Recently again I was asked if I was offering tutorship. No, I don't take students, I don't offer tutorship. I can give advices if you ask for, but not a step by step guidance, you have to work on your own. I simply don't have the energy and time to guide you, to take your hand and to give you all the keys of Alchemy. You have to make your own path. I can give you a direction, but not taking you on my shoulders. I'm not a taxi, not a bus. I tell you where to take the map in order to go where you want to, and you get prepared to make the journey.
Very often I'm asked "what book to read first ?". Well, frankly, I DON'T KNOW, some titles worked for me as a beginner, but, I'm really wondering what could work for YOU as a beginner. I'm not in your head, and I don't know what could really make a AHA moment in your head, OK ? Do you even have to read something ?
Listen, you don't need to read ALLL the Alchemy books. If for example you read a book in 10 hours, and meditate only one hour on it, what was the point ? But if you meditate 100 hours on it, then you can probably grasp something about the message delivered. I don't say it's the perfect method, but it's IMO more efficient than just reading and being a library on a pair of legs.
How many hours have you spend on a single image, or engraving ? In Nature ?
And don't ask me neither to tell you what kind of spagerics you have to do first as a beginner. I won't answer you tinctures, acetates, or ens melissae ...
There is now a kind of prepared path or curriculum commonly accepted, largely vehiculed by "schools" of Alchemy. You do this, and this, and step 1, the 2 and 3... and there you go ! It's so reassuring to feel guided right ? You don't feel lost with that. Bad news, you're already lost by taking such a path.
Never an old Adept ever categorized such path or made this very left brained approach. It's a new perspective and it is not convenient for everybody. It's maybe disapointing, but there is no such predetermined path to begin in Alchemy.
An Alchemist on Facebook stated this on his status :
We are witnessing recently, in the various discussion groups about alchemy, spagyrics and ormus chemistry - whether on Yahoo! channels or Fabebook - the profusion of uncontrolled daily tons of good bullshits and disinformation from a lot of comedic characters and other acrobats only good for the country fairs. Some literally monopolize these sites, continuing to publish personal slogan that frankly do not communicate any appreciable content. Self-appointed professors, self-styled masters, gurus of the last-hours. No one that is able to go beyond a common distillation of tartar or the production of a ens Melissae. I wonder what happened to years of teaching by the men who made alive the contemporary Alchemy, such as Fulcanelli, Von Bernus, Albert Riedel, Manfred Junius, Augusto Pancaldi, Jean Dubuis etc.. (...) It is the exhibition of mediocrity, which brings together acolytes of this approximate style and makes an argument for its proper nature 'sacred' in a sort of playful discussion.
Later he said in the discussion :
The first problem is that such individuals are acclaimed as the best references in today alchemical background. For this reason there isn't any progress and postulants are usually confused. By the way, I consider that masters more generally are totally unnecessary. Everything is related to what you want to reach in alchemy and what alchemy is for you.
I cannot agree more.
There is only few techniques and paths that are widely spreaded all over the alchemical world, and almost every newbee put his weels on those tracks. Unfortunately if those paths were heading to some better places, it would be known.
Where to dig then ? In the old stuff. Old of several centuries and in the ever new and fresh nature all around you.
