The Caretaker

Arab Alchemy - 19/april/2023

Added 2024-04-19 16:16:54 +0000 UTC

ISLAMICATE ALCHEMY

EMERALD TABLET

Just give us a page on this bad boy maybe

CORUPUS JABIRIANUM (died 806)

Sulfur Mercury Theory
Organic Matter
Proto-Iatrochemistry
Panacea
Transmutation of base metals into noble metals

(Alexandrian alchemy created this divide between esoteric and exoteric alchemy. This carries over to the ISlamicate world. Rhazes is the exoteric one, Zadith is the Esoteric one.)

RHAZES (864-935)

Liber Secretorum
Exoteric

AL FARABI (873-950)

Father of islamic Neoplatonism

IBN UMAYL / SENIOR ZADITH (900-960)

Esoteric Alchemy

Tabula Chemica
“Epistola Solis ad Lunam Crescentem” (Translation of an arabic work named Letter of the Sun to the New Moon. By Ibn Umayl.)
[Transition: Alchemy and mysticism]

AVICENNA (980-1037)

Book of Remedy
Denies Transmustation
Anticipated Iatrochemistry
[Now lets get mystical]

ISLAMICATE ALCHEMY AND GNOSTICISM

Brethren of Purity from Basra
[Transition: Alchemy and philosophy]

ALCHEMY AND ASTROLOGY

Here’s where we talk about the Secretum Secretorum
Pesudo-Aristotelian
[Transition: The SS was hella influential on everyone who came after]

THE BIG FIVE: JABIR IBN-HAYYAN

First and most prolific of the Big Five, Jabir Ibn-Hayyan is the foundation of Islamic alchemy. The man himself probably died around 816, but it was fairly common for one’s students to carry on writing under the name of their departed teacher. As such, more than three thousand texts carry the name Jabir Ibn-Hayyan. This body of work –The Jabirian Corpus– introduces too many new ideas to cover in a text like this, but the most important are the Sulfur Mercury Theory, the introduction of organic matter, full transmutation of base metals into noble metals, and the first inklings of medical applications for alchemy. This collection of ideas are what draw the line between Byzantine alchemy, and Islamic alchemy.

JABIR IBN-HAYYAN: MERCURY-SULFUR THEORY

Jabir introduces two new important concepts: Sophic Mercury, and Sophic Sulfur. (Sophic means “of the philosophers.”) Every physical thing has a Sophic Mercury and a Sophic Sulfur that can be extracted from it. You get sophic mercury by fermenting something. You get sophic sulfur by distilling something down to its essential oil.“

Let us play alchemist for a moment. Let’s say you have a rose, and you want to extract its sophic mercury. You would seal it in a vessel to ferment down to a spirit. (As in an alcoholic spirit.) The fluid left over would be some form of ethyl alcohol, but the alchemists would call it something like “spirit of rose” or “sophic mercury.” If you want to extract some sophic sulfur of rose, you would put the flower in an oil still, and distill it down to rose essential oil.

But hey, that sophic mercury seems real similar to other plant sophic mercuries. If you reduce down any flower, you’re probably gonna end up with some sort of ethyl alcohol. Arab alchemists noticed this, and thought “well then, this spirit must be a shared, common essence to all plants. What we have here is a jar of plant-ness.” The same thing happened for essential oils. Arab alchemists noticed “well hey, this rose juice still smells quite strongly of rose. This essence must be a distilled form of rose-ness.”

To Arab alchemists, sophic mercury was what made substances similar, and sophic sulfur was what made substances unique. Theoretically, you could mix-and-match mercuries and sulfurs to “breed” new substances. (Mercury is often referred to as feminine, and sulfur as masculine.)

(Learned readers may be expecting a discussion of sophic salt here, but that doesn’t show up until Paracelsus. Give it a few centuries.)

JABIR IBN-HAYYAN: ORGANIC ALCHEMY

The One-Hundred and Twelve Books (of which only thirty survive) are a series of short, vaguely-related treatises on alchemy. A notable innovation here is the introduction of organic materials like plant and animal products. To many previous alchemists, the human body was higher on the divine ladder of being than things like rocks and stones. Of course it was, we have things like language, and an immortal soul. Rocks don’t have those things. The idea that something as special as the human body would be subject to the exact same rules as lowly lumps of metal was a dramatic change from established alchemical logic.

Previously, the closest alchemists would get to living tissue was old eggshells. Now, alchemists were theorizing about the alchemical effects of all sorts of plants and fluids. This was a significant paradigm shift for alchemy. Now semen could be involved. Which was important. Don’t laugh. It was important. This was one of the first steps alchemy took towards iatrochemistry, the idea of using alchemy to cure disease.

JABIR IBN-HAYYAN: BALANCE AND TRANSMUTATION

If a pre-Jabir alchemist wanted to make some gold, they needed some gold to act as a “seed” to transmute the base metal. It was actually ibn-Hayyan who introduced the idea that you could transmute lead into gold. This was a radical departure from established alchemical logic. Jabir placed no limits on what the alchemist could theoretically achieve. According to Jabir, if you had a big enough flask, a big enough furnace, and a big enough chunk of time, you could make your own tiny planet earth. You just had to get the ratios right.

The key to this new theory of transmutation was what Jabir called “The Science of Balances.” If you’ve ever tried to correctly season a big pot of soup, you understand the Jabirian balance. If the pot is too spicy, you might need to add cream or acid to cut it. If the pot is too salty, you need more food. A properly seasoned broth is not necessarily about the amount of an ingredient, it’s about the ratios. When all your flavors and textures taste “right” you have achieved Jabirian balance.

To Jabir, all non-gold materials are simply improperly seasoned broth. Tin might have too little elemental air, iron might have too much elemental earth, etc etc. Transmutation was a process of adding what your base substance “lacked.”

Chemically literate readers might compare this concept to balancing chemical equations in a high school chemistry course. While Jabir formed the bedrock of modern chemistry, his idea of balance extended beyond gold. Balance was how the body worked. Balance was how the universe worked. Balance was how language worked. According to Jabir, the balance of elements in alchemical gold was related to the balance of numerical values of letters in the Arabic word for gold. Additionally, if medicine healed a sickness, it is because it rebalanced the condition of your humors to a ratio similar to gold. The positions of the stars and the planets also had some effect on Jabirian Balance.

It should be noted that none of this is layed out systematically. If you are looking for some grand philosophical system of harmony between the heavens, the body, the world, and god, you will need to wait a few centuries. These concepts are divided across dozens of books, likely written decades apart, that repeatedly contradict and argue with each other. Its messy. But damn if it isn't compelling.

JABIR: TRANSMUTATION

Byzantine alchemists didn’t think you could make gold from scratch. You needed some starter gold that could be “fed” base metals until they were transmuted into gold. Jabir was different. Jabir theorized that you could cook yourself some gold from scratch.

Imagine, for a moment, that you live in the 10th century. Most of your world is made of living things. Your clothes are made from plant or animal fibers. Common tools are made from wood or bone or other animal products. Even the earthen bricks and clay that make up your home have a biological element to them. You understand that the earth itself exists on a complex continuum between alive and dead, and that relationship has serious consequences for the harvest this year. Stones and ores are a bit of an outlier in how not-alive they are.

The idea that you can just manufacture gold, soup-to-nuts, without needing to “breed” it from some existing gold, is quite radical. From a modern atomic physics perspective, it also happens to be true. Lasso yourself enough protons, neutrons and electrons, and you can theoretically cook yourself up some gold. Chalk up one more point for the alchemists.

Except, for Jabirian alchemists, they didn’t have protons, neutrons, and electrons. They had Sophic Mercury and Sophic Sulfur. If you wanted to make some gold, and all you had was some lead, you needed to distill that lead down to its separate essences, and then recombine them in the right ratios to make yourself some gold.

The language Jabir uses to describe transmutation is explicitly medical. To Jabir, the balancing of elemental essences in a metal, and the balancing of humors in a body, are fundamentally a similar process.

So, according to Jabir, an alchemist can create any material simply by manipulating the physical world, and this extends to the human body. So theoretically, if the alchemist wanted to, they could make a tiny human from scratch inside their alchemical vessel. The Jabirian corpus stops just short of discussing whether or not this homunculus would have a soul, but the implications were not lost on later alchemists and theologians.

That said, there is little evidence that any religious authority ever took the alchemists seriously enough to consider this a threat. Imagine if a theoretical physicist in this day and age claimed they could manufacture a human soul. The reaction would be a series of polite nods and a quick changing of the subject. The Abbasid Caliphate had more important things to deal with, and the alchemists never did manufacture a homunculus with a soul, but they did lay the groundwork for modern chemistry.

THE BIG FIVE: RHAZES

If you’ve ever read a chemistry textbook, you can thank Rhazes.

Rhazes was a teacher. His primary goal was to teach. He writes in a straightforward, no-nonsense, easy-to-understand way. He is not interested in the broader religious and philosophical implications of alchemy. He is interested in his students avoiding death by smoke inhalation. As such, his major work, “The Book of Secrets” is one of the most grounded and straightforward alchemical texts ever written.

Understand that “secrets” in this context just means “technical knowledge.” Rhazes is not making claims to occult knowledge. Quite the opposite. Rhazes took the fire hose of the Jabirian Corpus, and pruned it down to something more practical.

Practical is the key word when it comes to Rhazes. His biggest addition to alchemical history is a focus on reproducibility. All the theory in the world doesn’t do you much good unless you can produce reliable, useful, results. Reproducibility requires standards, and Rhazes introduced standards for laboratory alchemy that formed the foundation of modern laboratory chemistry.

Rhazes assumes the would-be alchemist has access to five things: Literacy, technical knowledge, space, financing, and reproducibility. These standards would become so influential, people would quote Rhazes as an authority on alchemy and medicine well into the 17th century.

Like many academics of his day, Rhazes wasn’t just an alchemist. He was also a doctor, and an astrologer. Academics often separate his work into halves, between chemistry and medicine, but this can flatten the broader picture. Rhazes was a systematic thinker, a combiner of ideas. Through the course of his work, he draws comparisons between the heavens, the body, and the flask. The connections are not as strong as some of the thinkers he would later inspire, but the groundwork for thinkers like Paracelsus is plain to see.

THE BIG FIVE: AVICENNA

Avicenna, the great doctor Ibn-Sina, is widely regarded as the greatest scholar of the Islamic golden age. We cannot do him justice in a text like this -we have magic to discuss- but suffice to say that modern science would not exist without him. He was educated on alchemy, but he was not an alchemist. Though dozens of later alchemical texts claim they were written by his hand, they are only pretenders. In reality, Avicenna was famously critical of alchemy, specifically the Jabirian corpus. His work was so influential that his criticisms of alchemical doctrine would be cited for nearly 600 years.

We return to the “by art or by nature” debate. Can materials created by alchemists ever measure up to the same quality as materials created by nature? The Jabirian Corpus says yes. There are no limits on what alchemists can theoretically recreate, given the time and materials. Avicenna says no. Materials created by alchemists cannot ever match natural materials, and base metals can never be transmuted into noble metals.

Crucially, he cedes one important point to alchemy. The man was a doctor. He believed that if alchemy had some genuine, practical, use, it was in the creation and preparation of medicines.

https://archive.org/details/the-metaphysics-of-the-book-of-Healing/page/52/mode/2up

THE TURBA PHILOSOPHORUM

One of the most enduring and popular alchemical texts in history, the Turba Philosophorum, or “convention of the philosophers” is what happens when you try to fit Greek philosophy into an islamicate-shaped hole. The text itself is a neat little summary of Greek alchemical theory, framed as a sharing of knowledge between several pre-socratic Greek philosophers. In the Plessner translation, the ultimate conclusion the Greek sages reach is “[One:] The creator of the World is Allah, the God of Islam;[two] The world is of a uniform nature; [three] All creatures of the upper as well as of the lower world are composed of all four elements.”

[Martin Plessner, The Place of the Turba Philosophorum in the Development of Alchemy]

NOTES

“The most valuable “secrets” in the Kitāb al-Asrār are

written specifications for proportions, temperature, timing, and endpoints, the

same tools for achieving reproducibility that laboratories use today.” (Taylor, 14)

Even in the tenth century alchemy was controversial and al- Rāzī

wrote energetic defenses of the controversial art of transforming the state of

metals under artificial conditions. The debate centered on feasibility, rather

than theory. (taylor, 15)

Theres a great anecdote about him teaching student on (taylor 31)

Medical schools in Holland continued to require al-

Rāzī’s medical books into the seventeenth century.[83] Alchemy was not a

university subject, but the wide distribution of Rhazes’ medical works may

have contributed to his reputation as an alchemist, especially since many

European alchemists were themselves university-educated physicians and

Clerics. (taylor 34)

he Romance of the Rose, a thirteenth-century poem by

Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meun, enjoyed in both France and England

for 300 years, includes Rhazes among medical authorities: “And we have not

seen any of the physicians themselves escape from her [Death], not

Hippocrates or Galen, no matter how good physicians they were. Rhases,

Constantine, and Avicenna have left her their skins.”(taylor 34)

From a historical perspective, the Kitāb al-Asrār had an

enduring presence throughout the Middle Ages and then retired to the

manuscript libraries. Its scope was limited, its goals outdated. Yet its content

has a characteristic style that makes it read like a laboratory manual even

Today. (taylor 46)

Absolutely influenced Paracelsus. People tend to see him as either a chemist or a doctor, but when you look at the whole of his work, they’re not all that different. There really isnt a conflict between the two.

By the 17th century, nobody cited Rhazes anymore. But, damn near every alchemical and chemical manual had a focus on reproducibility of results.

Is there a connection between the legions of

testing laboratories in existence today and the confined inner world of the

Kitāb al-Asrār? I argue that what links these laboratory environments is their

ability to impose a controlled template upon the vagaries of nature in order to

produce repeatable and credible results. (taylor 47)

Laboratory manuals depend on certain underlying principles. A

full description of every step of every procedure would overwhelm the

worker with gratuitous information and interfere with the simplicity that

reproducibility demands. These requirements remain unstated just as a road

map ignores the physical composition of streets and bridges. (taylor 48)

Literacy, technical knowledge, space, financing, and