M i g n e , P.L., Vol. 197, cols. 9-90. A d l e r , G e r h a r d . Studies in Analytical Psychology. L o n d o n an d New York, 1948. A e g i d i u s d e V a d i s . “Dialogus in ter n atu ra m et filium philosophiae.” See (A ) T h ea tru m chem icum , iciii. “A enigm a philosophicum .” See (A) M a n g e t u s , B ib lio th e c a ch em ica Curiosa1 viii. “A enigm a philosophorum sive sym bolum S atu rn i.” See (A) Theatrum chem icum , xxv. “A enigm ata ex visione Arislei et allegoriis sapientum .” See (A) A rtis Uuriferae1 ii. A g r i c o l a , G e o r g ( i u s ). D e anim a n tib u s subterraneis. Basel, 1549. A g r i p p a v o n N e t t e s h e i m , H e i n r i c h C o r n e l i u s . De incertitudine et vanitate scientiarum . Cologne, 1584. F or translation, see: T h e Van ity o f A rts and Sciences. L ondon, 1684. --------- . De occulta philosophia libri tres. Cologne, 1533. A l a n o f L i l l e (Alanus d e Insulis). Elucidatio in Cantica Canticorum. In M i g n e , P.L.} vol. 210, cols. 51—110. A l b e r t u s M a g n u s . “De alchem ia.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , xviii. --------- . “De m ineralibus et rebus m etallicis” (“M ineralium libri q u in q u e ”). In: A u g u s t e a n d E m i l B o r g n e t (eds.). Beati A lb erti M agni Opera om nia. Paris, 1890—99. 38 vols. (Vol. 5, pp. 1—103.) --------- . “Scriptum super arborem A ristotelis.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , xix.

A lc ia ti, A n d re a .

E m b le m a ta c u m com m en ta riis. P a d u a , 1 6 2 1 . D endrologiae libri duo. B ologna, [ 1 6 6 7 ] .

A ld r o v a n d u s , U ly s s e s .

vols. a l - ‘I r a q i .

See

A b u ’l Q a s i m .

“A llegoriae sa p ie n tu m s u p ra lib ru m T u r b a e X X IX d istin ctio n e s.” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m , xxviii. “A llegoriae su p e r lib ru m T u r b a e .’’ See (A) A r tis auriferae, i. [ A l t u s . ] M u t u s liber. L a R och elle, 1677. See also {A) M a n g e t u s , B ib lio th e c a chem ica Curiosai v. A m b r o s e , S a i n t . D e in terp ella tio n e Job et D avid. I n M i g n e , P.L., vol. 14, cols. 798-850. ----------. D e X L I I m a n sio n ib u s filiorum Israel. In M i g n e , P .L., vol. 17, cols. 9—40. A p a s t a m b a . In : Sacred Law s of the Aryas. T ra n s la te d by G. B iih le r P a rt I: A p a stam b a a n d G a u ta m a . (Sacred Books of th e E ast, 2.) O x fo rd , 1879. A pocalypse of Elias. See S t e i n d o r f f , G e o r g . A p u l e i u s , L u c i u s . T h e G olden Ass. T ra n s la te d ( 1 5 6 6 ) by W illia m A d lin g to n a n d revised by S tep h en G aselee. L o n d o n a n d N ew Y ork (Loeb C lassical L ib rary ) 1915. A n o th e r version: T ra n s la te d by R o b e rt G raves. (P en g u in Classics.) H a rm o n d sw o rth , 1954. “A q u a riu m s a p ie n tu m .” See (A) M u s a e u m h e r m e tic u m , ii. [ A r i s l e u s . ] “A e n ig m a ta ex visione A rislei e t allegoriis sa p ie n tu m .” See (A) A rtis auriferae, ii. [ A r i s t o t l e , p s e u d o - . ] “T ra c ta tu s A ristotelis alchym istae ad A lexand ru m m a g n u m de la p id e p h ilo so p h ico .” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m i c u m , xx x i. A r n o l d o f V i l l a n o v a (A m ald u s). “Flos florum A rn a ld i.” See (A) A rtis auriferae, xiv. A r t e f i u s . “ Clavis m aioris sa p ie n tia e .” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m , x x ii. A s h v a g h o s h a . “ B u d d h a -c a rita .” T ra n s la te d by E. B. Cow ell. In : B u d d h is t M a h a ya n a T e x ts . (Sacred Books o f th e E ast, 49.) O x fo rd , 1894. A tharva-V eda. See H y m n s of the A th a r v a -V eda. A u g u s t i n e , S a i n t . T h e Confessions. T ra n s la te d by Francis Jo sep h Sheed. L o n d o n a n d N ew Y ork, 1943.

. De civitate Dei. In M i g n e , P.L., vol. 4 1 . For translation, see: T h e City of God. T ran slated by M arcus Dods et al. (T h e W orks of A urelius A ugustine, 2.) E dinburgh, 1872. ■---------. L iber de Spiritu et A nim a. In M i g n e , P.L., vol. 40, cols. 779— 832. --------- . De vera religione. I n M i g n e , P.L ., vol. 34, cols. 121—72. For translation, see: “Of T ru e R eligion,” in J. H . S. B u r l e i g h (ed. and trans.). A ugustine: Earlier W ritings. (Library of C hristian Clas sics, 6.) London and P hiladelphia, 1953. --------- . Dialogus Q uaestionum L X V . I n M i g n e , P.L ., vol. 40, cols. 733 52 --------- . Enarrationes in Psalmos. In M i g n e , P.L., vols. 36, 37. For translation, see: S. H o b g i n and F. C o r r i g a n (trans.). St. A ugustine on the Psalms. W estm inster (Md.) and L ondon, i9 6 0 . 2 vols. published. “A urea h ora,” See “A urora consurgens.” “A urelia occulta.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , xxvi. “A urora consurgens.” See (A) A rtis auriferae, iv; Codices an d MSS., xvii; F r a n z , M.-L. v o n . A v a l o n , A r t h u r , pseud. (Sir Jo h n W oodroffe) (ed. and trans.). T h e Serpent Power (Shat-cakra-nirupana and Padukapanchaka). (Tantrik Texts.) London, 1919. A v i c e n n a . See “T ractatu lu s Avicennae,” in (A) A rtis auriferae, i x . B a r i n g - G o u l d , S a b i n e . Curious M yth s o f the M id d le Ages. L ondon, 1869. -

Barnabas, Epistle

o f.

See

L a k e , K ir s o p p .

A Coptic Gnostic Treatise contained in the Codex Brucianus— Bruce M S. 96, B odleian Library, O x ford. Cam bridge, 1933.

Ba y n es, C h a r lo tte A ugusta.

Contes turcs en langue turque, extraits du rom an intituld "Les Quarante Vizirs.” [By Shaikh-zadah o r §eyhzada.] Paris, 1812.

Belletete,

(tr a n s .) .

A tlantida. T ran sla ted by M. C. T o n g u e and M ary Ross. New York, 1920.

B e n o it , P ie r r e .

B e rn a rd , S a in t.

35 359 -

Sermones de tempore. I n M i g n e , P.L., v o l. 183, c o ls .

“D e chem ico m iracu lo (De a lc h im ia ).” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m , xii.

B e rn a rd u s T re v is a n u s .

d e V e r v il l e j F r a n c o is ( t r a n s . ) . L e T a b le a u des riches in v e n tio n s couvertes d u voile des feintes amoureuses, q u i sont re presentees dans Ie Songe de P o lip h ile . . . . Paris, 1600. B e r t h e l o t , M a r c e l l i n . L a C h im ie au m o y e n age. (H isto ire des sci ences.) P aris, 1893. 3 vols. ■--------- . C ollection des anciens alchimistes grecs. P aris, 1887—88. 3 vols.

eroalde

----------. Les O rigines de Valchimie. P aris, 1885. C a r l (ed. a n d trans.). M e ’arrath Gazze. D ie Schatzhohle. L eipzig, 1883-88. 2 p arts. [B hagavadglta.] T h e B hagavadgita3 w ith the Sanatsugatiya a n d the A n u g t t d . T r a n s la te d by ICashinath T rim b a k T e la n g . (Sacred Books o f th e E ast, 8.) O x fo rd , 1882. A n o th e r version: S w a m i P r a b h a v a n a n d a a n d C h r i s t o p h e r I s h e r w o o d (trans.). T h e Song of God. L o n d o n , 1947. (Also, w ith d iffering p a g in a tio n , H o lly w ood, 1944.) B e z o ld ,

A d a m v o n . O nom asticon. See: D ic tio n a riu m T h c o phrasti Paracelsi . . . a Gerardo D orneo collectum. F ra n k fu rt a. M., 1583.

B o d e n s te in ,

J a k o b . ] X L Q uestions concerning the Soule. P ro p o u n d e d by D r. B a lth a sa r W a lte r. A n d answ ered, by Ja co b B ehm en. [T ra n s la te d by Jo h n Sparrow .] L o n d o n , 1665.

[B o h m e,

Pretiosa margarita novella de thesauro ac pretiosissim o p h ilo s o p h o r u m lapide. . . . E d ite d by J a n u s L acinius. V en ice, 1546. F o r tra n s la tio n , see: A. E. W a i t e . T h e N e w Pearl of Great Price. L o n d o n , 1894. See also (A) M a n g e t u s , B ib h o th e c a chem ica curiosa, vi.

B o n u s, P e tru s .

H a u p tp r o b J e m e cler Gnosis. (F orschungen d e r R e lig io n u n d L ite r a tu r des A lten u n d N e u e n T e sta m e n ts, 10.) G o ttin g e n , 1907.

B o u s s e tj W ilh e lm .

“ L ig n u m v ita e .” See (A) theca chemica curiosa3 iv.

B ra c e sc h u s, Jo h a n n e s.

M a n g e tu s ,

“ Brevis m a n u d u c tio .” See (A) M u s a e u m h e r m e tic u m , x iii. B rih a d a ra n y a k a U p a n ish a d . See

u m e

361

Biblio-

B udge, E rn e s t A r th u r W a llis .

A m u le ts a n d Su p erstitio n s. L o n d o n ,

i93°----------(ed. a n d trans.). T h e B o o k o / th e D ead. A n E n g lish tra n sla tio n o f th e T h e b a n R ecension. (Books o n E gypt a n d C h a ld a e a , 6, 7, 8.) 2nd e d n ., L o n d o n , 1909. 3 vols. ----------. T h e G ods o f the E gyptians. L o n d o n , 1904. 2 vols. B u n d ah ish . In : E ’ W . W e s t (trans.). P ahlavi T e x ts , Vol. I (Sacred Books of th e E ast, 5.) O x fo rd , 1880-97. C a e s a r i u s o f H e i s t e r b a c h . D ialogus m ira c u lo ru m . E d ite d by J o seph Strange. C ologne, 1851. F o r tra n sla tio n , see: H . v o n E. S c o t t a n d C.C.S. B l a n d (trans.). D ialogue on M iracles. L o n d o n , 1929. C a l i d . " L i b e r secreto ru m .” See (A) A r tis auriferae, v i i . “C a n tic u m de cre a tio n e .” See H o r s t m a n n . C a r t e r , J a m e s B e n e d i c t . E p ith e ta D e o ru m quae a p u d Poetas L a tin a s le g u n tu r. (A u sfiih rlich es L e x ik o n der griechischen u n d rom ishcen M y th o lo g ie , ed. W . H . R oscher, S u p p lem en t.) L e ip zig, 1902. C a s s i o d o r u s , M a r c u s A u r e l i u s . H isto ria T rip a rtita . I n M i g n e , P .L ., vol. 70, cols. 879—1214. C h a r l e s , R o b e r t H e n r y (ed.). T h e A p o cryp h a a n d P seudepigrapha of th e O ld T e sta m e n t in E nglish. O x fo rd , 1913. 2 vols. C h a u c e r , G e o f f r e y . T h e C o m p lete W orks. E d ite d by F. N . R o b in son. (S tu d e n t’s C am bridge E d itio n .) B oston, 1933. C h h an d o g y a U p a n ish ad . In : T h e U panishads. T ra n s la te d by F. M ax M u ller. (Sacred Books of the E ast, 1, 15.) O x fo rd , 1900. 2 vols. (Vol. 1, 1-144.) C h re tie n de T ro y e s .

S ee H il k a .

L es T y p e s d u p re m ie r h o m m e et d u p re m ie r roi dans Vhistoire legendaire des Iraniens. (Archives d ’etudes o rien tales, 14.) Stockholm , 1917, 1934. 2 parts.

C h r is te n s e n , A r t h u r (E m a n u e l).

(K hw ol’son, D a n iil A vraam ovich). D ie Ssabier u n d d er Ssabism us. St. P etersb u rg , 1856. 2 vols.

C h w o ls o h n , D a n ie l

( S z e b e n y ) , N i c h o l a s M e l c h i o r . “A d d a m e t processum sub fo rm a m issae.” See (A) T h e a tr u m c h e m icu m , xxi.

C ib in e n s is

D e n a tu ra d eo ru m . In : M . T u llii Ciceronis Scripta quae m a n se ru n t o m n ia , ed. C. F. W . M u ller, P a rt IV, vol. 2. L eipzig, 1878. (pp. 1-142.) 362

C ic e ro , M a rc u s T u lliu s .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Codices and Manuscripts. i Basel. University Library. AX. 128b. Contains "De arbore contemplationis." ii -. . "Alchymistisch.es MS." iii Berlin. Codex Berolinensis Latinus 532. jv „_ Codex Berolinensis Latinus Q. 584. v Leiden. University Library. Codex Vossianus Chemicus 520 (29). 16th cent. vi London. British Museum. MS. Additional 10302. 16th cent. vii -. . MS. Sloane 5025. 1588. "Four Rolls Drawn in Lubeck" (The Ripley Scrowle). viii . . MS. Additional 15268. 13th cent. "Le Livre des Ansienes Estoires." ix Munich. Staatsbibliothek. Codex Germanicus 598. 1420. "Das Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit und Beschreibung der Heimlichkeit von Veranderung der Metallen." ix-a N e w Haven. Yale University Library. German alchemical ms. (Mellon Coll.). c. 1600. x Paris. Bibliothèque nationale. MS. gr. 2250. xi -. . M S . g r . 2252. xii . . MS. gr. 2419. xiii Bibliotheque Ste. Genevieve. MS. 2263-64. "Lapidis philosophorum nomina." xiv St. Gall. Codex N . Vadiensis 390. 15th cent. Contains the "Turba philosophorum." xv . Codex Germanicus Alchemicus Vadiensis. 16th cent. xvi Vatican. Codex Vaticanus Latinus 7286. 17th cent. xvii Zurich. Zentralbibliothek. Codex Rhenoviensis 172. 15th cent. "Aurora consurgens." Hypnerotomachia Poliphili . . . Venice, i4gg. For French translation, see B E R O A L D E DE V E R V I L L E ; for English paraphrase, see F I E R Z - D A V I D .

COLONNA,

FRANCESCO.

"Consilium coniugii." See (A) Ars chem ica, iii. K. "The Inverted Tree," Quarterly JourSociety (Bangalore), X X I X (1938-39), 111-49.

COOMARASWAMY, ANANDA

nal of the Mythic

Corpus Hermeticum. See

SCOTT,

CRAWLEY, ALFRED ERNEST.

Hermetica.

The Idea of the Soul. London, 363

1909.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Testes et monuments figures relatifs aux mystères de Mithra. Brussels, 1894-99. 2 vols. "De arte chymica." See (A) Artis auriferae, x. De chemia. See Z A D I T H S E N I O R . "Declaratio et explicatio Adolphi." See "Aurelia occulta." D E E , J O H N . "Monas hieroglyphica." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, xvi. C U M O N T , FRANZ.

DF.URSEN,

ARIE

VAN.

Der

Heilbringer.

(Dissertation.)

Groningen,

P A U L . Allgemeine Geschichte der Philosophie. Leipzig, 1894-1917. 2 vols, in 6 parts. "Dicta Belini." See "Allegoriae sapientum." See also (A) M A N G E T U S , Bibliotheca chemica curiosa, ii. DIETF.RICH, A L B R E C H T . Eine Mithrasliturgie. Leipzig, 1903. [DIOSCORIDES.] Petri Andreae Matthioli Medici Senensis Commentarii in libros sex Pedacii Dioscoridis Anazarbei de medica materia. Venice, 1554. D J A B I R IEN H A Y Y A N . "Le Livre du Mercure oriental. . . ." In B E R T H E L O T , Moyen age, vol. 3, pp. 214L D O R N , G E R A R D . "Congeries Paracelsicae chemicae." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, ix.

DEUSSEN,

. "De tenebris contra naturam et vita brevi." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, vii. . "Duellum animi cum corpore." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, viii. "De genealogia mineralium." See (A) Theatrum

chemicum,

x. •. "Philosophia chemica." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, vi. "Physica genesis." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, iii. •. "Physica Trismegisti." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, iv. . "Physica Trithemii." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, v. . "Speculativa philosophia." See (A) Theatrum chemicum, ii. . See also

PARACELSUS,

De vita

longa.

and DE G O E J E , M . J . "Nouveaux documents pour l'dtude de la religion des Harraniens." Actes du sixieme congres international des Orientalistes, 1883. London, 1885.

DOZY, REINHART,

364

D u C a n g e , C h a r l e s d u F r e s n e . G lossarium ad scriptores m ediae et infim ae L a tinitatis. 1733-36. 6 vols. N ew edn., G raz, 1954. 10 vols. in 5. E i s l e r , R o b e r t . W e l t e n m a n te l u n d H im m e lsze lt. M u n ic h , 1910. 2 vols. , A b r a h a m . Uraltes chymisches W erck. L eipzig, 1760. (P a rt I I has se p ara te p a g in a tio n .) E l-H a b ib , B ook of. See B e r t h e l o t , C h im ie au m o y e n dge, III. E l i a d e , M i r c e a . S h a m a n ism : Archaic T e c h n iq u e s of Ecstasy. T r a n s la te d fro m th e F re n c h by W illa rd R . T ra sk . N ew York (B ollingen Series) a n d L o n d o n 1964. [ E l i e z e r b e n H y r c a n u s .] P irke de R a b b i Eliezer. T ra n s la te d a n d e d ite d by G e ra ld F rie d la n d e r. L o n d o n a n d N ew York, 1916. E lija h , A pocalypse of. See A pocalypse of Elias. E noch, B ook of. See C h a r l e s , A p o c r y p h a a n d Pseudepigrapha. E p i p h a n i u s . A n c o ra tu s u n d P anarium . E d ite d b y K arl H o ll. (G riechische C h ristlich e Schriftsteller.) L eipzig, 1915-33. 3 vols. (A n co ra tus, vol. I, pp. 1—149; P a n a riu m , vol. I, p. 169 th ro u g h vol. III). "E p isto la ad H e rm a n n u ra .” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m , x x x ii. E u c h e r i u s , B i s h o p o f L y o n s . L ib e r f o r m u la r u m spiritalis intelligentiae. I n M i g n e , P.G., vol. 50, cols. 727-72. E u r i p i d e s . “T h e C re ta n s” (fragm ent). I n D i e t e r i c h , q.v. E u t h y m i o s Z i g a b e n o s . P anoplia dogmatica. I n M i g n e , P.G., v o l . 130, cols. 129®. E u t y c h i u s , P a t r i a r c h o f A l e x a n d r i a . A nnales. I n M i g n e , P.G., v o l . 111, cols. 907—1156. E v a n s - W e n t z , W . Y. (ed.). T h e T ib e ta n B o o k of the Dead. W ith a Psychological C o m m en tary by C. G. J u n g . 3rd edn., L o n d o n a n d N ew York, 1957. “ E x ercitatio n es in T u r b a m .” See (A) A r tis auriferae, iii. E zra, F o u rth B ook of. See C h a r l e s , A p o c r y p h a a n d Pseudepigrapha. F e r g u s o n , J o h n . B ib lio th e c a chemica. G lasgow , 1 9 0 6 . 2 vols. F e r g u s s o n j J a m e s . T r e e a n d S erpent W orship. L o n d o n , 1868. F i c i n o , M a r s i l i o . D e vita libri tres. Basel, 1549. F i e r z - D a v i d , L i n d a . T h e D rea m o f P o lip h ilo . T ra n s la te d by M ary H o ttin g e r. N ew Y ork (B ollingen Series) a n d L o n d o n , 1950. E

leazar

B e n e d i c t u s . Paradisus aureolus herm eticus. . . . F ran k fu rt a. M., 1608. --------- . Rosarium n o vu m olym picum et benedictum . Basel, 1608. F i r m i c u s M a t e r n u s , J u l i u s . L ib er de errore profanarum religionum . See: M . M in u cii Felicis O ctavius et Ju lii Firm ici M aterni L ib er de errore profanarum religionum . Ed. K arl H alm . (Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum , 2.) V ienna, 1867. F l a m e l , N i c o l a s . “Sum m arium philosophicum .” See (A) M usaeum herm eticum , iii. “Fons chymicae veritatis.” See (A) M usaeum herm eticum , xiv. F r a n z , M a r i e - L o u i s e v o n (ed.). Aurora Consurgens: A D ocum ent A t tributed to Thom as A quinas on the Problem of Opposites in A l chemy. T ran slated by R. F. C. H u ll an d A. S. B. Glover. New York (Bollingen Series) and L ondon, ig66. --------- . “D ie Passio P erpetuae.” In : C. G. J u n g . A ion. (Psychologische A bhandlungen, 8.) Zurich, 1951. F r a z e r , J a m e s G. T h e G olden Bough. L ondon, 1911-15. 12 vols. (P art I: T h e M agic A rt, vols. 1 an d 2. P a rt IV: A donis, A ttis, Osiris, vols. 5, 6.) F ig u lu s ,

--------- . T otem ism and Exogam y. London, 1910. 4 vols. Das Zeitalter des Sonnengottes. Vol. I (no m ore p u b lished). Berlin, 1904. G a l e n , C l a u d i u s . D e sim plicium m edicam entorum facultatibus Iibri X I . Lyons, 1561. G a u d e n t i u s , S a i n t . Sermo X I X . In M i g n e , P.L ., v o l . 2 0 , c o ls . 9 8 1 93 G e b e r . Sum m ae perfectionis. See (A) De alchemia (1541), i.

F ro b e n iu s , L e o .

C o n r a d . ] Epistolarum m edicinalium Conradi Gesneri, philosophi et m edici . . . L ib ri III. T ig u ri [Zurich], 1577.

[G e ssn e r,

“G loria m u n d i.’’ See (A) M usaeum herm eticum , v. G o d f r e y ( G o d e f r i d u s ) , A b b o t o f A d m o n t . H o m ilia I I I in D om inica I A dventus. In M i g n e , P.L., vol. 174, cols. 32-36. --------- . H o m ilia L X I I I in Vigiliam A ssum ptionis. In M i g n e , P.L., vol. 174, cols. 957-59. G o e t h e , J o h a n n W o l f g a n g v o n . Faust. An abridged version. T ra n s lated by Louis MacNeice. London, 1951.

----------. F aust: P art T w o . T ra n s la te d by P h ilip W ayne. H arm o n d sw o rth , 1959. G o u r m o n t , R e m y d e . L e L a tin m ystiq u e. 4th edn., P aris, 1930. G o e th e th e A lc h em ist. C am bridge, 1 9 5 2 . G r e g o r y t h e G r e a t , S a i n t . M ora lia in Job. In M i g n e , P .L ., vol. 75, col. 509-vol. 76, col. 782. ----------. I n se p te m P salm os p e n ite n tia le s exp o sitio . In M i g n e , P .L ., vol. 79, cols. 549-658. ----------. S u p e r C antica C a n tico ru m exp o sitio . In M i g n e , P .L ., vol. 79, cols. 471—548. G r e v e r u s , J o d o c u s . “ S ecretum .” See (A) T h e a tr u m c h e m icu m , rex. G r i m m , J a c o b . T e u to n ic M yth o lo g y. T ra n s la te d b y Jam es Steven Stallybrass. L o n d o n , 1880—88. 4 vols. [ G r i m m , J a c o b a n d W i l h e l m .] G rim m ’s Fairy Tales. T ra n s la te d by M a rg a re t H u n t a n d revised by Jam es Stern. N ew Y ork, 1944. G r u n b a u m , M a x . Jiidisch-deutsche C h re sto m a th ie . L eipzig, 1882. H a g g a r d , H e n r y R i d e r . She. L o n d o n , 1887. H a p p e l i u s , N i c o l a u s N i g e r . “A p h o rism i B a silian i.” See (A) T heatru m c h e m icu m , x x iii. G

ray

, R

a s t in g s ,

e g e m o n iu s .

erm es

onald

J a m e s (ed.). E ncyclopaedia o f R e lig io n a n d E thics. E d in b u rg h a n d N ew York, 1908—27. 13 vols.

A c ta A rchelai. E d ite d by C harles H e n ry Beeson. (G riechische C h ristlich e Schriftsteller.) L eipzig, 1906. T

r is m e g is t u s .

sm a ra g d in a .” See (A) D e alchem ia

“ T a b u la

(1541),11. ----------. “ T ra c ta tu s a u re u s.” See (A) A rs chem ica, 1; M a n g e t u s , B ibliotheca chem ica curiosa, i; M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m , i; T h e a tru m c h e m ic u m , xxvii. B a r b a r u s . C orollarium in D ioscoridem . See S ym bola aureae m ensae.

erm olaus

il d e g a r d o f

il k a

in g e n

A cta. In

ig n e ,

P .L .,

v o l. 1 9 7 , c o l.

a ie r

18.

, A l f o n s . D er altfranzosische P rosa-A lexander-R om an nach d e r B e rlin e r B ild e n h a n d s c h r ift. H a lle , 1920.

---------- (ed.). D er P ercevalrom an (L i C ontes d el Graal). V on C hris tia n von T ro y es. (C h ristian v o n T royes, S am tliche e rh a lte n e W erke, ed. W e n d e lin F oerster, 5.) H a lle , 1932. 367

Elenchos. See: H ippo lytus’ Werke. Vol. III. E dited by P aul W endland. (Griechische C hristliche Schriftsteller.) Leipzig, 1916. F or translation, see: Philosophum ena, or, T h e R e fu ta tio n of A ll Heresies. T ran slated by Francis Legge. (T ranslations of C hris tian L iterature.) L ondon and New York, 1921. 2 vols. H o g h e l a n d e , T h e o b a l d d e . “De alchem iae difficultatibus.” See (A) T h ea tru m chemicum, i. H o l m b e r g , U n o . Der B aum des Lebens. In: Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, Series B, vol. 16. H elsinki, 1922—23. H o l m y a r d , E r i c J o h n . See A b u ’l Q a s im . H o n o r i u s o f A u t u n . Speculum de mysteriis ecclesiae. In M i g n e , P.L., vol. 172, cols. 807-1108. H o r a c e . Epistola I. H ip p o ly t u s .

T h e Hieroglyphics of H orapollo. T ran slated by George Boas. N ew York (Bollingen Series), 1950.

[ H o r a p o llo N ilia c u s .]

Sam m lung altenglischer Legenden. H eilbronn, 1878-81. 2 vols. (“C anticum de creatione," vol. I, pp. 124-38.) o r t u l a n u s . “C om m entarius” o r “C om m entariolum .” See (A) Ars chemica, ii; De alchemia (1541), iii.

H o r s tm a n n , C a r l.

H um e, R o b e r t E rn est

(trans.). T h e T hirteen Principal Upanishads.

1921. H ym n s of the Atharva-Veda. T ran sla ted by M. Bloomfield. (Sacred Books of the East, 42.) O xford, 1897. H . Science and a Future Life. Boston, 1905. I Cking, or B ook of Changes. T h e R ich ard W ilhelm [Germ an] trans lation rendered in to English by Cary F. Baynes. New York (Bol lingen Series), 1950; London, 1951. 2 vols.; 3rd edn. in 1 vol., 1967.

H y s lo p , J a m es

[------ .] T h e Yi King. T ran slated by Jam es Legge. (Sacred Books of the East, 16.) 2nd edn., O xford, 1899. T h e Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius Loyola. E dited and translated by Joseph Rickaby, S.J. 2nd edn., L ondon, 1923.

[I g n a t iu s L o y o l a , S a in t .]

“Instructio de arbore solari.” See (A) T h ea tru m chemicum, xxxiv. “In tro itu s apertus.” See (A) M usaeum herm eticum, x. Adversus [or Contra] haereses Iibri quinque. In M i g n e , P.G., vol. 7, cols. 433-1224. For translation, see: T h e Writings of

Iren a eu s.

368

Iren a eu s.

T ra n s la te d

b y A le x a n d e r R o b e rts a n d

W . H . R a m b a u t.

( A n t e - N i c e n e C h r i s t i a n L i b r a r y , 5 , 9 .) E d i n b u r g h , 1 8 6 8 - 6 9 . 2 v o l s . " I s is to H o r u s .” S e e S J

c o tt

H erm etica .

, H e l m u t h , D i e d o g m a tis c h e S t e l l u n g des K o n i g s in d e r T h eo lo g ie der alten A egypter. ( A e g y p t o l o g i s c h e F o r s c h u n g e n , h e r -

a cobso h n

a u s g e g e b e n v o n A l e x a n d e r S c h a r f f , 8 .) G l u c k s t a d t , H a m b u r g , a n d N e w Y o rk , 1939. J

a ffe

n ie l a

M a rc h e n

“ B ild e r

u n d

'D e r G o I d n e

U nbew ussten.

S y m b o le

T o p f.’ " In :

aus

C. G . J

T .

u ng

A .

H o ffm a n n s

G e s t a l t u n g e n des

( P s y c h o l o g i s c h e A b h a n d l u n g e n , 8 .) Z u r i c h , 1 9 5 0 .

C a r l G u s t a v . A i o n : R e s e a r c h e s i n t o th e P h e n o m e n o l o g y o f t h e Self. C o lle c te d W o r k s * v o l . 9 , p a r t i i .

Ju n g ,

-------------- . “ A n s w e r t o J o b . ” I n : -------------- . " T h e

A rc h e ty p e s

le c te d W o r k s , -------------- .

C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

o f th e

C o lle c tiv e

v o l. 11.

U n c o n s c io u s .”

In :

C o l

v o l . 9 , p a r t i.

“ C o n c e rn in g

M a n d a la

S y m b o lis m .”

C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

In :

v o l . 9 , p a r t i. ■--------------. “ C o n c e r n i n g -------------- .

R e b ir th .” In :

C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

M e m o r i e s , D r e a m s , R e fle c tio n s .

T ra n s la te d

R ic h a rd

and

C la ra

R e c o rd e d

W in s to n . N e w

v o l . 9 , p a r t i. A n ie la

Y o rk

Ja ffA

an d

L on

d o n , 1963. -------------- .

M y s t e r i u m C o n i u n c t io n i s . C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

-------------- . “ O n

-------------- . “ T h e le c te d -------------- .

P h y s ic ia n .” I n :

P h e n o m e n o lo g y

W orks,

o f th e

C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

S p irit in

P s y c h o lo g ic a l A p p r o a c h

C o lle c te d W o r k s , vol.

F a ir y ta le s .” I n :

th e

15. C o l

v o l . 1.

D ogm a

o f th e

T rin ity .”

11.

P sy c h o lo g ic a l T y p e s . C o lle c te d W o r k s , source: T r a n s l a t i o n b y H . G . B a y n e s . N e w

-------------- .

v o l. 8.

v o l.

v o l . 9 , p a r t i.

P s y c h ia tr ic S tu d ie s. C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

-------------- . “ A In :

C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

th e N a t u r e o f th e P s y c h e .” I n :

-------------- . “ P a r a c e l s u s t h e

v o l. 14.

v o l. Y o rk

A lte rn a tiv e

and

L ondon,

9 2 3·

-------------- .

P sy c h o lo g y a n d A l c h e m y . C o lle c te d W o r k s ,

v o l. 12.

* For details o f the Coll ected Wo r k s of C. G. Jung, see a n n o u n cem en t at the en d o f this volum e.

----------. “T h e Psychology o f D em en tia P raecox.” In : C ollected W orks, v o l . 3 . ----------. “ Psychology a n d R e lig io n .” In : C ollected W orks, vol. 11. ----------. Psychology and R e lig io n : W est and East. vol. 11. ----------. “T h e Psychology of th e T ra n sfe re n c e .” In : vol. 16. ----------. “ R ic h a rd W ilh elm : In M em o riam .” In : vol. 15. ----------. T h e Sp irit in M a n , A rt, a n d L ite ra tu re ,

C ollected W orks, C ollected W orks, C ollected W orks, C ollected W orks,

v o l. 15.

----------. “A S tudy in the Process of In d iv id u a tio n .” In : C ollected W orks, vol. 9, p a rt i. ----------. Sym bols o f T ra n sfo rm a tio n . C ollected W o rks, vol. 5. ----------. " T ra n s fo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass.” In : C ollected W orks, vol. 11. ----------. T w o Essays on A n a ly tica l Psychology. C ollected W orks, vol. 7----------. See

a ls o P

a u l i;

il h e l m

“D er u m g ek eh rte S c h am an erb au m ,” A rc h iv fu r R eligionsw issenschaft (Leipzig a n d B erlin), X X V II (1929), 18385K e r n , O t t o (ed.). O rp hicorum fra g m en ta . B erlin, 1922. K h u n r a t h , H e n r i c u s ( H e i n r i c h ) . A m p h ith e a tr u m sapientiae aeternae. H a n a u , 1609. ----------. Von hylealischen Chaos. M agdeburg, 1597. K i r c h e r , A t h a n a s i u s . M u n d u s subterraneus. A m sterdam , 1 6 7 8 . 2 vols. K n o r r v o n R o s e n r o t h , C h r i s t i a n . K abbala D en u d a ta . Sulzbach a n d F ra n k fu rt a. M., 1677-84. 2 vols. K n u c h e l , E d u a r d F r i t z . D ie U m w a n d lu n g in K u lt, M agie u n d R ech tsb ra u ch . (Schriften d e r Schw eizerischen G esellschaft fiir V o lkskunde, 15.) Basel, 1919. K o m a r i o s . See B e r t h e l o t , C ollection des anciens alchim istes grecs, T re a tis e IV. K o p p , H e r m a n n . D ie A lc h em ie in alterer u n d neuerer Z eit. H e i d e l berg, 1886. 2 vols. K

agarow

, E

ugen

K o ran . T ra n s la te d by N . J . D aw ood. H a rm o n d sw o rth , 1956. K rates, B ook of. See B e r t h e l o t , L a C h im ie au m o yen Age, vol. I II . K r i c k e b e r g , W . (ed. a n d trans.). In d ia n e rm a rc h e n aus N o rd a m erik a . (D ie M a rc h e n d e r W e ltlite ra tu r.) Je n a , 1924. ---------- . M a rch en d e r A z te k e n , I n k a , M aya u n d M u isk a . (Die M a rc h e n d e r W e ltlite ra tu r.) Je n a , 1928. K r u e g e r , G u s t a v . D as D og m a v o n der D re iein ig ke it u n d G o ttm e n sc h h eit in sein er g esch ich tlich en E n tw ic k lu n g dargestellt. (Lebensfragen; S c h rifte n u n d R e d e n , e d ite d by H e in ric h W einel.) T u b in g en , 1905. L a c i n i u s . See B o n u s . L a k e , K i r s o p p (ed. a n d trans.). T h e A p o sto lic Fathers. (L oeb Clas sical L ib rary .) L o n d o n a n d N ew Y ork, 1914. 2 vols. (“ E pistle of B a rn a b a s,” I, 340-409.) “L a m b sp rin g k , T h e B ook of.” See (A) M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m , vi. L a s z l o , V i o l e t S. d e (ed.). Psyche a n d S y m b o l: A Selection fro m th e W ritin g s o f C. G. J u n g . G a rd e n City, N.Y ., 1958. [ L a z a r e l l o , L u d o v i c u s . ] C o n ten ta in hoc v o lu m in e : P im a n d e r M erc u rii T rism e g isti . . . A sclep iu s eju sd em M e rc u rii . . . ite m C rater H e r m e tis a Lazarelo S e p te m p ed a n o . (No d a te o r place.) (Folios 3 2 -4 2 1.) L : e v y - B r u h l , L u c i e n . P rim itiv e M e n ta lity . T ra n s la te d by L ilia n A. C lare. L o n d o n a n d N ew York, 1923. “ L ig n u m v ita e .” See B r a c e s c h u s . L i p p m a n n , E d m u n d O . v o n . E n ts te h u n g u n d A u s b r e itu n g der A lchem ie. B e rlin , 1919—54. 3 vols. L u l l y , R a y m o n d . “C o d icillu s.” See (A) M angetus, B ib lio th eca chem ica curiosa, iii. M a i e r , M i c h a e l . D e circulo physico quadrato. O p p e n h e im , 1 6 1 6 . ----------. Secretioris n a tu ra e secreto ru m s c ru tin iu m c h y m icu m . F ra n k f u r t a. M ., 1687. ----------. “S u b tilis alleg o ria s u p e r secreta chym iae.” See (A) M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , xi. . S ym b o la aureae m ensae d u o d ecim n a tio n u m . F ra n k fu rt a. M ., 1617. M a i t l a n d , E d w a r d . A n n a K in g s ford: H e r L ife , L e tte rs, D iary, a n d W o rk. L o n d o n , 1896. 2 vols.

M aitra y a n a -B ra h m an a U p a n ish a d . In : T h e Upanishads. T ra n s la te d by F. M ax M iiller. (Sacred Books of th e East, i, 15.) O x fo rd , 1900. 2 vols. (Vol. 2, p p . 287-546.) M a r i a P r o p h e t i s s a . “P ra c tic a .” See (A) A rtis auriferae, vi. M a r s i l i o F i c i n o . D e vita Iibri tres. Basel, 1549. M a r t i a l (M arcus V alerius M artialis). Epigram m ata. E d ite d by W a l ter G ebert. L eipzig, 1896. “T h e M o u n ta in C h a n t: A N av ajo C ere m o n y /’ F ifth A n n u a l R e p o r t of the B u r e a u of E th n o lo g y , 188384. W ash in g to n , 1887. (Pp. 385-467.) e a d , G. R . S. T h e D o c trin e of the S u b tle B o d y in W estern T r a d i tion. L o n d o n , 1919.

M a t t h e w s , W a s h in g t o n .

L ib e r gratiae spiritualis. V enice, 1578. “V om dem G elben u n d R o tte n M a n n .” See (A)

M e c h t h il d o f M a g d e b u r g . M e l c h io r o f B r ix e n .

A u r e u m vellus,

ii.

“A d d a m e t processum sub fo rm a m issae. See (A) T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , x x i . M i c h e l s p a c h e r , S t e f f a n . Cabala, sp e c u lu m artis et naturae, in alchymia. A ugsburg, 1654. (G erm an version: Cabala, Spiegel der K u n s t u n d N a tu r : in A lc h ym ia . A ugsburg, 161, 1616.) M i g n e , J a c q u e s P a u l ( e d .) . Patrologiae cursus com pletus. [P.L.] L a tin series. P aris, 1844-64. 221 vols. [P.G.] G reek series. Paris, 1857-66. 166 vols. (T hese w orks are re fe rre d to as “ M igne, P .L .” a n d “ M igne, P.G .” respectively.) [M issal.] T h e Missal in L a t in a n d English. E d ite d by J. O ’C o n n e ll a n d H .P .R . F in b erg . L o n d o n , 1949.

M e l c h i o r C i b i n e n s i s (S z e b e n y ) , N i c h o l a s .

M o r ie n u s R o m a n u s .

auriferae,

“De tra n s m u ta tio n e m e ta llo ru m .” See (A) A rtis

x i.

M a r t i n . . . . Paracelsus Sam tliche W erke: Erste A b teilung. R egisterband. (N ova A cta Paracelsica, S u p p lem en tu m .) E insiedeln, i960. “M u tu s l i b e r . ” S e e A l t u s .

M uller,

M y l iu s , J o h a n n D a n i e l .

Philosophia reformata. F ra n k fu rt a.

M .,

1622. N a z a r i, G io v a n n i B a t t is t a .

Brescia, 1599.

D ella tra m u ta tio n e metallica sogni tre.

N e a le ,

J . M . C ollected H y m n s , Sequences a n d Carols. L o n d o n ,

19 14 · “A n aly tisch e B eo b a c h tu n g e n fiber P h a n ta s ie n eines S c h izo p h re n en ,” J a h rb u c h fiir psychoanalytische u n d psychopa th o lo g isch e F orsch u n g en (V ienna a n d L eipzig), IV (1912), 5 0 4 62. e u m a n n , E r i c h . A m o r a n d Psyche: T h e Psychic D e v e lo p m e n t o f th e F e m in in e . A C o m m en ta ry o n the tale by A p u leiu s. T r a n s la te d by R a lp h M a n h eim . N ew Y ork (B ollingen Series) a n d L o n do n , 1956. i e t z s c h e , F r i e d r i c h W i l h e l m . T h u s Spake Z arathustra. See: T h e P ortable N ietzsch e. Selected a n d tra n s la te d by W a lte r K a u fm a n n . N ew York, 1954. i n c k , M a r t i n . G S tter u n d Jen seitsg la u b en der G erm anen. J e n a

N e lk e n , Ja n .

[ » 9373·

“T h e O rd in a l o£ A lchem y.” See (A ) M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , viii; (A ) T h e a tr u m c h e m icu m b rita n n ic u m , i.

N o rto n , T h o m a s.

“ N o v u m lu m e n c h em icu m .” See (A) M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m , ix. See grecs, T re a tis e II.

O ly m p io d o ru s .

B e rth e lo t,

O n ia n s , R ic h a r d B r o x to n .

C o llectio n des anciens alchim istes

T h e O rigins o f E u ro p e a n T h o u g h t. 2nd

ed n ., C am b rid g e, 1954. “ O p u sc u lu m a u th o ris ig n o ti.” See (A) A r tis auriferae, viii. O rth e liu s .

“ E p ilo g u s.” See (A) T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , xxxv.

See B e r t h e l o t , L a C h im ie au m o y e n age, v o l . I l l ; C ollec tio n des anciens a lch im istes grecs, T re a tise s I I I , IV.

O s ta n e s .

P a n th e u s .

A rs tra n sm u ta tio n is m etallicae. V enice, 1519.

(T h e o p h ra s tu s B om bast o f H o h e n h e im ). T h e o p h ra st v o n H o h e n h e im g e n a n n t Paracelsus S a m tlich e W erke. F irst sec tio n : M e d izin isc h e , n a tu rw issenschaftliche u n d p h ilo so p h isc h e S c h rifte n . E d ite d by K a rl S udhoff a n d W ilh e lm M atthiessen. M u n ic h a n d B erlin, 1922—33. 14 vols. Second section: T h eo lo g isch e u n d relig io n sp h ilo so p h isch e S ch riften . E d ite d by K a rl Sudhoff, W ilh e lm M atthiessen, a n d K. G o ld am m er. M u n ic h a n d W ies b a d e n , 1923. 5 vols. p u b lish e d . (In th e references below , this e d n . is cited as “S udhoff” ; a ll vols. are in th e first section ex cept “D e re lig io n e p e rp e tu a .”)

P a ra c e ls u s

. Aureoli P h ilip p i Theophrasti Bom basts von H ohen h eim Paracelsi . . . Philosophi et M edici Opera B u ch er u n d Schrifften. S trasbourg, 1603-16. 2 vols. (In th e references below , th is edn. is cited as “ H u se r.”) . “ A rchidoxis m ag icae.” In : H u ser, II, 544-73. . Astronom ia magna. In : Sudhoff, X II, 1—444. . “ Das B uch M e te o ru m .” In : H user, II, 69-96. . “ C a p u t de m orbis so m n ii.’’ In : Sudhoff, IX , 359-62. . “D e caducis.” In : Sudhoff, V III, 263-308; H u se r, I, 589-607. . “D e m o rb is a m e n tiu m .” In : H u se r, I, 486—506. . “D e n a tu ra re ru m .” In : Sudhoff, X I, 309-403. . “D e n y m p h is.” In : Sudhoff, X IV , 115—51; see also “D e pygm aeis,” below . . “D e p e s tilita te .” In : H u ser, I, 326—56. . “D e po d ag ricis.” In : H u ser, I, 563-77. . “D e pygm aeis.” See “L ib e r de n ym phis, sylphis, pygm aeis, et salam andris, e t de caeteris s p iritib u s,” in H u se r, II, 180-92. . “D e relig io n e p e rp e tu a .” In : Sudhoff, P a rt 2 , 1, 89-107. . “D e san g u in e u ltr a m o rte m .” In : H u ser, II, 267—71. . “D e ta rta ro : F ra g m e n ta a n a to m ia e .” I n : Sudhoff, I I I , 4 6 1 76. . D e vita longa. In : Sudhoff, I II , 249-92. O th e r ed itions: (1) E d ite d by A d am von B odenstein. Basel, 1562. (2) Theophrasti Paracelsi L ib r i V de Vita Longa. E d ite d by G e ra rd D o rn . F ra n k f u rt a. M ., 1583. . “F ra g m e n ta .” In : Sudhoff, I II , 292-308. . " F ra g m e n ta m ed ica.” In : H u se r, I, 131-69. . “L a b y rin th u s m ed ico ru m e rra n tiu m .” I n : Sudhoff, X I, 161— 221. . “L ib e r A zoth.” In : H u se r, II, 519-43. . Das Buch Paragranum. E d ite d by F ran z S trunz. Leipzig, 1903· . Param irum prim u m . In : Sudhoff, I, 163-239. . “P h ilo so p h ia a d A th en ien ses.” In : H u se r, I I , 1-19. . “V on d e r A stronom ey.” In : H u ser, I, 212-18. . “V on d e n d rey en ersten essentiis.” In : H u se r, I, 323-26.

---------- . “ V on E rk a n tn u s des G estirn s.” In : Sudhoff, X II, 495-98. ----------. T h e H e rm e tic a l a n d A lc h em ic a l W ritin g s o f A u r e o lu s Philip p u s T h e o p h r a s tu s B o m b a st o f H o h e n h e im , called Paracelsus th e G reat. T r a n s la te d by A. E. W a ite. L o n d o n , 1894. 2 vols. P a u l i , W . “T h e In flu e n ce o f A rc h e ty p a l Ideas o n th e Scientific T h e ories of K e p le r.” T r a n s la te d by P riscilla Silz. In : C. G. J u n g a n d W . P a u l i , T h e In te r p r e ta tio n o f N a tu r e a n d the Psyche. N ew Y ork (B ollingen Series) a n d L o n d o n , 1955. P a u l i n u s o f N o l a . P oem ata. I n M i g n e , P .L ., v o l . 6 1 , c o l s . 4 3 7 - 7 1 0 . P a u s a n i a s . D escriptio Graeciae. E d ite d b y F rie d ric h S piro. L eipzig, 1903. 3 vols. P e n o t u s . “D e m ed icam en tis chem icis.” See {A) Thea tru m chemiCumj xi. ---------- . T a b le o f Sym bols. See (A) Th ea tr um Chemicumj xiv. P e r n e t y , A. J. D ic tio n n a ire m y th o -h e rm e tiq u e . Paris, 1787. ---------- . L e s Fables eg yp tien n es et grecques. Paris, 1758. 2 vols. P e t r i e , W i l l i a m F l i n d e r s . E g y p tia n T a les, translated fr o m the Pa p y ri. L o n d o n , 1895. 2 series. P h i l a l e t h e s , E i r e n a e u s . “ Brevis m a n u d u c tio ad ru b in u m caeleste m .” See (A) M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , x iii. ----------. “ Fons chym icae v e rita tis,” See (A) M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m , xiv. ---------- . “In tr o itu s a p e rtu s .” See {A) M u sa e u m h e rm e tic u m , x. ---------- . “ M e ta llo ru m m eta m o rp h o sis.” See (A) M u sa e u m h e rm e ti cu m , x ii. P h i l o . “D e opificio m u n d i” (“O n th e A ccount of th e W o rld ’s C rea tio n given by M oses”). In : W o rk s, tra n sla te d by T . H . C olson a n d G. H . W h ita k e r. (Loeb Classical L ib rary .) N ew Y ork a n d L o n d o n , 1929. 10 vols. (I, 6—137.) P

ic in e l l u s ,

ic o

della

h il ip p u s

M u n d u s sym b olicus. C ologne, 1687. 2 vols.

ir a n d o l a

, J

oan n es.

“D e a rte cab alistica.” I n O pera

o m n ia , I. ---------- . H e p ta p lu s. I n O pera o m n ia , I. ---------- . O pera o m n ia . Basel, 1572—73. 2 vols. P

ie r r e ,

o el

Soleil noir. P aris,

P irke de R a b b i E lie ze r. See

1952.

l ie z e r b e n

yrcanus.

BIBLIOGRAPHY J E A N - B A P T I S T E (ed.). Analccta sacra Spicilegio Solesmensi praeparata. Paris, 1876—91. 8 vols. "Platonis liber quartorum." See (A) Theatrurn chemicum, xxx. P O M P O N I U S M E L A . Chronographia. Edited by Carl Frick. Leipzig, 1880. PORDAGE, J O H N . Ein griindlich philosophisch Sendschreiben von rechten und wahren Stein der Weisheit. In FRIEDRICH R O T H SCHOLTZ (ed.). Deutsche Theatrum Chemicum. Nurnberg, 17283 2 . 3 vols. (I, 557-96.) . Sophia. Amsterdam, 1699. (In German: translated from English MS.) "Practica Mariae." See (A) Artis auriferae, vi. PITRA,

Papyri Graecae Magicae: Berlin, 1928-31. 2 vols.

PREISENDANZ, K A R L .

berpapyrien.

PRELLER, L U D W I G .

Griechische

PREUSCHEN, ERWIN.

Mythologie.

Antilegomena.

Die griechischen

Zau-

Leipzig, 1854. 3 vols.

Giessen,

1901.

Priscilliani quae supersunt. Edited by Georg Schepss. (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 18.) Vienna, Prague, Leipzig, 1889.

[PRISCILLIAN.]

PRITCHARD, J A M E S B .

the Old Testament.

(ed.). Ancient Near Eastern 2nd ednt, Princeton, 1955.

Prodromus Rhodostauroticus, (Contains Verus Hermes.) PSELLUS, M I C H A E L .

Parergi philosophici.

De daemonibus.

Texts

relating

. . . n.d., 1620.

Translated by Marsilio Ficino.

1497Allegoriae in Sacram Scripturam. In M I G N E , P.L., vol. 112, cols. 850-1088. R A H N E R , H U G O . "Die seelenheilende Blume." In Eranos-Jahrbuch XIIj Festgabe fur C. G. Jung, Zurich, 1945. (Pp. 117-239.)

RABANUS MAURUS.

REINACH,

SALOMON.

Cultes,

mythes,

et religions.

Paris, 1905—23. 5

vols. Alchemistische Lehrschriften und Marchen bei den Arabern. (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten, 19, part 3.) Giessen, 1923.

REITZENSTEIN, RICHARD.

. Poimandres: Studien zur griechisch-agyptischen christlichen Literatur. Leipzig, 1904. 376

und

friih-

---------- a n d S c h a e d e r , H . S tu d ie n z u m a n tik e n S y n k re tis m u s aus Ir a n u n d G riechenland. (S tu d ien d e r B ib lio th e k W a rb u rg , 7.) B e rlin , 1926. R e u s n e r , H i e r o n y m u s . P andora: Das ist, die edelst Gab Gottes, oder d e r W erd e u n d heilsam e Stein der W eysen. Basel, 1588. R h e n a n u s , J o a n n e s ( e d . ) . Solis e p u te o em ergentis sive dissertationis c h y m o tec h n ica e Iibri tres. F ra n k fu rt a. M ., 1613. R i p l e y , G e o r g e . Opera o m n ia chemica. Cassel, 1649. ----------. C hym ische Schrifften. E rfu rt, 1624. ----------. “ D u o d ecim p o rta ru m a x io m a ta p h ilo so p h ic a .” See (A ) T h e a tr u m C hem ieum j x v . ----------. P reface to “ M e d u lla .” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m britannicum , iii. ---------- . “ Verses b e lo n g in g to a n E m b le m atica ll Scrow le.” See (A) T h e a t r u m c h e m ic u m b rita n n ic u m , i i . “ R o s a riu m p h ilo s o p h o ru m .” See (A ) A r tis auriferae, x i i i ; (A) D e alchim ia ( 1 5 5 0 ) ; (A) M a n g e t u s , B ib lio th e c a chem ica Curiosaj v i i . R o s c h e r , W . H . (ed.). A u s fu h rlic h e s L e x ik o n der griechischen u n d rom ischen M y th o lo g ie . L eipzig, 1884—1937. 6 vols. R o s f .n c r e u t z , C h r i s t i a n (pseud, of J o h a n n V a le n tin A ndreae). C hym ische H o c h z e it. S trasbourg, 1616. F o r tra n sla tio n , see: T h e H e r m e tic k R o m a n c e , or T h e C hym ical W e d d in g . T ra n s la te d by E. F oxcroft. L o n d o n , 1690. “ R o sin u s ad S a rra ta n ta m E p isc o p u m .” See (A) A r tis auriferae, v . R u l a n d , M a r t i n . L e x ic o n alchem iae sive D ic tio n a r iu m alchemistic u m . F ra n k fu rt a. M ., 1612. F o r tra n sla tio n , see: A L e x ic o n of A l chem y. L o n d o n , i8g2. R

u p e s c is s a

, J

ohannes

(Jean

o c h e t a il l a d e

o q u e t a il

L a Vertu et pro p rie te de la q u in te essence de toutes choses. L yons, 1581.

l a d e ).

, J u l i u s (ed.). T u r b a P h ilo s o p h o r u m . (Q u e lle n u n d S tu d ie n zur G eschichte d e r N a tu rw isse n sch a fte n u n d d e r M edizin, 1.) B er lin , 1931.

u sk a

“Scala p h ilo s o p h o ru m .” See (A) A r tis auriferae, x ii. o s e p h J u s t u s . A n im a d v e r sio n e s in C hronologia E vsebii. I n his: T h e sa u ru s t e m p o r u m , E u seb ii . . . ch ro n ic o ru m c a n o n u m . . . libri duo. 1606.

S c a l ig e r , J

S c h e v ill, M a r g a r e t

E. B e a u tifu l on th e E arth. S anta Fe (N ew M ex

ico), 1945. “O n the F o u rfo ld R o o t o f the P rin c ip le of Sufficient R easo n .” In : T w o Essays by A r th u r Schopenhauer. T ra n s la te d anonym ously. (B o h n ’s P h ilo so p h ical L ib rary .) L o n do n , 1889. (Pp. 1-189.) S c h r e b e r , D a n i e l P a u l . M em o irs o f M y N e rv o u s Illness. T r a n s la te d by Id a M acalp in e a n d R ic h a rd A. H u n te r. (P sychiatric M o n o g ra p h Series, 1.) L o n d o n , 1955. S c h w e i t z e r , B e r n h a r d . H erakles. T u b in g e n , 1 9 2 2 . S c o t t , W a l t e r (ed.). H e rm etica . O x fo rd , 1924— 36. 4 vols. S e n d i v o g i u s , M i c h a e l (M ichal Sendiw oj). “D ialogus M e rc u rii alchym istae e t n a tu ra e .” See (A) T h e a tr u m ch e m icu m , xxiv. ----------. “N o v u m lu m e n ch em icu m .” See (A) M u sa e u m herm eticw m , ix. ----------. “ P a rab o la , seu A enigm a p h ilo so p h ic u m .” See (A) M a n g e t u s , B ib lio th eca chem ica curiosa, viii. S c h o p e n h au e r, A rth u r.

--------- . T r ip u s chem icus. S trasbourg, 1628. S e n io r.

See

§eyhzade.

Z a d ith .

See

B e lle te te .

Sha ta p a th a -B ra h m a n a . T ra n s la te d by J u liu s E ggeling. (Sacred Books of the East, 12, 26, 41, 43, 44.) O x fo rd , 1882-1900. 5 vols. S p e n c e , L e w is .

T h e G ods o f M ex ico . L o n d o n , 1923.

B., a n d G i l l e n , F r a n c i s J a m ern T rib e s o f C entral A ustralia. L o n d o n , 1904.

S p e n c e r, S ir W a l t e r

es.

T h e N o r th

“U b e r d e n psychologischen In h a lt eines F alls von S ch izo p h ren ic.” J a h rb u c h fiir psychoanalytische u n d psychopathologische F orschung (L eipzig a n d V ien n a), I I I (1912), 329-400.

S p ie lr e in , S a b in a .

P ro m e th e u s a n d E p im e th e u s. T r a n s la te d by Jam es F u lla rto n M u irh e a d . L o n d o n , 1931.

S p itte le r, C a rl.

S te e b ,

Jo h an n

C h ris to p h .

C o elum

S e p h iro tic u m

H eb ra eo ru m .

M ainz, 1679. G e o r g (ed.). D ie A p o k a lyp se des Elias. (T e x te u n d U n te rsu c h u n g e n , N . S., 2, p a r t 3a.) L eipzig, 1899.

S te in d o rff,

S te in e n , K a r l v o n d e n .

B erlin, 1894.

U n te r d en N a tu r v o lk e r n Zentral-B rasiliens.

J a m e s . “C erem onial of H asjelti D ailjis an d M ythical Sand P ain tin g of the N avajo In d ian s.” E ighth A n n u a l R e p o rt of the B ureau of E th nology, 1886-87. W ashington, 1891. (Pp. 23585 ·) S t o b a e u s , J o h n . A n th o lo g iu m . E dited by K urt W achsm uth and O tto H ense. B erlin, 1884—1912. 5 v °lsS z e b e n y . See C i b i n e n s i s . T a b e r n a e m o n t a n u s , J a c o b u s T h e o d o r u s . K rauterbuch. [H erb a l.] Basel, 1731. 2 vols. “T a b u la sm aragdina.” See H e r m e s T r i s m e g i s t u s . T a l b o t , A m a u r y . I n th e Shadow of the Bush. L ondon, 1912. T o d d , R u t h v e n . "C oleridge an d Paracelsus, H oneydew and LSD,” L o n d o n M agazine, M arch 1967. “T ra c ta tu lu s A vicennae.” See (A) A rtis auriferae, ix. “T ra c ta tu s A ristotelis.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , xxxi. “ T rac tatu s aureus.” See (A) A rs chemica, i ; (A) M a n g e t u s , Bibliotheca chem ica curiosa, i ; M usaeum herm eticum , i . “T ra c ta tu s M icreris.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , x x i x . S te v e n s o n ,

S a l o m o n . “Splendor solis.” See (A) A u reu m vellus, i . For translation , see: Splendor solis: A lchem ical Treatises of Salo m on Trism osin. W ith explanatory notes by J. K. L ondon, 1920,

T ris m o s in ,

See R u s k a . Das W eihnachtsfest. 2nd edn., Bonn,

“ T u r b a p h ilo s o p h o r u m .” U sen e r, H e rm a n n . V a le n tin u s ,

B a s iliu s .

1911.

“P ractica.” See (A) M usaeum herm eticum ,

v ii.

“De rebus gestis Im p erato ris H en rici V II.” In : G erm aniae H istoricorum . . . E d ited by C hristianus U rstisius (W urstisen) of Basel. F ra n k fu rt a. M., 1585. 2 vols. (Vol. II, pp. 63-64.) Vedanta-Sutras. T ran sla ted by G. T h ib a u t. (Sacred Books of the East, 34, 38, 48.) O xford, 1890—1904. 3 vols. V e n t u r a , L a u r e n t i u s . “De ratio n e conficiendi lapidis.” See (A) T h ea tru m chem icum , x v i i . Verus H erm es. See Prodrom us Rhodostauroticus. V e t t i u s , V a l e n s . A n th o lo g ia ru m libri. E dited by W ilhelm Kroll. B erlin, 1908. V e c e riu s , C o n ra d u s .

“ V ia v e rita tis u n ic a e .” See (/4) M u s a e u m H e r m e tic u m i iv. V i g e n e r u s , B l a s i u s . “ D e ig n e e t sa le .” See (A) T h e a t r m n c h e m i c u m ,

x x x iii. “V isio A ris le i.” See A r i s l e u s . W a l d e , A l o i s . L a te in is c h e s E ty m o lo g is c h e s W o r te r b u c h . E d ite d by

J . B. H o fm a n n . 3 rd e d n ., H e id e lb e rg , 1938—54. 2 vols. W a sserstein d e r W e y s e n 1 D e r . F r a n k f u r t a. M ., 1619. [ W e i P o - y a n g . ] “A n A n c ie n t C h in e se T r e a tis e o n A lc h e m y e n title d

T s ’a n T ’u n g C h ’i, w r itte n b y W e i P o -y an g a b o u t 142 a . d . ” (tra n s la te d by L u -c h ’ia n g W u a n d T e n n e y L. D avis), Ists (B ruges), X V I I I (1932), 210-89. W e l l s , H e r b e r t G e o r g e . C h ris tin a A l b e r t a ’s F a th er. L o n d o n , 1925.

T h e Secret o f t h e G o ld e n Flo w er: A C h in ese B o o k o f L if e . T r a n s la te d by C a ry F . B aynes. L o n d o n a n d N e w Y ork, 1931; n ew e d n ., 1962.

W i l h e l m , R ic h a r d , a n d J u n g , C. G.

W iN D iscH M A N N , F r . Zoroa strische S t u d i e n . B e rlin , 1863. W tiN s c H E , A u g u s t . “D ie S agen v o n L e b e n s b a u m u n d L e b e n s w asser,”

E x O r i e n t e L u x (L eipzig), I (1905), p a rts 2, 3. Z a d i t h S e n i o r (Z a d ith b e n H a m u e l). D e chernia S e n io r is a n tiq u is -

s i m i p h i l o s o p h i libellus. S tra s b o u rg , 1566. Zockler, O tt o . T h e

Cross o f C hrist. T r a n s la t e d b y M a u ric e J. E v an s. L o n d o n , 1877.

INDEX

INDEX Under alchemical collections, when cross reference is made to "individual treatises in Bibl. A," see above pp. 353/f, where names of these and their authors are listed. A A a r o n , 130 a b e r r a t i o n s , m e n t a l , 323 ablutio, 68 a b l u t i o n , 29a a b o r t i f a c i e n t , 135n a b o v e a n d b e l o w , 1 0 4 n , 140, 233, 264, 336; g r o w t h f r o m , 272 A b r a h a m le J u i f , 213, 220; see also Eleazar A b u ' l Q a s i m a l - ' I r a q ï , 139 n , 2 2 6 n , 305, 308, 3 0 9 n , 310 n acacia tree, 305 A c h a m o t h , 283, 334 a c t i o n a n d n o n - a c t i o n , 16n, 25 A d a m , 81n, 94, 113n, 1 3 1 8 n , 137n, 139, 143, 146, fig. B4, 166, 169, 219, 220, 318; e a r t h l y , 169n; a n d Eve, fig. 32, 303; first w i f e of, 303; g e n i t a l s of, 143; h e a v e n l y , 169n; m a n of l i g h t i m p r i s o n e d in, 130; mystic, 139; O l d , 80; p a r a b l e , 8371; second, 80; — , C h r i s t as, 304; — , M e r c u r i u s as, 235; sin of, 304; t r e e of p a r a d i s e of, 138; t r u e h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 219; w i t h V e n u s i n b a t h , 226n A d a m K a d m o n , 130, 220, 220n A d a m a s , 283n, 318 A d a m v o n B o d e n s t e i n , see a d a p t a t i o n , lack of, 12 a d a p t e d n e s s , 18 A d e b a r (stork), 317

Bodenstein

A d e c h , 131&n, 164, 165&n, 166, 169, 172; difficult, 170, 171, 173, 174, 179; g r e a t , 170, 171; homo maior, 182 adept(s), 126, 139, 151, 171/, 172T1, 179/, 231, 275, 299, 302/, 309, 327, 331; i n d i v i d u a t i o n of, 326; m o o n - p l a n t of, 308 A d h v a r y u , 267 A d i t y a s , 267 Adler, Gerhard, xiv A d m o n t , G o d f r e y A b b o t of, see G o d f r e y adulatio, 32971 A e g i d i u s d e Vadis, 21771, 322 " A e n i g m a V I , " 6871, 9371, 10571; see also "Visio A r i s l e i " " A e n i g m a B o n o n i e n s e , " 19971 " A e n i g m a p h i l o s o p h o r u m , " 22771 Aeons, 162 aer elementalis, 13671 a e r i a l life, 163 a e s t h e t i c e x p e r i m e n t , 45 aestphara, 13471 a e t h e r , 76, 162, 176; s o u l r o o t e d i n , 31271 aetiology, 108, 342 affect(s), 12, 15. 34, 35, 41, 45, 82, 334, 343; a u t o n o m o u s c h a r a c t e r of, 3g; o u t b u r s t s of, 289; p e r s o n a l , 346; u n c o n t r o l l a b l e , 50 affective: n a t u r e of m a n , M a r s c h a r a c terizes, 1 4 m ; states, 39 A g a t h o d a i m o n (good s p i r i t ) , 62, 6771, 7471, 104, 333 age, o l d , 272 a g g r e g a t i o n , gaseous, 21a

383

INDEX agnata fides, 167 Agni, 267 agnoia, 336 agnosticism, 54 Agricola, Georg, 9371 A g r i p p a von N e t t e s h e i m , 114&n, 115n, 117, 128, 130f, 131n, 155n, 156n, 181n, 184, 187 A h u r a m a z d a , 89 air, 164, 165n, 213 217, 226n, 232, 236n, 265, 3 1 m , 324; d e m o n s spirits of, 161; god, 279; in m o t i o n , 212; synonym f o r spirit, 197; -world, fig. A4 a i r c r a f t , r o c k e t - p r o p e l l e d , 343, 345 A k h m i m m a n u s c r i p t , 71 Al-Iraqï, see A b u ' l Q a s i m a l a b a s t e r , 64 A l a n of Lille, 2947J, 295 albedo, 68, 214; see also s p i r i t u a l i t y A l b e r t u s M a g n u s , 123n, 138n, 288, 331, 333; " S c r i p t u m , " 310n, 315, 317, 338, 339

alchemical: a n d astrological t r a d i t i o n , 125; a u t h o r i t i e s , slaying of, 321; confession of f a i t h , i2g; d r e a m l a n g u a g e , 301; fantasies, 285; a n d F r e u d i a n red u c t i o n of symbols, 301; l a n g u a g e , 104; l i t e r a t u r e , 6on, 66, 82, 105n; m a t u r a t i o n , 124; M e r c u r i u s , 26g; m e t a p h o r s , 102; opus, 166, 172; philosop h y , 20671; physician, 124; process, 303; p r o j e c t i o n s , 92, 238; q u a t e r n i t y , 278; r e d e e m e r , 295; r e t o r t , 197; specul a t i o n , f r a u d u l e n c e of, 204; stork, 317; symbols, 299, 301; t h i n k i n g , 288, 293; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 70, 75, 227; tree, 285 alchemist(s), 59, 66-6g, 71, 74, 83, 92, 96, 102, 107, 178; Arabic, 150n; Chinese, i 2 6 « ; fantasies of, 285, 293; G e r m a n , 126; goal of, 161; L a t i n , 150n, 154n; p a g a n , 299; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 124n, 161; w a t e r of, 76 alchemy, 67f, 72f, 7871, 84, 89, 91, 116, 119,121/; a b s u r d fantasies of, 205; a i m of, 125; a n c i e n t , 79; a r c a n e t e a c h i n g of, 124; chemistry of, 204; Chinese, i f f ; —, g o l d e n flower of, 269; classical,

104, 125; c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n G r e e k / A r a b i c a n d I n d i a , 231; d o c t r i n e of red e m p t i o n in, 205; gigantic a b e r r a tion, 204; goal of, 161; g o l d e n age of, 203; Greek, 97, 284; —, t e t r a s o m i a of, 277; L a t i n , 6472, 93, 28771; l i t e r a t u r e of, 204; m a t t e r in, 140; m e d i e v a l , 4, 100, 127, 280; m e t a l l i c tree of, 89; mystical side of, 105; m y t h o l o g i c a l a n d gnostic ideas in, 204; Paracelsan, 129; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , m , 122, 126/, 147; p h i l o s o p h i c a l a i m of, 13571; projections of, 239; psychic d a n g e r of, 128; psychic f a c t o r in, 137; psychological secrets of, 69; psychology of, 93; secret c o n t e n t of, 129; a secret d o c t r i n e , 122; s p i r i t of, 103, 128; s p i r i t u a l t r e n d s of, 14471; symbolism of, 69, 80, 88; t h o u g h t a n d l a n g u a g e of, 87; t r u e n a t u r e of, 123; W e s t e r n , 324/; —, s a p p h i r i n e flower of, 269 " a l c h e m y s t i c a l " process, 91 alcheringa t i m e , 9871 "Alchymistisches MS," see Codices a n d Manuscripts Alciati, A n d r e a , 27373, 312 A l d r o v a n d u s , Ulysses, 33871 a l e p h a n d t a u , 222 A l e x a n d e r , R o m a n c e of, 30671, 339 A l e x a n d e r & S u c h t e n , 129 A l e x a n d e r t h e G r e a t , 315, 321 alexipharmakon, see M e r c u r i u s a l e x i p h a r m i c , 101, 135, 27471, 296 alga, g e l a t i n o u s , 15371 "Allegoriae s a p i e n t u m s u p r a l i b r u m T u r b a e " (Theatr. chem.), 85, 314, 318-21, 32gn; see also " D i c t a B e l i n i " "Allegoriae s u p e r l i b r u m T u r b a e " (Art. aurif.), 75, 8 5 1 0 5 7 1 , 223, 22677, 304??, 30871 allegory(-ies), 66; of Christ, stork as, 317; conscious, 91; ecclesiastical, 259; e u h e m e r i s t i c , 301; of M a r y , t h e rose is, 294; of piety, stork as, 317 A l m a M a t e r , 112 a l m o n d - t r e e , 877J a l p h a a n d o m e g a , 222, 281

384

INDEX A l p h i d i u s , 298&n, 323 a l t a r , 62, 325; b o w l - s h a p e d , 59, 60, 63,

assimilation of, 180*2/ c a r i c a t u r e of f e m i n i n e Eros, 41; as C h i n e s e p'o soul, 39; c o n n e c t i o n w i t h ghost, 40; consciousness as effect of, 42; c o n t a i n s secret of p r e c i o u s stone, gg; d e f i n i t i o n of, 40; e m o t i o n a l i t y of, 337; figure, 99; — , t r e e a p r o j e c t i o n of, 338; f u n c t i o n of, 180*2; i n f e r i o r E r o s of, 41; as l i n k w i t h e t e r n a l images, 337; — w i t h w o r l d b e y o n d , 337; M e l u s i n a as, fig. B5, 144; p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n of u n c o n scious, 42; possession, 180*1; project i o n , 340; psychic, p e r s o n a l a u t o n o m o u s system, 42; s h a m a n i s t i c , 303; as soul, 132*2; s u b j u g a t i n g , 42; u n i o n w i t h , 326

6 5 . 70. 7 3

a l t e r n a t i o n of d a y a n d n i g h t , 25 a l u m , 287 a m b e r , 176 a m b e r g r i s , 155n a m b i g u i t y , of M e r c u r i u s , 245 a m b i v a l e n c e , of s p i r i t a r c h e t y p e , 240 ambra, 155 n, 187 A m b r o s e , Saint, 292n, 296n, 309n, 333 a m b r o s i a , f o u n t of, 308*2 A m e r i c a n ( I n d i a n ) legends, 99 A m f o r t a s w o u n d , 47 A m n a e l , 75, 82, 215 A m o r , 187 a m p u t a t i o n , 304*2, 329 A m s e t , 280 a m u l e t s , 45, 119, 122 A m y g d a l o s ( a l m o n d - t r e e ) , 87n A n a c h m u s ( - i ) , 155&n, 156, 168 analogy(-ies), 55; p r i m i t i v e , 28 analysis, 189; r e d u c t i v e , 348; see also psychotherapy analyst as h a i r d r e s s e r , 347 a n a t o m y , 11, 135; c o m p a r a t i v e , 273*2; i n t e r i o r , 137, 138n ancestor(s): s h a m a n , 340; soul of, 97; w o r l d of, g 8 n A n c i e n t of Days, 2 8 m A n d a l u s i a n p r i n c e , l a p i s as, 320, 321, 327 angel(s): 35, 73, 75, 81&n, 83&n, 115, 130*2, 169*2, 182/, 183*2, 195*2, 215, 315*2, 316, 318, 332; B a r u c h , 339; d e f i n i t i o n of, 82; d u b i o u s m o r a l i t y of, 81; f a l l e n , 96; —, wives of, 143*2; f o u r , of G o d , 282; —, g u a r d i a n , 282; m o t h e r l y , 318; of r e v e l a t i o n , 339 a n g e l i c q u a l i t i e s of m a n , 130*2 angelology, J u d a e o - H e l l e n i s t i c , 81 A n g e l u s Silesius, 117/ anhata-chakra, 265

anima: aquina, 68; iliastri, 164; media natura, 67, 213/, 266*2; mundi, 67, 77, 128*2, 129, 139, 197, 214, 307; rationalis, 214, 244 animal(s), 32, 45, 114, 159, 166, 196, 248, 297, 341; body, 103*2; f e r t i l i t y of, 97; f o u r , 282, fig. 24, fig. 25; — , sacrificial, 280; h e a t , 151; h e l p f u l , 195*2; o r h u m a n b l o o d , 290; k i n g d o m , 77; p r i n ciple, 257; r i d i n g , of t h e C h u r c h , 283; sacred, 63*2; sacrifices, 45; snake, m o s t s p i r i t u a l , 333; t e a r i n g of living, 70; t h r e e , 183; t r i a d of, 141*2; see also a p e ; b a b o o n ; b a t ; b e a r ; b i r d s ; b i t c h ; b u l l ; cat; chick; cock; cockatoo; crocodile; crow; dog; d o l p h i n ; dove; d r a g o n ; eagle; fish; f o x ; g r a s s h o p p e r ; h a w k ; h e n ; h o r s e ; ibis; jackal; k i n g fisher; l e o p a r d ; lion; ox; peacock; p h o e n i x ; pig; p u p p y ; r a m ; r a v e n ; s a l a m a n d e r ; s c o r p i o n ; s e r p e n t ; snake; s p i d e r ; s q u i r r e l ; stag; stork; s w a n ; tiger; tortoise; w h a l e ; wolf a n i m a t e stone, 291 a n i m a t i o n of body, 257 a n i m i s m , p r i m i t i v e , 199 animosity, 41

A n i a d a / A n i a d u s , 131*2, 153-56, 163-66, i68&n, 174, 175, 188 A n i a d i n , year, 174, 175, 183, 186, 188 a n i m a , 38, 41, 95, 177/, 211, 335/, 338;

a n i m u s , 38, 268/; as C h i n e s e hun soul, 38; figure, 269; i n f e r i o r Logos, 41; o p i n i o n s , 41; possession, 267 A n t h e r a , 125

3«5

INDEX A n t h o s , 125, 135" a n t h r o p a r i o n / a n t h r o p a r i a , 6o&n, 62; t r a n s m u t a t i o n of, 91 a n t h r o p o m o r p h i s m ( s ) , 276 A n t h r o p o s , 101, 132, 139, 169, 171, 179, 225, 284, 338; Gnostic d o c t r i n e of, 205, 220; invisible, 176; secret d o c t r i n e of, 171; or self, tree as, 338; stork a symbol of the, 317 Antichrist, 242; d r a g o n ' s tail i d e n t i c a l w i t h , 316; as f a l l e n angel, 242; as Sat a n , 242 a n t i d o t e , 135 Anti-Messiah, 71, 101 A n t i m i m o s , 105n a n t i m o n y , as t r a n s f o r m a t i v e s u b s t a n c e , 146 a n t i q u i t y , 46, 161; p a g a n , 157 anus, 220 anxiety, in d r e a m , 345 A n y a d e i , 154n; see also spring, e t e r n a l ; Paradise A p a s t a m b a , 267n ape, 280 A p h r o d i t e , 182f, 216; day of, 22672; U r a n i a , 187 Apocalypse, 188; of E l i j a h , 71, 101 A p o c a l y p t i c M a r r i a g e of L a m b , 182 apocatastasis, 284 A p o c r y p h a , 244 A p o l l o n i u s , 78 A p o l l o n i u s of T y a n a (pseudo-), 126, 219; see also " D i c t a B e l i n i " apostle, 113n a p o t h e c a r y , 205 a p o t r o p a i c , 24; c h a r m s , 45; e u p h e m i s m , 326; significance of q u a t e r n i t y , 281 a p p a r a t u s , distilling, 88, 317; see alsd Pelican apple(s), 302, 306f; f o r b i d d e n , 241; of t h e H e s p e r i d e s , 307; of t h e H o l y Spirit, 30972 A p u l e i u s , Lucius, 63n, 183n, 335 aqua(e): alba, 207; aurea, 208; divina/ permanens, 67f, 76, 78n, 85, 132n, 1 5 0 7 1 , fig. B4, 284, 329n; — , connect i o n of tree w i t h , 309; fortes, 331;

mercurialis, 14172, 209; nostra, 74, 77n, 213; pura, 150n; septies distillata, 207; sicca, 207; vitae, 207; — , perennis, 7972 "Aquarium sapientum," 186, 207n, 209n, 214n, 217n, 222, 235n, 292f, 293n A q u a s t e r , 137-140, 142/, 171; close to concept of t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , 140; great, 164; —, vision of, 166 aqueum subtile, 207 Arab(s). 206 A r a b i c a l c h e m y , 231 arbor: aurea, 3 1 0 7 2 , fig. 4; inversa, 340; philosophica, 89, 131, 240; see also tree(s) A r c a d i a , 230; see also M o n a k r i s a r c a n e : doctrine, 129; n a m e , 131; p h i losophy of Paracelsus, 110; r e m e d y (-ies), 135, 15672; substance(s), 72, 74/, 82, 8371, 85, 142, 145, 203, 207/, 211. 213, 216, 22672, 230, 242, 274, 278, 283, 291, 315, 320, 329/; —, b l o o d y sweat of, 290, 295; —, lead as, 331; — , M e r c u r i u s as, 216, 235$; — , as res simplex a n d G o d , 215; teachings of alchemy, 124; t e r m i n o l o g y , 122, 133, 186 a r c a n u m ( - a ) , 73, 76, 81/, 102, 10472, 123, 1 35 n > 153", !85, 18722, 309; i d e n t i c a l w i t h a r t i f e x , 309; M e r c u r i u s as, 235 Archa, 169 archai, Gnostic, 22 archaic: G o d - i m a g e , 345; residues i n d r e a m s , 347 Archelaus, 12372 a r c h e t y p a l : a n d collective symbols, 301 (see also symbols); concept of p e r f e c t b e i n g , 26; c o n f i g u r a t i o n s of t h e u n conscious, 253; d r e a m s , 6972; e x p l a n a tory principles, 288/; ideas, 346; image, 272; p a t t e r n s , unconscious, 12; p r o j e c t i o n s , 300; symbols, 272, 302, 348; tree, 272, 289 archetype(s), 84, 13972, 171, 177, 178, 246, 266, 277, 283, 289, 292, 302, 333; a n i m a as, 40; of consciousness, C h r i s t as, 247; a fascinosum, 168; of incest,

3 86

INDEX 301; of self, 87; of tree, 339; of treeb i r t h , 307; of u n c o n s c i o u s , M e r c u r i u s as, 247 A r c h e u s , 131, 140; d i s p e n s e r of n a t u r e , 140 A r c h i m e d e a n p o i n t , 108 archon(s): a n d aeons, G n o s t i c d o c t r i n e of, 225; in A t h e n s , 98*1; S a t u r n , t h e h i g h e s t , 228 A r d v l S u r a A n a h i t a , f o u n t a i n of, 308 Ares, 138*1, 140-42, 165, 177; a f o r m a t i v e p r i n c i p l e , 141; as Mars, 1 4 m ; Melusin i a n , 138, 142; as p r i n c i p l e of indiv i d u a t i o n , 140 argent vive/argentum vivum, 207, 239 argentum putum (unalloyed silver), 290*2, 295 A r i a n i s m , 119, 129 Aries, 141*1, 166, 3 1 m ; m o n t h of, 154 Arisleus, 306; see also "Visio Arislei" A r i s t o t e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y , 115 Aristotle, 27, 288 Aristotle, p s e u d o - , 125, 146*1, 206, 220*2, 307, 321 a r m y w i t h b a n n e r s (acies castrorum), 295 A r n a l d u s d e V i l l a n o v a , 78, 116, 123*1, 294 a r r o w , 231; p h a l l i c , 263 ars aurifera, 124, 314 Ars chemtca, 82n, 83*1, 85*1, 88**, 94*2, 103*1, 128*1, 138*1, 147*1, 152*1, 217*1, 236*1, 310*1, 320*1, 331*1; see also individual treatises in Bibl. A A r t , t h e , 61, 64, 324, 135, 292, 300; d a n gers of, 322/f; a n d deus absconditus, 105; rules of, 218; secret(s) of, 75*1, 85 art(s): f o r b i d d e n , 119; of h e a l i n g , 111, 117; kabbalistic, 113*1; magic, 122; of m e t a l s , 63; royal, 204, 275; sacred, 74 Artefius, 225 a r t i f e x , 67*1, 88, 137/, 142, 314, 322, 326, 328f; a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s t h e w o r k , 172; i d e n t i c a l w i t h a r c a n u m , 309; M e r c u rius, reflection of mystical e x p e r i e n c e o f , 237; mystic t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 229

Artis auriferae, 60*1, 66*1, 68*1/, 73*1, 75*1, 78*1/, 85*1, 93*1/, 103*1, 105*1, 123*1, 126*1, 139*1, 147*1, 207*1, 2ogn, 212*1, 215*1, 217*1, 223n, 2 2 6 n f , 232*1, 235*1/, 240*1, 276*1, 278*1, 286*1/, 290*?, 291*1, 304*1, 30812, 31011, 314*1, 327*1, 329*1, 331*1; see also individual treatises in Bibl. A arunquiltha, 97 asat (non-existing), 218*1 ascent, 62, 130, 146, 154; a n d descent, 104*1, 218; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , m o t i f of, 59, 1038m, 304; of M e r c u r i u s , 233 ash, 147 A s h v a g h o s h a , 338*1 ashvattha (Ficus religiosa), 312/, 313*1 Ask, 337*1 a s p a r a g u s p l a n t , 313 ass, 129, 183*1 a s s i m i l a t i o n , 38; of a n i m a , i8orc; of unf a m i l i a r , 12 A s s u m p t i o n of Blessed Virgin, 96 A s t a r t e , see I s h t a r Astrampsychos, 279/ astrology, 35, 116, 118/, 225, 237; e a r t h l y , 276; r e l a t i o n of M e r c u r i u s to, 225 a s t r o n o m y , 113*1, 118, 237 astrum (star), 114, 130*1, 137; d o c t r i n e / theory, 114*1, 125; see also s t a r a t h a n o r , fig. B 4 A t h a r v a - V e d a , 268; H y m n s of the, 313*1 A t h e n s , 70; a r c h o n s in, 98*1 Atlantida, see B e n o i t a t m a n , 171, 220; p e r s o n a l , of tree, 239; s u p r a - p e r s o n a l , 239 atom(s), 108, 201 a t r o p h y , i n s t i n c t u a l , 12/ Attic f e r t i l i t y a n d r e b i r t h ceremonies, 70 Attis, 70; p i n e t r e e of, 30511 a t t i t u d e , c h a n g e of, 345 a u g u r i e s , 114 A u g u s t i n e , St., 247-50, 337 " A u r e l i a o c c u l t a , " 72, 80, 83*1, 196, 217*1, 218, 222, 225, 226*1, 233*1, 331 a u r e o l e of s u n , 8of

387

INDEX Aureum vellus, 6 8 n , 9 s n , 219n; see also individual treatises in Bibl. A A u r o r a , 176 Aurora consurgens, 77, 85, 95, 123, 149, 2o8n, 209", 212n, 2 i g n , 22071, 27671, 27971, 310, 322, 331; ed. v o n Franz, 6g7j, 7871, 12371, 3O6&7J, 32271 aurum: non vulgi, 166, 275; philosophicum seu potabile, 27472; potabile, 172; vitreum, ig8 A u s t r a l i a n s (aborigines), g7, g8n " A u t h o r i s ignoti o p u s c u l u m , " 9471 authority(-ies), 18, 112, 116; alchemical, slaying of, 321; of lumen naturae, 116; of t r a d i t i o n , 115 a u t o c h t h o n o u s image, 273 a u t o - e r o t i c isolation, 254 Autogenes, t h e , 318 a u t o n o m o u s : c h a r a c t e r of effects, 39; images, 247; psychic, c o m p l e x , 50; â&#x20AC;&#x201D;, contents, 35, 37 a u t o n o m y , 12, 328; of complexes, 34; of m a t t e r , 238; of unconscious, 328 Avalon, A r t h u r (Sir J o h n W o o d r o f f e ) , 2473, 26571 avarice, 275 Avicenna, 116, 206, 214, 288, 330; see also " T r a c t a t u l u s A v i c e n n a e " a x i o m of M a r i a , 1 5 m , fig. B2, 166, 224, 278; see also M a r i a P r o p h e t i s s a ayami (familiar, protective spirit), 340 Azoth, 222, 2g2n Aztec(s), 71, 100

B b a b o o n , d o g - h e a d e d , 27g B a d e n w e i l e r , 133 B a l d z a m e n , 13571 Balgus, 31471 B a l i n u s , see B e l i n u s ball, blade, 266 b a l s a m , 134/, 13571; i n t h e h e a r t , 152; sidereal, 151 b a o b a b , fig. 2

b a p t i s m , 68n, 168; by fire, gs; by w a t e r a n d spirit, 78 b a r b a r i s m , 9, 13 B a r b e l i o t s , 318, 338 B a r b e l o = " G o d is f o u r , " 1 3 m b a r b e r , 6o&n, 62 Bardesanes, 337 B a r d o , the, 265 Bardo Thodol, see Tibetan Book of the Dead B a r i n g - G o u l d , Sabine, 17871 B a r n a b a s , Epistle of, 87 B a r u c h , angel, 339 Basel, 98 basilisk, i n f e r n a l , 143 Basilius V a l e n t i n u s , 21271 B a s u t o legend, 101 b a t , wings of, fig. B2 Bata, E g y p t i a n tale of, 305, 33771 Bavnes, Cary F., 1 15aynes, C h a r l o t t e A u g u s t a , 17271 Baynes, H . G., 3407J bear, 282 B e a r , G r e a t , 14171 Beatrice, 176; see also D a n t e Beelzebub, 143; S a t u r n as, 228 Beeson, Charles H e n r y , 31871 b e g i n n i n g , 23; of work, M e r c u r i u s as, 235 b e i n g , u n i t y of, 28; u n f a t h o m a b l e , 2 i o n ; universal, 40 belief in Jesus Christ, 168 B e l i n u s / B a l i n u s , 126, 219; see also "Dicta Belini" Bellator ignis, 14871 Bellet&te, 23171 beloved, lover a n d , 219 below, see above a n d below benedicta viriditas, 247 benedictio fontis 68&7I, 73; r i t e of, 78 Benoit, P i e r r e , g9 benzol ring, 108 Berissa, 310 B e r n a r d , Saint, 29471 B e r n a r d u s T r e v i s a n u s , 21771, 22871, 235". 3Â°8n, 332rt Berthelot, Marcellin,

3 88

5971, 6on, 6371,

INDEX 206; La Chimie au moyen Age, 6on, 6 6 n , 6 8 n , 7gn, 82nf, 88n, 9 5 " , 2 1 5 n f , 226n, 286n, 309n, 314n, 320n, 33172," Collection des anciens alchetnistes grecSj 5 9 n f , 6Sn, 7%nf, >j6n, 7 8 n , 8 2 n , 93n» 95n> 9 1 0 1 » > i°5"> \s8n, 1 3 i n , 138", i 3 g n , i 4 g n , 151 n, 15472, 1 6 m , 20372, 208n, 21571, 221H, 226n, 274n, 2797?, 284n/, 29071, 314", 3 2 m , 32371; Les Origines de I'alchimie, 27771 B e t h l e h e m , 7071 Beya, a n d G a b r i c u s , 93 bezoar, i 5 5 « Bezold, Carl, 332n BhagavadgTta, 265, 26772, 268, 312/ Bible, 315, 321; see also A p o c r y p h a ; New Testament; Old Testament; Sainte Bible Bibliotheca chemica curiosa (ed. M a n get), 67 n , 8573, i 2 6 n , 1 4 m , 21971, 22472, 236n, 2987?; see also individual treatises in Bibl. A B i n a h , 312 biology, h u m a n , 243 bird(s), fig. A4, 114, 258/, 268, 341, figs. 3, 22, 25, 26, 30, 32; g r e e n , 286; of h e a v e n , 314; of H e r m e s , 152, 202; m y t h i c a l , 344/; r e l a t i o n t o t h e tree, 315; r e p r e s e n t i n g w i n g e d t h o u g h t s , 266; see also List under a n i m a l s Birs (river), 98 b i r t h , 46; of B u d d h a , 318; a n d d e a t h , cycle of, 79, 102; g e r m i n a t i o n a n d , of stone, 298; of R e d e e m e r , 298; stone-, 97, gg; tree-, 266, 307; see also reb i r t h ; twice-born b i r t h p l a c e of gods: l o t u s as, 269; s t o n e as, 97 b i t c h , 93 black: ball, 266, crow, 229; dog, 311; e a r t h , 265/; fish, 265; r a v e n , 9 2 n ; spider, 333; s p i r i t , old, 329; substances, 242; Sun, 266 blackness, see melanosis/nigredo B l a n d , C. C. S„ a n d Scott, H . v o n E „ 86n, iC)8n

3«9

b l a s p h e m y , 127 blessedness, e t e r n a l , 182 blindness, psychological, 336 blood, 8472, 116, 143, 244, 262, 279n, 287/, 290, 292, 29572, 305, fig. 23; anim a l or h u m a n , 290; black, b u r n t o u t , 153; bodies i n t o , 63; b o n d a g e of, 52; eyes, b e c a m e as, 60; —, filled w i t h , 62, 71; fire-coloured, 77n; of Gayom a r t , 288; of lion, 29571; magic, 8 3 n ; r e d e e m i n g , 296; rose-coloured, 290, 292, 295, 325; s p i r i t u a l , Tjn; of stone, 20/, 295; symbol of soul, 143; symbolic, 296; vein, swollen w i t h , 247; vessels, fig. A9, 28g; — , tree as system of, 287 b l o o d y sweat, of a r c a n e substance, 290, 295 blossom(s), 269, 290; h e a r t - s h a p e d , 259; lotus, 266; w h i t e , fig. 1; see also flower(s) b l u e w o m a n , 232 B o d e n s t e i n , A d a m von, 113, 11572, n g , i33&n, 140, i 5 3 « , 157, 173, 18772; (ed.) De vita longa, 11372, 14172, 15672, 16372 B o d h i tree, 318 body(-ies), 63, 77/, g2, 94, 97, gg, 107, 122,

138,

14177,

142,

153,

163,

165,

195,

197, 23672, 257, 278Sen, 285, 329, 346; A d a m ' s , 13172; a n i m a l , i 0 3 n ; anim a t i o n of, 257; b r e a t h - , see b r e a t h ; calcined, 16572; c e n t r e i n the, 266; c h e m i c a l e l e m e n t s of, 195; of C h r i s t , 87, 96, 140; clarified, 130; c o n s u m e d by fire, 62; dense, 16072; d i a m o n d , 21, 46, 51; division i n t o f o u r , 6on, 68; escape f r o m , 61; of flint, 100; glorified, 297; heavenly, 125, 157, fig. 4; h u m a n , 11; i m p e r f e c t , 293; i m p u r e , 137, 148; i n c o r r u p t i b l e , 46, 104; invisible, i i 4 « ; —, of n a t u r e , 114; Jesah a c h , 167; l i g h t of, 106; living, 52; of M a r y , 1 3 9 f ; microcosmic, 135; m o r tal, 134; m o r t i f i e d , 103; mystic, 107n; physical, 5172; p n e u m a t i c , 52; r e s u r rected, 96, 167; r o u n d , 139; sensa-

INDEX body(-ies) (cont.y. tions of, 28; s h i n i n g , 151/, 157; s o u l a n d spirit c o n t a i n e d in stone, 290/; a n d soul, s e p a r a t i o n o f , 239; spirit-, figs. 32, 46; — , d i l e m m a of, 216; s p i r i t of, 103*1; a n d s p i r i t , 214; —, link, between, 95; stone-, motif of, 99; or substance, 132*1; subtle, 104*1, 213; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 60; t u r b u l e n c e of, 152, 165; visible a n d n a t u r a l , 114*2; wholeness of, 280; see also corpus B o h m e , J a k o b , 22, 317 Bogomils, 223*1, 229 bones, 60 Bonus, P e t r u s , 297/, 298*1, 299, 330/; see also L a c i n i u s Book of t h e D e a d , 280; see also Tibetan Book of the Dead Book of E I - H a b i b , 68*1, 82*1, 88 " B o o k of t h e H o l y T r i n i t y . . . ," see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s , " D a s B u c h d e r heiligen D r e i f a l t i g k e i t . . ." Book of Krates, see K r a t e s Book of Ostanes, see O s t a n e s B o r g n e t , A. a n d E., 138*1 Bororos, 205 Bostra, T i t u s of, 334 b o t t l e , spirit in (tale), 193, 194*2, 195, 197. i99> 2 0 a > 2 39/^ 2 5 8 Bousset, W i l h e l m , 132*2,

b r i d e , 226*2, 337; b r i d e g r o o m a n d , 93, 219; tree a n d t h e heavenly, 340 b r i d e g r o o m , 292*2; a n d b r i d e , 93, 219 B r i h a d a r a n y a k a U p a n i s h a d , 248*2 b r o n c h i , 289 b r o o d i n g of H o l y Spirit, 78 b r o t h e r s , motif of t w o hostile, 246*2 "Buch der heiligen Dreifaltigkeit . . . ," see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s " B u c h des Weisen M a g u s , " 240*2 B u d d h a ( S h a k y a m u n i ) : b i r t h of, 318; m a i e u t i c m e t h o d of, 243; n a m e d tree of paradise, 338*2 B u d d h i s m , 29, 42, ig6, 243; in Persia, 231; T i b e t a n , 22, 29; yoga in, 36 B u d g e , E. A. Wallis, 22*2, 73n, 79*2, 155*2, 279*1; (tr.) The Book of the Dead, 280 b u l l , 155*2, 305; s t r e n g t h of, 268 B u n d a h i s h , 220, 308, 337*2 B u r c k h a r d t , J a c o b , 118 B u r g a e s c h i , L a k e , 98 B u r m a , 97 b u s i n e s s m a n , n e u r o s i s of, 13 Bythos, 87*2

C 2sSn,

232*1,

334"

boy, 183, 256; crowned, fig. 32 Braceschus, J o h a n n e s , 141*2 b r a i n : c u t t i n g o u t a n d e a t i n g , 71; i d e n tity of s t r u c t u r e , 11; - p a n , 88; struct u r e of, 152 b r a n c h e s : f o u r , 332; seven, 315 brass: eagle, 93; m a n , 61/, 64; s e r p e n t , 333

b r e a d of life, 306 b r e a t h : -bodies, 46, 238; — , as c a r r i e r of life, 51*1; — , i n c o r r u p t i b l e , 51; control, 27, 51*1; of G o d , 139; -soul, 213; —, h i g h e r , 39; s u b t l e , 78 "Brevis m a n u d u c t i o , " 217*1, 22872 b r i d a l bed, cross as, 337

C a b a l a , 117, 130f, 137*1, 304, 311, 318, 340 Cabalistic: i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of A d a m , 169*2; Paracelsan p h i l o s o p h y n o t , 123 Caesarius of H e i s t e r b a c h , 86, 197, 198*2 cagastric: A q u a s t e r , 139; m a g i c , 1258m; soul, 164/ " C a g a s t r u m , " i25&n Calid, 77*2, 290*2, 29 m calx, 138*2 c a n d e l a b r u m , 255 C a n o p i c jars, f o u r , 280 capsule, of h e a r t , 164 capulsa cordis, 165 caput corvi, 266*2 caput draconis, 316; see also d r a g o n c a r b o n i f e r o u s e r a , 266

INDEX c a r b u n c l e , 147; M e r c u r i u s as, 235 C a r m e l , 312 C a r n i t o l u s , J o s e p h u s , 311 C a r t e r , J . B., 187*1 Cassiodorus, M a r c u s A u r e l i u s , 305 castle: d r a g o n , 23; yellow, 23 c a s t r a t i o n c o m p l e x , 304*1 casuistry, 184 cat, fig. 32 c a t a r a c t , of Nile, 279*1 C a t h a r s , 22gScn; see also Bogomils C a t h o l i c : M o n a d , 15 m ; t r i b e , l i o n of, 228 cauda pavonis (peacock's tail), 152*2, 154*2, 290*1 c e d a r tree, 337*2 C e d u r i n i , 171 celestial: A q u a s t e r , 139; — , s o u l as, 140; f a m i l y r e u n i o n , 242; spirit, 292/ cell d e g e n e r a t i o n , 34 Celts, 119 censor, 343 centre, 21, 24/, fig. 33, 138/, 139*2, 148/, 149*2, 164/, 233, 264/, 271*2, 337*2; in t h e body, 266; c o m m a n d of, 25; of e a r t h , 149, 210; of e m p t i n e s s , 38; fiery, 152; fire i n , 149, 151; flowerlike, 269, fig. 31; of h e a r t , 139; h e a r t as, 271; h e a v e n l y , 150; " a n i n f i n i t e abyss of mysteries," 149; m i d p o i n t of, 151; of n a t u r a l w i s d o m , 151; psychic, 152; of tree, 196; of u n i v e r s a l system, 26 ceremonies, religious, 22 cervus fugitivus, see servus fugitivus cesspits, of m e d i e v a l magic, 245 chakras, 265Sen " C h ' a n g S h e n g S h u ; T h e A r t of P r o longing Life," 1 change(s): of a t t i t u d e , 345; cycle of, 13 chaos, 78, 84, 122, 136*2, 141*2, 325; M e r c u r i u s , c h i l d of, 228; — , as p r i m e v a l , 235; son of, 136*2; of T i a m a t , 239 c h a r a c t e r , 39; affective, of m a n , 40; astrological c o n s t i t u e n t s of, 238 chariot(s), 268, 281; fiery, 167; stone, 281*2 c h a r i t y , C h r i s t i a n , 2g6

Charles, R . H., 149n, 219n, 3o6n, 3087?, 31872; see also E n o c h , Book of charm(s), a p o t r o p a i c , 45 chastity, 259 C h a u c e r , Geoffrey, 93 Cheiri Paracelsicum, 135 n; see also Cheyri chemical: e l e m e n t s , 159; — , of body, 195; m e d i c i n e , 124; processes, 67; substances, see substances chemist, 204/ chemistry, 108, 119, 189, 238, 274n, 349; of alchemy, 204 chen-yen, 324/ chermesj 148 Sen C h e r u b , 88, 2 8 m c h e r u b i m , 281; f o u r , of Ezekiel, fig. 32 Cheyri, 1358011, 153// i87&n; see also Cheiri C h h a n d o g y a U p a n i s h a d , 2 i 8 n , 313n ch'i, 324/ chick, 152 child, 52; C h r i s t , 100; of G o d , 52; M e r c u r i u s as, see M e r c u r i u s ; -stone, 97; Sunday's, 202 c h i l d r e n of light, 247 chimaera, 14m C h i n a , 3 4 o n ; c u l t u r a l life of, 8; soul of, 11 Chinese, 14, 18, 47, 71; alchemists, i 2 6 n ; a l c h e m y , v; — , g o l d e n flower of, 1, 269; c o n d u c t , 324; consciousness, 39; c u l t u r e , 8; d o c t r i n e of p'o soul, 40; p h i l o s o p h y , g, 11, 40, 5071; t h o u g h t , 8; w i s d o m , 6; yoga, 4, 14, 29 chlamys, 192 C h r e t i e n d e T r o y e s , 2231 Christ, 22, 52, 70, 80, 8471, 10371, 10471, 106, 113^1, 115, 126, 1 3 m , 139, 188, ig6&n, 223, 233, 236, 241, 246/, 281, 283, 285, 295, 298, 328, 334; allegory of, 123, fig. B4; as a r c h e t y p e of consciousness, 247; b o d y of, 87, 96, 140; c h i l d , 100; c o m p a r e d w i t h e a r t h l y stone, 292n; crucified, 263; defects i n i m a g e of, 95; d i v i n i t y of, 95, 119, 129; d r a g o n ' s h e a d i d e n t i f i e d w i t h , 316;

391

INDEX C h ris t (c o n t.): E n o ch p re f ig u ra tio n of, 137η; fig u re, 246; as filiu s tnicro co sm i, 294; fu tu re , 296; g en ealo g ical tre e of, 307; g e n e a l ogy of, 304; G n o stic, 336; h u m a n ity of, 104η; im age, 245; — , o n e -sid e d ness of, 96; in c a r n a tio n of, 292n; — , M e rc u riu s as im ag e of, 235; in n e r , 27, 96; Jesu s, S a v io u r o f M icrocosm , 127; -lap is p a ra lle l, 95f; a n d la p is p h ilo so p h o r u m , id e n tity of, 294; as lio n , 228η; th e L ogos, 83, 222, 244, 332, 333; m a sc u lin e s p iritu a lity of, 335/; M e rc u riu s as, 222, 235; — as b r o th e r to , 222; — in co m p e n sa to ry re la tio n to, 245; n a m e d tre e of p a ra d ise , 33873; o m n ip re se n c e of, 95; as o rd in a ry m a n , 129; p assio n of, 105η; th e P e li can , 87; p e rs o n a lity a n d h is to ric ity of, 53; as p e rso n ific a tio n o f th e u n conscious, 333; P rim o rd ia l M a n , 336; p u r is s im u s h o m o , 295/; re fle c tio n of in n e r A n th ro p o s , 171; ro ck , 102; sec o n d A d am , 304; Sol N o v u s, 242; as “son o f m a n ,” 52; so rro w -la d e n h e ro , 53; s p iritu a lity of, 96; s to rk as a lle g o ry of, 317; as sw ord, 333; sym bol, 54, 241; — o f in n e r , 96; — , P a u lin e , 53; sy m b o lized b y m o u n ta in tree, 309; th r o n e of, 283; tre e , 196; — o r v in e, 338; w o rk o f re d e m p tio n , 96; see also Jesu s C h ris te n d o m , ills of, 112 C h riste n se n , A r th u r , 220n, 337n C h ristian (s), 35, 53, 70; ascetic m o ra lity , 46; c h a ra c te r o f G o e th e ’s conscious ness, 245; c h a rity , 2g6; — a n d fo r b e aran ce, 48; c h u rc h , m e d ie v a lism of, 18 (see also C h u rc h ); con scio u s ness, 128; co n v in ce d , 49; cross, in v e rte d , 264; c u ltu re , 9; d e v e lo p m e n t, 48; devil, 24773; — , a d ia b o liz a tio n o f L u c ife r, 247/; d o g m a, 90, 221; fa ith , fo u r m a in a rticles of, 168; — , m y s te r ies of, 188; ideas, 22, 172; ideology, 283; im ag ery , 183; k n o w le d g e , 11373; love o f o n e ’s n e ig h b o u r , 185, 187;

m a n d a la s, 22; m e n ta lity , 245; m o tifs, early , fig. B i ; m y stery , 103η; P a ra c e l su s as, 160; R e d e e m e r, 233; S a cra m e n ts, 154; sto ry o f sa lv a tio n , 2gg; sy m b o lism , 84, 185, 300; tr a d itio n , 280, 317; v alu es, 48 C h ris tia n ity , 122, 161, 184, 196, 198, 241, 2gC; early , 5 1 η ; fo u n d e r of, 229; h is to ry of, 242; m e d ie v a l, 303; s p irit of, 129; te n sio n o f o p p o site s in , 243 C h ristia n o s, 149 C h ris tm a s tre e , 23, 254/ ch ryso p oea (g o ld -m ak in g ), 172; tre e sy m b o l of, 314 c h th o n ic : h a lf of g o d h e a d , M e rc iiriu s as, 222; n u m e n o f tre e as sn ak e, d ra g o n , 317; se rp e n t, 333; tr ia d , fig. B2, 223 C h u rc h , 116, 120, 158, 161, 171, 321; cen so rsh ip of, 88; e te r n a l v e ritie s of, 160; F a th e rs, 2 9 2 7 3 ; la n g u a g e of, 102; M o th e r, 112, 117; p ro te c tio n of, go; rid in g a n im a l of, 283; sa c ra m e n ts of, 186 ch u rin ga (s), 97f, 1 0 0 C h w o lso h n , D a n ie l, 6 0 7 3 , 2 2 4 7 3 , 3 1 2 7 3 ch y m ical m a rria g e / w e d d in g , 1 2 3 , 1 2 6 , 136, 257; C h y m ica l W e d d in g , see R o se n creu tz C ib in en sis, see Szebeny C icero , M a rc u s T u lliu s , 221 cico n ia v e l storca, 3 1 6 7 3 c in n a b a r, m e r id ia n of, 6373 C irce, 99 c ircle, 151, 161, 224, 233, 336, 33773; c h a rm e d , 24; m agic, 22, 24, 90, fig. 17; o f m o o n , 192, 22673; m o v e m e n t in , 25; — , a ro u n d o n eself, 25; O n e m id p o in t of, 151; p ro te c tiv e , 24, 29; sim p le st a n d m o st p e rfe c t fo rm , 151; sq u a rin g of, 86&T3, 96, 172; sy m b o l of w h o le ness, 337 c irc u la r: m o v e m e n t, 21, 25, 149f; te m p le , 84; th in k in g , 84; u ro b o ro s, 233 c irc u lu s s im p le x , 233 c ir c u m a m b u la tio , 25 c ir c u m ro ta tio n , 1 5 1 7 3

city, 295; e te r n a l, 172; fo rtifie d , fig. A 10; o f ja d e , 23, 53; o f N e k h e n , 280; o f P e, 280 c iv iliz a tio n : C h in e se , 18; W e ste rn , 8 civilized: consciousness, 184; p e o p le s, 55 clay, 278, 287 C le o p a tra , 94, 99, 154 c lo u d -d e m o n , gg co ag u la tio n (s), 287η, 331 cock(s), 105η, 114, 23*> 329 cockatoo, re d , 205 code: m o ra l, 184; p e n a l, 184 C odices a n d M a n u sc rip ts: B asel: "A lch y m istisc h e s M S.”: 144η; “ D e a rb o re c o n te m p la tio n is ,” A X . 128b: 315η B e rlin : C od. B ero l. L a t. 532: 152η; C od. B ero l. L a t. Q.584: 67η, 305η, 3°S L e id e n : C od. Voss. C h em . 520 (29): 83η, 23 in L o n d o n : “ L e L iv re des A n sien es Esto ire s” : B M MS. A d d . 15268: fig. B i; R ip le y S crow le, B M MS. S Ioane 5025: fig. B5, 199η, 212, 286η, 303, 306η, 317 M u n ic h : C od. G e rm . 598 (“ B u c h d e r h lg . D re if a ltig k e it”): 144η, fig. B3 N ew H a v e n : G e rm a n alc h . m s. (M el lo n C oll.): fr o n tis p . P a ris: B N MS. g r. 2250: 15412; B N MS. gr. 2252: 64η,· B N MS. g r. 2419: 228η; Ste. G en . MS. 2263-64: 16611 St. G a ll: C od. G e rm . A lch. V ad .: 144η; C od. V ad. 390: 76n V a tic a n : C od. V at. L a t. 7286: 83η Z u ric h : C od. R h e n o v . 172: 144η, 220η , 23 m O th e r : MS A k h m im : 71; C od. B ezae:

243 c o e lu m (heav en ), 136η; as M e rc u riu s, 219; as q u in ta essen tia , 219 coffer, figs. 14-15, 258 coffin, as tre e o f d e a th , 304 co g n itio : m a tu tin a , 247-49; s u i ip siu s, 248; v e sp e r tin a , 247f , 250 c o g n itiv e process, 289

c o h a b ita tio n of Sol a n d L u n a , 123 c o in c id e n tia o p p o s ito r u m , G o d as, 209/ c o ld /w a rm , 278 C o lerid g e , S. T ., 15311 co llective: a n d a rc h e ty p a l sym bols, 301; consciousness, 341; d elu sio n s, 36; n a tu r e o f self, 240; p syche, 347; p sych ic p h e n o m e n a , 36; so u l, 240η; u n c o n scious, see u n co n sc io u s c o lly riu m , 75 C o lo n n a , F ran cesco : H y p n e r o to m a c h ia P o lip h ili, 141η, 157, 176, 183, 304 colo u r(s), 23, 5g, 106, 152801, 154, 218, 238, 290, 339; em p ty , a n d fo rm s, 29, 37; fo u r, 305; fo u r p rim a ry , figs. A 6, A8; th re e , 76; see also b lack ; b lu e ; g ree n ; p u rp le ; re d ; w h ite ; y ellow C o lso n , T . H ., a n d G . H . W h ita k e r, 26611 c o m b u s tib le liq u id , 320 C o m m u n io n , 157; su b stan ces, 154 c o m p a ra tiv e : a n a to m y , 27312; re se a rc h in to sy m b o ls/sy m b o lism , 273, 341 c o m p assio n , 112 c o m p e n s a tio n : b io lo g ic a l, b y d re a m s, 69; la w /p r in c ip le of, 245 c o m p e n sa to ry : Logos, 297; p o w ers of th e u n co n scio u s, 335; p rim o rd ia l im ages, 301; re la tio n to C h ris t sy m b o l ized b y M e rc u riu s , 245; te n d en c ies fro m u n co n scio u s, 245 com p!ex(es): a u to n o m o u s , 5 0 / (see also system s); a u to n o m y of, 34; c a s tra tio n , 30411; n u m in o u s , 328; psychology, 326; sp lit-o ff, 34 c o m p le x io o p p o s ito r u m , 241 c o m p o sitio n : o f th e liq u id s , 62; o f th e w aters, s g f, 66, 91, 102, 105, 108 c o n c e n tra tio n , 25 c o n c e n tra tio n cam p , 342/ c o n c re tiz a tio n , 105, 179 c o n d e n sin g a p p a ra tu s , 88 c o n d u c t: C h in ese, 324; p rin c ip le s of,

325 c o n fig u ra tio n s, a rc h e ty p a l, o f th e u n conscious, 253

INDEX co n ftrm am entum , 137 conflict(s), ig, 15, 116, 120, 127, 189, 244; betw een know ledge an d faith , 115; of duty, 184f; in Paracelsus, 112; of opposites, 348; w ith th e u n co n scious, 336 coniunctio, 123, 135η, 152/, 153«, fig· B4, 181 f, 187Scn1 337; anim ae cum corpore, fig. B5; fourfold, 278η; n o blest, 278ft; obscene pictures of, 231; rela tio n of suffering to the, 334; supracelestial, 153; tetraptiva, 277, erS n; threefold, 278n; triptativa, 277 co n junction, 137; cross as m ed iu m of, 337; o f sun an d m oon, 79n ; tree as m edium of, 337 conscious: a ttitu d e , aberratio n s of, 185: — , one-sidedness of, 181; d ifferentia tion, 301; discrim ination, 239; expec tations, 16; ju d g m en t, 17; m in d , see m ind; m orality, 325; psyche, 347; realization, 244; an d unconscious, dissociation betw een, 34; u n io n w ith unconscious, 180; way, 20; w ill, 12/, 28; w illing, 16 consciousness, 11-14, 20, 37- 42, 89, g4, 150, 197, 260, 301; acute state of, 27; b ro ad e n in g o r h eig h ten in g of, 243; Chinese, gg; C hrist as archetype of, 247; C hristian, 128; — character o f G oethe's, 245; circum ferential, 26; civilized, 184; clarification of, 243; clarity of, 28, 40; collective, 341; cram p of, 17; creative, 40; cu lt of, 36; daylight of, 242; d etach m en t of, 27, 44/, 46, 52; developm ent of, 69; differ en tia tio n of, 200, 243, 335; disintegra tion of, 29; divided, 260; as effect of anim a, 42; evolution of hig h er, 54; extinction of, 336; finite, 171; fire as, 15m ; fo u r functions of, 84; free of contents, 38; functions of, 176; h ead is seat of, 81; higher, 15, 18, 48, 73, 189, 200, 297; as h u i, 2 in , 25; illu m i n atio n of, 255; — a n d expansion of, Sg. 3; illusion of suprem acy of, 52; in d iv id u al, 29; in n e r an d central, 26;

intensification of, 21; language of, see language; an d life, 21, 23; — , union of, 21-25; lig h t of, go, 247; — , an d reason, 40; localizations of, 265; m asculine, 335; m o d ern , 327; m ono theism of, 36; m oral, 196; narrow ness of, 37; n a tu ra l, 247; o rd erin g p rin c i ples of, 325; o rien tin g system of, 167; is p artisan , 28; possession by, 36; present level of, 28, 200; p rim itiv e, 268; P ro testan t cu lt of, 48; q u a te r nary stru ctu re of, 169; ratio n al, 238, 345; rela tio n of lapis to, 240; sep ara tion of, a n d life, 21; stren g th en in g of, 243; supra-, 184; symbols com pen sate u n a d a p te d a ttitu d e of, 302; tw i lig h t state of, 92; unconscious n o t d e rivative of, 42; an d unconscious, sp lit betw een, 246; u n ity of, 29; u p ro o ted , 12, 21, 49; W estern, 55; w idening of, 9 - 55 - 296 C onsecration in Mass, 84 conservatism , psychic, 12 C onsideratio1 165η “Consilium co niugii,” 82η, 83, 88, 94, 103«, 107η, 128«, 15280«, 217«, 310«, 319

. 331

constancy, 259 C onstantine, E m peror, 122 c o n te m p la tio , 165« contem plation, 29«, 44, fig. A5; of life o f Jesus, 165«; sage in, 29; tree of, 315

content(s): repressed, 36; unconscious, see unconscious contradictions, logical an d m oral, 245 conviction, inw ard, 54 cooking, 68, 75 Coom arasw am y, A. Κ., 310η, 313«, 337« copper, 89, 183, 218, 277 coral, tree of, 30880« cor a ltu m , 249« corn: seed of, 259; cobs, 263, fig. 25 corners, four, of th e heavens, 279 co ro n a , 269, fig. 31 corporalia an d sp iritu alia, 103

INDEX c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o r e a l , 75; l a n g u a g e of, 76 c o r p o r e a l i t y , 257 corpus: astrale, 125, 152, 167, 16872; coeleste sive supracoeleste, 137; glorificationis, 13073, 167; Jesahach, 167; mysticum, jo^n, 107; n o s t r u m , 233 Corpus Hermeticum, 73, 78, 206, 225 c o r r u p t i o n , 134&71 cortical centres, 185 cosmic: principles, fig. A6; p r o j e c t i o n , 335; tree, see tree cosmos, m a t e r i a l i t y of, 239 C r a t o von C r a f f t h e i m , 119 Crawley, A l f r e d E r n e s t , 14373 creatio ex nihilo, 201; d e n i a l of, 236 c r e a t i o n , 132; days of, 248, 265; of m a n , 86; m y t h , 99; of souls, 86 C r e a t o r : k n o w l e d g e of t h e , 247n; love a n d p r a i s e of the, 24772; r e n a m e d C o n g l o m e r a t e , 201 crocodile(s), 7922, 257, fig. 10 cross, 22, 2 8 m , 332, fig. 26; as b r i d a l b e d , 337; c o n n e c t i o n of tree w i t h , 332; of light, 265; m e d i u m of conj u n c t i o n , 337; m o t i f s , 268; as q u a t e r n i t y , 282, 332; s e r p e n t on t h e , 333; sign of, 68, 282 cross-cousin m a r r i a g e , 278 crow, black, 229 crowd, 41 crowfoot, 15572 crown, 269, 317; King's, 8073; m u r a l , 30372; of stars, 80 c r o w n e d : boy, fig. 32; d r a g o n , fig. 14; s e r p e n t , fig. 32 crucifix, 334; see also cross c r y s t a l s ) , 101; terrible, 281 cube, 271 Sen c u l t , 37; of consciousness, 36; of t h e d e a d , 280; i n s t r u m e n t , c h u r i n g a as, 97; stone-, 100 c u l t u r e , 11; Chinese, 8; C h r i s t i a n , g; h e r o , 100; m e g a l i t h i c , 100 C u m o n t , Franz, 30773 C u p i d , 247; a r r o w of, 83; M e r c u r i u s as, 231

cupiditas, 38 c u t t i n g off of h a n d s a n d feet, 329 cycle: b i r t h a n d d e a t h , 79, 102; d e a t h a n d r e b i r t h , 105 C y p h a n t a , 175 C y p r i a n , t h e , 183

D D a e m o g o r g o n , M a r s called, 14172 daemon(s), 36, 203, 231, 268f, 28571; c o n q u e r e d , 327; as a f a m i l i a r , 328; is an illusion, 37; m a s c u l i n e , 267; Merc u r i u s as s t o r m , 202; of r e v e l a t i o n , 178; of scientific spirit, 128; serpent-, f e m a l e , 240; tree, 200 d a e m o n i c : agencies, 323; forces of life, 38 d a e m o n i z a t i o n of m a n , 282 D a i m o r g o n , 14171 D a m a s c e n e e a r t h , 318 d a n c e : m a n d a l a , 23; r o u n d , of stars, 22672 danger(s): of t h e Art, 322, 327, 329; psychic n a t u r e of, 170 D a n i e l : B o o k of, 13, 132, 2 8 m , 28271, 283; vision of, 282 D a n t e Alighieri, 1 4 m , 176, 236, 295, 31172 d a r k : abyss of n o t - k n o w i n g , 178; backg r o u n d of soul, 147; M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; p o w e r s of psyche, 42 darkness(es), 24, 162, 170, 177, 242, 245, 247, 249, 325, 335/; c r e a t u r e s of, 162; h o r r i b l e , of o u r m i n d , 250; of h u m a n n a t u r e , 244; l i g h t of, 1 6 0 f f ; of n a t u r e , 160; of n i g h t , 23672; poles of light a n d , 25; of S a t u r n , 12672, 130, 15272; w o r l d of, 265 d a u g h t e r s : of m e n , 81; f o u r , 98/ D a v i d , 346, 223 Davis, T . L â&#x20AC;&#x17E; a n d L u - c h ' i a n g W u , 1 2 6 7 7 , 22672, 32472 day(s): of j u d g m e n t , 297; a n d n i g h t , r h y t h m of, 248; a single, 62, 7972; of week, p a g a n n a m e s of, 249

395

INDEX d a y - d r e a m i n g , subjective, 43 dead, 29, 35, 68; a w a k e n e d , 290*1; c u l t o£ the, 280; G o d , 128; h e a r t s / s o u l s o f , 271*3, 317; r e s u r r e c t i o n of, 297; tree, see tree; see also d e a t h ; E g y p t i a n Book of t h e D e a d ; Tibetan Book of the Dead De alchemia, 126*1, 140*1, 147n, 2ion, 297*7; see also individual treatises in Bib!. A Dea N a t u r a , 98 " D e a r b o r e c o n t e m p l a t i o n i s , " see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s " D e a r t e c h y m i c a , " see " L i b e r d e a r t e cbymica" d e a t h , 38ff, 46, 105, 16480*1, 166, 218, 228, 322, 326; cycle of b i r t h a n d , 79, 102; - d e a l i n g poison, 323; of d r a g o n , 316; n o t e n d b u t goal, 46; figurative, 6 3 n ; a n d life, 51 *?; -ray, red, 304; a n d r e b i r t h , 73, 102, 105; — , of p h i l o sophical tree, 287; survival a f t e r , 51 n; tree of, 304; — , life a n d , 271 d e c a p i t a t i o n , 72 De chernia, see Z a d i t h Senior " D e c l a r a t i o et E x p l i c a t i o A d o l p h i , " 80 d e c o m p o s i t i o n , 134*1 Dee, J o h n , 155*1, 220*1, 32211, 332*1 d e e p h e a r t {cor altum), 249*1 D£esse R a i s o n , 244 d e f e c a t i o n , 220*1 d e G o e j e , M. J., see Dozy deity, n a t u r e , 200, 247 delusion(s), 34, 37, 105*1; 335; collective, 36; of insane, 246; M e r c u r i u s a god of, 247; social a n d political, 8 d e m i u r g e , 73, 2 2 m , 222*1, 228; powers of, 87; p r i n c i p l e of, 232 D e m o c r i t u s , 67, 76, 103, 161, 225, 286, 321; pseudo-, 77*1, 147 demon(s), 39, 89, 117, 119, 128, 161; of air, 161; of forest, 198; lead possessed of a, 323; p e r s o n a l , 41 d e m o n o l o g y , p r i m i t i v e , 42 " D e m o r g o n , " 141*1 d e p e n d e n c e , free, 52

d e p e r s o n a l i z i n g of unconscious figures, 42 deprcssion(s), 331, 335 descent, 59, 63, 150, 154; ascent a n d , 59, 1038c?!, 104*1, 218, 304; of M e r c u r i u s , 233 d e t a c h m e n t , 41; of consciousness, 44/, 52; i n n e r , 38 D e u c a l i o n , 99 Deursen, Arie v a n , 100*1 deus: absconditus, 95, 104/, 241; terrenus, 166; terrestris, M e r c u r i u s as, 235, 241; see also god(s) Deussen, P a u l , 20611 D e u t e r o n o m y , 306, 318 d e v e l o p m e n t : C h r i s t i a n , 48; of m e a n ing, 272; of personality, 18, si; psychic, n f , 15, 21, 162, 245; regressive, 260/; s p i r i t u a l , 47, 245 devil(s), 7, 83, 90, 105*1, 113*1, 114/, 128*1, 143, 170, 183*?, 223, 241, 245/, 328; d e c e p t i o n s of the, 323; d r a g o n ' s tail identical w i t h , 316; M e r c u r i u s as. 237; S a t u r n d w e l l i n g p l a c e of, 228; seven, i28&n; tricked, 198; w i t h i n , 244 dew, 86, 176, 305*1; r e a n i m a t i n g , 103 Dharmakaya, 35 d i a b o l i z a t i o n , of L u c i f e r a n d M e r c u rius, 248 diabolus, s u l p h u r as, 228 d i a d e m , 147, 269 diadema cordis tui, 26g dialectic, p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 238 " D i a l o g u s M e r c u r i i , A l c h y m i s t a e et N a t u r a e , " see Sendivogius d i a m o n d body, 21, 46, 51 D i a n a (goddess), 303 dice, g a m e of, 267/ " D i c t a B e l i n i " : (1) Distinctio X X V I I I , in Theatr. chem. V, 197*1; (2) Theatr. chem. I, 227; (3) Bibl. chem. curiosa, 219, 236*1; (4) Rosarium, in Art. aurif., 126, 227 " D i c t i o n a r y of G o l d m a k i n g , " 74 D i e t e r i c h , A l b r e c h t , 70n difference(s), racial, 11

INDEX d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , 336; conscious, 301; of consciousness, see consciousness; of W e s t e r n i n t e l l e c t , 9; see also n o n differentiation D i o n y s i u s , 70 D i o s c o r i d e s , 155", 156 D i o s k o r o s , 13871 d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , 41, 200, 243, 336; c o n scious, 239 disease(s): " e n s s p i r i t u a l e " of, g o d s h a v e b e c o m e , 37; o b s c u r i t y as d a r k n e s s of, 331 d i s e m b o w e l l i n g , 329 d i s m e m b e r m e n t / d i s m e m b e r i n g , 60, 67/, 70&J1, 71, 73, 84, 8771, 91, 30471 d i s o r d e r , i n f e r n a l , 122 d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , 13; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 8 d i s p l a c e m e n t : d o w n w a r d s , 266/; u p w a r d s , 265 d i s p o s i t i o n s : i n d i v i d u a l , 342; i n s t i n c tive, 275 d i s s o c i a t i o n , 35, 37, 82, 342, 345; b e t w e e n c o n s c i o u s a n d u n c o n s c i o u s , 34; of p e r s o n a l i t y , 264 d i s t i l l a t i o n , 148, 180; c i r c u l a t o r y , 148; t h o u s a n d f o l d , 148; vessel of, fig. B 7 , 88, 317; see also P e l i c a n ; retorta distillatio d i s t i l l i n g a p p a r a t u s , 317 d i s t u r b a n c e ( s ) , m e n t a l / p s y c h i c , 34, 324, 342; see also a b e r r a t i o n ; disease d i v i d e d : consciousness, 260; i n t o f o u r , t o t a l i t y i m a g e , 283 d i v i n e : a t t r i b u t e s of s t o n e , 328; d y n a m i s m of self, 285; fire, 209; l i g h t , 107, 330; love, 210, 307; m a g i c , 139; m o t h e r , 333; m y s t e r i e s , 188; m y t h , 263; n u m e n , 268; office of p h y s i c i a n , 116; r e v e l a t i o n , 116, 236; secrets, M e r c u r i u s as r e v e a l e r of, 230; s p a r k , 160; s p i r i t , 26; w a t e r , see w a t e r ; will, see will Divine Comedy, see D a n t e d i v i n i t y / D i v i n i t y , 149; of C h r i s t , 95, 119, 129; itself, M e r c u r i u s as, 235; t r i u n e , M e r c u r i u s as, 222 divinus ternarius, M e r c u r i u s as, 230

d i v i s i o n , 93; i n t o f o u r , 6 8 n , 8271, 8311, 168; by sex, 139 D j a b i r i b n H a y y a n , 2 1 5 7 1 , 286, 314 doctor(s), 13, 119, 121 d o c t r i n a i r i s m , F r e u d i a n , 342 d o c t r i n e ( s ) : a r c a n e , 129; B u d d h i s t yoga, 36; G n o s t i c , of A n t l i r o p o s , 171, 205, 220; of r e d e m p t i o n , in a l c h e m y , 205; secret, 49, 1 3 3 [ f , 188, 242 d o g . 69, 7312, 90, 93, 258; b l a c k , 311; -like w o m a n , 232; as logos, 232n; as p s y c h o p o m p , 23271 d o g m a , 242, 29371; C h r i s t i a n , 90, 221 d o l l , 261, fig. 20 d o l p h i n , 265 domus: ignis, 21 on; sapientiae, 172; domus thesaurorurn or gazophylacium ( t r e a s u r e - h o u s e ) , 85 D o r n , G e r a r d , 86/, 1157;, 12477, 13471, â&#x20AC;˘49#'

'54,

157-

16572,

L6FI

17 1 -

176, 187, 215, 217, 236, 287/?, 291 Sen, 292. 295, 330/, 334; " q u i d " of, 300; Veritas of, 324 WORKS: "Congeries Paracelsicae," 86n, 20971, 22771, 23071, 23571, 289, 31072, 33173; " D e t e n e b r i s c o n t r a n a t u r a m e t vita b r e v i , " 21773, 31177; " D u e l l u m a n i m i c u m c o r p o r e , " 15172; " D e g e n e a l o g i a m i n e r a l i u m , " 28772, 31 i n ; " P h i l o s o p h i a c h e m i c a , " 86/, 23572; " P h y s i c a g e n e s i s , " 139", 14922, 150; " P h y s i c a T r i s m e g i s t i , " 15072, 33 of; "Physica T r i t h e m i i , " ison, 15171; " S p e c u l a t i v a p h i l o s o p h i a , " 72, 83, 332; ed., De vita longa (Paracelsus), 13171, 144, I 6 4 ÂŤ , 16812, 17272, 173/7, 18771 d o u b l e : c o n t r a r y n a t u r e of M e r c u r i u s , 319; d y a d s , u n i f i c a t i o n of, 278 d o v e , 339; of H o l y G h o s t , 89, g2?2 d o w n w a r d s , d i s p l a c e m e n t , see d i s p l a c e ment Dozy, R . , a n d M . J . d e G o e j e , 225Sen draco viridis, 258; see also s e r p e n t , dragon d r a g o n ( s ) , 64, 7 9 " , 87, 89/, 13273, 198, 228, 257, 330, 340; belly of, 210;

397

INDEX d u n g h e a p s , 14671, 170, 232 d u p l e x , M e r c u r i u s , 309, 3 i g D u r d a l e s , 158 d w a r f , 271, 2g7 dyad(s), 278, 280 d y n a m i s m , d i v i n e , of self, 28571

dragon(s) (cont.): c h a i n e d i n t h e u n d e r w o r l d , 242; c h t h o n i c n u m e n of tree, 317; d i v i n e w a t e r , 8271; egg s y n o n y m f o r , 82; ever-waking, 217; fire-spitting, 303, 321; g r e e n , c r o w n e d , fig. 14; h e a d of, 2911, 316; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , a n d tail of, 7971; killi n g of, 8371; l i t t l e g r e e n , 258; m a n y eyed, 86; o l d , 218; p o i s o n - d r i p p i n g , 218; p o i s o n o u s , 321; s e l f - d e v o u r i n g , 259; tail-eater, 79, 13271; tail, i d e n t i fied w i t h A n t i c h r i s t / d e v i l , 316; two, 217, 256/; u r o b o r o s , 223; w i n g e d a n d wingless, 217; see also s e r p e n t , m e r curial

dream(s), 66, 89, 91, 96, 11471, 176/, 194, 246, 283, 293, 300/, 341, 343; a l c h e m i cal l a n g u a g e of, 301; a n x i e t y in, 345; a p p a r e n t disguise i n , 347; a r c h a i c residues in, 347; a r c h e t y p a l , 6 g n ; -exp e r i e n c e ^ ) , 6771, 80; F r e u d ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of, 301; h e l p f u l , 179; images, 273; i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , subjective, 66; l a n g u a g e , 69; m e a n s w h a t it says, 347; of N e b u c h a d n e z z a r , 27271, 337; of P o l i p h i l o , see P o l i p h i l o ; s e n t by G o d , 105; s y m b o l i s m of, 6g, 347; -vision, 80; w o m e n ' s , 347; w o r l d of, 9871; of Z a r a t h u s t r a , 89; of Zosimos, 102; see also d a y - d r e a m i n g A n eagle circles o v e r Y's c o n c e n t r a t i o n c a m p ; h e t h i n k s of s h o o t i n g it f r o m a r o c k e t - p r o p e l l e d a i r c r a f t , 342-47 Dreifaltigkeitsbuch, see Codices a n d Manuscripts: Munich d r i n k , of i m m o r t a l i t y , 313 drive, p o w e r , 260 drug(s), 15371, 204 D r u i d s , 119 d u a l i s m : of a n c i e n t Persia, 243; see also Cathars d u a l i t y , 182, 214, 237, 246, 257, 336; of G o d , 26; of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; of s o n s h i p , 22371; of soul, 214; in w o r l d a n d soul, 116 D u C a n g e , C. d u F., 14871, 32271 EXAMPLE:

eagle, 183, 280, 303, 317, 33g, 343^, 347; black, 198; b r a z e n , g3; " e y e , " 344 earth(s), 39, 49, 92, 217, 219, 233, 23671, 248, 256, 278, fig. 8; b l a c k , 265/; c e n t r e of, 149, 210; glorified, 311; goddess, fig. 8; M a r y as, 256; M e r c u rius, of p a r a d i s e , 235; m e t a l l i c , 310; p h i l o s o p h i c , 290; p u r i f i e d , 218; r e a l ity of, 54; r e d D a m a s c e n e , 318; salt of, 233; -spirit, 297; two, 27871; - w o r l d , fig. A4 E a r t h : M o t h e r , 98; S p i r i t , 7971 e a r t h l y : A d a m , 16971; astrology, 276; firmament of Paracelsus, 27671; p a r a dise, 196; stone, C h r i s t c o m p a r e d w i t h , 29271 E a s t / e a s t , 14, 22, 42/, 166; E u r o p e a n invasion of, 55; m i n d of, 56; philoso p h e r s of, 50; p r a c t i c e s of, 24; psychology of, 8; r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e s of, 53; s p i r i t of, 49; a n d W e s t , 55; â&#x20AC;&#x201D;, d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n , 53 Easter Eve, 78 E a s t e r n : e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 54; ideas, 7, 10; i n t e l l e c t , 9, 55/; m a n d a l a s , 56; occultism, 7; p h i l o s o p h e r s , 6, 56; realism, 7, 288; religions, 6; w i s d o m , 11 Ebionites, 22371 ecclesiastical: allegory, 259; S a c r a m e n t , I 8 5 # ; t e r m i n o l o g y , 157; t r a d i t i o n , 2gg, 3 2 1 E c h i d n a : s y m b o l of M e r c u r i u s , 1 4 4 " E c k h a r t , M e i s t e r , 16, 50, 1 1 4 7 1 , 284 eclipse, 7971 ecstatic: e x p e r i e n c e , 40; states, 34; j o u r ney, 341

398

INDEX E d d a , 337*1 E d e m , 321 E d e n , r i v e r of, 319*1 E d f u , 73 E d o c h i n u m , 131, 164/f effect: n u m i n o u s , of a r c h e t y p a l symbols, 302; t h e r a p e u t i c , of d e t a c h m e n t , 45 efficacity, of things, 154, 157, 175 efflorescence, of m e t a l l i c salts, 146*1 egg(s), 63, 83, 87, 290; division of, 82; g e r m of, i52&*i; i d e n t i t y of, w i t h u r o b o r o s , 82n; of n a t u r e , 218; nom e n c l a t u r e of, 82*3; O l y m p i o d o r u s o n , 82**; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 82; s h i n i n g , fig. 32; s y n o n y m , f o r d r a g o n , 82; —, f o r vessel, 82; — , f o r w a t e r , 82; -white, 82 ego- 34. 45- 5lf> 9°- 18o8c*i, 239, 246, 248, 254, 263, 285n; affinity w i t h G o d , 117; c e n t r e of consciousness, 45; -centricity, 285*1; e n t a n g l e m e n t in t h e , 302; godlike, 118; - m a n i a , 38; m o r t a l , 171; personality, 254; r e l a t i o n of to self, 172 E g y p t , 81; a n c i e n t , 73 Egyptian(s): Book of t h e D e a d , 279; H e l l e n i s m , 279; m u m m i e s , 134; m y t h ology, 142; q u a t e r n i t y , 280; tale of B a t a , 305, 337n; y o u n g , 320 Eisler, R o b e r t , 307*1 Eleazar, A b r a h a m , 213*1, 220*1, 333*1 element(s), 150; ascent of, 150; b o d y ' s chemical, 195; chemical, 159; creation of, 150; Eucharistic, 159; f o u r , 65, 68, 82, g2#, 115, 129, 131, 13580*1, 141, 152, i 6 6 f f , 168*1, 176, 195, 219, 227, 266, 269, 278n, 293, 305, 332; h e a d - , 291*1; heavenly, 155; m a s c u l i n e , 74; of M e r c u r i u s , 217; o g d o a d of, 278; o m e g a , see o m e g a ; physical, 155; q u a t e r n i t y of, 278; r o u n d , 72, 76; of t h e stone, 314*1; " s u p e r m o n i c , " 180 Eliade, Mircea, 7 0 n , 1 0 m , 305*1, 307*1, 309*1, 340*1, 34 in Elias, see E l i j a h Eliezer b e n H y r c a n u s , R a b b i , 318, 337*1

E l i j a h / E l i a s , 136*1, 167; Apocalypse of, 71, 101 elixir, 166, 172; h u m a n , 94; of life, 51*1, 78&n, 81, 154; n a t u r a l , 134 e m b a l m i n g , 61, 64 E m b l a , 337*1 e m b r y o , 52 E m m e r i c h , C o u n t of Poitiers, 177 e m o t i o n , 15 e m o t i o n a l : intensity, 268; v a l u e , 268 e m o t i o n a l i t y , g, 257 e m p a t h y , 163 E m p e d o c l e a n rhizomata, 195 e m p i r i c a l n o m i n a l i s t , 289 e m p t i n e s s : c e n t r e of, 38; g r e a t , 39 e n a n t i o d r o m i a , 245 enclosure, 25 e n d of work, M e r c u r i u s as, 235 e n e r g y : life, 25; of b o d i l y sensations, 28 English "rescue circles," 51*1 " E n i g m a of B o l o g n a , " 338*1 E n k i d u , 321; s h a d o w of Gilgamesh, 320 e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 85, 186, 200, 280*1; Easte r n , 54; tree symbolizes, 313/ E n o c h , 132, 136*1, 137 Sen, 149, 166, 176*1, 210*1, 283; Book of, 143", "49 n > 282, 306, 308, 318; E t h i o p i c B o o k of, 306; p r e f i g u r a t i o n of Christ, 137*1; "son of m a n , " 149*1 E n o c h d i a n u s ( - u m , -i), 137, 142, 153, 165*1, 166, 168 Enos, 138*1 ens spirituale, of diseases, 113*1 e n t a n g l e m e n t ( s ) : in t h e ego, 302; e m o t i o n a l a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l , 28 entelechy, of Aristotle, 27 epidemic(s), psychic, 37 "Epigramma Mercurio philosophico d i c a t u m , " 230 E p i m e t h e u s , 94 E p i m e t h e u s , Franciscus, 144*1; see also Reusner E p i p h a n i u s , 88*7, 14680*1, 186, 223*1, 228*1, 309*1 E p i s t l e of B a r n a b a s , 87 " E p i s t o l a ad H e r m a n n u m , " 226*1, 259*1 e q u i l i b r i u m , psychic, 46; l e f t / r i g h t , 269

399

INDEX Eranos

Jahrbuch:

( • 9 3 7 ) . 58".

(I942)'

(1936, 1 1

1937),

9 *' (1945).

471; 3LON

Eros, 157, 230, 247, 2 9 5 f ; a n i m a as c a r i c a t u r e of f e m i n i n e , 41; f e m i n i n e , 295 E r y t h r a e a n Sibyl, 230 Esdras, 147 n e s s e n c e / E s s e n c e : e t h e r e a l , 324; fifth, 130; m e r c u r i a l , 196; S a l a m a n d r i n e , 138, 142; t r i u n e , 293 E s t s d n a t l e h i , 98 e t e r n a l : blessedness, 182; ideas, 289; m a n , 3067?,' p r i n c i p l e ( s ) , 169; w a t e r , 227 e t e r n i t y , 1 4 1 7 ? ; f e e l i n g of, 181; h i e r o g l y p h of, u r o b o r o s as, 259 " E t h i o p i a n , " T h e , 6 0 n , 316 E t h i o p i c B o o k of E n o c h , see E n o c h e t h n o l o g y , 6, 5 m E u c h a r i s t i c : e l e m e n t s , 159; s i g n i f i c a n c e of fish, 266 E u c h e r i u s , B i s h o p of Lyons, 10471 E u c h i t e s , 223, 229 e u h e m e r i s t i c allegories, 301 E u l o g i u s of A l e x a n d r i a , 196 e u p h e m i s m , a p o t r o p a i c , 326 E u p h o r i o n , 176 E u r i p i d e s , 70 Europaische Revue, 1 E u r o p e , 97 E u r o p e a n : consciousncss, 45; e n l i g h t e n e d , 37; i n v a s i o n of t h e E a s t , 55; m a n d a l a s , 2, 2277., 24, 56; see also Western E u t h y m i o s Zigabenos, 22371 E u t y c h i u s , P a t r i a r c h of A l e x a n d r i a , 6 on e v a n g e l i s t s : f o u r , 22; t h r e e , 18371 E v a n s - W e n t z , W . Y., 25n, 26 Eve, 8371, 95, 143, fig. B4, 219, 262, 304; A d a m a n d , 303; A d a m i c M e r c u r i u s i n , 23571; g e n i t a l s of, 143 e v e n i n g k n o w l e d g e , 248&71; see also cognitio e v e r l a s t i n g hills, 306 evil, 47, 16571, 18371, 187, 197, 200, 223; c o u n t e r p a r t of g o o d , 210; g o o d a n d , see g o o d a n d evil; h e l l - f i r e , s u b s t a n c e

of g o o d a n d , 210; individuation, s o u r c e of all, i g 6 ; s p i r i t , 196-201, 240 e x a l t a t i o n , 1 5 3 ^ ; i n M a y , 161, 163, 176, 182; of s p r i n g , 182 excoction, i52n e x c r e t o r y acts, 231 exercises, s p i r i t u a l , 244 "Exercitationes in T u r b a m philosop h o r u m , " 6 o n , 6 8 n , 8 3 n , 217n, 2 3 5 n , 236n e x p a n s i o n , of consciousness, fig. 3; see also c o n s c i o u s n e s s e x p e r i e n c e ( s ) : i n n e r , 16; psychic, 2"jn, 52 e x t e n s i t y , 25 eye(s), 25, 39; " e a g l e , " 344; fleshly, 288; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 22; s p i r i t u a l , 288 e y e w a s h , 75 Ezekiel: B o o k of, 1 3 6 ^ 258, 281; f o u r c h e r u b i m of, fig. 32; vision of, 280 Ezra, 132, 21971; F o u r t h B o o k of, 21971; vision of, 132, 219

F f a b l e s , d i d a c t i c , 66 face(s), 25; f o u r , see f o u r f a i t h , 7, 34, 46, 54, 187, 241; a l c h e m i c a l c o n f e s s i o n of, 129; c h a r i s m a of, 49; in G o d , 111; g r a c e o f , 160; i n b o r n , 167/; a n d k n o w l e d g e , c o n f l i c t bet w e e n , 115; — , s p l i t b e t w e e n , 189; m y s t e r i e s of C h r i s t i a n , 188 F a l l , 290, 295, 304 f a m i l i a r ( s ) , fig. B5, 179, 203, 225, 341; d a e m o n as, 328 familiar is, 245 f a m i l y r e u n i o n , celestial, 242 fantasy(-ies), 16, 22, 24, 43, 276, 283, 285, 339, 342; a c t i v i t y , s p o n t a n e o u s , 17; of a l c h e m i s t s , 205, 293; c r e a t i v e , 43> 253; ideas b o r n of, 277; i m a g e s , 179; m o d e r n , of t r e e , 341; m y t h l i k e , 258; p e r s o n a l , 344; p r i m i t i v e , 98; p r o d u c t s , si, 194, 205, 253; s e c o n d a r y , 260

4<x>

INDEX f a s c i n a t i o n , 171 fate(s), 15/, 41, 171, 18471, 264; a e s t h e t i c flirtations w i t h , 18; of psyche, 349 f a t h e r ( s ) / F a t h e r , 52, 112, 166; C h u r c h , 29271; f o u r , 150; -God, 339; G o d is M o t h e r a n d , 27; of lies, L u c i f e r as, 250; of all metals, 235; - m o t h e r , 22071; a n d Son, 116 Faust, 47, 118, 119; for the drama, see Goethe " f e d e l i d ' a m o r e , " 294 feeling(s), 9, 167; c o n s o l i d a t i o n of, 180; of e t e r n i t y , 181; t o n e , 268 feet, c u t t i n g off of, 329 f e m a l e : genies, w i n g e d , 281; m a l e a n d , p o w e r s of, 218; s e r p e n t - d a e m o n , 240 f e m i n i n e , 13; a n i m a is, 39; aspect of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; c h a r a c t e r of unconscious, 325; Eros, 295; figure in unconscious, 40; n a t u r e of tree, see tree; p r i n c i p l e , f o u r t h , g6; psyche / s o u l , 40, fig. A6; psychology, 41, 82; significance of Yggdrasil, 340; see also masculine

filius, 142, 150&n, 168n, figs. B2, B4; canis coelici coloris, 232n, and see p u p p y ; ignis, 127n; macrocosmi, 96, 166, 233, 240, 292, 293n; — , lapis p h i l o s o p h o r u m as, 294; M e r c u r i u s as, 222; microcosmi, 96, 292; — , C h r i s t as, 294; noster rex genitus, 148; philosophorum, 123, 125^, 129, 130, 140, 150, 284; — , son of macrocosm, 126; regis, fig. B6; regius, 145/7; sapientiae, 123; unicuSj 172; unigenitus, 172n; " u n i u s diei," lapis as, 24871; see also son(s)

f e m i n i n i t y : of m a n , 338; unconscious, 99

F e r d i n a n d I, 11971, 15871 F e r g u s o n , J o h n , 14171, 22971 Fergusson, J a m e s , 34071 fertility: ceremonies, Attic, 70; of l a n d , 71; of m e n a n d a n i m a l s , 97; significance of c h u r i n g a s , 100n; symbol, fish as, fig. A2 Ficino, Marsilio, 131, 13411, 22371 Ficus religiosa, see ashvattha fides, 176 field: of s q u a r e i n c h , 25, 51; t r e a s u r e in the, 259 fiery: a n d gaseous poison, 27871; p i l l a r ,

filth, 1460, 153, 170, 242/ fire, 24, 63/, 74, 7771, 78, 7971, 85/, 107, 11371, 1380, 14171, 142, 146/, 150, 15371, 162, 216, 218, 244, 268, 27977, 298, 307, 30971, fig. 5; of t h e a r t , 60; b a p tism by, gg; in c e n t r e , 149; coal, 138; as consciousness, 15 m ; divine, 209; of d i v i n e love, 210, 307; ever-living, 310; fighter of, 148; global, 149, 210; of h e a r t , 164; of hell, see hell; h o u s e of, 149; invisible, 209; m e r c u r i a l , 210; M e r c u r i u s as, zogff, 310; m i d p o i n t of centre, 151; o u r , 148; p i l l a r of, 62; secret, i n f e r n a l , 210; s p h e r e of, 74; spirits of, 142; s p i r i t u a l , 15071; - s p i t t i n g d r a g o n , 303, 321; struck f r o m stones i n Persia, 320; i n s u n , 150; supracelestial, 310; symbolical, 148; system of h i g h e r a n d lower powers, 210; t o n g u e s of, 29; t o r m e n t of, 67, 72, 146; -tree, 258, 33971; u n n a t u r a l , 330; w a r r i o r , 148; a n d w a t e r , see w a t e r , —, u n i o n of, 255 firmament, fig. A6, 137, 248, 281; e a r t h l y , of Paracelsus, 27671; i n m a n , 152 firmamentum, 219 F i r m i c u s M a t e r n u s , J u l i u s , 7071 firm-rootedness, 272 First Cause, 23271 first p a r e n t s , 257 First T h o m a s , 13271 fish(es), 51, 69, 75, 7671, 143, 177, 194, fig. 32; black, 265; as fertility sym-

31071

Fierz-David, L i n d a , 17671 fifth essence, 130; s p i r i t of, 130 fig tree, 313 figments, " s u p e r m o n i c , " 173/ F i g u l u s , B e n e d i c t u s , 149, 210, 307 Fihrist, 24071 ft Iii Sapientiae, 308 401

INDEX fish(es) (cont.): bols, fig. A2; h a l f - m a n , half-, motif of, 178; meal, fig. B i ; pot-, 15571; r o u n d , 7 5 f ; symbol, 265 fishing rod, God's, 336 fitness, in biology, 342 five m o u n t a i n s , 256 fixation, 25, 180 flame(s), 155 Flamel, Nicolas, 213, 21777, 30671, 309&72, 333"

flammula, 1 5 5 7 2 , 1 5 7 flattery, 329 flatus vocis, 289 flaying, 70, 71, 8772 flesh, 60/, 63/, 84, 92, 94, 96, 101, 10372, 10471, 1 1 4 7 2 , 116, 228, 310 fleshly eyes, 288 flint, 107, 11372; body, 100; m a n , 100 flores, alchemical, 125 Flos cheiri, 13572 flower(s), 22, fig. A4, 154, 253, 255, 268, 27172, 29072, 314, 320; discoloured, 2860; g o l d e n / G o l d e n , 23/, 51, 53, figs. A t , A2, B2; •—, of Chinese alchemy, 26g; —, origin of, 23; heavenly, 155, 163-, of light, fig. 32; l u m i n o u s , fig. A3; red, fig. 5 flowerlike centre, 2Gg, fig. 31 F l u d d , R o b e r t , 288/ f o a m - b o r n , 182 foemina alba, 182 foetus: of longevity, 166; n o v e n a r y , 151; spagyric, i5o&n folk: beliefs, 122; customs, 24; magic, 122 "Fons chymicae veritatis," 20972 f o n t , 73, 7872 fontina, 255 f o o d of i m m o r t a l i t y , 306 force(s): life-, 214; —, d a e m o n i c , 38; of n a t u r e , 128 forest, 193/, 200; d e m o n of, 198; k i n g of, 194, igg; of mares'-tails, fig. 27 f o r e t h o u g h t , 22171 f o r m , psychoid, 272 fortress, 294

f o u n t ( a i n ) , 255; of a m b r o s i a , 30872; of A r d v i Sura A n a h i t a , 308; of gold a n d silver, 10372; of H u l d a , 317; of life, 84, 10372; of living w a t e r , 1 0 4 7 2 ; of renewal, 33272; salty, 308 f o u r , 166, 2 7 5 7 1 , 277; angels, 1 7 6 7 2 , 282; animals, 282, figs. 24, 25; arms, 281; b r a n c h e s , 332; C a n o p i c jars, 280; c h e r u b i m , 280; — of Ezekiel, fig. 32; colours, 305, figs. A6, A8; corners of t h e heavens, 279; d a u g h t e r s , g8/; directions, 168; division into, see division; elements, see e l e m e n t s ; evangelists, 22; faces, 27972, 280; — of G o d / g o d , 1 7 6 7 2 , 279; f a t h e r s a n d m o t h e r s , 150; f u n c t i o n s , 167; gates, 172; gospels, 283; g u a r d i a n angels, 282; heads, 266, fig. 27; kings, 282; m a i n articles of C h r i s t i a n f a i t h , 168; m o u n t a i n s , 256, 262, fig. 24; m u l t i p l e s of, 96, 280; n u m b e r , 150/, 262/; pillars of Shu, 279, 281; q u a r t e r s , 2 7 1 7 2 , 281; — of h e a v e n , 167; — of t h e w o r l d , 281; q u a t e r n i o n s , 28on; rivers, 262, fig. 24; — of paradise, 149, 172; roots, 68; sacrificial animals, 280; Scaiolae, 167; seasons, 167/; sons of H o r u s , 22, s y g f f ; streams, 304, s i g n ; t h r e e a n d , d i l e m m a , 224; totality image, divided i n t o , 283; wheels, 167, 281; wings of t h e c h e r u b i m , 281; see also q u a t e r n i t y f o u r f o l d : c o n i u n c t i o , 27872; M e r c u r i u s , 279 f o u r t h , t h e , 167 fox, ig$n Foxcroft, T . , see R o s e n c r e u t z Franz, M a r i e - L o u i s e von, 6371, g g n ; (ed.) Aurora consurgens, 6971, 7871, 9572,

12372,

14972,

30672,

32272,

32372;

" D i e Passio P e r p e t u a e , " 31672 Frazer, J a m e s G., 70?1, 7 1 7 2 , 9 7 7 2 , 9 8 7 2 , i94™ f r e e d o m , P r o m e t h e a n , 12 F r e u d , S i g m u n d , 34, 82, 244, 302, 347; i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of d r e a m s , 301 F r e u d i a n : a n d alchemical r e d u c t i o n of

402

INDEX symbols, 301; o r t h o d o x y , d o c t r i n a i r ism of, 342; repression t h e o r y , 42 F r i d a y , day of Venus, 249 F r i e d l a n d e r , G e r a l d , 318Sen, 33771 F r o b e n i u s , Leo, 101 fruit(s), 52; - b e a r i n g tree, 166, 305; f o r b i d d e n , 304; a n d h e r b s of p a r a d i s e , 30677; holy, 46; n o u r i s h i n g , 272; suna n d - m o o n , 303, 306, 308/ frumentum nostrum, 310 f u l f i l m e n t , 44, 49, 53 f u l m i n a t i o n , metallic, 15271 f u n c t i o n ( s ) : of a n i m a , i 8 o n ; of consciousness, see consciousness; f o u r , 167 (see also under individual functions); h i g h e r m e n t a l , 1 3 9 7 1 ; of persona, i 8 o n ; psychic, 9, 169, 176 f u r n a c e , fig. B4 f u t u r e Christ, 296

G G a b a l , t h e , 130 G a b r i c u s a n d Beya, 93 G a l a t e a , 179 G a l e n , C l a u d i u s , 116, 13571, 28771 g a m e of dice, 267/ g a m o n y m u s , 136, 161; see also hierosgamos G a o k e r e n a , P e r s i a n tree, 340 G a r d e n / g a r d e n : ascetic, 3ogn; of E d e n , 304, 318; of G e t h s e m a n e , 295; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 309; of spices, see hortus aromatum g a r m e n t , p u r p l e , 62 G a r o t m a n , a n u s of, 220 gas(es), 213, 325; fiery poison of, 27871 gates, f o u r , 172 G a u d e n t i u s , Saint, 10471 G a u l , 221 G a y o m a r t / g a y d - m a r e t a n , 132, 2 2 on, 337n; b l o o d of, 288 G e b e r , 186, 206, 21 on, 330/ Geley, Gustave, 5171 gem(s), 98. 287 Genesis, 78, 81, 137n, 248, 309, 318

genies: protective, 281; w i n g e d f e m a l e , 281 genitals of A d a m a n d Eve, 143 Gentiles, gods of, 1 4 m g e o m a n c y , 119 g e o m e t r i c p a t t e r n , 23 G e r m a n i c m a n . F a u s t i a n split in, 47 g e r m i n a l vesicle, 23/, figs. A8, Ag g e r m i n a t i o n a n d b i r t h of stone, 2g8 Gessner, C o n r a d , n g , 129 G e t h s e m a n e , g a r d e n of, 295 ghost, 45; c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a n i m a , 40; w h i t e , 39 g i a n t of twofold s u b s t a n c e , 217, 2g2/&n G i l b e r t Islands, 337n G i l g a m e s h : epic, 320f glass, ig7; gold, ig8 " G l o r i a m u n d i , " g2n, 20771, 2 i o n , 2 i g n , 226n, 286n, 307, 31072, 311 glorified: body, 297; " e a r t h , " 311 Glory, K i n g of, 146 Glover, A. S. B., vi, 5gn, 29371, 2g6r2 gnome(s), fig. B 5 Gnosis, 4, 318, 338/ Gnostic(ism), 4, 5g, 1 3 m , 132, lg571, 228, 310, 3 i g , 321, 334/; analogical t h i n k i n g of, 147; archa'i, 22; Christ, 336; d o c t r i n e of, A n t h r o p o s , 205, 220; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , a r c h o n s a n d aeons, 225; h e r esy, 102, 188; ideas, 147; a n d m y t h ological ideas i n alchemy, 204; p n e u m a t i c m a n of, 310; R e d e e m e r s , 233; s p e c u l a t i o n , 283; systems, 3; t h i n k i n g , circular, 84 goal, 17, 20, 264/, 274; of alchemist, i7g; of alchemy, 161; of first half of life, 46; highest, 23; of i n d i v i d u a t i o n process, 195; M e r c u r i u s is, of his own t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 235; of o p u s . 152, 180, 275/, 279, 2gg, 305, 307; of psyche, 25; of s p i r i t u a l existence, 46 goblins, g3 G o d , 20, 26, 37, 50/, 54, 77/, 8 i n , 86, 88n, 102, 106/, 116/, 126, 128, 132, i 6 4 n , i 6 g n , 182, 197, 2og, 236, 268, 284, 292, 300, 317, 324/; affinity of ego w i t h , 117; a r c a n e s u b s t a n c e as

4Â°3

G od (con£.): res sim p le x an d , 215; a ttr ib u te of q u a te rn ity of, 281; a ttrib u te s of, 82η; — tra n sfe rre d to th e stone, 294; b re a th of, 139; child of, 52; as cotncid en lia o p p o sito ru m , 209; d ea d , 128; d rea m sen t by, 105; d u a lity of, 26; face of, 88; faith in, 111; F ath e r-, 339; is F e m in in e an d M asculine, 27; first son of, 223; fish-eating brin g s p a r tic i p a tio n w ith , 266; fishing ro d of, 336; “is fo u r,” 1 3 m ; fo u r angels of, 282; — faces of, 176η; “ h ig h e r a n d g ood,” 200; is hypothesis, 36; illu sio n o f p e r sonal, 35; -im age, stone as, 97; im age of, 125; of Jews, 222; kin g d o m of, 106; know ledge of, 94; lig h t of, 288; is Love, a n d W ill, 26; -m an, 297; in m an, 96; m a n ’s idea of, 344; M ercurius, second son of, 222; M o th e r of, 183; is — a n d F a th e r, 27; as p ro d u c t o f th e opus, 307; S atan is c o u n te rp a rt of, 236; science of, 96; second son of, 223; sign of, 281; Son of, 103η, 159f; sons of, 81, 283; s p irit of, 136η; is S p irit, 104; is S ubstance a n d Force, 26; te rrify in g vision of, 346; tra n sfo r m a tio n of, 334; is tw o in one, 27; W o rd of, 83, 87η, iig , 195η; w ra th of, 83; “ u n d e r m e ,” 121, 127; u n io n w ith , 24973; u n ity of, 116 god(s), 36, 38/, 45, 70, 98, 267η, 268; acknow ledgm ent of, 38; air, 279; b ir th of, 37; have becom e diseases, 37; d ism em b ered , 73; ea rlier, 33; -ea tin g (teoqualo), 8173; fav o u rab le a n d u n fav o u rab le , 29; w ith fo u r faces, 279; of G entiles, 14173; H erm es, o f rev e latio n , 209, 233; — , o f thieves an d cheats, 233; h id d e n , 241 (see also deus absconditus); of illu sio n a n d d e lusion, M e rc u riu s as, 247; of In d ia n s, 337; lo tu s as b irth p la c e of, 269; of m agicians, M e rc u riu s as, 202; m asters of, 5073; n a tu re , 150; o rig in a n d seed of, 76; p h a n ta sm a l, 37; becom e p h y si cal, 104; ra in -, 26873; o f rev elatio n ,

179; sacrifice of, 8on; sky-, 26873; solar, 26773; sto n e as b irth p la c e of, 97; sun-, 8173; tw o-faced, 250; of th e u n d erw o rld , tria d ic c h a ra c te r of, 221; “ of u tm o s t em p tin ess a n d life ,” 38; w ind-, 221; w o rld of, 155; see also deity; d eu s goddess: e a rth , fig. 8; of love, see love; m a tria rc h a l, 99; m o o n , D ian a , 303; m o th e r, 18373; tu rq u o ise , 99; see also D ea N a tu ra ; D iesse R aiso n G odfrey, A b b o t of A d m o n t, 29573 god-im age, 241, 337; arch aic, 345; self as in d is tin g u ish a b le fro m , 241 G oethe, J. W . von, 69, 13673, 2g6; co n sciousness of, has C h ristia n ch a racter, 245; F a u st, 7, 90, 111, 124, 128, 170, 179, 245; (trans. L. M acN eice), 7973; F aust I I (trans. P . W ayne), 12073, 176, 18371; “D ie G eh eim n isse,” 296 gold, 24, 72, 75, 77, 89, 101, 122/, 135, 155, 160, 172, 255, 277«, 284, 296, 307, 332; b ra n c h o f tree, 8g; com m on, 275; essence of, 13573; glass, 198; m a k in g of, 5173, 91, 204, 237, 314; of M ercuriu s, 202; p e rish a b le , 218; p erso n ifica tio n of, 314; p h ilo so p h ic(al), 218, 274; — , M e rc u riu s is, 207, 211; p o ta b le , 13573; a n d silver, fo u n ta in of, 10373; sun, 226; — , in th e e a rth , 225; sym bol of e te rn ity , 149 golden: Age, 167; a p p le o f th e H esp erides, 307; flower, see flower; g erm , 240; m a n , 64; oil, 227; star, fig. A4; tem ple, fig. A10; tin c tu re , 208; tree, see tree; trid e n t, 334 g old sm ith , 204 good, 47, 18373, 18473; evil as c o u n te r p a r t of, 210 good a n d evil, 196, 201, 228; M ercurius· as, 218 G o rd ian k n o t, 185 Gospel(s), 68 t i ; fo u r, 283; lan g u ag e of, 73; Jo h n , 8773, 102, 10373, 104, 182, 283, 306, 333, 33873; L u k e, 106, 13673, fig. B6, 29571; M a tth e w , 106, 217, 242, 29273, 316, 319; synoptic, 243, 283

INDEX Gotterdammerung, 250 G o u r m o n t , R e m y de, 333*1 goyim, 113 grace, 53, 108, 187 g r a i n : of m u s t a r d seed, 259; s o w i n g of, 7371; of w h e a t , 306; as granum frumenti, 306 grape(s), 27971, 306, 318 g r a s s h o p p e r , fig. 25 G r a t i a n u s , 331 graves, 97 Graves, R o b e r t , 63*1 G r a y , R o n a l d D., 6971 G r e a t Magic P a p y r u s of Paris, 161; see also P r e i s e n d a n z G r e e k : a l c h e m y , 97, 284; — , a n d Arabic, c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n , a n d I n d i a , 231; •—, t e t r a s o m i a of, 277; Magic P a p y r i , 126, 148, 179, 192, 22671, 329; m y t h o l o g y , 142; Satan, 288 g r e e n : b i r d , 286; c r o w n e d d r a g o n , fig. 14; a n d red lion, see lion greenness: blessed, 77; glorious greenness (viriditas gloriosa), 315 G r e g o r y X I V , Pope, 233 G r e g o r y t h e G r e a t , Saint, 228*7, 30971, 338"

G r e t c h e n , 179; see also F a u s t G r e v e r u s , J o d o c u s , 274/, 275n, 277, 285, 30671, 31077 greybeard,228 griffins, H y p e r b o r e a n , 63*1 G r i m m , J a c o b a n d W i l h e l m , 17871, 194*1; fairy tale of spirit in bottle, 193, 19471, 258; see also bottle, spirit in g r o u p , I m p e r a t o r , 41 grove of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 262 g r o w t h , 24; f r o m a b o v e / b e l o w , 272; int u r n e d , 260; process of. self d e p i c t e d as, 253; regressive, 261 G r i i n b a u m , Max, 31771 g u a r d i a n : angels, f o u r , 282; spirit, 7171, 341; of spirits, 61, 105 G u a r i n i , 163 G u d a k e s h a , 267 guilt, 196; P r o m e t h e a n , 189

gumma aqua permanens), also aqua divina g u n a s , 313 g y p s u m , 28771

32971; see

H H a d e s , 78&71, 154, 29071 H a g g a d i c t r a d i t i o n , 317 H a g g a r d , H e n r y R i d e r , 9971 h a i r , 92, 279, 28771, 290, 312, 340; w o m en's, 81 hallucination(s), 34, 200, 286 H a l m , Karl, 7077 h a l o , fig. 12 H a l y , K i n g of A r a b i a , 126, 22371, 322 hand(s), 17; a n d feet, c u t t i n g off of, 329 hapax legomenon, 121 H a p i , 279 H a p p e l i u s , N i c o l a u s Niger, 214*1, 21971 h a p p e n i n g , o u t e r , 16 h a p p i n e s s , 153, 160 h a r e , 195*1 H a r f o r e t u s ( H a r p o k r a t e s ) , 306 h a r l e q u i n m o t i f , 261 harmony(-ies), 65; r u l e of, 60, 84 H a r p o k r a t e s , see H a r f o r e t u s H a r r a n , priests of, 8171 H a r r a n i t e school, 8171, 14777, 206, 215 H a s t i n g s , J a m e s , 9771 h a w k , 280 head(s), 29, 72, 80, 86, 88, 280, 312, 341, 347, figs. 27-29; of d r a g o n , see d r a g o n ; - e l e m e n t , 291*7; e n t r a n c e i n t o , 89; f o u r heads, 266, fig. 27; mystery, H a r r a n i t e , 81*1; s k i n n i n g of, 71/; of snake, 29173; sons of t h e G o l d e n , 72; symbolism, 88; t e m p l e i n , 89 h e a l i n g : a r t of, 111, 117; psychic systems of, 347; s n a k e of Moses, 104 heart(s), 70, 73, 139, 152, 160, 164, 192, 248, 259, 267, 294; bodily, fleshly, 39; capsule, 164, c e n t r e of, 139; as c e n t r e , 271; c u t t i n g o u t a n d e a t i n g , 71; of t h e d e a d , 271*7; d e e p , 24971; d i a d e m

4°5

INDEX heart(s) (cont.): of, 147, 269; fire of, 164; heavenly, 23, 39, 44; high, 249M; of Mercurius, at N o r t h Pole, 2 0 9 7 3 ; of the microcosm, 219; region, 165; -shaped, 2 7 i n ; —, blossoms, 259; see also cor altum h e a t h e n , 18 heating, 21 heaven(s), 2 i g n ; ascent to, one way, 233; birds of, 314; f o u r corners of, 279; h e a r t of, 44; invisible rays of, 72; k i n g d o m of, 73, 87ft, 202, 259; light of, see light; philosophic, 222; "space of f o r m e r , " 23; spirits of, 176; starry, Mercurius as, 222; waters above a n d below, 151; see also caelum heavenly; A d a m , i6gn; bodies, 125; elements, 155; flowers, 155, 163; h e a r t , 23; image, 176; J e r u s a l e m , ig8; journey of t h e s h a m a n , 303, 309; m a r riage, 163; physician of soul, 293; rose, 295; spirit, 2og; spouse, 337; waters, 151 Hebrews, 95 Hebrews, Epistle to the, 83 Hecate, triple, 221 H e g e m o n i u s , 31873 H e l e n , in Faust, 176, 179 Helia Artista, 12371 hell, 96, i65n; fire(s) of, 209, 210, 330 Hellenistic: Hermes, 279; n a t u r e p h i losophy, 79; syncretism, 102, 104 hen,231 henosis, 277 H e r a , 70 Heraclitus, 310 Heraclius, 31473 H e r a k l e o n , 87Sen Herakles, 99 heresiologists, 3, 147, 186 heresy(-ies), 186, 229; Gnostic, 188 h e r m a p h r o d i t e , 123, 1360, figs. B1-4, 166; M e r c u r i u s as, 319; — p a r e n t a l , 236 h e r m a p h r o d i t i c : m o n s t e r , 139, 219; true, A d a m , 219; u n i o n , 136; Venus, 18773

h e r m e n e u t , 230 H e r m e s , 60n, 122, 12373, i25n, i26n, 147, fig. B6, 192/, 19373, 197/, 217, 220, 226n, 230, 283, 309, 331; All a n d T h r i c e One, 221; b i r d of, 152, 202; Chthonios, 247; god of revelation, 209, 233; -— thieves a n d cheats, 233; Hellenistic, 279; ithyphallic, 230; Kyllenios, 230; - M e r c u r i u s - W o t a n , 202; Psychopompos, 80; t h r e e - h e a d e d , 221, 224; tetracephalus, 224; tree of, 3ogn; u n d e r w o r l d l y , 231; vine of the wise, 314; wind god, 212 H e r m e s Trismegistus, 76, i03n, 178, 258, 279, 2 9 m , 298, 303; M e r c u r i u s symbolized by, 319; see also " T r a c tatus aureus" H e r m e t i c : literature, 123; p h i l o s o p h e r , 289; philosophy, 233, 274, 288; q u a ternity, 283; symbols, 241; vessel, see vas Hermetis H e r m o l a u s B a r b a r u s , 7673 hero, 98, 101, 117, 128, i83n, 194, 258, 292. 305, 320, 337, fig. 15; culture, 100; d a n g e r o u s f a t e of, 99; Kyllenian, 230; m y t h , 258, fig. 14; of peace, 229; struggle of, w i t h d r a g o n , 89 Hesperides: golden a p p l e of, 307; tree of, 256, 3o8n, 340 hexagrams, 56 h i e r o g l y p h of eternity, u r o b o r o s as, 259 hieTOsgamos, 123, 155, 180ff, 183, 257; of light a n d darkness, 161 h i g h h e a r t (cor altum), 24gn H i l d e g a r d of B i n g e n , 27/ H i l k a , Alfons, 223n, 30673 hills, everlasting, 306 Himalayas, 312 H i n d u polytheism, 243 H i n k l e , Beatrice, 26n H i p p o l y t u s , 76n, 87n, 146/, i g ^ n , 22773, 232, 283n, 285, 3 i o n , 3 1 9 ^ 33973 hiranyagarbha (golden germ), 240 history, 43; of religion, 204; of symbols.

406

344

H o b g i n , S., a n d Corrigan, F., 24gn H o l d e r l i n , Friedrich, 248

INDEX H o g h e l a n d e , T h e o b a l d de, 85n, 10573, 138*1, 13973, 20771, 212, 21573, 314, 322, 32377, 324 H o l l , Karl, 14673 H o l m b e r g , U n o , 274, 29 m H o l m y a r d , E r i c J o h n , 13971, 22673, 3 0 5 7 7 , 30973, 3 1 0 7 3 h o l y : d r e a d , 171; s a c r a m e n t s , 157; S c r i p t u r e , 28673; trees of I n d i a , 340 H o l y G h o s t , 7873, 157; dove of, 8g; ins p i r a t i o n of, 130; S a p i e n t i a a n d , M e r c u r i u s identified w i t h , 22g H o l y Spirit, see Spirit, H o l y H o l y T r i n i t y , see T r i n i t y H o m e r i c ftw\v, 31073 homo: alius, 166; maior, i7g, 182; m a x imus,

131&73,

166,

168,

i7g,

284,

29173; —, i n n e r , 165; — , q u a t e r n i t y of, 167; — , u n i o n w i t h , 167; purissimus, C h r i s t t h e , 2 9 5 f ; putissimus, 295; s y n o n y m f o r m i c r o c o s m , 219; totus, 284, 295 h o m u n c u l u s ( - i ) , 60n, 84, 89, go, 102, 123, 140; 158/, 179, ig8; l e a d e n , 71 h o n e y d e w , 15373 H o n o r i u s of A u t u n , 8773 h o o k , t h r e e - p r o n g e d , 332, 334 H o r a c e , 18473 H o r a p o l l o , 259 H o r f o l t u s , 6773 H o r m a n u t h i , 74 horoscopes, 118 horoscopum, 13073 horse, O d i n ' s , 34073 H o r s t m a n n , Carl, 30473 H o r t u l a n u s , 6973, 10373, 14073 hortus aromatum/conclusus, 294 H o r u s , 74/, 280; a n d f o u r sons, 22; o l d e r , 281; as rising s u n , 28073 H o s t , 306 house: "of t h e C r e a t i v e , " 39; of fire, 149 hsing ( h u m a n n a t u r e ) , 2173, 25, 29, 40/; -rning ( h u m a n n a t u r e a n d life), 23 hui (consciousness), 2173, 25 Hui Ming Ching (Book of Consciousness a n d Life), 1, 2, 20/, 2173, 23, 29, 30, 37, 44, 53

H u l d a , f o u n t a i n of, 317 h u m a n : a n a t o m y , 27371, 27473; or a n i m a l blood, stone consists of, 290; biology, 243; i n c a r n a t i o n , 53; m i n d , 54; n a t u r e , see n a t u r e h u m a n i s t s , 338 h u m a n i t y , c u l t u r a l a c h i e v e m e n t s of, 13; l e a d e r of, 53 H u m e , R o b e r t Ernest, 24873 humiditas, 207 humidum, 138, 207 hun soul, 41; as a n i m u s , 38, 40; as " c l o u d - d e m o n , " 39; as Logos, 40 h u n d r e d pulses, 325 H u n t , M a r g a r e t , 19477 h u s b a n d a n d wife, M e r c u r i u s as, 219 H u s e r , J o h a n n , 11273, 11473, 11573, 117, 12273, 12573, 129, 1301, 13177, 13973, 14373, 16473, 17271 hybris, 12, 37 hydrargyrum, 239, 284; M e r c u r i u s as, 207 h y d r o l i t h , 64 hylic i n t o p n e u m a t i c m a n , C h r i s t i a n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 233 Hymns of the Atharva-vedn, 31373 Hypnerotomachia Poliphili, see Colonna; Poliphilo hypostases, 142 h y p o t h e s i s of G o d , 36 H y s l o p , J a m e s H., 4171 hysteria, 34 hysterical self-deceivers, 107

I I a l d a b a o t h , 22271; l i o n - h e a d e d , 228 ibis, 279 I b n Sina, 28871; see also A v i c e n n a I Ching, 8, 10, 13, 56, fig. A4 idea(s), 26; abstract, 35; a r c h e t y p a l , 346; b o r n of fantasy, 277; E a s t e r n , 10; e t e r n a l , 28g; Gnostic, 147; i n t u i t i v e , 9, 40; m a n ' s , of G o d , 344; —, i n alchemy, 204; n u m i n o u s , 2gg, 301; per-

407°3

INDEX idea(s) (cont.): sonified, 35; religious, 301; w o r l d o f , " 13273 i d e a t i o n , conscious, a n d a c t i o n , 12 I d e c h t r u m , 132 i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of psyche w i t h consciousness, 42; w i t h self, 263 i d e n t i t y : of C h r i s t a n d lapis, 294; mystical, 225; psychic, 92; s t o n e ' s w i t h m a n , 300; u n c o n s c i o u s , 45, g i , 93; of u r o b o r o s a n d egg, 8271 ideology, C h r i s t i a n , 283 I d e s / I d e u s , 131/, 154 I g n a t i u s L o y o l a , Saint, 86, 165n, 21771, 244&M ignis: coelestis, 7 7 n ; elementaris, 209; fatuus, 250; mercurialis, 209 i g n i t i o n , 13871 Iliaster/ Iliastrum /Iliadus / Iliastes/Ylias t r u n / Y l i e d e s / Y I i e d u s , 125&71, 1318:71, 132&71, 134/, 13671, 140, 142; extrinsic, 166; g r e a t , 152; hypostasis of b e i n g , 140; as p r i n c i p l e of i n d i v i d u a t i o n , 137; sanctitus, 136; s p i r i t u a l , 165; — p r i n c i p l e , 140; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 148; w a t e r y a s p e c t of, 138 iliastric: A q u a s t e r , 139; s p i r i t , 139 i l l u m i n a t i o n , 81, 85, 8g, 115, 317; of consciousness, see consciousness; reve l a t i o n or, i7g; t w o sources of, 214 illusion(s), 18, 29, 38, 297; d a e m o n is, 37; M e r c u r i u s a g o d of, 247; of p e r sonal G o d , 35; t r a n s c e n d e n t a l , 34 Iloch, 153 image(s), 66, 274; a r c h e t y p a l , 272; — , t r e e as, 272; a u t o c h t h o n o u s , 273; a u t o n o m o u s , 247; C h r i s t , see C h r i s t ; compensating, primordial, 301; d r e a m , 273; eschatological, 244; etern a l , 337; f a n t a s y , 179; G o d - , 97; of G o d , 125; h e a v e n l y , 176; p r i m o r d i a l , 12/, 118, 301/; — , of t h e m o t h e r , 112; is psyche, 50; r e g u l a t i n g , a n d u n c o n scious, 301; t o t a l i t y , 284; — , d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r , 283; t w o d i f f e r e n t , of self, see self; of wholeness, 283 i m a g e r y , 52; C h r i s t i a n , 183

imaginatio, 137, 167, 176; per sensus, 16571 i m a g i n a t i o n , 154, 159, 164/?, 168, 175, 179, 2gg; active, 6 i n , 16571, 286; corp o r e a l , 140 i m a g o : Dei, 24gn, 316; m o t h e r - , 112 imitatio Christi, 53, 325 imitation, 18m; Western, 8 I m m a c u l a t e C o n c e p t i o n , g6 i m m o r t a l i t y , 46, 5171, 13673, 186; connection of l a p i s w i t h , 101; d r i n k of, 313; f o o d of, 306; f r a g r a n c e of, 337; o d o u r of, 3 3 4 I m p e r a t o r g r o u p , 41 imps, 93 i m p u l s e s , vital, 44 i m p u r e m e t a l s , 2go7i i n c a r n a t i o n ( s ) , 2973; of C h r i s t , see C h r i s t incest, 280; a r c h e t y p e , 301; m o t h e r - s o n , 232; p r i m a l , 302 incineratio, 12871 i n c o r p o r e a l , see c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o r e a l i n c o r r u p t i b i l i t y , 134, 13673, 142; of M e r c u r i u s , 245/ increatum, 236 I n d i a ( n ) , 14, 23, 24, 97, 132, 142, 178, 2 8 m ; connections between Greek/ A r a b i c a l c h e m y a n d , 231; god of t h e , 337; h o l y trees o f , 340; " Q u i c k s i l v e r System," 206; t h e o s o p h y , 268, 26g I n d i a n s , A m e r i c a n , gg/, 178; Aztec, 100; H o p i , 221; I r o q u o i s , 99; N a t c h e z , 100; N a v a h o , 22; P e r u v i a n , 100; P u e b l o , 22, 100, 263; Sioux, 100; T h o m p s o n a n d S h u s w a p , 7171; W i c h i t a , 100 i n d i v i d u a l i t y , s p i r i t u a l , 27 i n d i v i d u a t i o n , 28, 105, 179, 325, 327; of t h e a d e p t , 326; p r i n c i p l e of, 137, 142, 199, 239; — , Ares as, 140; process, 176, 194, 240, 254, 269, 325, 328, 339, 341; —, goal of, 195; — , M e r c u r i u s r e p r e sents, 237; — , p r o j e c t i o n of, 22g; — , s y m b o l i s m of, 2gg; source of all evil, ig6; s y m b o l of, fig. 24 i n d o l e n c e , 15 infantile memories/wishes, repressed,

408

34»

INDEX i n f e r i o r Logos, a n i m u s as, 41 i n f e r i o r i t y , f e e l i n g s of, 1 28/, 335 i n f l a t i o n , 263, 326*1 i n i t i a t e , 63*1, 72, 80 i n i t i a t i o n , 91 i n n e r : e x p e r i e n c e , 16; homo maximus, 165; l i g h t , 106; m a n , 87*1, 8gf, 106, 1 57» J 7 9 ' 2 4 g n ; — , o r a s t r a l , 131, 165, i 6 8 n ; — , i m a g i n a r y , 165*1; — , l a w of f u t u r e , 180; — , secret o f , 163; — , s p i r i t u a l , 148; t h i n g s , 43; w o r l d , 180*1 i n n o v a t i o n s , 53 i n o r g a n i c , 239; r e a l m , 195; s t o n e , s y m b o l of t h e , 238 i n s a n e , d e l u s i o n s of t h e , 246 i n s a n i t y , 18, 36, 325 i n s i d e , 15/, 18 i n s i g h t ( s ) , 17, 28; d e s t r u c t i v e , 117; sec r e t , 37; s u p e r i o r , 343/ instinct(s), 8, 12; a t r o p h y of, 12/; c o n c e p t of, 5; d e e p l y r o o t e d , 16; of i d e a t i o n a n d a c t i o n , 12; p s y c h o s o m a t i c , 346; r e p r e s s i o n of, 47 i n s t i n c t i v e : d e m a n d s , 8; d i s p o s i t i o n s , 275 i n s t i n c t u a l i t y , 9, 12, 196, 333 " I n s t r u c t i o d e a r b o r e s o l a r i , " 308*1 " I n s t r u c t i o n of C l e o p a t r a b y t h e A r c h p r i e s t K o m a r i o s , " 154 i n t e g r a t i o n : n e w , 48; of u n c o n s c i o u s ,

i n v u l n e r a b i l i t y of M e r c u r i u s , 245 I o n , 60, 80, 84 I o n i a n s , 60*1 I r a n i a n t r a d i t i o n , 337*1 I r e n a e u s , 318, 3348c*!, 338, 339*1 i r o n , 1 4 m , ig4, 218, 277, 332; m i x e d , b r a n c h of t r e e , 89 i r o n s m i t h , 204 I r o q u o i s , 9g i r r a t i o n a l i t y , 17, 261 i r r i t a t i o n , 82 I s a i a h , 146 I s h e r w o o d , C h r i s t o p h e r , see P r a b h a v a nanda I s h t a r / I s t a r / A s t a r t e , 182, 232, 320; Sem i t i c , 308*1 Isis, 73, 183*1, 30311; a t t r i b u t e s of, 318; h a s f o r m of M e l u s i n a , 318; m y s t e r i e s , 80, 183*1; treatise, 74, 81; vision of, 81 "Isis to H o r u s , " 73, 215 i s l a n d , 253, 271, 308, figs. 1, 23 isles, blessed, 3og i s o l a t i o n , 301; a u t o - e r o t i c , 254 I s r a e l , 146 I s t a r , see I s h t a r I s t r i a , 298*1 i t h y p h a l l i c o l d m a n , w i n g e d , 232

325<346

i n t e l l e c t , 6, g, 50, 201, 238, 246/, 26g, 314, 328; E a s t e r n , 9; e x t e r n a l i s t i c , 10; r a t i o n a l i s t ( i c ) , 336, W e s t e r n , 48 i n t e l l e c t u a l i s m , 9, 246 i n t e n s i t y , 25; e m o t i o n a l , 268 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , 67; of d r e a m s , 66, 347; of u n c o n s c i o u s , 341 " I n t r o i t u s a p e r t u s , " see P h i l a l e t h e s i n t r o s p e c t i o n , 40; i n t u i t i v e , 169; lack of, 335

i n t r o v e r s i o n , 315 i n t u i t i o n ( s ) , 6, 9, 167; m y s t i c a l , 7; of t h e self, 24; of t h e s p i r i t , 28 i n t u i t i v e : ideas, g, 40; i n t r o s p e c t i o n , 169 invisibilts homo maximus, i6g

j a c k a l , 280 J a c o b , 146 Jacobi, J o l a n d e , vi J a c o b s o h n , H e l m u t h , 73*1, 337*1 Jaff6, Aniela, 315n J a m e s , W i l l i a m , 41*1 j a r s , f o u r C a n o p i c , 280 J e h o v a , M e r c u r i u s as, 222 J e r e m i a h , 317 Jerusalem, heavenly, ig8 J e s u i t s , 20 J e s u s , 53/, t o z f f , 283; belief i n , 168; c o n t e m p l a t i o n of t h e l i f e of, 165*1; a c o r n e r s t o n e , 102; sayings of, 243; t r e e is, 318; see also C h r i s t jewel, 53

4°9

INDEX J e w i s h t r a d i t i o n , 339; see also I s r a e l ; Hebrews; Judaism J e w s , G o d o f , 222 J o b , 242 J o h a n n e s d e R u p e s c i s s a , 88, 219&71 J o h n , G o s p e l of St., see G o s p e l ( s ) J o n a h , 143 J o r d a n , 74n J o s h u a b e n N u n , M o s e s ' r e l a t i o n to, 321 j o u r n a l i s t s , 37 j o u r n e y : e c s t a t i c , 341; h e a v e n l y , of t h e s h a m a n , 303, 309 J u d a h , l i o n of t h e t r i b e o f , 228, 29571 J u d a i s m , 243; see also I s r a e l ; H e b r e w s ; Jewish tradition j u d g m e n t / J u d g m e n t : c o n s c i o u s , 17; d a y o f , 297; L a s t , 298; r a t i o n a l , 12 J f i n S n b e n M e r q t i l i u s , s o n of M e r c u r y ,

60n Jung, Carl Gustav; CASES IN SUMMARY (in

entation,

numbered

order

for

pres-

reference)-.

[1] W o m a n p a t i e n t w r o t e h i m l e t t e r . —47f [2] S o m n a m b u l i s t girl, aged 15J, d r e w m a n d a l a (not illus. here).— 2 3*1, 25 [3] U n i v e r s i t y - t r a i n e d w o m a n , d r e w m a n d a l a , fig. A 4 . — 5 6 [4] P a t i e n t , d r e w figs. 2, 30, 3 1 . — 2 5 4 f , 268/, 338 [5] P a t i e n t , d r e w figs. 26, 28, 29.— 264-68, 338 works: Aion, 75n, 7 6 * 1 , 9 4 * 1 , 2 4 1 7 1 , 254n, 266n,

28071, 28372, 2 8 4 n ,

295n,

Answer to Job, 342; " T h e A r c h e t y p e s of t h e C o l l e c t i v e U n c o n s c i o u s , " 2 2 n , 17871; "Concerning the Archetypes, with special r e f e r e n c e to t h e A n i m a Conc e p t , " 178?!,* " C o n c e r n i n g M a n d a l a Symbolism," 2 , 2271, 5672, 2 5 3 , 28271; " C o n c e r n i n g R e b i r t h , " 3 2 1 7 3 ; Memories, Dreams, Reflections, v ; Mysterium Coniunctionis, v , 8 g n , lggn, 2207J, 22671, 23071, 23271, 24871, 29071, 91072. 08271. 39171. 95871: " O n thf» 3C>on;

3 2 2 n , 3 2 4 n , 325*1;

N a t u r e of t h e P s y c h e , " 8672, 21771, 222; " P a r a c e l s u s t h e Physician," 11973, 17871; " P h e n o m e n o l o g y of t h e S p i r i t i n F a i r y t a l e s , T h e , " 24072, 33773; Phychiatric Studies, 2372; " A Psychological A p p r o a c h to the D o g m a of t h e T r i n i t y , " 8472, 15172, 16772; Psychological Types, a in, 4 o n , 9 m , 34073; Psychology and Alchemy, v, 4 n , 6071, 6 6 n , 6 8 n , 6 g n , 76?!, 8 o n , 8 3 n , 8971, 9 5 0 , i 0 4 n , 1 2 3 " , 13173, 14472, 1 5 m , 15372, 1580, i 6 8 n , 1 7 2 n , 18672, i g s n , 2 2 o n , 2 3 6 0 , 2 4 m , 253, 2 5 8 n , 262, 2 7 6 n , 2 7 8 n , 28472, 28672, 2 9 5 n , 302, 3 0 3 ^ 3 0 4 0 , 3 o 6 n , 30872, 31372, 3 i 4 n , g i 5 n , 3 i 6 n , 3 1 7 ^ 32 m , 33372, 33672; " T h e P s y c h o l o g y of D e m e n t i a P r a e c o x , " 1 2 m ; " P s y c h o l o g y a n d R e l i g i o n , " Q2n, 1 5 m , i 6 6 n , 187n; " T h e P s y c h o l o g y of t h e T r a n s f e r e n c e , " v, 8 6 n , 15772, 1 9 5 " , 22572, 27872, 294; " R i c h a r d W i l h e l m : I n M e m o r i a m , " 1; " A S t u d y i n t h e P r o c e s s of I n d i v i d u a t i o n , " 22 n , 5673, 253, 269, 31773, 3 3 6 n ; Symbols of Transformation, 2 3 in, 34 o n ; " T r a n s f o r m a t i o n Symbolism in the M a s s , " v, 6 i n , 7 o n , 71, 7272, 8 m , 8 3 « , 86, 22672; Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, 3gn; (with W . P a u l i ) The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche, 288n J u p i t e r , 275, 278, 310; b r i g h t n e s s o f , 15271 justice, l i g h t of, 24gn J u s t i n M a r t y r , 1 0 4 0 ; G n o s i s o f , 318, 339

410

K ka of k i n g , 101 K a b b a l i s t , S a t a n is, 11471 k a b b a l i s t i c a r t s , 1130 Kagarow, Eugen, 340 K a l i d , see C a l i d K a l i g h a t ( C a l c u t t a ) , 9771 K a n t . I m m a n u e l . KA

INDEX K a u f m a n n , W a l t e r , 12871 K£kul6 von S t r a d n i t z , F. A., 108 K e n s e t , 279n K e p l e r , J o h n , 118, 288 kermes, i48n K e r n , O t t o , 31271 K h i d r , 321 K h u n r a t h , H e i n r i c h , 96, 126/, 219, 221, 227/, 292, 308, 32on; Amphitheatrum, 127n; Von hylealischen Chaos, 15 i n , sofn, si8n, sign, 22172, 22373, 226n, 22771, 22871, 23071, 2367a, 29271, 30871, 32071 killing, 67, 321; of d r a g o n , 8371 king(s), 83, 146/, 166, 228, 27271, 31271, 317; crown of, 8 o « ; d i v i n e , 101; of forest, 194, igg; f o u r , 282; of Glory, 146; ka, IOI; M e r c u r i u s , 235; p u r p l e of, 312; Sol, 303; son, fig. B6; see also filius k i n g a n d q u e e n , 294 kingfisher, fig. 32 K i n g s f o r d , A n n a , 26 K i r c h e r , A t h a n a s i u s , 9371 kiss of t h e L o r d , 29571 " K i t a b el FOQUI," 3 0 9

k n i f e , sacrificial, 84 K n o r r v o n R o s e n r o t h , C h r i s t i a n , 312&71 k n o w l e d g e , 83, 320, 327; acquisition of, 92; C h r i s t i a n , 11372; of C r e a t o r , 24777; of c r e a t u r e , 24777, 2487?; deliverance t h r o u g h , 313; d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g , 41; a n d f a i t h , conflict b e t w e e n , 115; — , split b e t w e e n , 189; of G o d , 94; of m a n , 248/; n a t u r a l , 11371; p a r a d i s e t r e e of, see tree; t r e e of, 318, 339, fig. 11; two f o r m s of, 247; — sources of, 111, 116; t r u e , 288 K n u c h e l , E. F., 2471 kobold(s), 89, 162 K o m a r i o s , 67, 94, 9872, 154 K o p p , H e r m a n n , 29811 K o r a n , 31871, 32 m Korybas, 232 krater, 73

Krickeberg, W . , 100*2 K r i s h n a , 267/, 312 Kronos, 76, 227 K r u e g e r , C., ig6?2 kuei (demon), 39 Kyllenios, 232, 247; s a n c t u a r y of, 230

L l a b o r a t o r i u m , 349 labor Sophiae, 170f l a b y r i n t h s , 324 Lacinius, J a n u s , 6 8 n , 2 8 8 7 1 , 2 9 8 7 1 , 313, 33071; see also B o n u s L a c o n i a , 97 lac virginis, 20771 ladanum, 15671, 187 l a d d e r , 26 L a d i s l a u s I I , 158 " L a d y Soul," 340 L a k e , Kirsopp, 8771 lake of V o u r u k a s h a , 308, 340 l a m b / L a m b , fig. 22; A p o c a l y p t i c M a r r i a g e of, 182/ L a m b s p r i n g k , fig. B6, 8371 l a n g u a g e ; alchemical, 104; — , d r e a m , 301; allegorical, 94; of conscious m i n d / c o n s c i o u s n e s s , 28, 301; d r e a m , 69; esoteric, 157; secret, 162 " L a p i d i s p h i l o s o p h o r u m n o m i n a , " see

"Krates, B o o k o f , " 66n, 8371, 95, 216, 22671, 27871 411

Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s lapis, 67, 84, 87, 92/, 96, l o t / , 140, 142, fig. B4, 16871, 170, 17471, 180, 224, 241/, *47> 859, 26 9> 279, 284, 310, 329; aethereus, 104; as A n d a l u s i a n p r i n c e , 320, 327; - C h r i s t p a r a l l e l , q r f , 102, 2g4, 300; c o n n e c t i o n w i t h imm o r t a l i t y , 101; consists of body, soul a n d spirit, 102; elevatus cum vento, 212; as "filius u n i u s diei," 24871; Lydius, 72; M e r c u r i u s as, see M e r curius; n a m e s of, 95; philosophorum, 72, 123/, 166, 195, 241/; — a n d Christ, i d e n t i t y of, 294; — as filius macrocosmi, 294; as p r i m a m a t e r i a , 319; as q u i n t e s s e n c e of e l e m e n t s , 16871; rela-

INDEX l a p i s (cont.): tion to consciousness, 240; as self, 101; signifies i n n e r m a n , 95; as spiritus humidus et aereus, 104n; as s y m b o l of G o d in m a n , 96; t r e e as, 319 L a p l a c e , P i e r r e S i m o n , M a r q u i s de, 36 L a s t S u p p e r , 168, 217, 29211 L a t i n i s t s , 206 laudanum, 155, 156 n law(s), 22, 44; of c o m p e n s a t i o n , 245; of t h e e a r t h , 8; of i n n e r , f u t u r e m a n , 180; of life, 18; m a t h e m a t i c a l , 159; of m a t t e r , 239; o u t w a r d , 54; psychic, 237, 277; of r e a s o n , 245; t r a n s g r e s s i o n of, 243; u n c o n s c i o u s , of o u r b e i n g , 8, 21; of u n c o n s c i o u s , 239 L a z a r e l l o , L u d o v i c u s , 188 l e a d , 6071, 74&n, 8g, 10571, 128n, 203, 218, 226, 277, 325; as a r c a n e substance, 331; p h i l o s o p h i c , 227; possessed of a d e m o n , 323; as p r i m a m a t e r i a , 305n; S a t u r n i n e , 331; is w a t e r , 74; of t h e w a t e r r e g i o n , 24; w h i t e , 64 l e a d e n : h o m u n c u l u s , 71; m a n , 62 leafless tree, see t r e e l e f t / r i g h t , 265, 336; e q u i l i b r i u m of, 269; o r m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e , 341 legal p r a c t i c e , 34 legend(s): A m e r i c a n , gg; Aztec, 100; B a s u t o , 101; K h i d r , 321; P e r u v i a n a n d C o l o m b i a n , 100; sacred, 299 Legge, F r a n c i s , 76n, 8771, 145, 28571, 31071 Legge, J a m e s , 56 l e o p a r d , 28a l e p r o u s m e t a l s , 290Sen L e t o , 318 l e t t i n g t h i n g s h a p p e n , 16/ L e u k a d i a , 97 L e v i a t h a n , 265, 334 Leviticus, 317 L&vy-Bruhl, L u c i e n , 45, 91, 347 l i b e r a t i o n , 52 " L i b e r d e a r t e c h y m i c a , " 10377, 22071 Liber mutus, see A l t u s " L i b e r P l a t o n i s q u a r t o r u m , " 8571, 86, 88, 13971, 215, 225, 22771, 323 412

life, 24, 284; a e r i a l , 163; a e s t h e t i c flirtations w i t h , 18; biological, 52; b r e a d of, 306; consciousness a n d , see consciousness; c o n t i n u a t i o n of, 5 m , 52; a n d d e a t h , 5172; — , t r e e of, 271; dev o t i o n , 24; e l i x i r of, see elixir; e n ergy, 25; e v e r l a s t i n g , 154; -force, 214; f o u n t a i n of, 84, 1 0 3 7 1 ; h u m a n n a t u r e a n d , see n a t u r e ; l a w of, 18; l e n g t h of, 135; m i d d l e , 46; m i d d l e of, 14; as m t n g , 25; m y s t e r y o f , 239; P a r a c e l s u s ' d e f i n i t i o n of, 134; p r i n c i p l e , 135, 213; — of tree, 196; p r o b l e m s of, 15; -soul, m e r c u r i a l , 214; source of, 272; s t r e a m of, 17; t r e e of, see tree; u r g e , 15; w o o d of, 339 l i g h t , 20/, 24, 59, 77, 85, 94, 107, 125/f, 147, 162, 166, 236, 23671, 242, 245, 262, 268, 299, 341; f r o m a b o v e , 160/; of t h e b o d y , 106; - b r i n g e r , 127, 226; — , L u c i f e r t h e , 247; — , p r i m o r d i a l , 248; c e n t r a l m y s t e r y of p h i l o s o p h i c a l a l c h e m y , 126; c e n t r a l w h i t e , 25; child r e n o f , 247; c i r c u l a t i o n o f , 16; clarif y i n g , 41; c o m i n g of, 226; of consciousness, 90, 247; — a n d r e a s o n , 40; cross of, 265; of d a r k n e s s , idoff; d i v i n e , 107, 330; figure(s) of, 264/; flower of, fig. 32; g a t h e r i n g t h e , 30; g l o b e s of, fig. 25; of G o d , 288; of h e a v e n , 20; — is T a o , 23; h e a v e n l y , b e t w e e n t h e eyes, 2211; of H o l y S p i r i t , 116; of h u m a n n a t u r e , 29; inaccessib l e , 7471; i n n e r , 106; of i n n e r m o s t reg i o n , 44; of m a n ' s o w n i n t e l l e c t , 250; of justice, 2 4 9 7 1 ; of lights, M e r c u r i u s as,

235;

m a n

of,

10471,

130/,

1 3 m ;

m a n , 106; M e r c u r i u s , of n a t u r e , 2og/; of m o o n a n d stars, 248; n a t u r a l , 239; — , of m a n , 127; n a t u r e of, 151; of n a t u r e , i n , 113-16, 160, 184/, 209, 218, 248, 288; n e w , 126; — m o r n i n g , 248; p n e u m a t i c r e a l m of, 334; poles of, a n d d a r k n e s s , 25; p u r e w h i t e , 35; r a y s o f , 6371; r e a l m of, 264; of revelat i o n , 111, 115; seat of h e a v e n l y , 2071; of self, 248; t h a t s h i n e s i n d a r k n e s s .

INDEX 297; simulacrum Dei, 151; s u p e r n a t u r a l , 115; s u r p a s s i n g all lights, 247; -symbol(s), 15072, 262/; symbolism, 25; tree of, 255; vision of, 27; w h i t e , fig. A6; w o r l d of, 336; yellow, 126 n l i g h t a n d darkness: d a e m o n s of, 243; struggle b e t w e e n , 244 l i g h t n i n g , 1528:72, 162, 221, 317; physical, 152 L i l i t h , 19972, 240, 303, 339 Lilius, 14772 Lille, A l a n of, see A l a n limus profundi, 146 linea media ( m i d d l e line), 312 lion(s), 7372, 14571, 183, 280, 282, 292, 303, figs. 22, 25; allegory of Christ, 228; associated w i t h S a t u r n , 227; b l o o d of, 29572/ of C a t h o l i c tribe, 228; cut-off p a w s of, 304, 321; fiery, 198; g r e e n a n d r e d , 218, 22672, 227/; - h e a d e d I a l d a b a o t h , 228; M e r c u r i u s as g r e e n a n d r e d , 227; of t r i b e of J u d a h , 228, 29571 L i p p m a n n , E d m u n d O. von, 14671, 28771 l i q u i d , c o m b u s t i b l e , 320 liquor Sophiae, 180 Litigius, 14172 liver, 39 " L i v r e des ansienes estoires," see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s Livre d'Heures du Due de Berry, 30871 Llewellyn, R . T , , 106, 11172, igon l o a t h s o m e sponge, 290 locustae, 28772 logical c o n t r a d i c t i o n s , 245 logos, 40, 83, 232, 283; a n i m u s as i n f e r i o r , 41; C h r i s t as, see Christ; comp e n s a t o r y , 297; d o g as, 23272; J o h a n n i n e , 222; M e r c u r i u s , b e c o m e w o r l d , 222; p r i n c i p l e , 41; spermatikos, 40 Lolium temulentum, 28871 longevity, 134, 137, 148, 152, 15372, 154, 156, 166, 174, 326 L o n g i n u s , fig. B4 L o r d : kiss of t h e , 29571; of Spirits, 244; of trees, 33772 413

L o r e t o , L i t a n y o f , 29471 loss of soul, 34 lotus, 280, 295, fig. 31; as b i r t h p l a c e of t h e gods, 269; blossom, 266 love, 83, 187, 296/; C h r i s t i a n , of one's n e i g h b o u r , 168, 185; divine, 210, 307; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , fire of, 210, 307; goddess of, 216, 232; -magic, 280; -play of r o y a l m a r riage, 32971; a n d p r a i s e of C r e a t o r , 24772; shield a n d b u c k l e r of, 175, 187 lover(s): a n d beloved, 2ig; of w i s d o m , 168, 171; see also Scaioli lower, 341; w o r l d , 256 L u - c h ' i a n g W u , a n d T . L. Davis, 12671, 22671, 32471 L u c i f e r , 223, 226, 228, 249; f a t h e r of lies, 250; l i g h t - b r i n g e r , 247, 250 lucusta, 28772 L u d w i g I I of B a v a r i a , 194 L u d w i g W o l f g a n g v o n H a p s b e r g , 133 L u k e , G o s p e l of St., see Gospel(s) Lully, R a y m o n d , 12372, 14172, 186, 227, 2351, 29872, 324 lumen de lumine, 244 lumen naturae, 113n, 1 1 4 7 2 , 160, 162/, 169, 179, 184, 187, 209, 250; a u t h o r i t y of, 116; M e r c u r i u s as, 2 o g f ; see also l i g h t s.v. of n a t u r e luminositas sensus naturae, 114 L u n a , 86, 13672, 150, fig. B4, 310; cohabi t a t i o n w i t h Sol, 123; as silver, 122; see also m o o n L u n a t i c a , 310 l u n g - b r e a t h i n g , 243 L u s i g n a n , c o u n t s of, 143 lust, flames of, 155 Lii-tsu, Master, 16/ lutum, 28772 lux moderna, 247

M MacNeice, Louis, see G o e t h e macrocosm, g4, 127, 152, 165, 236, 259, 284, 291; h e r m a p h r o d i t i c seed of, 2ig; P r e s e r v e r of, 127; son of, 126

INDEX m a d n e s s , 203, 261; C a e s a r e a n , 13 M a g i , 11371 Magi a, 114 magic(al), 45, 90, 113, 116, 118, 1 2 o f , 179, 189, 282; arts, 122; b l o o d , 8371; cagastric, 125Sen; circle, 22, 24, go; d i v i n e , 139; f o l k , 122; f u r r o w , 24; love-, 280; m e d i e v a l cesspits of, 245; practices, 24, 46; psychic d a n g e r s of, f o r a d e p t , ixg; r a g , 203; rites, 54, 122; spells, 10; of s y m b o l , 28; texts, 327; tree, 303, 341; w o r d , 121 M a g i c P a p y r u s ( - i ) , 126, 148, 179, 192, 22673, 329 magician(s), ig5, 328; a q u a s t r i c , 139: M e r c u r i u s , god of, 202 m a g i s t e r y , 6gn, 290, 29111, 298, 314 M a g n a l i a , 163 magnesia, 2 0 7 n , 21611, 230 m a g n e t , 308 magus, 114, 119, 24011 M a g u s , S i m o n , 258, 310, 33911 M a h a y a n a B u d d h i s m , 29 Maheshvarapurana, 206n M a h r y a , 33711 M a i e r , M i c h a e l , 6gn, 72, 76n, 7971, 8211, 85, 145-48, i 6 o n , 22771, 230, 27571, 277, 303, 30671, 310 maior homo, 148 M a i t l a n d , E d w a r d , 26 Maitrayana-Brahmana Upanishad, 24071 M a k a r a , 265 m a l a d a p t a t i o n , 12 M a l c h u t h , 312 m a l e a n d f e m a l e , p o w e r s of, 218 " M a l u s P h i l o s o p h u s , " 240 m a n ( m e n ) / M a n , 40; accursed, 139; a n gelic q u a l i t i e s of, 1 3 0 7 1 ; a n i m a l , go; astral', 131, 165, i68rc; basis of r e a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g , 55; b e g e t t i n g of, 7371; b r a z e n , 61/, 64; celestial, 132; civilized, 45; c o n t e m p o r a r y , 54; c r e a t i o n of, 86; d a e m o n i z a t i o n o f , 282; e a r t h ly, fleshly, 94; e t e r n a l , 30611; everlasting, i8off; F a u s t i a n s p i r i t i n , 47; f e m i n i n i t y o f , 338; f e r t i l i t y of, 97; firmament i n , 152; f l i n t , 100; f o r m

of, 166; G o d - , 297; G o d i n , 96; g o l d e n , 64; h a l f - / h a l f - f i s h , m o t i f o f , 178; h i g h , M e r c u r i u s as, 235; h i g h e r , 54; h i m s e l f , k n o w l e d g e of, 248; i d e a of G o d , 344; i n c a r n a t e , P r i m o r d i a l , fig. B4; i n n e r see i n n e r ; — o r a s t r a l , 153; —, e t e r n a l , 150; i n t e r i o r , 13171; as i n v e r t e d tree, 312; k n o w l e d g e of, 249; l a p i s signifies i n n e r , 95, 102; l e a d e n , 62; l i g h t i n / o f , 106, 127; of l i g h t , 1 0 4 7 1 , 1 3 o f , 13173; M a r s c h a r a c terizes affective n a t u r e of, 14171; m e t a l , 8g, g3; m e t a l l i c , 198; as m i c r o cosm, 92, 166/; m o s t p u r e , 290; n a t u r a l , 169, 184, 260; — , p u r i f i c a t i o n of, 142; O n e , 131, 183; O r i g i n a l , 166; o u t e r , m o r t a l , 150; p h i l o s o p h i c , M e r c u r i u s as, 235; — a m b i s e x u a l , M e r c u r i u s as, 219; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 94; p l a n e t s i n , 125&71; p n e u m a t i c , 46, 310; P r i m o r d i a l , 8771, 129, 131&73, 132, 139, 16571, 22071, 334, 337&T3; — , (Christ), 336; — , u n i t a r y , 334; — , is w o r l d soul, 334; q u a d r i p a r t i t e , 168; q u a t e r n i t y of O r i g i n a l , 172; r e b i r t h o f , 27; R e d , 9 2 7 3 , 93; r e g e n e r a t e d s p i r i t u a l , 157; r o o t e d in p a r a d i s e b y h a i r , 312; a n d h i s s h a d o w , 246; silver, 64; son of, g6, 232; — , h i s t o r i c a l p e r s o n a l i t y of, 16571; a n d h i s soul, 160; s p i r i t u a l , g4/, 1 3 m ; s t a r i n , 127, 152; s t o n e ' s i d e n t i t y w i t h , 300; t o t a l i t y of, 139; t r e e as, 337; — of p a r a d i s e as, 337; t r u e o r c o m p l e t e , 324; t r u e s p i r i t i n , 13673; t r u e , is s t a r , 131; u n c h a r a c t e r i z e d , 145; W e s t e r n , 55; w h i t e , 93; w h o l e , 325; — a n d c o m p l e t e , 296; W i s e O l d , 178; Yellow, 92; see also homo m a n a , 97, 268; of d e a d , 97 M a n d a e a n i n f l u e n c e s , 232 m a n d a l a ( s ) , 22/, 28, 96, 24973, 253, 269, fig. 31; C h r i s t i a n , 22; d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r , 264; E a s t e r n , 56; E u r o p e a n , 2, 227i, 24, 56; L a m a i c , fig. A2; nrithya, d a n c e , 23; rose as, 295; of s o m n a m b u l i s t ( J u n g ' s case), 2371, 25; s y m b o l ,

414

INDEX m a n d r a k e , 2 9 o n , 291/, 311 Manget/Mangetus, Johannes Jacobus, see Bibliotheca chemica M a n i , 70 m a n i a , 38 m a n i f e s t , o c c u l t a t i o n of the, 1 5 m m a n i k i n s , w a x , 122, 122n manipura-chakra, 266 m a n n a , 306; f a t or oil of, 153n m a n t i c i s m , 118 M a n u , 265 m a n u s c r i p t s , see Codices a n d M a n u scripts m a r b l e , P r o c o n n e s i a n , 64 Marcasita, 28y&:n mare nostrum, 146, 237 m a r e s , -tails, forest of, fig. 27 M a r i a (the Jewess) P r o p h e t i s s a , 85, 28671, 308; a x i o m of, 15 m , fig. B2, 166, 224, 278 M a r j o r a m , 311 M a r m a r a , 64n m a r r i a g e : Apocalyptic, of L a m b , 182/; chymical, see c h y m i c a l m a r r i a g e crosscousin, 278; heavenly, 163; p a i r , 83; p r o b l e m s , 8; royal, 278, 326; —, lovep l a y of the, 32971; see also hierosgamos Mars, 93, 13571, 1 4 m , 154, 187, 275, 278, 310; characterizes affective n a t u r e of m a n , 14 m ; a n d V e n u s , 93, 183 Marsyas, 70 M a r t i a l , 221&71 m a r t y r d o m , s p i r i t u a l , 330 M a r y , 155, 294, 318; allegories of, 294; b o d y of, 139, 140; c o r o n a t i o n of, 144; as e a r t h , 256; I m m a c u l a t e Conception, 96; obumbratio of, 214 m a s c u l i n e , 13, 39; aspect of M e r c u r i u s , 319; consciousness, 334; d a e m o n , 267; d i f f e r e n t i a t e d m i n d , 41; - f e m i n i n e , 341; — division of tree-soul, 319; m i n d , 336; neuroses, 336; p r i n c i p l e , 268; psychology, 81/, 269; soul, fig. A6; s u l p h u r , p r i n c i p l e of M e r c u r i u s , 228; t h i n k i n g , 267; T r i n i t y , 96 m a s c u l i n i t y , w o m a n ' s , 338 415

mass psychoses, 36 Mass, 123, 160; opus alchymicum in f o r m of, 158 massa confusa, 84, 325 M a t e r : ecclesia, 112; Gloriosa, 18371; N a t u r a , 112, 147 materia: medica, 123; t o r t u r i n g of, 10571; see also p r i m a m a t e r i a m a t e r i a l i t y of cosmos, 239 m a t e r i a l i z a t i o n of soul, 257 m a t e r n a l : f e m i n i n e , n a t u r e of tree, 317/; significance of tree, 261 m a t r i a r c h a l society, 99 m a t t e r , 67, 89, 95, 97, 104, 125, 127, 129, 138, 146, 161, 171, 184. 238/, 284, 300; in alchemy, 140; a u t o n o m y of, 238; h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 2ig; i n e r t , 68; laws of, 239; mystery of cosmic, 96; p h i l o sophic, 290; p r o j e c t i o n into, 300; secrets of, 299; a n d spirit, c o n t a m i n a t i o n of, 212; —, identical, 214; u n k n o w n , 237 M a t t h e w , Gospel of St., see Gospel(s) M a t t h e w s , W a s h i n g t o n , 22n m a t u r a t i o n : alchemical, 124; of physician, 124 May, 176; e x a l t a t i o n i n , 161; —, true, 163; m o n t h of, 155; t h e t r u e , 153 Maya, 95, 318; veil of, 38, 180 m a y d e w , 15371 M a y r y a n a , 33771 M e a d , G . R . S., 10471 m e a n i n g , 20, 342; d e v e l o p m e n t of, 272; one's o w n , 53; of psyche's existence, 346 M e c h t h i l d of M a g d e b u r g , 294/ media substantia, 213 m e d i a t o r , gg, fig. B2, 23571; M e r c u r i u s as, 235 m e d i c a l : psychology, 273; schools, 115 medicina catholica, 27471; M e r c u r i u s as, 235 m e d i c i n e , 111; bags, 45; chemical, 124; fiery, 7871; G e r m a n i z a t i o n of, 14471 m e d i e v a l : C h r i s t i a n i t y , 18, 303; magic, cesspits of, 245 meditatio, 16571

INDEX m e d i t a t i o n , 30, 137, 330, 346; i n t e r m i n able, 239 m e d i u m i s t i c : " c o n t r o l s , " 40; p h e n o m e n a , 35 m e g a l i t h i c : c u l t u r e , 100/ M e i s t e r E c k h a r t , see E c k h a r t m e l a n c h o l i a , 153, 170, 331 m e l a n c h o l y , 101; S a t u r n i n e , 153 M e l a n e s i a n s , 97 melanosis (blackness), 331, 341 M e l c h i o r of B r i x e n , 9271 M e l c h i o r Cibinensis, see Szebeny M e l c h i s e d e k , 13772 Melissa, 153&71, 154

s t a n c e / a r c a n u m , 216, 235/f; as a r c h e t y p e of u n c o n s c i o u s , 247; a s c e n t of, 233; h a s a t t r i b u t e s of V e n u s , 22671; is b e g e t t e r of h i s p a r e n t s , 226; as b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e a n d e n d of w o r k , 235; as c a r b u n c l e , 235; c h a n g e d i n t o w i n d , 212; as c h i l d of chaos, 228; — of S a t u r n , 7611, 227; — of s u n a n d m o o n , 7671, 225; a n d C h r i s t , as b r o t h ers, 222; — , in c o m p e n s a t o r y r e l a t i o n s h i p , 245; as C h r i s t , 222, 235; as c h t h o n i c half of G o d h e a d , 222; coelum as, 219; c o m m o n , 275; — , a n d p h i l o s o p h i c , 217; consists of opposites,

M e l l o n , P a u l , A l c h e m i c a l Collection, vi melothesiae, 9271 M e l u s i n a , 138, 142/f, 145, fig. B5, 163, 173-80, 182, 183, 199, 240, 303, 315, 317, 321; as anima, fig. B5, 144; Isis h a s f o r m of, 318; psychic reality of, 176; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 179; as treen u m e n , 315; vision a p p e a r i n g in m i n d , 144, 174 Melusines, 158 M e l u s i n i a n Ares, 138, 142 Melyssina, see M e l u s i n a m e m b r a n e s , in m a n d a l a s , 24 m e m o r i e s , r e p r e s s e d i n f a n t i l e , 341 M e n d e s , r a m of, 279 menhirs, too

220, 237; c o n t i n u o u s c o h a b i t a t i o n of, 231; c o n t r a r y n a t u r e of, 319; c o r p o r e a l aspect of, 212; as C u p i d , 231; d a r k , 232; — a n d d u b i o u s q u a l i t y of, 241; d e s c e n t of, 233; as dew terrestris, 235, 241; is devil, 237; d i a b o l i z a t i o n of, 248; is d i v i n i t y itself, 235; as divinus ternarius, 230; d u a l i t y of, 144, 217ff, 221, 23211, 237, 319; d u p l e x , 7971, 269, 2 z 9 > 3°9> S ' 9 : d u p l i c i t y of, 217, 245; as e a r t h of p a r a d i s e , 235; E c h i d n a s y m b o l of, 1 4 4 7 1 ; e l e m e n t s of, 217; e n d o w e d w i t h a t t r i b u t e s of T r i n i t y , 236; evasive, 1 9 5 7 1 ; as f a t h e r of a l l m e t a l s , 235; as F a t h e r - M o t h e r , 22071; f e m i n i n e aspect o f , 321; — , r o l e of w i s d o m , 319; as fiery a n d p e r f e c t , 23571; as filius, 222; as fire, 2ogff, 310; as foemina, 213; f o u n d in d u n g h e a p s , sewers, 220, 232; f o u r f o l d , 279; o r G i a n t , 292; as g l u e , 2 1 3 f ; as g o a l of his o w n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 235; G o d , of i l l u s i o n a n d d e l u s i o n , 247; — , of m a g i c i a n s , 202; g o l d o f , 202; as g o o d a n d evil, 218; as g r e e n a n d r e d l i o n , 227; h e a r t o f , a t N o r t h P o l e , 2og&n; is hell-fire, 210; as h e r m a p h r o d i t e , 319; H e r m e s - W o t a n , 202; as " h i g h m a n , " 219; as h u s b a n d a n d w i f e , 219; as hydrargyrum, 207; i d e n t i f i e d w i t h anima mundi, 214; — collective u n c o n s c i o u s , 222, 237; — M o o n a n d V e n u s , 226; — S a p i e n t i a

m e n t a l : a b e r r a t i o n s , 323; diseases, 35: d i s t u r b a n c e s , 34, 324; processes, 56 M e p h i s t o p h e l e s , 13671, 203, 245; coldness of, 90; see also G o e t h e , Faust m e r c u r i a l : essence, 196; fire, 210; lifesoul, 214; pneuma, 215; p o i s o n i n g , 323; s e r p e n t , see s e r p e n t ; spirit, see spirit M e r c u r i u s , 6771, 75, 7871, 7971, 83, 8g, 96, 122/, 125/, 13211, 13671, 178, 18771, 196/, 202/, 2 0 7 f , 275, 277, 284, 291, gog/f, 329; A d a m i c , i n Eve, 23571; aerial, 212; is a k i n t o g o d h e a d , 220; a l c h e m i c a l , 269; as alexipharmahon, 235; a m b i g u i t y of, 245; as anima, 213; as a n a l o g u e of C h r i s t , 235; a n t i n o m i a n n a t u r e of, 216; as a r c a n e s u b 416

IN D E X a n d H o ly G h o st, 2 2 9 ;— tre e , 338; is ig n is e le m e n ta ris, 209; as im ag e of C h ris t’s in c a r n a tio n , 235; in c o r r u p ti b ility of, 245 / ; in v u ln e ra b ility of, 245; as Je h o v a , 222; ju v e n is, 250; as k in g , 235; as K y lIe n ia n h e ro , 230; as la p is, 221, 235, 241, 246; lasciv io u s ness, 231; as life p rin c ip le o f tree, 319; as lig h t o f lig h ts, 235; — of n a tu re , 2ogf; as L ogos b eco m e w o rld , 222; h a s m an y -sid e d asso ciatio n s, 202; m a s c u lin e a sp e c t of, g ig ; as M e d ia to r, 235; as m e d ic in a Catholica1 235; is m o st ch aste v irg in , 226; m u l tip le asp ects of, 237; as m y stag o g u e, 225; n o ste r, 213; — , n a tu ra lis ignis certissim u s, 209; n o n v u lg a r is jv u lg i, 214, 284; no stra a n im a , 213; " o u r ,” 211, 219; P a ra c e lsa n , 136 n ; p a r a d o x ical n a tu r e of, 241; as p a r e n ta l h e rm a p h ro d ite , 236; p e rs e c u te d w ith to rm e n ts, 331; as p e rso n ific a tio n of u n co n scio u s, 333; p h ilo s o p h ic u s J p h iIo s o p h o ru m j 136n , 207, 211; ■ —■a m b i sex u al M an , 2 ig ; — g o ld , 235; — m a n , 235; p o sitiv e a sp e c t of, 241; as p rim a m a te ria , 235, 309; as p rim e v a l chaos, 235; p sy ch ic n a tu r e of, 216; p sy ch o lo g em of, 216; as p u e r , 220; — lep ro su s, 226n ; q u a d ra tu sj 278; as q u ic k silv e r, 207ff; as re d e e m in g p sy c h o p o m p , 237; as r e flection o f m y stical e x p e rie n c e of a rtife x , 237; re la tio n to astro lo g y , 225; — to S a tu rn , 226, 250; — to V enus, 250; re p re se n ts in d iv id u a tio n process, 237; — th e self, 237; as re v e a le r o f d iv in e secrets, 230; as salt o f S a tu rn , 227; as S a lv a to r, 235; as second A d a m , 235; — son o f G od, 222; se lf-d e stru c tio n / tra n s fo rm a tio n of, 236; as se n e x , 178, 220, 226, 250; as S erv ato r, 235; as son o f T ia m a t, 236; as so u l of m e ta ls, 198; as so u rce o f a ll o p p o sites, 348; as s p irit, see s p irit; as s p ir it a n d so u l o f th e bod ies, 213; as s p ir itu s veg eta tiv a s, 202, 310; as

s ta rry h e a v e n , 222; as sto n e , 235; as sto rm d a e m o n , 202; s u lp h u r, is fire h id d e n in , 228η ; — , is m a s c u lin e p rin c ip le of, 228; as su p ra c e le stia l s p irit, 214; sym bols of, 257; sy m b o l ized by H e rm e s T ris m e g istu s , 319; sy n th esis of, 257; as system of h ig h e r a n d lo w er po w ers, 222; as te r m in u s a n ij 220; th re e -h e a d e d , 221; — snake, 222; as tin c tu r e , 235; tra n s fo rm a tio n of, 333; as tre e o f m eta ls, 309; as tre e -n u m e n , 239; tr ia d o f s u lp h u r, s a lt a n d , 277; — of su n , m o o n a n d , 277; tr ia d ic n a tu r e of, 221; as tric k ste r, 203, 237; as tr in ity a n d q u a te rn ity , 222; tr in ity a n d u n ity of, 221 ff; as tr in u s e t u n u s , 196; as tr iu n e d i v in ity , 222; as tr iu n u s a n d tern a riu s, 221; tu r n s in to god d ess o f love, 226; tw o su b sta n c e s of, 217; as u ltim a m a te ria , 235; u n d iv id e d n e ss of, 245; as u n ig e n itu s , 235; u n ite s o p p o sites, 309/; as u n ity , 237; u tr iu s q u e ca p a x, 348; v a p o u r-lik e n a tu r e of, 212; a n d V en u s, 226n ; as v irg o , 213; as w a te r, 207#, 309 m e rc u ry , 277n ; see also q u ic k silv e r M e rc u ry : e x te rn a l, 135η; p la n e t, 225; son of, 6on m e re L u sin e , 143 m e rid ia n , 46; of th e S u n , 63, 72, 8off; see also life, m id d le M e rk a b a h , 281 M e so p o ta m ia , 231 “ M essiah o f th e L ie ,” 232 M e sth a , 280 m etal(s), 72, 89, 218, 227n , 287, 290, 331; b ase, 101; im p u re , 290n; lep ro sita s of, 29 m ; le p ro u s, 290; m e n , 8g, 93; M e rc u riu s, fa th e r o f all, 235; o f p h i lo so p h ers, 2 ig n , 275; seven, 288/, 337; — , co n n e c tio n o f tre e w ith , 310; -s p irit, 297; sp irits of, g i; tr a n s m u ta tio n of, 124; tre e of, 315, 332; see also a n tim o n y ; b rass; c o p p e r; g o ld ; iro n ; le a d ; m e rc u ry ; q u ick silv e r; s il v er; steel; tin

INDEX metallic: e a r t h , 310; m e n , 89, 93, 198; tree, see tree m e t a m o r p h o s i s , 261 m e t a p h y s i c a l : assertions, 51; m o u n t a i n s , 262; p r e s u m p t i o n , 51; split, 243; w o r l d , 244 metaphysicians(s), 276/ metaphysics, 50, 54, 300 metasomatosis, 75 M e t a t r o n , 132 m e t h o d , 7, 16, 21, 63, 65, 327; " f a l s e , " 324 M e t r o p o l i s , 172 Mexico, a n c i e n t , 8 m ; w o r l d - t r e e , fig. 8 M i c h e l s p a c h e r , Steffan, 195*2 Micreris, 323 m i c r o c o s m , 82, 127, 135, 13712, 138*1, 152, 165, 218/, 220, 284, 285*1, 291; h e a r t of, 164; homo as s y n o n y m for, 219; m a n as, g2; Saviour of, 127; s t o n e as, 328; w a n d e r i n g , 153 M i d d l e Ages, 22, 106; L a t e , 103 m i d p o i n t , u n i v e r s a l , 271 M i g n e , J a c q u e s P a u l (ed. P.G. a n d P.L.,), 6on, 248*1, 249*1, 2 8 m , 294*2, 295"; 3 3 3 "

m i l k , virgin's, 290 m i n d , 41, 104*2; conscious, 17, 184, 255; — , i m p a t i e n c e of, 17; — , l a n g u a g e of, 28; — , one-sidedness o f , 348; d i f f e r e n t i a t e d m a s c u l i n e , 41; E a s t e r n , 55/; — , p o l y t h e i s t i c a t t i t u d e of, 35; — , s h a d o w l a n d of, 11; h o r r i b l e d a r k n e s s o f , 250; h u m a n , 54; m a s c u l i n e , 336; M e l u s i n a , vision a p p e a r i n g in, 144, 174; p r i m i t i v e , 51*2; t r a n q u i l l i t y of, 152; W a l p u r g i s n a c h t o f , 90; W e s t e r n , 6, 7, 20, 42 mine(s), 89, 93 mineral(s), see m e t a l m i n e r a l k i n g d o m , 77, 195 ming (life), 25, 41 m i r e of t h e d e e p , 146/ m i r r o r of W i s d o m , 22 Missal, 68n, 78*2 M i t h r a s , 97; relief f r o m O s t e r b u r k e n ,

307

Moguls, 231 m o i s t / d r y , 278 m o i s t u r e , 86*i m o n a d , 82; C a t h o l i c , 1 5 m M o n a k r i s (Arcadia), 221 M o n o g e n e s , 104, 172*2 m o n o l i t h , 85 m o n o t h e i s m of consciousness, 36 monster(s): h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 139, 219; p r i m o r d i a l , 98; w i t h v u l t u r e ' s wings, 79"

m o o d s , 34, 37, 39, 335; b a d , 82; p e r sonal, 41 m o o n , 44, 72, 76*1, 86, 98/, 161, 22680*2, 265, 2758:12, 277, 308, 311, 339, fig. 32; b o w l of, 231; circle of, 192, 226n; goddess D i a n a , 303; h o m s o f , 155*2; m o t h e r a n d w i f e of s u n , 150*1; - p l a n t , of t h e a d e p t s , 308; r e l a t e d t o w a t e r , 139; sickle, 155*1; a n d stars, l i g h t of, 248; a n d s u n , 79*2; — , M e r c u r i u s , c h i l d of, 7 6 n , 225; — a n d M e r c u r i u s , t r i a d of, 277; — , tree, 306*1, 308, 339; t r e e of, 30311; a n d Venus, Mercurius identified with, 226; w a t e r of, a n d of S a t u r n , 227; see also L u n a m o r a l : code, 184; consciousness, 196; c o n t r a d i c t i o n s , 245; q u a l i t i e s , 326; u n m a s k i n g , 54; values, 185 m o r a l i t y , 13, 245; b r u t a l , 47; C h r i s t i a n ascetic, 46; conscious, 325 M o r g a n a , 182 M o r i e n u s R o m a n u s , 123*1, 314*2 m o r n i n g , k n o w l e d g e , 249; see also cognitio m o r t a l i t y , 133*1, 168/ mortificatio, Son, 68*1, 80, 83*1, 87*1 Moses, 113*1, 130, 2 g i n , 298, 321; heali n g s n a k e of, 104; r e l a t i o n o f , t o self / s h a d o w , 321 M o t h e r / m o t h e r ( s ) , 87f, 100, 184*2; A n i adic, 166; C h u r c h a, 117; -complexes, m a s c u l i n e , 99; d i v i n e , 333; f o u r , 150; - F a t h e r , M e r c u r i u s as, 220*2; G o d is, a n d F a t h e r , 27; of G o d , 183, 333*1; goddess, 183*1; i m a g e of, 112; - i m a g o .

4i8

INDEX i i 2 ; N a t u r e , 117; of Q u e t z a l c o a t l , ioo; -son, incest, 232; of t w i n gods, 98; t w o , 112, 117, 189; see also M a t e r ; m a t r i a r c h a l society; m e r e L u s i n e M o t h e r h o o d , Q u e e n of, 18471 m o t h e r l y angels, 318 m o t i f ( s ) : of a s c e n t / d e s c e n t , see ascent; cross, 268; d i s m e m b e r m e n t ^ 30471; d o u b l e q u a t e r n i t y , 305; e a r l y C h r i s t i a n , fig. B i ; h a r l e q u i n , 261; incest, 232, 280, 302; m u t i l a t i o n , 30471; m y t h , i i , 273; m y t h o l o g i c a l , 69n, 299; spellb o u n d s p i r i t , ig8; t o r t u r e , 328; treasu r e , 258; t w o h o s t i l e b r o t h e r s , 24671 m o t i o n , c i r c u l a r , 77 m o u n t a i n ( s ) , 15, fig. B6, 19571, 227, 256, 261, 2 9 m , 298, 312; b o u n d a r y r e g i o n of snow, 23; five, 256; f o u r , 256, 262, fig. 24; m e t a p h y s i c a l , 262; r e l a t i o n of t r e e to, 309; S a t u r n i n e , 2g2; s y m b o l of p e r s o n a l i t y / s e l f , 309; tree's h a b i t a t i o n , 308; w o r l d , 2 g m m o v e m e n t , c i r c u l a r , 21, 25 Moyses, 323 mudra, 265 M i i l l e r , M a r t i n , 16871 M u i r h e a d , J a m e s F u l l e r t o n , 34071 multi flores, 247 M u m i a , 134, 152 m u m m y ( - i e s ) , E g y p t i a n , 134 Mundus/mundus, 32g; intelligibilis, 215; rationalis, 236 m u r a l c r o w n , 30371 Musa, 2 g m Musaeum hermeticum, Sen, 8372, 92 n, 10571, fig. B6, I86TI, 20771, 20871, 2ogn, 21271, 21471, 21571, 21771, 21971, 22071, 22271, 22671, 2 2 8 n , 23071, 2 3 m , 23571, 28671, 29271, 303, 30671, 30771, 30971, 31071, 31171; see also names of individual treatises in Bibl. A M u s a i o s , 29 m muscus, 15671, 187 m u s i c a l i t y , 108 m u s k , 155, 176 m u s t a r d seed, 259

m u t i l a t i o n , m o t i f of, 30471; see also dismemberment Mutus liber, 19571 Mylius, J o h a n n D a n i e l , 72, 85/, 12671, 12771, 13872, 152&71, 20711, 2ogn, 213, 214, 21772, 219&72, 221, 22271, 22671, 22772, 228&T2, 23572, 26671, 30371, 30671, 308&72, 30972, 319&72 m y r t l e , 286; mystic, 314 m y s t a g o g u e , 80; M e r c u r i u s as, 225 mysterium: a l c h e m i c a l , 334; et magnate Dei, 120 mystery(-ies), 63; C h r i s t i a n , 10372, 188; d i v i n e , 188; of H a r r a n i t e h e a d , 8 m ; Isis, 80, 18371; of life, 239; of N a a s senes, 145; n a t u r a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 157; n a t u r e , 158; r e b i r t h â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , o p u s a, 338; of r e l i g i o n , 276; - t r a d i t i o n , D i o nysian, 70 mystic(s), 27, ig5; A d a m , i3g; b o d y , 10772; M e r c u r i u s a r e f l e c t i o n of, exp e r i e n c e of a r t i f e x , 237; p e r e g r i n a t i o n , 230; s p e c u l a t i o n , 91, 111; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 13671 mysticism, 87; n e b u l o u s , 349; rose, 295; t r u e , 210 m y s t i f i c a t i o n , 162; s p u r i o u s , 276 m y s t i q u e of t h e R o s e , 2g4 myth(s), g8, 301; c r e a t i o n , gg; d i v i n e , 263; h e r o , 258, fig. 14; m o t i f s , 11, 6 g n , 273, 2gg; m o t i f s , u n i v e r s a l , 347; sacred, 298 m y t h i c a l b i r d , 344/ m y t h l i k e f a n t a s i e s , 258 m y t h o l o g e m ( s ) , 162, 273/, 2g2, 300, 348 m y t h o l o g y , 41, 6 g n , i s g , 274, 293, 348; G r e e k a n d E g y p t i a n , 142; T e u t o n i c , 3*7

N N a a s , 319&T1, 321, 333 N a a s s e n e s , 146, 23271, 31971; m y s t e r i e s of, 145; see also N a a s N a b u , 232 a l - N a d i m , I b n , 24.071

419

INDEX naga s t o n e s , 3 4 0 Nagel, Hildegard, igi N a k a s s a , 340 n a k e d ( n e s s ) , 53; s n a k e , 304 n a m e ( s ) : p a g a n , of d a y s of w e e k , 249; secret, 327; s p e l l b i n d i n g , 328 N a t c h e z I n d i a n s , 100 natura abscondita, g5 n a t u r a l : c o n s c i o u s n e s s , 247; e l i x i r , 134; l i g h t , 239; m a n , p u r i f i c a t i o n o f , 142; p h i l o s o p h y , 102, 159, 274, 348; p s y c h e , 238; science, see science; secrets, 301; s p i r i t , 184; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n m y s t e r y , 157; w i s d o m , 271, 333; — , c e n t r e of,

N e g r o , 52 N e k h e n , c i t y of, 2 8 0 N e l k e n , J a n , 3398:" n e o l o g i s m ( s ) , 113, i 2 i & n , 124, 137, 186 N e o p l a t o n i c ( - i s t ) : i d e a s , 131, 215; I d e s , 132*1 N e p t u n e , 303*1 n e r v o u s n e s s , 13, 37 n e t t l e ( s ) , 155, 176 N e u m a n n , E r i c h , 335 n e u r o s i s ( - e s ) , 8, 12/f, 36, 45, 341, 343, 345; m a s c u l i n e , 336; t r e a t m e n t o f , 69 n e u r o t i c ( s ) , 302; s t a t e s , 50;

symptoms,

n a t u r a l n e s s , 185 n a t u r e ( s ) , 197; c o l l e c t i v e , of self, 240; c o n t r a r y , of M e r c u r i u s , 319; d o u b l e / d u a l / t r i o d i c , of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; f e m i n i n e - m a t e r n a l of t r e e , 3 1 7 / ; f o u r , 76, g 4 (see also e l e m e n t s , f o u r ) ; h u m a n , d a r k n e s s of, 244; — , e s s e n c e o f , 4 0 ; — , as hsing, 2 i n , 25; — , a n d l i f e , 20, 2 3 ; — . l i g h t of, 29; — , l i g h t a n d d a r k f o r c e s o f , 25; — , t r u e , 39; of l i g h t , 151; of m a n , see m a n ; n y m p h i d i d i c , 173/; o n e ' s o w n , 48; P l a t o n i c , 292; r e v e r s a l of o n e ' s , 18; s e p a r a t i o n o f , 161; t r u e , of alc h e m y , 123; t w o , 284; u n i o n o f , 161 N a t u r e / n a t u r e , 65, 160, 184; c o n v e r g e s i n m a n , 94; d a r k n e s s o f , 160; d e i t y , 200; — , d a r k , 247; e g g of, 218; f o r c e s of, 128; g o d s , 150; i n v i s i b l e b o d y o f , 114; m o n a r c h y o f , 163; M o t h e r , 117; m y s t e r y , 158; p h i l o s o p h y , H e l l e n i s t i c , 7g; w i s d o m o f , 120; w o r s h i p , 161 N a v a h o I n d i a n s , 22, 9 8 Nazari, G. Battista, 67n N e a l e , J . M . , Collected Hymns, Sequences and Carols, 2930, 296™ N e b u c h a d n e z z a r , 13, 310; d r e a m o f , 272*1, 337 necrocomica, 139*1 necrolica, 172 n N e c r o l i i , 171, 172*1 n e c r o m a n c y , 119 420

n e w : e n e m y of t h e o l d , 48; t h i n g , 15/ N e w T e s t a m e n t , 78, 242; C o r i n t h i a n s I , 107, 296*1; H e b r e w s , 83; T h e s s a l o n i a n s , 247; see also G o s p e l s ; R e v e l a t i o n N e w t o n , S i r I s a a c , 69 N i c o d e m u s , 102/ N i e t z s c h e , F . W „ 52, 99, 118, 1288cn, 332; see also Z a r a t h u s t r a n i g h t m a r e , 143 nigredo, 68, 79*1, 165*1, 232, 266, 325, 3 3 3 4 I

N i k l a u s v o n d e r F l u e , 346 Nikotheos, 76 N i l e , 215; s t o n e , 101; v a l l e y , c i v i l i z a t i o n o f , 101; w a t e r o f , 7 3 N i n c k , M a r t i n , 340*1 n i n e : n u m b e r , 157; s i r e n s , 178 nirdvandva, 14 nivis, 2 0 7 n N o a h , 314 n o m e , 279n n o m e n c l a t u r e : a n t i n o m i a n , 216; of e g g , 82*1; s y m b o l i c , 275 n o m i n a l i s m , 288/ n o n - a c t i o n , 16, 25 n o n - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , 45 n o n - e x i s t i n g (asat), z i 8 n n o r t h e r n lights, 209 N o r t o n , T h o m a s , 197*1, 203*1 N o s t o c ( s ) / N o s t o c h , 153*1, 154 n o t - k n o w i n g , d a r k a b y s s o f , 178 N o t r e D a m e , as D e e s s e R a i s o n , 244

INDEX n o u r i s h i n g f r u i t s , 272 N o u s , 73, 104, 269; f e m a l e , 321; o p p o s i t i o n w i t h sex, 269; s e r p e n t of, 333 n u m b e r : basic, 22; o n e , two, t h r e e , f o u r , 151; s y m b o l i s m , 1 5 m ; see also o n e ; two; t h r e e ; f o u r ; five; six; seven; n i n e ; h u n d r e d ; ten t h o u s a n d n u m e n : c h t h o n i c , of tree, d r a g o n / s n a k e as, 317; d i v i n e , 268; tree-, 195, 315, 317; — , as a n i m u s , 338; — , f e m i n i n e , 338; — , M e r c u r i u s as, 239; vegetat i o n , 22071 n u m i n o s i t y , 301, 324 n u m i n o u s : complexes, 328; effect, 302; ideas, 299, 301 N y a g r o d h a , 31371 nycticorax, 198 n y m p h ( s ) , 142/, 158, 231; tree-, w i t c h like, 260; w a t e r - , 143 N y m p h i d i d a , 143 n y m p h i d i d i c r e a l m , 173/

O oak, 193/, 197, igg, 203, 286, 308, 33271 O a n n e s , 219 o b j e c t , 15; a n d s u b j e c t , 45 o b j e c t i v i t y , scientific, 6, 28g obscurantist(s), ig8 o b s c u r i t y as t h e d a r k n e s s of disease, 331 obsession(s), 37, 246 obsessional neurosis, 34 obumbratio of M a r y , 214 occult, m a n i f e s t a t i o n of, 15171 occultism, E a s t e r n , 7 O d i n , 333; h o r s e of, 34071 o d o u r of i m m o r t a l i t y , 334 o g d o a d , 151, 305; of e l e m e n t s , 278; as s y m b o l of t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n process, 316 oil, 287; g o l d e n , 227 O k e a n o s , 76 o l d : age, 272 O l d T e s t a m e n t , 333; see also Apocr y p h a ; D a n i e l ; D e u t e r o n o m y ; Eze421

kiel; Ezra; Genesis; J e r e m i a h ; J o b ; Psalms o l d e r H o r u s , 281 olive, 279Sen O l y m p i a n ( s ) , 37 O l y m p i o d o r u s , 74, 8 2 7 1 , 105 n, 1 2 8 7 1 , 13972, 20371, 284/, 323 O l y m p u s , 37 o m e g a : a l p h a a n d , 222, 281; e l e m e n t , 72, 76 omniscience, d r i n k of, 89 O m p h a l e , 99 O n e , 148, 150, 151, 176; a n d All, 232; F a t h e r a n d Son are, 116; a n d M a n y , 233; a n d t h e r o o t of itself, 139; imp u r e / p u r e , 15171; m i d p o i n t of circle, 151; s u b s t a n c e , 284 one-sidedness, 9, 13, 262, 336; of conscious m i n d , 348 O n i a n s , R . B., 26571 O n k e l o s , 16971 O n l y - B e g o t t e n , 145 o n o m a s t i c a , 121 O p h i t e s , 333 O p h i u c h o s d e m o n , 323 opinion(s), a n i m u s , 41 o p i u m , 15671 O p o r i n , 119, 133 opposite(s), 9, 14, 5171, 99, 216, 237, 242, 245, 256, 293, 332; clash of, 14, 348; d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of, 243; f r e e of (nirdvandva), 14; M e r c u r i u s consists of, 220, 237; — source of, 348; — u n i t e s , 309/; p a i r s of, 336; p l a y of, 238; p r o b l e m of, 326; psychological, 25; q u a t e r n i o of, 278; r e d u c t i o n / s y n t h e s i s of, 278; t e n s i o n of, 112, 118, 242; — , in C h r i s t i a n i t y , 243; u n i o n of, 21, 15171, 162, 210, 232, 254, 255, 257, 336, 341; EXAMPLES: a c t i o n / n o n - a c t i o n , I 6 N ; a c -

tive/passive, 79; c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o real, 75; l i f e / d e a t h , 5171; m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e , 79; N o u s / s e x , 269; p h y s i c a l / s p i r i t u a l , 5171; S o l / L u n a , 161; w a t e r / fire, 74, 216; w a t e r / s p i r i t , 74; y a n g / yin, g; y e a / n a y , 14

INDEX opposition: absolute, 210; between N o u s a n d sex, 269 o p u s , 66, 67*2, 8 8 n , 104, 127, 1 4 m , 148, 170, 179, 202/, 239, 275, 2 9 7 # , 322*2; a l c h e m i c a l , alchymicum, 123, 154, 160, 185/f, 186, 237; 166, 172; — , t w o p a r t s o f , 348; c o m p l e t i o n o f , 152*2; contra naturam, 3 1 4 / ; divinum, 123, 160; i n f o r m of a Mass, 158; g o a l o f , see g o a l ; G o d as p r o d u c t o f , 307; m i c r o c o s m i c , 197; m i s t a k e s d u r i n g , 324; a r e b i r t h m y s t e r y , 338; r e l a t i o n t o z o d i a c , 314*1; a s t r e e , 313; — , s y m b o l i z e s w h o l e , 311 o r a t o r i u m , 349 o r d e r , d i v i n e , 122 O r e s t e s , m a d n e s s of, 97 o r g y , D i o n y s i a n , 70 O r i e n t a l , 53; r e l i g i o n , 4 7 ; Sages, 3 7 ; w i s d o m , 7; see also E a s t e r n o r i e n t a t i o n , q u a t e r n a r y systems of, 167 O r i g i n a l : M a n , 166; sin, i g 6 ; w h o l e n e s s , 284, 3 3 6 Orpheus, 2 9 m O r t h e l i u s , 94*1 o r t h o d o x y , F r e u d i a n , 342 Osiris, 73/, 2 8 o f ; p r i n c i p l e of all m o i s t u r e , 74*1; s e a l e d t o m b of, 74 O s t a n e s , 79*1, 99, 101, 154, 215, 247*1, 2 7 9 " . 3°9>

3 2 ° - 32", 3 2 7/> 3 3 1

O s t e r b u r k e n , 307 o t h e r : s h o r e , 206*1; s i d e , 101 o u r s e l v e s , s p l i t i n , 246 o u t e r h a p p e n i n g , 16 o u t f l o w i n g , 24, 2 9 o u t g r o w i n g of p r o b l e m , 14/ o u t s i d e , 15/, 18 o x , 70, i 2 g , 183, 280 o x i d e s , 104*2, 290*1

P Pacific c u l t u r e ,

101;

Gilbert

Islands,

337"

P a d m a n a b a , 231 P a d m a n a b h a p u r a , t e m p l e o f , 231

p a g a n ( s ) , 113/, 116, 122, 189; a l c h e m i s t s , 299; a n t i q u i t y , 157; l o r e , 122 p a g a n u m , 113 p a g o d a s , 281*2 P a g o y u m , 113*2, 116, 122*1 p a i n t i n g ( s ) , s a n d , 22 p a i r , r o y a l , 332; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d u n i t y o f , 326 p a l a e o l i t h i c : c u l t of s o u l - s t o n e s , 100; s u n - w h e e l , 28 p a l m , 318; t r e e , 3 1 5 P a n , 231 p a n a c e a , 104, 150, 166, 178, 274*2, 296, 306 P a n d o r a , 94 Pandora, see R e u s n e r p a n s y , m o u n t a i n , 135*2 P a n t h e u s , Ars transmutationis metallicae, 227*2 P a n t o p h t h a l m o s , 217 p a p y r i : m a g i c , see M a g i c P a p y r i ; G r e e k M a g i c , see G r e e k s.v. p a r a b l e : of h o u s e b u i l t o n s a n d , 319; of t h e u n j u s t s t e w a r d , 243f p a r a b o l i c figure, 8 0 P a r a c e l s u s , 212, 219, 236; a l c h e m y , 129; a r c a n e p h i l o s o p h y , 110; C h r i s t i a n , 160; d e f i n i t i o n of l i f e , 134; e a r t h l y f i r m a m e n t , 276*2; P a g o y u m ( a ) , 113, 122, 158; s u b s t a n c e s , 277; t h i n k i n g , 115, 142; t r i a d , 277; W O R K S : " A p o k a lypsis H e r m e t i s , " 129; " A r c h i d o x i s m a g i c a e , " 122*2; Astronomia magna, 114*2, 115*2, 131*2; " D a s B u c h M e t e o r u m , " 143*2; " C a p u t d e m o r b i s s o m n i i , " 113*2, 114*2; " D e c a d u c i s , " 112*2, 1 1 7 n ; " D e m o r b i s a m e n t i u m , " 122*1; " D e n a t u r a r e r u m , " 123*2; " D e n y m p h i s , " 115*2; " D e p e s t i l i t a t e , " 114*2, 122ti, 164*2; De philosophia occulta, 18m; " D e p o d a g r i c i s , " 114*2, 1 1 5 0 , 130*2; " D e p y g m a e i s , " 143; " D e r e l i g i o n e p e r p e t u a , " 130*2; " D e s a n g u i n e u l t r a m o r t e m , " 143; " D e t a r t a r o : f r a g m e n t a a n a t o m i a e , " 132*2; De vita longa, 113*1, 124*2, 1 3 m , i 3 3 # , 135*2, 136*1, 144, 160, 172*1, 173 ff, 187*1;

422

INDEX " F r a g m e n t a , " 16472, 18072; " F r a g m e n t a m e d i c a , " 11472, 135", 15372; "Labyrinthus medicorum errant i u m , " 11371, 11472, 11572; " L i b e r A z o t h , " 12521, 13972, 14372, 16472, 17272; Das Buch Paragranum, 111, 124, i 3 i & n , 17822, 18772; Paramirum de quinque entibus morborum, 113, 11572, 12272; Paramirum primum, 11372; " P h i l o s o p h i a a d A t h e n i e n s e s , " 14372; " P h i l o s o p h i a sagax," 116; " V o n d e r A s t r o n o m e y , " 13172; " V o n d e n d r e y e n ersten essentiis," 13172; "Von E r k a n t n u s des Gestirns," 11372 P a r a c l e t e , 229 P a r a - d a , 20671 p a r a d i s e , 83, 13172, 143, 1548:72, 230, 241, 298, 30872, 311/; A d a m ' s t r e e of, 138; e a r t h l y , 196; f o u r rivers of, 149, 172, fig. 24; f r u i t s a n d h e r b s of, 30672; M e r c u r i u s , e a r t h of, 235; s e r p e n t of, 303; t r e e in, 318; tree of, see t r e e p a r a d o x i c a l i t y of life, 9 parallelism(s), psychological, 12 p a r a p h y s i o l o g i c a l theory, Geley's, 5171 p a r a p s y c h o l o g y , 4of p a r e d r o s , 12671, fig. 5, 179, 225 parent(s): first, 257, 321; i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h , 45 P a r i s MS., see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s P a r j a n y a , 268 P a r m e n i d e s , 77 participation mystique, 52, 91, 205, 266; dissolution of, 45, 4712; p r i m o r d i a l , 44

P a t a g o n i a n s , 71 pater mirabilis, 166 Patrizzi, Francesco, 233 p a t t e r n , g e o m e t r i c , 23 P a u l , St., 52; i n n e r Christ of, 27 P a u l , of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e , 3ogn P a u l i , W â&#x20AC;&#x17E; 28872 P a u l i c i a n s , 229 P a u l i n u s of N o l a , 2818:72 P a u s a n i a s , 9771 paws, cut-off, lion w i t h , 304, 321 Pe, city of, 280

peace, h e r o of, 229 peacock(s), 114; tail, 290/2 pearl(s), 135, 176; of g r e a t p r i c e , 259 Pelagios, 274 Pelican, 148, figs. B2, B7, 316; p h i l o sophical, 87 p e n a l code, 184 P e n o t u s , 2128(72, 2 2 3 7 2 , 231, 2328:71, 233 Peratics, 76 p e r e g r i n u s microcosmus, 153 p e r f e c t i o n , s y m b o l of, 269 p e r m a n e n c e , 259, 272 P e r n e t y , A. J., 14171, 16672, 18772 persea trees, 305, 33772 Persia(n), 132; a n c i e n t , d u a l i s m of, 243; B u d d h i s t m o n a s t e r i e s in, 231; fire s t r u c k f r o m stones in, 320; t r a d i t i o n , 288, 308; tree, 340 p e r s o n a , 18071, medical, 121 p e r s o n a l : affects, 346; fantasies, 344: p r o b l e m s , 301/, psyche/psychology, 347; r e s e n t m e n t s , 345/; unconscious, 348 p e r s o n a l i t y , 25, 35, 39, ig4, 272, 341; all sides of, 25; d e v e l o p m e n t of, 18, 21; dissociation of, 264; d o u b l e , 35; ego, 254; e n l a r g e m e n t of, 18; e p h e m e r a l / g r e a t e r , go; h i g h e r level of, 15; i n n e r ( m o s t ) , 24, 28; m a r k s of, 195; p h e n o m e n a l , 27; psychic, 35, 37; psychogenic s p l i t t i n g of, 35; s u p e r i o r , 46; symbol of, 194; symbolized by m o u n t a i n a n d tree, 309; total, 16, 45; trees a n i m a t e d by souls, have, lgg; u n i t y of, 14, 34; wholeness of, 240 personification, 38/, 41, g2, 112; a n i m a as, of unconscious, 42; of lifeless things, 91; of metals, 93; of s u n o r g o l d , 80; of trees, 1 9 4 7 2 Petasios, 74, 1 0 5 7 2 , 203 P e t r i , H e n r i c , 14471 P e t r i e , W . F., 3 0 5 7 2 p e t r i f a c t i o n , 100 p h a l l i c : a r r o w , 263; symbol, fig. 30 p h a l l u s , 232 phantasia, 16772, 176 P h a r a o h , 305

423

INDEX p h a r m a c e u t i c s , 122 p h a r m a c o l o g y , 122 4>6-PHO.KOV AOavaoias, 154 p h a s e s , seven, of t h e a l c h e m i c a l p r o c ess, 303 P h e l a n , G l a d y s , 191 p h e n o m e n a : collective p s y c h i c , 36; telep a t h i c , 139*1 P h e r e k y d e s , fig. 2 p h i a l , s p h e r i c a l , 82*1 P h i l a l e t h a / P h i l a l e t h e S , E i r e n a e u s , 2o8n, 2og*i, 2 i o n , 212*1, 217*1, 219*1, 220*1, 228*1, 2 3 m , 286*1 P h i l o J u d a e u s , 132, 266*1, 333 p h i l o s o p h e r s , 70, 95; C h i n e s e , 40, 50*1; E a s t e r n , 50; H e r m e t i c , 289; g a r d e n o f , 309; m e t a l o f , 219*1; m o d e r n , 121; secrets o f , 7 6 n ; s o n o f , 129; s t o n e o f , 198, 271; v i n e g a r / w a t e r of, 85 p h i l o s o p h i c ( a l ) : a l c h e m i s t s , 124*1, 161; a l c h e m y , a i m o f , 135*1; " c o m m o n a n d , M e r c u r i u s , " 217; d i a l e c t i c , 238; e a r t h , 290; E y e , 22; g o l d , 218, 274; h e a v e n , 222; l e a d , 227; m a n , g4, 235; m a t t e r , 29o; s p e c u l a t i o n , 124*1; s t o n e , 94, 293; t r e e , see t r e e ; w a t e r s , 279*1 philosophic ambisexual man, Mercur i u s as, 219 p h i l o s o p h y ( - i e s ) , 111; a l c h e m i c a l , 206*1; A r i s t o t e l i a n , 116; C h i n e s e , 9, 11, 40; — , yoga, 4, 14, 29; E a s t e r n , 6, 56; H e l l e n i s t i c n a t u r e , 79; H e r m e t i c , 233, 274, 288; I n d i a n , 142; of life, 50; n a t u r a l , 102, 159, 348; — , m e d i e v a l , 274; P a r a c e l s a n , n o t C a b a l i s t i c , 123; t r u e , 288 p h o b i a ( s ) , 37, 246 p h o e n i x , 128*1, 226*1 P h r y g i a n ( s ) , 87*1 p h y s i c a l : e l e m e n t s , 155; l i g h t n i n g , 152; a n d s p i r i t u a l , 5 m ; s y m p t o m s , 335 p h y s i c i a n ( s ) : a c a d e m i c , 120; a l c h e m i c a l , 124; d i v i n e office of, 116; h e a v e n l y , o f t h e s o u l , 293; m a t u r a t i o n o f , 124 physics: m o d e r n , 289; t r u e , 288 p h y s i k a a n d m y s t i k a , 103 p h y s i o c h e m i s t s , 149

physiological c o n t i n u u m , 9 Physis, 104, 307 Picasso, P a b l o , 261 P i c i n e l l u s , P h i l i p p u s , 155*1, 3 1 7 " Pico della Mirandola, Joannes,

130,

» 3 i . i37n-> 169*1 P i e r r e , N o e l , 27of p i e t y , s t o r k as a l l e g o r y o f , 317 p i g , fig. 22 p i l l a r ( s ) : f i e r y / p n e u m a t i c / s o l a r , 310*1; of S h u , f o u r , 279, 281 p i n e t r e e of A t t i s , 305*1 pinguedo mannae, 153*1; see also manna P i p e r , L e o n o r a , 418c*! P i r k e d e R a b b i E l i e z e r , see E l i e z e r p i s c i n a , 73 P i t r a , J e a n - B a p t i s t e , 74*1, 309*1 p l a g u e b a l l s , 155*1 p l a n e t a r y s p i r i t s , fig. B 5 , 225, 227 p l a n e t s , 1411, 181*1, 277, 316; i n m a n , 125*1; seven, 303, 310; — , t r e e s of, 309 p l a n t ( s ) , 23, 45, 248, 297; a s p a r a g u s , 313; k i n g d o m , 77; m o o n - , of t h e a d e p t s , 308; re'tvas, 337*1; s e e d , 24; s y m b o l i s m , 194; w o n d e r - w o r k i n g , 253 P l a t o , 77, 139, 214, 298, 31280*1 P l a t o n i c : m a n , 26; n a t u r e , 292 " P l a t o n i s l i b e r q u a r t o r u m , " see " L i b e r Platonis quartorum" P l e r o m a , 87*1, 334, 336 P l u t a r c h , 74*1 p n e u m a , 75/, 87*1, 212, 284; m e r c u r i a l , 215 p n e u m a t i c : b o d y , 52; m a n , 46, 233; p i l l a r , 310*1 p'o s o u l , 39, 4 0 P o i m a n d r e s , 73 p o i n t ( s ) , 151, 337; c a r d i n a l , fig. 25; crea t i v e , v i s u a l i z a t i o n of, 25; i n d i v i s i b l e , 148; s u n - , 15281*1 poison(s), 135, 229, 297; d e a t h - d e a l i n g , 323; - d r i p p i n g d r a g o n , 218; fiery a n d g a s e o u s , 278*1 p o i s o n i n g , 322; m e r c u r i a l , 323 p o i s o n o u s : d r a g o n , 218, 321; t i n c t u r e , 284*1

424

INDEX P o l a (Istria), 298n p o l a r i t y , 26; of life, g; in self-regulating systems, 15 pole(s): of l i g h t a n d darkness, 25; star, 14171 pole-dwellings, g8 Polia, 176, 183 P o l i p h i l o , 176, 183, 305; h i e r o s g a m o s of, 155; see also Francesco C o l o n n a political Utopias, 300 politician(s), 37 p o l y o p h t h a l m i a , 86, 21771 p o l y t h e i s m , 47; H i n d u , 243 p o m a n d e r , 1558:71 P o m p o n i u s Mela, 17881:73 ponderatio, 16573 P o r d a g e , J o h n , 15771, 30671 p o r n o g r a p h i c a , 231 possession: of a n i m u s , 267; by consciousness, 36; s t a t e of, 34 " p o u r e s l i o m m e s evangelisans," 22971 power(s): c o m p e n s a t i n g , of t h e u n c o n scious, 335; of darkness, 243, 334; drive, 260; to fly, 101; of light, 243; m a t e r i a l , 244; t h r o u g h words, 4g; t r u s t in h i g h e r , 54; -words, 121 P r a b h a v a n a n d a , Swami, a n d Isherwood, C . , 31373

" P r a c t i c a M a r i a e P r o p h e t i s s a e , " see Maria Prophetissa praise of t h e C r e a t o r , 24771 P r a j a p a t i , 132 p r e c i n c t , sacred (temenos), 24/, 244 p r e c i p i t a t i o n s , 331 P r e i s e n d a n z , Karl, 12611, 148, 16173, 179, 192, 22673, 27973, 32:911 prejudice(s), 41, 45 P r e l l e r , L u d w i g , 7073, 22771 premises, psychic, 289 " P r e t i o s a m a r g a r i t a novella correctiss i m a , " see B o n u s ; L a c i n i u s P r e u s c h e n , E r w i n , 10473 priest, 59, 60/, 64, 68, 70; sacrificial, 5gn, 84; i n w h i t e r o b e , 63 prima compositio, 13671 p r i m a m a t e r i a , 6on, 67, 73, 7771, 86/, 92, i05n, 122, 13611, 138/, 140, 147,

fig. B6, 170, 205, 219, 227, 236, 3198:71, 3 2 5. 33o/>" lapis as, 319; lead as, 30573; M e r c u r i u s as, 235, 309 p r i m a l incest, 302 P r i m a r y Force, 25 p r i m e v a l time, 9871 primitive(s), 12, 34, 5a, 346; analogies, 28; a n i m i s m , igg; b e l i e f s / p a r a d o x e s of, 6; consciousness, 268; d e m o n o l o g y , 42; instincts, 47; life, 8; m e n t a l i t y , 14, 45, 5171; psychology, 268 p r i m o r d i a l / P r i m o r d i a l : image, see image; l i g h t - b r i n g e r , 248; M a n , see m a n ; monsters, g8; participation mystique, 44; pass, 23; tree, 33771; u n i t y , 265; w o r l d , 243 prince, A n d a l u s i a n , 320/, 328 principium individuations, 196 principle(s), 22; a n i m a l , 257; a n i m a t i n g , 239; a r c h e t y p a l e x p l a n a t o r y , 288/; of c o m p e n s a t i o n , 245; of c o n d u c t , 325; cosmic, fig. A6; d e m i u r g i c , 232; etern a l , 169; f e m i n i n e , tao of the, 324; f o r m a t i v e , 137, 165; f o u r t h , f e m i n i n e , 96; of i n d i v i d u a t i o n , see i n d i v i d u a tion; life, 135, 213; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , of tree, M e r c u r i u s as, 319; m a s c u l i n e , 268; o r d e r ing, of consciousness, 325; psychic, 140; s p i r i t u a l , 138//; â&#x20AC;&#x201D;, of stork, tree as, 317; of sufficient reason, 84; vegetative, 257 Priscillian,

102&73

P r i t c h a r d , J. B., 33811 problem(s): insoluble, of life, 15; of opposites, 326; o u t g r o w i n g of, 14; p e r sonal, 301/ p r o c e d u r e , reductive, 348 process(es): alchemical, seven p h a s e s of, 303; chemical, 67; cognitive, 289; of g r o w t h , self d e p i c t e d as, 253; of ind i v i d u a t i o n , see i n d i v i d u a t i o n ; psychic, 16/, 67, 88; of realization, 348; spagyric, 150; of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , see t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ; unconscious m e n t a l , 56 p r o c r e a t i o n , 46, 213/

425

IN D E X P ro d ro m u s R h o d o sta u r o tic u s, 312 η; see also V eru s H e rm e s products: sp on tan eou s, o f u n con sciou s, 273. 299, 339, 346 p rojection , 36, 67, 88, 91, 106, 138, 159, 170, 176, 211, 238, 286, 297, 330f; a l ch em ical, 92, 238; o f alch em y, 239: anim a, 340: o f — figure, tree a, 338; arch etyp al, 300; -carrier, 238: o f co l lectiv e u ncon sciou s, 229; cosm ic, 335; o f dissociated tend en cies, 37; o f in d i v id u a tio n process, 22g; in to m atter, 300: on o u tsid e w o rld , 35; o f psychic a ctu ality, 237; — even ts, 24; in to tree, 200; o f u n co n scio u s, 205, 211; — co n ten ts in to an o b ject, 91; o f to r ture, 329; w ith d ra w a l of, 89 P rokonnesos, 64η P rom eth eu s, 12, 94, 263; g u ilt, 189 !Γρούμπον, go p ropaganda, 250 p ro p h et, 59η , 113η, i i 4 p rotective gen ies, 281 P rotestant(s), 54, 81; c u lt o f con sciou s ness, 48; schism , 112 P roteus, 178 p rotoplast(s), 132, 166 P rototh om a, 132 Psalm (s), 1458177, 146, 292η P sellu s, M ich ael, 2238071 p sy ch e/P sy ch e, 9, 11, 16, 24, 35, 40, 42/, 51» 55· 92. !2 8. !59· 162, 239, 235, 288/, 346; a b o lish m en t of, 300; archetypal w orld of, 171; bord er region s of, 96; co llectiv e/co n scio u s, 347: conscious im a g e is, 50; dark pow ers of, 42; d im m er elem en ts of, 243; e x is te n c e / m ea n in g of, 346; fa te of, 349: fe m i n in e , 40; g o a l of, see goal; in terio r w o rld of, 297; liv in g , 328; n atu ral, 238; person al, 347; P rim o r d ia l M an n am ed , 334; rea lity of, 201; u n c o n scious, 11, 36; w o m a n ’s, sp lit in , 269 psychiatrists, 34 psychic: actu ality, p ro jectio n of, 237; a u to n o m o u s system , see system ; c e n tre, 152; co llectiv e, p h en o m en a , 36;

co m p lex , a u to n o m o u s, 50; c o m p lic a tions, so lu tio n o f, 28; co n ten ts, 34, 92; — , a u to n o m o u s, 35, 37; con trols, 4111; d an ger o f alch em y, 128; d e v el o p m en t, see d ev elop m en t; d efin itio n of, 5 1 7 1 ; distu rb an ces, 342; ep id em ics, 37; e q u ilib riu m : 46; even ts, p ro jec tio n of, 24; exp erien ce(s), 2777, 52; factor in alch em y, 137; facts, 37; h a p p en in g s, 28; id en tity , g2; law s, 237, 277; n a tu r e o f M ercurius, 216; — Scaiolae, 169; o p era tio n , 86; personality(-ies), 35, 37; prem ises, 28g; p r in cip le, 140; processes, see processes; rea lity , see reality; — , o f m an , 244; state(s), 19, 23, 44, 54f; — , ab n orm al, 43; suffering, 336; system s, o f h ea lin g , 347; — , sp lit in th e, 243; tran sform a tio n , 144, 155, 160; tru th , 171; visio n , 177 p sy ch o g en ic d istu rb an ces, 34, 157 p sy ch o id form , 272 psych ologem , 336; M ercu riu s, 2x6 p sych ological: b lin d n ess, 336; ru les, re v ersib ility o f, 347; sym p tom s, 335 p sych ologism , 49, 5 0 / psych ologist(s), 34, 39, 46, 69; sy m b o li cal, 50; W estern , 40 p sych ology, 4 , 43, 5 0 /, 51η, 159; aca d em ic, 3; o f alch em y, 93; c o m p lex , 326; o f th e East, 8; fe m in in e , 41, 82; m ascu lin e, 81 f, 269; m ed ica l, 3, 273; and m etap h ysics, 49, 54; m o d e m , 91; p erson al, 347; p erso n a listic, 107; p rim itiv e, 268; — an d archaic, 91; o f r e lig io n , 332; sh am an istic, yon ; o f th e u n co n scio u s, go, 189, 268; w ith o u t sou l, 238; see also typ ology, psy ch o lo g ica l p sy ch o p o m p , 80, 13677, 221, 250; d o g as, 23277; M ercurius as red eem in g , 237 psychosis(-es), 322; m ass, 36 p sych osom atic in stin cts, 346 p sych oth erap y, 189, 205, 244, 327; see also analysis P u e b lo In d ia n s, 22, 100; m y th o lo g y o f, 263

INDEX puer aeternus, 179 puer leprosus, M e r c u r i u s as, 226n puff-ball(s), 290 pulses, h u n d r e d , 325 p u n i s h m e n t ( s ) , 60n, 61, 71, 105, 281, 330; p l a c e of, 62/ p u p p y of celestial h u e , 2320 p u r e m a n , 290 p u r i f i c a t i o n , 138; of n a t u r a l m a n , 142 p u r p l e , 148, 312Sen P u r u r a v a s , 178 P u r u s h a , 132, 171, 220 p u t r e f a c t i o n , 83*1, 13472 P y r a m i d Text(s), 279&71 pyrites, 28777 P y r r h a , 99 P y t h a g o r a s , 306; tetraktys of, 22 Python, 213

216, 225/f, 269, 284; fixation of, 7371; s p i r i t of, 225; system, I n d i a n , 206; as w a t e r , 207; see also m e r c u r y " q u i d , " of D o r n , 300 quinta essentia, 87, 115, 135, 176, 219; as coelum, sig quintessence, 76, 88, 13571, 151, 166, 168n, i6g, 196, 239, 266, 292, 325; of i n d i v i d u a l a n d collective, 182

radices, 195 R a h n e r , H u g o , 31071 r a i n , 221, 268; -god, 26871 r a i n b o w , figs. 26, 29 r a m , of M e n d e s , 279 ranunculus, 15571 Rasis, see R h a z e s rationalism(-ality), 18, 40, 45; of consciousness, 345; of intellect, 336, 345 r a v e n , 9271, 198 ray(s): d e a t h - , r e d , 304; of Surya, 267 R a y m o n d (in M e l u s i n a legend), 177 Raziel, 33771 R e , 280 realism, E a s t e r n , 7, 288 reality, 51; d i f f e r e n t i a l , 37; of e a r t h , 54; living, 54; of psyche, 201; psychic, 42; — , c o n c e p t of, 5 m ; — , of m a n , 244; —, of M e l u s i n a , 176; relative, 38; of unconscious, 42, 201; — , p a r a d o x i c a l , 202 r e a l i z a t i o n , go; conscious, 244; imagin a t i v e , 177; of t h e opposite, 21; p r o c ess of, 348; of t h e self, 264; of T a o , 21 r e a l m : of light, 264; of spirit, 300 reason, 13, 184, 238, 244, 250, 328, 335, 344; laws of, 245

R R a b a n u s , M a u r u s , 2958071 R a b b i , son of J o s e p h u s C a r n i t o l u s , 311 R a b b i Eliezer, see Eliezer racial differences, 11 r a d i c a l m o i s t u r e , 67, 75, 7771, 86, 138,

151 Q e b h s e n n u f , 280 quadratus, M e r c u r i u s as, 278 quality(-ies): m o r a l , 326; of

wisdom,

338 q u a r t e r ( s ) , f o u r , 27171, 281 Quaternarius, 15m q u a t e r n a r y : p r i n c i p l e , 28; s t r u c t u r e , 22, i6g; symbols, 336; system, 167 q u a t e r n i o ( s ) : f o u r , 28071; of opposites, 278 quaternity(-ies), 151, 166/, 262, 269, 282, 305, fig. 24; alchemical, 278; a p o t r o p a i c significance of, 281; cross as, 282; d o u b l e motif of, 305; E g y p t i a n , 280; of t h e elements, 278; God's att r i b u t e of, 281; of God's sons, 283; H e r m e t i c , 283; of O r i g i n a l M a n , 172; symbolized by c r o s s / t r e e , 332; as u n i t y , 151 Q u e e n of M o t h e r h o o d , 18471 q u e s t f o r t h e stone, 300 Q u e t z a l c o a t l , m o t h e r of, 100 q u i c k l i m e , 307 quicksilver, 72, 7771, 7971, 89, 10771, 122, 13135". 20671, 207/, 210/,

427

re b irth , 332; cerem onies, 70; a n d d eath , 73, 102; — , cycle of, 105; — , of p h ilo sophical tree, 287; of m an , 27, 68n; m ystery, opus a, 338; —, tree a, 338; sp iritu a l, 73; see also tw ice-born R ebis, fig. B3 re d /R e d , 339; cockatoo(s), 205; D am a scene ea rth , 318; flowers, fig. 5; and green lion, see lion; M an, g2n, 93; slave, 93; stone, 297; tin c tu re, see tin c tu re redeem er(s), 307; alchem ical, 295; C h ristian , 233; g en e ratio n , b irth and re su rre ctio n of, 298; G nostic, 233; o ri g in of, low liness of, 146η red e m p tio n , 53, 132, 145, 147, 159, 183η; alchem ical, d o ctrin e of, 205; by blood, 296; C h rist’s w ork of, g6; goal of, 183; m a n ’s longing for, 107 red u c tio n : of opposites to u n ity , 278; of symbols, a lc h e m ic a l/F re u d ia n , 301 refining, 24 reflection, 334; ra tio n a l, 169; to rm e n t of u n lim ite d , 330; tw ilig h t of, 265 reg e n eratio n , 184η regression, 264, 282, 345; unconscious, 260 R e in ach , Salom on, 22 m R eitzenstein, R ic h a rd , 73η , 188η, 204, 228η, 231 Sen; a n d H . Schaeder, 89η, 220n , 332n reivas p la n t, 337η relatedness, 41; in ferio r, 41 rela tio n sh ip , fu n c tio n of, 42 religio m edica, 125 religion(s), 54; co m p arativ e, 6; E astern, 6; facts of, 36; history of, 204; m yster ies of, 276; O rien ta l, 47; p h en o m e n ology of, 35; p h ilosophical, 47; as psychic systems of healing, 347; psy chology of, 332; see also C h ristian ity ; P ro te sta n t religious: cerem onies, 22; experiences of W est a n d East, 53; ideas, 301; la n guage, 52; practice, 47; p ro b lem s of th e p resen t, 53; segregation of — from n a tu ra l tran sfo rm atio n m ystery.

157; sp irit, ev o lu tio n of, 53; th erap ies for disorders of soul, 48; th o u g h t, 46 rem edy(-ies), arcane, 135, 156η rem ission of sins, 276 R enaissance, 189; sp irit of, 117 renew al: fo u n t of, 332η; sp iritu a l, 73; a n d tran sfo rm atio n , tree as seat of, 317; w ord of, 222 repercussion, alchem ical, 138η representations collectives, 347 repression, 8, 82, 264, 342; o f contents, 36; F re u d ian , theory, 42; of in fan tile m em ories an d wishes, 341; theory, 34; unconscious, of sexuality, 34; v io len t, of in stin cts, 47 rep ro d u ctio n , goal of first h a lf o f life, 46 res, 329; quaerenda, 286; s im p le x , 88n, 215 “ rescue circles,’’ E nglish, 51η research: co m p arativ e, 345; — , in to sym bolism , 273, 341 resentm en ts, p erso n al, 345/ resignatio n , 320, 327 resistance(s), 17, 260; in n e r, 121; non-, 327

resp ira tio n , in te rn a l, 27 responsib ility , 297; d im in ish ed , 34 resu rrectio n , 218, 276, 298; o f th e dead, 297

resuscitatio n , w ate r has p o w er of, 74 re to rt, 148, 316η; alchem ical, 197; tree in the, 315 retorta d istilla tio , 138, 148, 152 re u n io n w ith unconscious laws, 21 R eu sn er, H iero n y m u s, 144η, fig. B4, 258, 304, 317, 319, 32i&n, 338 revelatio n , 113, 209, 229; angel of, 339; daem ons of, 178; divine, 116, 236; god of, j 79; lig h t of, 111, 115 R evelatio n , Book of, 71, 182, 187, 197n, 200, 223, 242, 332 rev e n an t, 3g rcverberatio, 165η rev e rb e ra tio n , alchem ical, 138η reverbera to riu m , 138η

INDEX r e v e r s a l : m o t i f of, 314; of o n e ' s n a t u r e , j 8; process of, 21 r e v o l u t i o n ( s ) , 36 rex: fig. B2; antiquissimus, 221; coronatus, 148; marinus, 146 R h a z e s / R a s i s , 116, 1 4 i n , 288&n, 297 R h en a n us, J o a n n e s , fig. B 7 , 316 n rhizomata, 195 r h i z o m e , go R h o d e s i a , 28 R i c k a b y , J o s e p h , 165n, 244n r i d d l e s , 255 r i f t i n m e t a p h y s i c a l w o r l d , 244 R i m a s , 2 4 0 ^ ; see also Zosimos R i p l e y , G e o r g e , 2 i 2 n , 227, 230, 2 3 m , 235n, 286n, 30gn, 311, 3 i 4 & n , 330, 332&n,"Axiomata philosophica," 2 i 5 n , 309n, 3 3 o n ; " C a n t i l e n a , " 8 3 n ; " V e r s e s b e l o n g i n g to a n E m b l e m a t i call S c r o w l e , " fig. B5, 212, 286n, 303, 3o6n, 317; tree in, i g g n rite(s): of benedictio jontis, 78; ecclesiastical, 68; m a g i c a l , 54, 122; p r e C h r i s t i a n , 68n r i t u a l a c t i o n , 25 river(s): of E d e n , 31 gn; f o u r , 262, fig. 24; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , of p a r a d i s e , i4g, 172 r o c k e t - p r o p e l l e d a i r c r a f t , 343, 345 R o m a n u s , St., 7 4 " R o m e , i m p e r i a l , 317 root(s), 8 7 n , 195//, 239, 2 5 7 f t 264, 268, 275n, 286, 3 1 m , 313, 315, 320, 340, figs. 12, 15; of All, i g s n ; f o u r , 68; O n e a n d , of itself, 139, 151; secret in, of tree, 195; of self, lgg R o q u e t a i l l a d e , J e a n de, 2 2 g n ; see also Rupescissa rosa mystica, 294 " R o s a r i u m p h i l o s o p h o r u m , " 68n, 6gn, 73n, 77n, 78, 7 9 " , 85, i 0 3 n , i 2 6 n , i 3 g n , 1 4 4 ^ I47&n, 15311, figs. B2, B3, 2 0 7 n , 2 i 2 & n , 2 i 5 n , 2ig8cn, 220 n , 2 2 m , 22221, 223, 2 2 6 n , 232n, 235n, 2 3 6 n , 294, 331, 327n " R o s a r i u s " ( r o s e - g a r d e n e r ) , 294 R o s c h e r , W . H . : Lexicon, 14m, 2 2 m rose(s), 294; flowers of V e n u s , i 8 3 n ;

h e a v e n l y , 295; as m a n d a l a , 295; m y s ticism, 295; m y s t i q u e of t h e , 294; sign of t h e , 2g6 r o s e - c o l o u r e d b l o o d , see b l o o d R o s e n c r e u t z , C h r i s t i a n , 90, 183, 187, 216, 230, 315, 326 R o s i c r u c i a n m o v e m e n t , 296 R o s i n u s , 220, 2 4 o n ; see also Z o s i m o s " R o s i n u s ad S a r r a t a n t a m , " 94n, 226n, 240, 322n r o t a t i o n , s p i r a l , 271 R o t h - S c h o l t z , F r i e d r i c h , 157n rotundum, 76 r o u n d : b o d y , 139; e l e m e n t , 72, 76 r o y a l : a r t , 204, 275; m a r r i a g e , 278, 326 R u e l l e , C. E., 5gn R u l a n d , M a r t i n , 137, i 3 8 n , 140, 154, 1 57> LF>7/, i 6 8 n , i6g, 2 i g n , 2 2 o n ; Lexicon alchemiae, 7671, 7 8 n , 134", 135", i36n, i3gn, i4on, i44n, i52n, i53n, 15411, 25gn, z'jgn, zS'jn R u m p e l s t i l t s k i n , 327 R u p e s c i s s a , J o h a n n e s de, i 2 3 n , i 3 8 n , i 4 8 n , 229n R u s k a , J u l i u s , ed.: Turba philosophorum, 6 7 n , f68en, 77Sen, 7 8 n , 8272, i 0 5 n , i 3 8 n , i52&n, 227, 24on, 305Sen, 3 0 6 n , 3i4n, 322n, 32g&n r u s t , 138, 1 4 m

S Sabaean(s), 6on S a b b a t h , 24g sacraments: Christian, 154; of the Church, 186; ecclesiastical, 185 ff; H o l y , 157 s a c r e d : l e g e n d , agg; m y t h , 298; p r e c i n c t , 24 f S a c r e d B o o k s of t h e E a s t , 56, 2 i 8 n , 24on, 267n, 17811 sacrifice(s), 72; a n i m a l ( s ) , 45, 280; of g o d , 8 o n , s n a k e , 333; see also k n i f e , sacrificial sacrificer, 80; is sacrificed, 84

429

INDEX sage(s): a n c i e n t , 21; i n

contemplation,

29. 3 0 -33; o r i e n t a l , 37 saint(s), 35, 71, 182, 282; b o d y of, becomes s t o n e , 101 Sainte Bible traduit . . . sous la direction de VEcole Biblique de Jerusalem, 28 i n St. E x u p ^ r y , A n t o i n e de, fig. 2 St. Vitus's D a n c e , 12271 S a l a m a n c a , 119 salamander, 142,210 S a l a m a n d r i n e Essence, 138, 142 S a l a m a n d r i n i , 142, 163 Saldini, 142, 163 salt(s), 1 3 6 7 1 , 277, 286&71, 287, 290&71, 308; c o n n e c t i o n of t r e e w i t h , 309; e a r t h l y , 14 m , 233; efflorescence of metallic, 14677; interior, 13571 salty: f o u n t a i n , 308; s p r i n g , 287 s a l v a t i o n , 1 8 4 7 1 , 298; C h r i s t i a n story of, 2gg; m a n ' s , 127; of u n i v e r s e , 127 s a l v a t o r / S a l v a t o r , 166, 250; M e r c u r i u s as, 235; microcosmi, 296; Mundi, 242 S a m a r i a , w o m a n of, 104 s a n d p a i n t i n g s , 22 S a p i e n t i a , 126, 130, 258, 333; a n d H o l y Ghost, Mercurius identified with, 229; tree's r e l a t i o n to, 318 s a p p h i r e , i87&n, 258/, figs. 16, 17; s t o n e , 258 s a p p h i r i n e : flower, 18771, 269; m a t e r i a l , 18771, 259 S a t a n , 8 i ÂŤ , 114, 316; A n t i c h r i s t as, 242; c o u n t e r p a r t of G o d , 236; G r e e k , 288; a Kabbalist, 11471; three-headed, 14 m , 236 S a t a n a e l , 223 S a t u r d a y , see d a y s of t h e week S a t u r n , 6771, 7671, 83, 126, 12871, 14171, 170, 220, 2 2 6 f t 278, 30571, 31 of, 331; as B e e l z e b u b , 228; c h i l d of, 7671, 227; d a r k n e s s o f , 12671, 15271; d a y of, 22871, 24971; h i g h e s t a r c h o n , 228; l i g h t n i n g of, 152; l i o n associated w i t h , 227; M e r c u r i u s , r e l a t i o n to, 226, 250; a n d Sol, s e p a r a t i o n of, 153; s p i r i t of, 227 "Saturn's Chyld," 227n

S a t u r n i a , p l a n t , 227 S a t u r n i n e : d a r k n e s s , 130; f o r m , 12871; l e a d , 331; m e l a n c h o l y , 153; m o u n t a i n , 292 s a v i o u r , 100; s e r p e n t - , 104; s y m b o l of, 101; see also S a l v a t o r Saxo G r a m m a t i c u s , 98 Scaiolae, 13371, 13971, 15571, i68&n, 171174, 176, 179; f o u r , 167; psychic n a t u r e of, 169 Scaioli, 168&71, 172 "Scala p h i l o s o p h o r u m , " 27871 Scaliger, J . J., 13771 scalping, 71 scayolic, A q u a s t e r , 139 Scayolus, 16871 S c h a e d e r , H . , see R e i t z e n s t e i n Schevill, M a r g a r e t E., 9871 s c h i z o p h r e n i a , 34, 7071; process of, 29; states of, 106 S c h m i e d e r , K. C., 204 S c h o p e n h a u e r , A r t h u r , 84, 16771, 196 S c h r e b e r , D . P., 37 Schrottli, 143 Schweitzer, B e r n a r d , 2 2 m , 22471 science, 6, 7, 34, 43, 55, 106, 128, 244; 01 G o d , g6; n a t u r a l , 111, 115, i5g, 300; Western, 6 scientia/Scientia, 126; creaturae, 247; Creatoris, 247, 249; hominis, 249 s c o r p i o n , 71, 7971, 134 Scott, H . v o n E., see B l a n d , C. C. S. Scott, W a l t e r , 7371, 7871; see also Corpus Hermeticum " S c r i p t u m A l b e r t i , " see A l b e r t u s M a g nus Scripture(s), 2 0 9 , 2 8 6 7 1 ; see also N e w and O l d T e s t a m e n t Scylla a n d C h a r y b d i s , 145 Scythian(s), 71; j u i c e , 76 sea, 44, 51, 92, 139, 146, fig. B5, 178, J 94> z o 9 n > 248, 253, 291, fig. 1; - b o r n , 182; b o t t o m of, 23; d e p t h s of, 8771; kingly s u b s t a n c e , h i d d e n in, 145; t r e e p l a n t e d i n t h e , 308; w a t e r , 308; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , c o n n e c t i o n of t r e e w i t h , 309 seat of h e a v e n l y l i g h t , 2071

INDEX second: A d a m , C h r i s t t h e , 304; t e t r a d , 283 secret(s), 199; artificial, 301; c o n t e n t of alchemy, 129; doctrines, see doctrines; â&#x20AC;&#x201D; , of A n t h r o p o s , 171; i n f e r n a l fire, 210; of i n n e r m a n , 163; l a n g u a g e , 162; of m a t t e r , 299; M e r c u r i u s , revealer of divine, 230; n a m e , 327; n a t u r a l , 301; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 76 n ; p o w e r , 4g; in roots of tree, 195; stone, 291; t r e a s u r e , fig. 14 seducer, diabolical, 250 seed(s): of corn, 259; divine, 86; of gods, 76 Seele, 4 0 Sefiroth, 3x2 self, 45, 99, 101, 139, 142, 152, 182, 194/, 220, 240/, 249, 263, 267/7, 282, 284, 300, 325, 338; A n t h r o p o s or, tree as, 338; a r c h e t y p e of, 87; b i r t h of, 266; c e n t r e of total personality, 45; collective n a t u r e of, 240; deus absconditus as e l e m e n t of, 24; d i v i n e d y n a m i s m of, 285n; i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with, 263; imm o r t a l , 171; i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m G o d - i m a g e , 241; l i g h t of t h e , 248; Mercurius represents, 237; Moses' r e l a t i o n to, 321; as process of g r o w t h , 253; realization of t h e , 264; roots of, 199; sacrifice of, 263; s u p r a p e r s o n a l , 240; symbolized by m o u n t a i n / t r e e , 309; symbol (ism) of, 241, 246, 253, 28012; tree, visible sign of r e a l i z a t i o n of, xg6; u n i o n w i t h , 263 self-awareness, psychological, go self-brooding, 26 self-conquest, heroic, 47 self-deception, 7, 200 s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n / d e v o u r i n g , 79; d r a g o n , 259; of M e r c u r i u s , 236 s e l f - d e v e l o p m e n t , 179 self-fertilization, 7g self-generation / r e p r o d u c t i o n / transf o r m a t i o n of M e r c u r i u s , 236 self-knowledge, 25, 94&71, 248/, 24922, 284 self-realization, 53

s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g systems, 15 self-sacrifice, 325 S e n a / S e n a e , x78 senarius, 266 Sendivogius, Michael, 6722, 203n, 20772, 231 senex: draco, 22072; ithyphallicus, 231; M e r c u r i u s as, 2so, 250 Senior, Z a d i t h , see Z a d i t h Senn, Gustav, 251 sensation(s), 167; bodily, 28 sense: organs, 152; - p e r c e p t i o n , 167 separatio, 68 s e p a r a t i o n : of b o d y a n d soul, 23g; f r o m world of t h o u g h t , 267 " S e p t e m t r a c t a t u s h e r m e t i s , " see " T r a c tatus aureus" serenitus aerea, 212 Seringapatam, 34072 serpens mercurialis, ig8; see also serpent, mercurial serpent(s), fig. A4, 7972, 89, 103, 1 4 1 7 2 , 143, 14671, igg, 279, 304, 3x972, 321; brazen, 333; c h t h o n i c , 333; on t h e cross, 333; c r o w n e d , fig. 32; - d a e m o n , f e m a l e / d a e m o n i c , 240; D e l p h i c , 213; I n d i a n , 6372; m e r c u r i a l , 68, 77, 82, 144/, 152, 258, 315 (see also d r a g o n ) ; of t h e N o u s , 333; old, 83; of p a r a d i s e , 303; -saviour, 104; t h r e e - h e a d e d , fig. B2; see also s n a k e senator, x66; cosmi, 296; M e r c u r i u s as, 235. 250 servus (cervus) fugitivus, 178, 211 Set ( T y p h o n ) , 74, 281 Seth, 1 3 7 7 2 , 304 seven: b r a n c h e s , 315; devils, 1288071; -fold star, 225; metals, 288/, 337; p l a n e t s , 303, 3x0; trees of, 309 sex(uality), 260, 269; division by, 139; e x c i t e m e n t of, 82; o p p o s i t i o n w i t h N o u s , 269; t h e o r y of, 343; u n c o n scious repression of, 34 shadow, 47, 244, 265/, 268, 348; of Gilgamesh, 320; m a n a n d his, 246; u n i o n w i t h , 326 Shakti, 95, 180

INDEX S h a k y a m u n i , see B u d d h a s h a m a n , 70n, 337, 341; East S i b e r i a n , 340; h e a v e n l y j o u r n e y of t h e , 303, 309; t r u e p e r s o n a l i t y of, 341 s h a m a n i s m , 101, 253, 305, 341 s h a m a n ( i s t ) i c ; a n i m a , 303; psychology, p r i m i t i v e , 7 0 n ; s y m b o l i s m , 341; tree, fig. 2, 272 shape(s), 37 S h a t a p a t h a B r a h m a n a , 178, 267, 313*1 Sheed, F. J., 24gn shell, 21 shen (spirit), 3g, 4 0 s h i n i n g bodies, 151/, 157 Shiva, 20671; - S h a k t i , 231 S h u , f o u r p i l l a r s of, 279, 281 S i b e r i a n s h a m a n s , 340 Sidgwick, Mrs. H e n r y , 4 i n sign: of G o d , 281; of t h e rose, 296 signa T h a u , 28 m silver, 75, 89, 122, 194, 226, 27771, 296, 332; b r a n c h of tree, 8g; c o m m o n , 275; g o l d a n d , f o u n t a i n of, 10371; m a n , 64; u n a l l o y e d , 29071, 295; waters, 284; w h i t e e l i x i r o f , 13571 S i m o n (Magus), 13771 simplicity, 16, i 5 i & n sin(s): A d a m ' s , 304; o r i g i n a l , 196; r e m i s sion of, 276; w a g e s of all, 22g Sinn, 20 sinology(-ists), 6, 10 S i o u x , 100 sirens, 14371; n i n e , 178 six ( n u m b e r ) , 266 skin, 64, g2; of h e a d , 60; stuffing of, 70 s k i n n i n g , 71/ sky-god, 2 6 8 7 1 Sky F a t h e r , 98 slave, f u g i t i v e , 211 slaying, of a l c h e m i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , 321; see also k i l l i n g sleep, 114&71; of i n c u b a t i o n , 105 snake(s), 83, 134, fig. B2, 177; 221; 256/, 263, 27171, 314, 3 4 o f , figs. 11, 12; as c h t h o n i c n u m e n of tree, 317; conn e c t e d w i t h tree, 315; crucified, 333; h e a d of, 29171; h e a l i n g of Moses, 104;

as m o s t s p i r i t u a l a n i m a l , 333; n a k e d , 304; as s y m b o l of u n c o n s c i o u s , 333; t h r e e - h e a d e d , fig. 32; —, M e r c u r i u s as, 222; tree-, 241; t r e e a n d , u n i o n of, fig. 12; as t r e e - n u m e n , 315; vision, 86; —, of I g n a t i u s L o y o l a , 21771; - w o m a n , 144; see also s e r p e n t snow, 214 society, m a t r i a r c h a l , 99 Socrates, 77 Sol, 13671, 150, fig. B4, 303, 310; c o h a b i t a t i o n w i t h L u n a , 123; as g o l d , 122; l i g h t n i n g of, 152; N o v u s , C h r i s t t h e , 242; a n d S a t u r n , s e p a r a t i o n of, 153; see also s u n solar: gods, 26771; p i l l a r , 31071; p l e x u s , 37, fig. Ag, 266; p o i n t , 152 solidity, 272 solificatio, 72, 80 S o l o m o n , 130 S o l o t h u r n (canton), 98 solutio, 330 s o l u t i o n , saline, 134 soma, 313 s o m a t a a n d a s o m a t a , 103 s o m a t i c : d i s t u r b a n c e s , 342; s p h e r e , 262 s o m n a m b u l i s t , 2377, 25 s o m n a m b u l i s t i c states, 34 son(s), 116; e x i s t e n c e of, 52; of t h e G o l d e n H e a d , 72; King's, fig. B6; m o t h e r - , incest, 232; o n l y b e g o t t e n , i 6 g « ; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 129; -ship, d u ality of, 22371; see also filius Son, 26; F a t h e r a n d , 116; of G o d , see G o d ; — , first a n d second, 223; of M a c r o c o s m , 126; of M a n , 96, 232 S o n g of God, 31371; see also B h a g a v a d gita Song of Songs, 312 S o p h i a , 187, 308, 334, 336; - A c h a m o t h , 334; p e r v e r t e d i n t o P h i l o s o p h i a , 288; s u f f e r i n g s of, 335 Sophists, 2go, 331 s o r c e r e r (Magus), 119 sorcery, 119, 122 soror mystica, 73 soul(s), 9, 41, 50, 5171, 71, 78, 83, 88n,

432

INDEX 94/» 97> , 2 2 » ' 4 ' " , 145?!, 161, 164/, 180, 2 H , 213, 216, 236n, 238, 257, 27812, 330; of ancestor, 97; a n i m a t i o n of, 257; ascent of, 103; b o d y a n d , see body a n d soul; b o d y a n d s p i r i t cont a i n e d in stone, 290/; b r e a t h - , 213; cagastric, 164/; as celestial A q u a s t e r , 140; c h i l d r e n ' s , 97; collective, 2 4 0 7 2 ; c r e a t i o n of, 86; d a m p , 171; d a r k b a c k g r o u n d of, 147; darkness of, 79n; of t h e d e a d , 317; descent of, 86n; d u a l i t y of, 214; — in w o r l d a n d , 116; e a r t h - b o u n d bodily, 39; e x t r a c t i o n of, 72, 32972, 330; heavenly, a n d earthly, fig. A6; —, physician of the, 293; lliastric, 1360,' i m p u l s e of, 54; as int e r m e d i a t e n a t u r e , 213; " L a d y S o u l , " 340; loss of, 34; m a s c u l i n e a n d femi n i n e , fig. A6; m a s t e r of, 197; m e r c u r i a l life-, 214; M e r c u r i u s , of metals, 398; moist, 77T1; " n o t h i n g b u t , " 50; psychology w i t h o u t , 238; P r i m o r d i a l M a n as world-, 334; reasoning, 2 4 9 7 2 ; r o o t e d in t h e a e t h e r , 312n; r u l e r oE, 196; of t h e sick, 101; simple, 88n; skin is, 72; as spherical glass vessel, J97; s p i r i t a n d , see spirit; of stone, 68; stones, 98; -substance, 325; of t h e substance(s), 138, 1501%; suffering of t h e , 335; t r a n q u i l l i t y of, 165; tree-, 319; trees a n i m a t e d by, h a v e personality, 199; t r u e , 139; u n i o n with, 155; w o r l d , 77, 122, 129, 214; of w o r l d , 77, 130; see also anima mundi source of life, 272 spagirica foetura, 150 spagyric/Spagyric, 113, 135", 1508cn, 180n spark, divine, 160 s p a t i a l p r i n c i p l e , 25 specialism, 6 spectres, verbal, 37 speculatio, 167, 176 s p e c u l a t i o n ^ ) : alchemical, f r a u d u l e n c e of, 204; e n i g m a t i c a l , 175, 179; Gnostic, 283; mystic(al), 91, 111; p h i l o sophical, 1 2 4 7 1 ; theological, 96

433

" S p e c u l u m vcritatis," 83 speech, colloquial, 34 spell(s), 119, 162; magic, 10 s p e l l b i n d i n g names, 328 Spence, Lewis, 8 m , fig. 8 Spencer, W . B., a n d F. J . Gillen, 9771 sperma mundi, 138 sphere(s), 26; m o v e m e n t of, 74/,- somatic, 262 spider, black, 333 Spielrein, Sabina, 70n spiral r o t a t i o n , 271&7J s p i r i t s ) , 8, 36, 5 m , 6af, 64, 75, 7 7 f , 89, 96-99, 102, 113 n, 140, 1 4 m , 148, 149", 154, 161/, 16577, i8on, 1 8 m , 184, 193, 196, 211, 213, 216, 23672, 238, 259, 278&n, 284, 323// in abstract sense, 215; aerial, 212; a e t h e r i a l , 162; of t h e a g c / e p o c h , 116/7,• of t h e air, 161; i n / of alchemy, 75, 103, 10472, 128; archetype, a m b i v a l e n c e of, 240; astral, 114; a n d body, see body; in bottle, see bottle; celestial, 292/; of C h r i s t i a n i t y , 129; c h t h o n i c , 118; d a e m o n of the scientific, 128; diabolical, 139; of discretion, 22872; divine, 26; e a r t h - , 297; E a r t h , 7972; of t h e East, 49; evil, 196201, 240; e v o l u t i o n of religious, 53; e x p a n d i n g a n d self-revealing, 39; f a m i l i a r , 90, 126, 258, 340; fiery, 63; of the fifth essence, 130; -fire, 29, 37; of fire, 142; ghostly, 139; God is, 104; of G o d , 13672; g u a r d i a n , 7 m , 341; of heaven, 176; heavenly, 209; iliastric, 139; i n n a t e , 1148:72, 1 4 m ; i n t u i t i o n s of, 28; kabbalistic, 11472; of life, 213; l i n k b e t w e e n body a n d . 95; L o r d of, 244; m a n ' s , 40; a n d m a t t e r , c o n t a m i n a t i o n of, 212; m a t t e r a n d , identical, 214; M e r c u r i a l , 13672, 203, 239; M e r curius, 258; metal-, 297; m i n i s t e r i n g , 101, 179; n a t u r a l , 184; objective, 2gg; — existence of, 200; o l d black, 329; p l a n e t a r y , fig. Bg, 225, 227; p o o r i n , 202; of quicksilver, 225; reality, 201, realm of, 300; red, 77; of Renaissance, 117; of S a t u r n , 227; scientific, g i ;

INDEX spirit(s) (cont.): soul, b o d y a n d , c o n t a i n e d i n s t o n e , 2 9 o f ; a n d Soul, fig. B6, 229; spellb o u n d , m o t i f of t h e , 198; of stars, 1 8 m ; of stone, 2 4 7 n ; s u f f e r i n g s of, 9; s u p r a c e l e s t i a l , M e r c u r i u s as, 214; — , of t h e waters, 77; i n tree, 200; t r u e , i n m a n , 136n; of t r u t h , 130, 214; u n d i vided a n d d i v i d e d , 70; victory of t h e , 335; a v o l a t i l e b o d y , 5 i n ; as w a t e r , 74, 76, 78; of t h e w o r l d , 212, see also anima mundi Spirit, H o l y , 78, 214, 240/, 334; a p p l e s of, 3ogn; g i f t of, 102, 107, 114/7 g r a c e of, 160; inflatio o r inspiratio of, 214; l i g h t of, 116 " S p i r i t in t h e B o t t l e , T h e , " see b o t t l e s.v.; G r i m m s.v. s p i r i t u a l : b e i n g , 52; b l o o d , 7 7 n ; develo p m e n t , 47, 245; exercises, 244; eyes, 288; Iliaster, 140, 165; m a n , 94/, 13 m ; — , i n n e r , 148; •—•, g r o w t h of, 89; m a r t y r d o m , 330; a n d physical, 5 m ; p o w e r , 29; p r i n c i p l e , 138ff; symbols, 54; t r e n d s of a l c h e m y , 144*1; truth, turning into something mat e r i a l , 250; u n d e r s t a n d i n g , 322 Spiritual Exercises, see I g n a t i u s L o y o l a s p i r i t u a l i t y , 47, 118, 185, 214, 335; of C h r i s t , g6; m a s c u l i n e , Christ's, 335/ spiritus, 21 i f ; aquae, 138; humidus et aereus, l a p i s as, 104*1; mercurialis, 7 9 n , 131*1, 150*1; mercurii, 128*1, 135; mundi, 213; Phytonis, 213; prae cunctis valde purus, 212; seminalis, 213; vegetativus, ig5, 213, 240*1, 338; — , c h t h o n i c , 315; — , M e r c u r i u s , 202, 310; visibilis, tamen impalpabilis, 212; vitae, 125, 1 3 m , 136*1, 140 S p i t t e l e r , C a r l , 170, 340&*i s p i t t l e , 97 Splendor solis, 68*1, 72, 219&H split: b e t w e e n consciousness a n d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , 246; b e t w e e n k n o w l e d g e a n d f a i t h , 189; i n h u m a n psyche, 244; m e t a p h y s i c a l , 243 s p o n g e , 290*1; 291; l o a t h s o m e , 290

spouse, h e a v e n l y , 337 s p r i n g , 154, 247, 253, 255, 290*1, 314; e t e r n a l , 154*1; 156*1; e x a l t a t i o n of, 182; salty, 287; z o d i o n , 311*1 s q u a r e , 224; i n c h , 25 s q u a r i n g of circle, see circle s q u i r r e l , 340*1 stag(s), 200; f u g i t i v e , 211 star(s), fig. A3, 114, 125, 137, 141*1, 184*1, 222, 237, 247/, fig. 13; c r o w n of, 80, 225; e v e n i n g , 247; i n flesh a n d b l o o d , 116, g o l d e n , fig. A4; jelly, 153*1; m a l e seeds of, 150; i n m a n , 127, 152; m o o n a n d , l i g h t of, 248; m o r n i n g , 223, 226, 247; P o l e , 141*1; r o u n d d a n c e of, 226*1; s e v e n f o l d , 225; i n s o u t h , 100; s p i r i t s of, 1 8 m ; t r u e m a n is, 131; w a t e r , 138*1; see also stella s t a t e : p a r a d i s a l , 265; of s u s p e n s i o n , 267 status iustitiae originalis / naturae integrae, 197*1 Steeb, J o h a n n C h r i s t o p h , 778c*!, 82*1, 151*1, 214*1, 215*1, 318*1 steel, ig4, 332; b r a n c h of tree, 89 S t e i n d o r f f , G e o r g , 71*1, 101*1 S t e i n e n , K a r l v o n d e n , 2058c*! stella: maris, 256; matutina, 247 S t e r n , J a m e s , 194*1 Stevenson, J a m e s , 22*1 Stobaeus, J o h n , 337*! stoics, 85*1 stone(s), 85, 92/, 100, 103*1, 107, 119*1, 1 4 m , 146*1, 236*1, 240, 278, 2g3, 314, 317, 322, 331; A d a m i c , 235*1; is a n i m a t e , 99, 291; of A r r a n , g r e e n , 98; a t t r i b u t e s of, 95; b l o o d of, 290/, 295; -birth(s), 97, 99; as b i r t h p l a c e of gods, 97; - b o d y , m o t i f of, gg; c h a r i o t s , 2 8 m , c h i l d - , 97; consists of a n i m a l o r h u m a n b l o o d , 290; c o n t a i n s b o d y , soul, s p i r i t , 290/; -cult, m e g a l i t h i c , 100; d i v i n e a t t r i b u t e s of, 328; e a r t h l y , C h r i s t c o m p a r e d w i t h , 292*1; e l e m e n t of t h e , 314*1; a n e n e m y , 321; g e r m i n a t i o n a n d b i r t h of, 2g8; G o d ' s a t t r i b u t e s t r a n s f e r r e d to, 2g4; as G o d i m a g e , g7; g r e e n , 100; h e a l i n g , 95;

434

INDEX h e a t e d , 329; hostile, 320; i d e n t i t y w i t h m a n , 300; i n c o r r u p t i b i l i t y of, 72; magic(al), 97, 98; M e r c u r i u s as, 235; as a microcosm, 328; m o t h e r of, 86; naga, 340; Nile, 101; o c h r e p a i n t e d , 97n; as o u t c r o p p i n g of t h e unconscious, 242; i n Persia, fire s t r u c k f r o m , 320; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 127, ig8; p h i l o s o p h i c , 94, 293; p r e cious, 258; — , f a k e r of, 204; p r e s e r v e r of macrocosm, 127; q u e s t f o r t h e , 300; r e d , 297; r o u n d w h i t e , 76; s a p p h i r e , 258; secret, 291; — of, 6g, 99; soul, g8, 100; t h a t h a s a spirit, 24771; statues, 101; t h a t is n o stone, 29 in, 292; symbol, 97; — of t h e i n o r g a n i c , 238; symbolism, 94; of t h e wise, 320; see also lapis stork, 315/, 339; A d e b a r , 317; a n allegory of C h r i s t , 317 s t o r m , 15, 268; d e m o n of, 198 stream(s): f o u r , 304, 31971; of life, 17; of t i m e , 16 s t r e n g t h of b u l l , 268 s t r u c t u r e : q u a t e r n a r y , 22; of u n c o n scious, 36 Strunz, F r a n z , i n n , 12411, 1 3 m s t u p i d i t y , m o t h e r of t h e wise, 180 subconscious, 185 s u b j e c t a n d o b j e c t , 45 s u b l i m a t i o n ( s ) , 10411, 15371, 16571, 331 substance(s): a r c a n e , see a r c a n e ; a n t i m o n y , t r a n s f o r m a t i v e , 146; black, 242; chemical, 204/, 275/, 2gg, 301, 310; C o m m u n i o n , 154; i n t e r m e d i a t e , 213; kingly, h i d d e n i n sea, 145; living, 239; moist, 3 i g i i ; n o b l e , 331; o n e , 284; P a r a c e l s a n , 277; soul-, 325; symbolic, 302; t o r m e n t i n g of the, 330; t r a n s f o r m a t i v e , 211; two of M e r c u r i u s , 217; — f o l d , 292; volatile, 148, fig. B6; v u l g a r , 302 succus lunariae, 22671 Sudhoff, K a r l (ed. of Paracelsus): 11371, 11471, 11771, 12371, 130, 13171, 13271, • 3 3 n , J53M» s u f f e r i n g ^ ) , 330, 332, 334; psychic, 336;

r e l a t i o n of to t h e c o n i u n c t i o , 334; of S o p h i a , 335; of t h e soul, 335 suggestion, 24 sulcus primigenius, 24 s u l p h u r , 74, 13671, 14171, 18771, 2 i g , 277; diabolus, 228; fire h i d d e n i n M e r curius, 22811; i n c o m b u s t i b l e , 142; m a s c u l i n e p r i n c i p l e of M e r c u r i u s , 228 summa of secret k n o w l e d g e , 22 S u m m u m B o n u m , n a t u r a l , 116 s u n / S u n , 25, 27, 47, 6371, 64, 72, 8on, g S f f , 1 4 m , 147, 152, 161, 176, 225, 22612, 232, 24971, 255, 257/, 262, 268, 275&71, 277/, 307/, 324, 339, figs. 12, 1 3» 23> 32; a u r e o l e of, 80/; B e a r e r , 99; b i r t h p l a c e of s p i r i t u a l fire, 15072; black, 266; called a f t e r G o d , 15012; c a r b u n c l e of, 218; c h i l d of, 7672; c i r c u l a t o r y w o r k o f , 72; d a r k c o u n t e r - , 7671 (see also S a t u r n ) ; -day, 250; disk, 15572, figs. 17, 24; -god, 8 m , 2678cn; gold, 225, 226; h e a r t as, in Microcosm, 164; M e r c u r i u s , c h i l d of m o o n a n d , 7671, 225; — , a n d m o o n , t r i a d of, 277; M e r i d i a n of, 63, 72, Soff; a n d m o o n , 7971, 83; — , - f r u i t , 303, 306, 309; — , tree, 30672, 308, 309; p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n of, 80; - p o i n t , 1528072; rays of, 218; rises, 89; rising, H o r u s as, 28071; -symbol, 262; synony m o u s w i t h g o l d , 72; tree of, 30371; w h e e l , 25; — , p a l e o l i t h i c , 28; see also Sol; solar S u n d a y ' s child, 202 superiority, mental, 8 s u p e r m a n , 128 supermonic:

elements,

180;

figments,

173/ superstition(s), 7, 122, 158; folk, 122; r a t i o n a l i s t i c f e a r of, 159 s u p r a c e l e s t i a l fire, 310 survival a f t e r d e a t h , 5171; see also immortality Surya, 2678011 suspension, s t a t e o f , 207 svadhisthana-chakra, 265

435

IN D EX Svaha, 267 sw an, fig. 32 sweat, bloody, of arcane substance, 290, 295

sw ine-herd, 240 Sw itzerland, p a tro n sa in t of, 346 sw ord, 60, 63/, 68, 80, 828cw, 83/, 177, 185; C h rist as, 333; fiery, 83η, 228; o f G od’s w ra th , 83, 332; h an g in g o n a tree, 333; tw o-edged, 83", 332 Sylvester II, P ope, 8 m symbol(s), 12, 19, 2 i f, 27, 46-49, 162/7 alchem ical, 299, 301; — a n d F re u d ia n red u c tio n of, 301; o f th e A nthropos, stork a, 317; arch ety p al, 272, 302, 348; C hrist, 54; — as “son of m a n ," 52; of chrysopoea, tree as, 314; collec tive an d arch ety p al, 301; com pensate u n a d a p te d a ttitu d e of conscious, 302; co ntrasexual, 338; cross as, of q u a te rn ity , 332; d ream , red u ctiv e in te r p re ta tio n of, 347; eth nological, 101; fish, 265, fig. A2; fo rm atio n , 274; H e r m etic, 241; h isto ry of, 344; of in d iv id u atio n , fig. 24; “jew el" th e central, 53; lig h t, see lig h t; m agic of, 28; m a n d ala, 23; m e an in g of, 302; of M ercurius, see M ercurius; of p erfec tio n , 269; of perso nality, 194; p h allic , fig. 30; is p rim itiv e e x p o n e n t o f u n conscious, 28; p ro d u c tio n , 301; q u a tern ary , 336; research in to , 273; of saviour, xoi; snake-, 333; of soul, 143; sp iritu a l, 54; stone, see stone; sun, 262; th e rio m o rp h ic, 183n; of to tality, g6; tran sfo rm atio n , 71; p ro c ess of — , ogdoad as, 316; tree , see tree; of th e unconscious, snake as, 333; o f w holeness, 320, 337 sym bolic: b lood, 296; n o m en clatu re, 275; substances, 302 sym bolism , 24, 55; of alchem y, 69, 80, 88; C h ristian , 84, 185, 300; co m p ara tive research in to , 341; of dream s, 69; h ea d , 88; of in d iv id u a tio n process, 299; lig h t, 25; n u m b e r, 151η; p la n t, 194; of self, 280η; sham anistic, 341;

spontan eo u s tree sym bolism , 270; — of th e unconscious, 282; of starry heaven, 86; stone, 94; w ater, 101 “ Sym bolum S a tu rn i,” 303η, 309η sym ptom (s); n eu ro tic, 37, 260, 327; physical or psychological, 335 syncretism , H ellen istic, 102, 104 Synesios, 138η synthesis, 189, 277; of M ercurius, 257; of opposites to u n ity , 278; see also henosis Syrena, 178 Syriktes, 87η syzygy, 232 Szebeny, N icholas M elchior (C ibinensis), 123Sen, i588cn

T T a b e rn a e m o n ta n u s, Ja co b u s T h eo dorus, 135η, 153n > taboo, 54, 97 “T a b u la sm a ra g d in a ,” 103η, 104η, 140, 226η, 233, 297” . 331” T 'a i I C hin H u a T su n g C h ih , 1 T a lb o t, A m aury, 199« talism ans, 119 T a n tris m , 231, 265 ta o /T a o (W ay), 20f, 25, 40, 54; of fem in in e p rin cip le, 324; grows o u t of th e in d iv id u al, 53; is lig h t of heaven, 23; realizatio n of, 21 T aoism , 4, 16 T ao s P ueblos, 100 tapas, 26 tares, 288 ta u , a le p h an d , 222 T a u ru s, 155η T av , 28 m technology, 55, 128 T eh o m , 236 teleological aspect o f fitness, 342 te lep a th ic p h en o m en a, 139η te lu m passionis (cu p id ’s arrow ), 83, 231 tem enos (sacred precinct), 24, 244 tem p eram en ts, astrological, 275

INDEX t e m p l e , 24, 64, 89, 195", 325; b u i l t of a single s t o n e , 91; c i r c u l a r , 84; g o l d e n , fig. A10; of Zosimos, 85 T e m p t a t i o n , t h e , fig. B6 T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s , 185 " t e n t h o u s a n d t h i n g s , " 249 tenebriones, 198 teoqualo (god-eating), 8 m t e r m i n o l o g y : a r c a n e , 122, 133, 186; ecclesiastical, 157 terminus ani, M e r c u r i u s as, 220 ternarius, 1 5 m ; M e r c u r i u s , 221 terra alba foliata, 20771 t e r t i u m , 162 T e r t u l l i a n , 54 t e t r a d , s e c o n d , 283 tetraktys, fig. A7, 283; P y t h a g o r e a n , 22 t e t r a m o r p h , 282/ t e t r a s o m i a , 8273, 27577, 277, 283; of G r e e k a l c h e m y , 277 T e u t o n i c : b a r b a r i a n s , 47; m y t h o l o g y , 317 texts, m a g i c , 327 Tezcatlipoca, 8 m T h a l e s , 31971 0e6.v&pa>Tros, 127 Theatrum chemicum, 7271, 8071, 8373, 8573, 8 8 n , 9473, 10573, 12373, 12573,

13873,

13973,

14673,

14973,

150*3,

15m,

15573,

15873, 21473, 22373, 23171, 28673, 30773,

19673,

19773, 21773, 22773, 2357I, 28873, 31073,

20373, 21873, 22873, 25971, 28973, 31171,

20gn, 2ign, 22973, 27573, 30573, 31271,

21273, 22273,

38171,

32271,

32373,

32473,

31573,

21573, 226?3, 23273, 28773,

309M, 31971,

23073,

27971, 30673, 31473,

names of individual treatises in Bibl. A Theatrum chemicum Britannnicum, 1 9 7 7 3 , 2 0 3 7 3 , 2 2 7 7 3 ; see also names of individual treatises in Bibl. A T h e o d o r e t h e Studite, 30973 T h e o l o g i a , 11371 theologian(s), 277 theology, 1 1 3 7 1 , 247 t h e o p h a n y , 7473 T h e o p h r a s t u s , 119; school, lsg 32673,

33073,

33271; s e e

ako

t h e o r y : aetiological, 342; s e x u a l , 343 T h e o s e b e i a , 73, 284 t h e o s o p h y , 7; I n d i a n , 268/; W e s t e r n , 265 t h e r a p e u t i c : effect, 45; m e t h o d , J u n g ' s , 4 T h e r e n i a b i n , 15373, 154 thesaurus thesaurum, 315 T h e s s a l o n i a n s I, E p i s t l e to, 247 T h e u t i u s ( T h o t h ) , 230; see also T h o t h t h i n g ( s ) : -in-itself, 54; i n n e r , 43; m a g i cal c l a i m of, 44; n e w , 15f; s i m p l e , 88 t h i n k i n g , 167; a l c h e m i c a l , 288; a l c h e m i cal w a y of, 293; a n a l o g i c a l , of Gnostics, 147; G n o s t i c , c i r c u l a r , 84; m a s c u l i n e , 267; P a r a c e l s a n , 115, 142; philosophical, 16873 t h i r d s o n s h i p , B a s i l i d i a n c o n c e p t of, 233 thistle, 15573 T h o m a s A q u i n a s , 123 T h o m p s o n a n d S h u s w a p I n d i a n s , 7171 T h o t h , 94, 212, 230 t h o u g h t ( s ) , 29, 259, 267; cessation o f , 324; C h i n e s e , 8; -figures, 2g; religious, 46; w i n g e d , b i r d s r e p r e s e n t i n g , 266; w o r l d of, 266; — , s e p a r a t i o n f r o m , 267 t h r e e , 166, 277; - b o d i e d H e c a t e , 221; — T y p h o n , 221; - f o l d c o n i u n c t i o , 27871; a n d f o u r d i l e m m a , 224, 278; - h e a d e d , M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; — , S a t a n , 236; — , s n a k e , see s n a k e ; n u m b e r , 151; - i n - o n e , S a t a n as, 236; P e r s o n s , g6; - p r o n g e d h o o k , 332, 334; see also triads; T r i n i t y t h r o n e , C h r i s t ' s , 283 t h u n d e r b o l t s , fig. A2 t h u n d e r s t o r m s , 26771 T i a m a t : c h a o s of, 23g; m a t e r n a l w o r l d of, 236 T i b e t a n : B u d d h i s m , 22; T a n t r i s m , 265 Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thodol), 25, 29, 35, 265 T i f e r e t h , 312 tiger, 34oScn

437

IN D E X tim e : a s tro n o m ic a l d e te rm in a tio n , of, 238; o u r, 36; o f p e rfe c tio n , 174η, 183: p rim e v a l a lc h e rin g a , 98 η ; s tre a m of, 16 tim elessn ess, 181 tin , 218, 277 tin c tu r e , 92, 101, 166, 278η ; g o ld e n , 208; p o iso n o u s, 2 8 4 η ; M e r c u riu s as, 235; r e d , 160, 292/, 295; self-re n e w in g , 203 T it a n s , 70 T o d d , R u th v e n , 153η to rc h , 318 to rm e n t(s ), 105, 328/, 336; fiery, 138: o f fire, 67, 72, 146: o f h e ll, 71, 331: M erc u r iu s p e rs e c u te d w ith , 331; u n e n d u r a b le , 60, 62, 80; o f u n lim ite d r e flectio n , 330 to r m e n tin g o f su b sta n c e s, 330 T o r q u e m a d a , 296 to rto ise , 100, fig. 25 to r tu re ( -in g ), 67, 71, 105η, 329: o f m a te r ia , 105n ; m o tif of, 328; p ro je c te d , 329

to ta lity , 167, 224, 243, 246, 268; im ag e, see im a g e ; o f m a n , 139; sy m b o l of, 96; tra n s c e n d e n t, 101; see also w h o le ness to te m a n c e sto r, 97 to u c h s to n e , 72 T o x c a tl, fe s tiv a l of, 8 i n to x in s, 34 “ T r a c t a tu lu s A v ic e n n a e ,” 79n “ T r a c t a tu s A ris to te lis ,” see A ris to tle , p se u d o " T r a c t a tu s a u r e u s ,” 144 n ; in B ib l. c h e m ., I, 85, 224; in D e a lc h im ia a n d B ib l. c h e m ., II, 125/; in A r s c h e m ., 338τι, 147n , 236η ; in T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV , 87, 222, 230, 233η, 23573; in M u s . h e r m ., 20773, 209η , 21213, 21573, 21773,

235n “ T r a c t a tu s M ic re ris,” 2 1 9 1 3 , 329 tr a d itio n (s ), 273; a lc h e m ic a l a n d a s tro lo g ical, 125; a u th o r ity o f, 115; C h ris tia n , 280, 317; ecclesiastical, 299, 321; H a g g a d ic , 317; I r a n ia n , 33771, Je w ish ,

339; P e rs ia n , 288, 308; S a b a e a n , 6 o n tra n c e , 341 tra n q u illiz e r(s ), 45 tr a n s c e n d e n ta l s ta te m e n ts , 54 tr a n s fig u ra tio n , 105 tr a n s fo r m a tio n , 61, 67, 7 0 7 3 , 88, 146, 162, 323; a lc h e m ic a l, 70, 75, 227; C h r is tia n , o f h y lic in t o p n e u m a tic m a n , 233; G o d ’s, 334; g ro v e of, 262; o f Ilia ste r, 148; o f M e lu sin a , 179; o f M erc u riu s , 333; M e rc u riu s , g o a l o f h is o w n , 235; m y stic, 13613; — , o f a rtife x , 229; n a tu r a l, m y stery , 157; p o w e r o f, 68; p ro c e ss of, 6773, 89, 105, 242, 274, 278; — , o g d o a d as sy m b o l o f, 316; psy ch ic, 144, 155, 160; in t o s p ir itu a l b e in g , 73; in to sto n e , ioo ; sy m b o l, 71; tre e , as s e a t of, 317; — sy m b o l of, 332; a n d u n ity o f ro y a l p a ir , 326 tra n s fo rm a tiv e : o r a rc a n e su b s ta n c e , 72, 74, 211; a n tim o n y as, 146 tr a n situ s, 101; o f a d e p t, 80 tr a n s m u ta tio n , 91; o f m e ta ls , 124, 159 tr a n s u b s ta n tia tio n , 159 T ra ra m e s , 139, 158, 160 T ra v a n c o re , 231 tr e a s u re , 163, 179, 199, 203, 218, 258, 2 5 9 . 271; i n fie ld , 2 5 9 ; k in g ly , 145; m o tif, 258; se c re t, fig. 14; tre e as g u a r d ia n of, 314 tre a s u re -h o u s e , 85, 88 tree(s), 183, 193#, 201, 308, 320, 329; A d a m ’s, see A d a m ; a n im a te d b y so u ls, 199; as A n th ro p o s , o r self, 338; a rc h e ty p a l, 289; as a rc h e ty p a l im a g e , 272; a rc h e ty p e of, 339; b ir d s ’ r e la tio n to , 315; - b ir th , 266; — , a rc h e ty p e of, 307; -b o rn , 262; in B u n d a h is h , 308; c e n tre , ig 6 ; C h ris t th e , 196, 338; C h r is t’s g e n e a lo g ic a l, 307; C h ris tm a s, 23. 253, 256, 303, 340, fig. 2; o f c o n te m p la tio n , 315; o f c o ra l, 287, 3088:71; cosm ic, 305, 340, figs. 4, 18, 20; — , a sso c ia tio n s of, 339; a n d cross, 332; d a e m o n , 200; o f d e a th , 304; d ra g o n is c h th o n ic n u m e n o f, 317; fe m in in e -m a te rn a l n a t u r e o f, 261,

INDEX 3 1 7 f ; as fiery p i l l a r , fig. 313, 31 on; fire-, 258, 33972; w i t h f o u r m e t a l l i c / b r a n c h e s , 89, 332; f r u i t - , 166, 305; as gnosis, 318; g o l d e n , 289, 310, 316/; as g u a r d i a n of t r e a s u r e , 314; a n d heavenly b r i d e , 340; of H e r m e s , 30972; of H e s p e r i d e s , 256; holy, of I n d i a , 340; i d e n t i t y of, w i t h M e r c u r i u s , 338; imm o r t a l , 6772; i n d i v i d u a l i t y of, 194; inv e r t e d (arbor inversa), 311, 314, 318, 3 4 0 ; — , m a n as, 31271; as Jesus, 318; of knowledge, 318, 339, fig. 11; as lapis, 319; leafless or d e a d , 256, 264, 268, 304; of life, 83, 19673, 274, 308, 312, 318, 339; — a n d d e a t h , 271; — , r o o t e d in B i n a h , 312; life p r i n c i p l e of, 196; of light, 255; L o r d of, 33772; magic(al), 303, 341; as m a n , 337; m a t e r n a l significance of, 261; m e d i u m of c o n j u n c t i o n , 337; M e r c u r i u s a n d , see M e r c u r i u s ; metallic, 286, 310, 311, 315, 332; —, of alchemy, 8g; m o d e r n fantasies of, 341; of m o o n , 30371; o n m o u n t a i n t o p , 308, 320; - n u m e n , 195, 3'5> 317' 3*8; n y m p h , 262, 265, 339; — , witchlike, 260; oji, 199; o p u s as, 313, 338; of p a r a d i s e / p a r a d i s a l , 143, J 99> 257. 3°2, 304, 318, 332, 339/; — , B u d d h a / C h r i s t n a m e d , 33871; — , of knowledge, 240; — , as m a n , 337; —, two, 306; p e r s o n a l a t m a n of, 239; p e r sonification of, 1 9 4 7 3 ; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 230, 240, 253, 287; p l a n t e d i n sea, 308; as p n e u m a t i c pillar, 3 1 0 7 1 ; prim o r d i a l , 33771; p r o j e c t i o n i n t o , 200; -—, of a n i m a figure, 338; q u a t e r n i t y of, 332; r e b i r t h mystery, 338; r e l a t i o n of, to m o u n t a i n , 309; —, t o S a p i e n t a , 318; in t h e r e t o r t , 315; in R i p l e y Scrowle, lggn; r o o t e d in air, 311; as seat of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d renewal, 317; secret i n r o o t s of, 195; of Sefiro t h , 312; a n d seven metals, 310; of seven planets, 3og; shaman(ist)ic, fig. 2, 272; snake, 241, 315; —, c h t h o n i c n u m e n of, 317; a n d —, u n i o n of, fig. 12; as solar p i l l a r , 3 1 0 7 3 ; -soul, divi-

sion of i n t o m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e , 3 i g ; s p i r i t in, see spirit; is s p i r i t u a l p r i n ciple of stork, 317; of s u n , 30371; — a n d m o o n , 30672, 308, 339; sword h a n g i n g o n the, 333; symbol(s), ig572, 253, 270, 272; — , of chrysopoea (goldm a k i n g ) , 314; — , of e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 313/; —, of p e r s o n a l i t y a n d self, 309; —, of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 332; — , of w h o l e opus, 311; as system of b l o o d vessels, 287; t r u n c a t e d , 304/; o r v i n e , C h r i s t as, 338; visible sign of realization of self, ig6; -voice, lgg; a n d water, sog; in W e s t e r n L a n d , 306; w h i t e , 30572; of w i s d o m , 258, 306, 318; as w o m a n , 338; world-, see w o r l d ; Z a r a t h u s t r a ' s vision of, 332; see also acacia; a l m o n d ; ash; ashvattha; baob a b ; B o d h i ; cedar; fig; forest; G a o k e r e n a ; m y r t l e ; n e t t l e ; oak; olive; p a l m ; persea; p i n e ; p l a n t s tremendum, 200 T r e v i s a n u s , B e r n a r d u s , see B e r n a r d u s triad(s), 151, 221, 241; of a n i m a l s , 1 4 1 7 1 ; c h t h o n i c , fig. B2, 223; indivisible, 22171; lower, 1 4 m , 18373; Paracelsan, 277; s u n / m o o n / M e r c u r i u s , 277; upp e r , 165, 167 triadic: c h a r a c t e r of gods of u n d e r world, 221; n a t u r e of M e r c u r i u s , 221 t r i a n g l e , 224 t r i d e n t , g o l d e n , 334 T r i n i t y , 35, 10372, 15172, 166, 222, 241, 2 77> 334> 336; Holy, 221, 276; —, u n i o n of persons in, 277; m a s c u l i n e , g6; M e r c u r i u s as, see M e r c u r i u s ; totality of, 96; u n i o n of, 27871; u p p e r , 1 4 m , 18372 Trismegistos, 22 i n ; see also H e r m e s Trismegistus T r i s m o s i n , S a l o m o n , 6871, 219; see also Splendor solis t r i u n e essence, 293 triunus, M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s t r u t h , 77, 24973, 301; absolute, 300; div i n e b o d y of, 35; living, 162; psychic, 171; revealed, 160; seekers a f t e r , 160;

439

IN D E X tr u th (cont.)'.: s p irit of, 130, a 14; sp iritu a l, tu r n in g in to so m e th in g m a teria l, 250 T u a m u te f, 280 T u r b a p h ilo s o p h o ru m , see R u sk a tu rq u o ise , 98, 100 tw ice-born, 73; see also r e b ir th tw ilig h t, 163, 247n , 250; o f reflection, 265 tw ins, 100 tw o: dragons, 217, 256f; dyads, 280: ea rth s, 278η; -faced god, 250; -fold su bstance, g ia n t of, see g ia n t; m o th ers, 112, 117, 189; n a tu re s, 284; n u m ber, 151; p a rts o f alchem ical opus, 348; sources o f know ledge, 116; s u b stances o f M ercu riu s, 217; trees of p ara d ise, 306; w aters, 278η; see also d u a lity tw ofold substance, 217, 292fScn T y p h o n , th ree -b o d ied , 221; see also Set typology, psychological, 84 ΰδωρ θΐϊο ν, 150η, 208, 284; see also w a te r

U U itz ilo p o c h tli, 8 m u ltim a m a te ria : lap is as, 319; M ercu riu s as, 235 u n a d a p te d n e ss, 18 u nconscious, 12/7, 24, 47/, 52, 101, 106, 143. l 46> fig· b 5> *79" 2° 1224, 242, 256, 265, 299; a n im a p e r sonification of, 42; A q u aster close to co n cep t of, 140; a rc h e ty p a l co nfigura tio n s of, 253; a u to n o m y of, 328; C a u casus of, 12; chaotic fra g m e n ts of, 84; C h rist as perso n ificatio n of, 333; co m p en sa tin g pow ers of, 335; com p en sato ry tendencies fro m , 245; co n flict w ith , 336; c o n fro n ta tio n /e n c o u n te r w ith , 322, 341, 348; a n d conscious, d isso c ia tio n /sp lit b etw een , 34, 246; co n ten ts of, 36, 82, 91; darkness of, 23; n o t d eriv ativ e of consciousness, 42;

d isin te g ra tin g effect of, 29; fem in in e ch a racter of, 325; figures of, 38, 42/; in stin c tu a lity of n a t u r e ’s w isdom of, 333; in te g ra tio n of, 325, 346; in te r p re ta tio n of, 341; in u n d a tio n by, 322; laws of, 21, 239; M e rcu riu s as a rc h e type of, 247; — p erso n ificatio n of, 333; p a ra d o x ic a l re a lity of, 202; p e r sonal, 348; p re d o m in a n c e of, 14; p r o je ctio n of, 205, 211; psychology of, 90, 189, 268, 302, 348; ra p p ro c h e m e n t w ith , 170, 180; re a lity of, 42, 201; r e gression, 260; r e g u la tin g im ages an d , 301; snake as sym bol of, 333; sp o n ta n eo u s p ro d u cts of, 273, 299, 339, 346; — sta te m en ts of, 194; — sym bolism of, 282; sto n e as o u tc ro p p in g of, 242; stru c tu re of, 36, 69, 205; u n io n w ith conscious, 180; — fe m in in e p e rso n i fication of, 182; w a te r as, 1 5 m unconscious, collective, 3, 28f, 177, 205, 240, 266n, 334, 348; d efin itio n of, 11; M e rc u riu s id e n tified w ith , 222, 237; processes of, in m o d e rn m a n , 4; p ro jec tio n of, 229 unconsciousness, 89, 127, 171, 180, 194, ig6, 264, 280η, 299; b estial, 99; o v er com in g of, 333; p rim itiv e , 45; S ophia su n k in , 335 u n d e rsta n d in g , 89, 229, 296/, 320, 327, 346; b rid g e of psychological, 55; E ast e rn , 7; in te lle c tu a l, 264, 349; psycho logical, 49; scientific, 6, 159; s p iritu a l, 322 u n d e rw o rld , d rag o n s ch a in e d in , 242 u n ific atio n , 277; o f d o u b le dyads, 278; see also henosis u n ig e n itu s, M e rcu riu s as, 235 u n io n , 332, 348; w ith a n im a , 326; co n scious/u n co n scio u s, 180; conscious n ess/life , 21, 24; w ith fe m in in e p e r sonificatio n o f u n conscious, 182; fire / w ater, 255; w ith G od, 249η; h e r m a p h ro d itic , 136; n a tu r a l/s p ir itu a l m an , 157; of o pposites, see o p p o site/s); of perso n s, 278; — , in H o ly T rin ity , 277; w ith self, 263; w ith

INDEX s h a d o w , 326; w i t h s o u l , 155; t r e e / s n a k e , fig. 12; of T r i n i t y , 278n u n i t y , 26, 38, 169n, 182, 237, 305; of b e i n g , 28; c o n s c i o u s n e s s / l i f e , 23, 25; o r i g i n a l , 336; p r i m o r d i a l , 265; q u a t e r n i t y as, 151; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d , of r o y a l p a i r , 326; a n d t r i n i t y of M e r c u r i u s , 221 ff universal(s): b e i n g , 40; controversy a b o u t , 288; m i d p o i n t , 271; m y t h m o t i f s , n , 273; s i g n i f i c a n c e of d r e a m s y m b o l s , 347 u n j u s t s t e w a r d , p a r a b l e o f , 243/ U p a n i s h a d ( s ) , 239; C h h a n d o g y a , 3 1 3 7 1 ; M a i t r a y a n a - B r a h m a n a , 240*1 Upa-Puranas, 206*1 u p p e r w o r l d , 256, 341 u p w a r d s d i s p l a c e m e n t , 265 uraeus, 303n u r i n e , 290 u r o b o r o s , fig, 17, 79, 8 2 n , 84, 103/, 132*1, 232; c i r c u l a r n a t u r e of, 233; d r a g o n , 223; as h i e r o g l y p h of e t e r n i t y , 259; m o t i f , 90 u r t i c a , 155*1 U r v a s h i , 178 U s e n e r , H e r m a n n , 283*1 u t e r u s , 73, 97 U t o p i a ( s ) : b l o o d l e s s , 244; p o l i t i c a l , 300 utriusque capax, M e r c u r i u s as, 348 •uvae Hermetis, 279N u v u l a , 61

V V a l e n t i n i a n s , 283 V a l e n t i n u s , B a s i l i u s , 208*1, 215*1, 217*1, 22Dn, 226*3 v a l l e y , 15 v a l u e ( s ) , 18; c o n s c i o u s , 13; e m o t i o n a l , 268; m o r a l , 185; — r e v e r s a l o f , 183*3 vapor terrae, 138 vapour, 20J V a r u n a , 268&71 vas: cerebri ( c r a n i u m ) , 86; circulatorium (vessel of c i r c u l a r d i s t i l l a t i o n ) , 441

316 (see also d i s t i l l a t i o n ; Hermeticum, 197; Hermetis, pellicanicum, 87 V e c e r i u s , C o n r a d , 178&71 V e d a ( s ) , 26771, 313 V e d a n t a - S u t r a s , 34071 v e g e t a t i v e p r i n c i p l e , 257 veil of M a y a , 38, 180 v e i n s w o l l e n w i t h b l o o d , 247 v e n o m , 7gn Ventura,

Laurentius,

235 N > 3°7> S

1 1

85/,

Pelican); 72/, 85;

215,

22671,

^ 323"/ 3 2 6

V e n u s , 13571, 155, 15671, i 8 i f f , 231, 275, 278, 3 1 0 / ; w i t h A d a m i n b a t h , 22671; c h a r a c t e r s o f , 174/, 187; d a y of (Frid a y ) , 249; h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 18771; h o u s e o f , 155; M a g i s t r a , 187; a n d M a r s , 93; M e r c u r i u s h a s a t t r i b u t e s of, 226&71; s h i p o f , 15571; s l e e p i n g , 216; Venus armata, 187 Verus Hermes, 8371, 21471, 22071, 228; see also Prodromus Rhodostauroticus v e s i c a n t , 15571 vesicle, g e r m i n a l , see g e r m i n a l V e s p e r s , 29671 vessel(s), 73, 8a, 87/, 92, figs. B 4 , B6, 290; of c i r c u l a r d i s t i l l a t i o n , 316; dist i l l i n g , 88, 175 (see also P e l i c a n ) ; as f i r e , 85; a s foemina alba, 86; glass, 10571; w i t h g o d ' s l i m b s , 73; h e r m e t i c , 7 a / , 85; as L u n a , 86; " r o o t a n d p r i n c i p l e of o u r a r t , " 85; s y n o n y m f o r e g g , 82; w o n d e r - w o r k i n g , 73 V e t t i u s V a l e n s , 31271 " V i a v e r i t a t i s u n i c a e , " 20971 v i c t o r y of t h e s p i r i t , 335 vif-argent, 207 de V i g e n i r e , Blaise (Vigenerus, Blasius), 304&71, 305, 311, 312&n, 331 xnndemia, 27971; Hermetis, 31471 v i n e , 286. 306, 314, 318; t r e e o r , C h r i s t as, 338; t r u e , 27971, 306; of t h e wise, H e r m e s , 314 v i n e g a r , 77, 331; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 85; q u i c k s i l v e r as, 7771 Viola petraea lutea ( m o u n t a i n p a n s y ) , 135"

INDEX v i o l a t i o n , m o t i f of, 74 virgin(s), 100, 182, 298; f o o l i s h , 317; M e r c u r i u s , m o s t chaste, 226; m i l k , 290 ViTgin, t h e , 10371, 18471, 232 virgines velandae, 54 virgo, 178 viriditas- benedicta, 287n; gloriosa, 315 V i s h n u , 265, 267 "Visio A r i s l e i , " 6071, 6671, 6771, 93, 305, 32971; " A e n i g m a V I , " 6871, 9371, 1 0 5 7 1 ; see also A r i s l e u s vision(s), 62, 64, 66, 68, g6, 176, 179, ig7, 286; of A q u a s t e r , 166; of Arisleus, 306; c o n t e m p l a t i v e , 44; of D a n iel, Ezra, E n o c h , 132; of Ezekiel, 280; of H i l d e g a r d of B i n g e n , 27; of Isis, 81; of Urates, 83; of l i g h t , 27; M e l u sina, a p p e a r i n g i n m i n d , 144, 174; psychic, 177; s n a k e , 86, 2 1 7 7 1 ; t e r r i f y i n g , of G o d , 346; of Z a r a t h u s t r a , 332, 337; of Zosimos, 225 vis Mercurii, 13611 v i s u a l i z a t i o n , 17; of c r e a t i v e p o i n t , 25 " v i t a c o s m o g r a p h i c a , " 167 vitam aeream, 163 vitis, 27gn; arborea, 28671; sapientum, 28611 v i t r i o l , 287 vitrum, 198 viziers, f o r t y , 231 v o l a t i l e s u b s t a n c e s , 148, fig. B 6 v o m i t i n g , 231 V o u r o u k a s h a , 308; l a k e o f , 340 V u l g a t e , 71, 10371, 2 8 m , 30671

W W a c h s m u t h , K., a n d O . H e n s e , 33771 W a l d e , Alois, 28871 W a l d k i r c h , C o n r a d , 123, 27611 wallflower, yellow, 13571 W a l p u r g i s n a c h t of m i n d , g o w a n d e r i n g scholars, 119 war, 36 w a r m b l o o d e d n e s s , 243

w a s h i n g , m i r a c u l o u s , 68 Wasserstein der Weysen, 10571,

Der,

io4n,

106

water(s), 24, 44, 63, 67, 68n, 72, 7 4 f t 78, 8271, 88, 138, 145/, 162, 16371, 182, 194, 214, 216-19, 256, 278, 286/, 30971, 320, 324, 341, figs. 5, 8, 10, 32; a b o v e a n d b e l o w h e a v e n s , 151; b a p t i s m a l , 68, 84; blessed, 7871, 154; b o i l i n g , 60; b r i g h t , 227; celestial, 77, 150; c o m p o s i t i o n of, see c o m p o s i t i o n ; is d e s t r u c t i o n , 76, 227; d i v i n e , 64, 68, 102-105, 107, 208, 215, 284, 32271; — , of a l c h e m i s t s , 76; — , of t h e a r t , 73, — , d y o p h y s i t e n a t u r e of, 79; d r a g o n as d i v i n e , 8271; egg s y n o n y m f o r , 82; e t e r n a l , 227; e v e r - m o v i n g , 284; a n d fire, 74, 112, 20811; — , t h e u n i o n o f , 255; a b o v e t h e firmament, 77, 82; f o u n t of living, 10471; g e r m i n a t i n g , 149; of G r a c e , 83; h e a v e n l y , 151; l o w e r , 150; as Mercurii caduceus, 208; M e r c u r i u s as, 2 0 7 f t 309; m i r a c u l o u s , 67; m o o n r e l a t e d to, 139; of m o o n a n d S a t u r n , 227; n e t t l e , 155; of N i l e , 73; - n i x i e , 176, 182; - n y m p h , 143; oily, 319; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 85; p h i l o s o p h i c ( a l ) , 6771, 27g n; p o w e r of r e s u s c i t a t i o n , 74; pure, 150; quicksilver as, 207; r e g i o n , 265; sea, 308; s e e t h i n g of, 6 i ; s h i n i n g , 73; silver, 284; as s p i r i t , 74, 76, 78; s p r i n g of p u r e s t , 64, 84; s t a r , 13871; s y m b o l i s m , 1 0 1 f t s y m b o l s of d i v i n e , 7311; s y n o n y m f o r s p i r i t , 197; t r a n s l u c e n t , 75; t r e e a n d , 3og; two, 27871; as u n c o n s c i o u s , 15171; as w h o l e ness, 284; w o n d e r f u l , 308; w o n d e r w o r k i n g , 79, 102; see also a q u a w a t e r y : aspect of Iliaster, 138; r e a l m , 142/, 179/ W a y ( T a o ) , 20; conscious, 20 W a y n e , P h i l i p , 12011, 18311 w e d d i n g , c h y m i c a l , 136, 257; see also Rosencreutz W e i P o - y a n g , 12671, 226&71, 32471, 325 Wells, H . G., 37 W e n d l a n d , P a u l , 23271

442

INDEX W e s t : d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n East a n d , 53; d o g m a t i s t s of, 50n; a n d East, 55; reaction against i n t e l l e c t in, 9; religious experiences o f , 53 W e s t e r n : alchemy, s a p p h i r i n e flower of, 269; a t t i t u d e of m i n d , 42; civilization, 8; c u l t of consciousness, 48; i m i t a t i o n , 8; intellect, d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of, 9; — a n d will, 48; L a n d , 308; — , tree i n t h e , 306; m a n , 8, 14, 18, 37, 5 m , 55; m i n d , 6, 42; p r e j u d i c e , 50; psychology) 40; science, 6; t h e o s o p h y , 265; see also E u r o p e a n w h a l e , 143, 303; s p e r m - , 15571 w h e a t , g r a i n of, 306

wise, stone of t h e , 320; see also l a p i s witch, 261; - b u t t e r , 15371; - c r a f t , 121, 143; - l a n g u a g e , 121 wolf, 141&71, 279 w o m a n ( - e n ) , 23, 4 of; b l u e , doglike, 232; d r e a m s of, 347; m a s c u l i n i t y of, 338; psyche of, 269; psychology of m a t r i a r c h a l , 40, 99; of S a m a r i a , 104; snake-, 144; t r e e in f o r m of, 338; w h i t e , 93 w o n d e r - w o r k i n g p l a n t , 253 w o o d of life, 339 woodcutter, ig3 w o r d / W o r d : creative, 222; of G o d , see G o d ; magic, 121; of renewal, 222 work, d a n g e r s of the, 329; see also Art w o r l d : air, fig. A4; of ancestors, 9871; -axis, 253, 2 g m , fig. 2; — , t r e e as, 339; b e y o n d , 337; c h t h o n i c , 337; - c r e a t i n g p r i n c i p l e , 132; of darkness, 265; of d r e a m s , g 8 n ; d u a l i t y in, a n d soul, 116; e a r t h - , fig. A4; -egg, 82; e m p i r i c a l , 51; e x t e r n a l , 43; f o u r q u a r t e r s of, 281; f u l l n e s s of, 44; of gods, 155; of ideas, 1 3 2 7 7 ; i n n e r , 1 8 0 7 7 ; i n t e r i o r , of t h e psyche, 2g7; i n t e r m e d i a t e , g i n ; of light, 336; — a n d d a r k , fig. A5; lower, 256; macrocosmic, 214; M e r c u r i u s as Logos b e c o m e , 222; m e t a p h y s i c a l , r i f t i n t h e , 244; microcosmic, 214; - m o u n t a i n , 2 g m ; o r d e r , d i v i n e , 127; physical, 91; p r i m o r d i a l , 243; p r i n c i p l e of, 77; Son of t h e G r e a t , 96, 292; soul of, see soul, anima mundi; s p i r i t of, 212; of t h o u g h t , 266f; -tree, 240, 253, 256, 258, 2 9 m , 305, 307/, 310/, figs. 2, 30; — , M e x i c a n , fig. 8; — , mystical, 312; t r e e as, 339; u n i t a r y , 116; u p p e r ,

wheel(s), 22, 281; f o u r , 167, 281; s u n , 25 w h i t e , 339; blossom, fig. 1; dove, 92*1; e l i x i r of silver, 13571; ghost, 39; m a n , 93; tree, 30577; w o m a n , g3 w h o l e : a n d c o m p l e t e m a n , 296; conflicting, 189; m a n , 325 wholeness, 139, 168, 180, 182, 195, 263, 268, 281/, 305; of body, 280; i m a g e o f , 283; o r i g i n a l , 284, 336; of p e r s o n ality, 240; r o u n d , 8g; of self, 263; s y m b o l of, 320, 337; w a t e r is, 284 W i c h i t a , 100 W i l h e l m , R i c h a r d , 1, 3, 4, 6, 11, 20, 38-41, 5071, 206 W i l h e l m , Salome, 1 will(s), 14, 21, 34, 50, 159; conscious, 12/, 16, 28; c u l t of, 45; d i v i n e , 188; m o r a l v a l u e of, 13 wind(s), 162, 268; b u f f e t i n g s of t h e , 314, 319; -gods, 22 I; M e r c u r i u s c h a n g e d i n t o , 212; as p n e u m a , 8771 W i n d i s c h m a n n , F., 30871 w i n d o w , t r a n s p a r e n t , fig. A 3 w i n g e d : f e m a l e genies, 281; tiger, 340 wings, f o u r , of t h e c h e r u b i m , 281 w i s d o m , 13, 77, 180, 314, 319, 334; of C a b a l a , 130; Chinese, 6; E a s t e r n , 11; M i r r o r of, 22; n a t u r a l , 271, 333; — , c e n t r e of, 151; O r i e n t a l , 7; q u a l i t y of, 338; t r e e of, 196

256. 3 4 1

w o r m , 146; i n t e s t i n a l , 14671 W o t a n , ig8; H e r m e s - M e r c u r i u s - , 202 w r a t h of G o d , 83 Wiinsche, August, 3177? wu wei, 16

443

INDEX y

Y a j n a v a k y a , 248 Y a j u r - V e d a , 267 Y a k u t s , 340 yang, 9, 13, 25; p r i n c i p l e , 39 Yellow: M a n , 92; w a l l f l o w e r , 13571 Yggdrasil, 340Sen yin, 9, 13, 25, 324; p r i n c i p l e , 39; -react i o n , 13; tiger a s y m b o l of, 3 4 0 7 7 Y l i a s t r u m , see I l i a s t e r yoga, 38, 16511; B u d d h i s t d o c t r i n e s , 36; C h i n e s e , 4, 14, 29, 46; exercises, 5 i n ; I n d i a n K u n d a l i n i , 24; p r a c t i c e s , 7; T a n t r i c , 265; t e a c h i n g , 43 Y o l k a i e s t s a n , 98 y o u t h , n e t t l e a s y m b o l o f , 155

Z a d i t h S e n i o r , 8 2 n , 13871, 258n, 286n, 307n, 319/ Z a r a t h u s t r a , 128, 332; d r e a m of, 89; vision of, 337; — , t h e t r e e , 332 Zeus, 37, 97; t h e k i n g , 221; triops, 2 2 i n zodiac, 15511; r e l a t i o n of o p u s t o , 31471 zodion, spring, 3 1 m Zockler, O t t o , 33211 Zohar, 132 zone, s e v e n t h , 7 6 Z o s i m o s of P a n o p o l i s ( R i m a s / R o s i n u s ) , 59, 66, 90, 130, 1 3 m , 215, 220, 221, 2 4 0 7 1 , 274, 27gn, 284, 292, 314™, 3 2 g n ; conscious p s y c h o l o g y of, 68; d r e a m o f , 102; t e m p l e of, 85; visions o f , 5g, 2 i 5 n , 225, 329

444