Symbols ana a

IS
15
17
20
23
27
30
33
36
39
41
44
47
52
56
60
64



Foreword by H. T Hansen Translator's Note Prefaceparc one: cbe sgmBols aoo ceAcbirxgs
Introduction to Part One: The Tree, the Serpent, and the Titans
One: The Plurality and Duality of Civilizations
Two: Living Nature
Three: The Hermetic Knowledge
Four: "One the All” and the Dragon Ouroboros
Five: The Hermetic Presence
Six: Creation and Myth
Seven: "Woman,” "Water," "Mercury,” and "Poison”
Eight: The Separation: Sun and Moon Nine: Frozen and Flowing Waters Ten: Salt and the Cross Eleven: The Four Elements and Sulfur Twelve: Soul, Spirit, and Body Thirteen: The "Four” in Man Fourteen: The Planets Fifteen: The Centers of Life
Sixteen: The Seven, the Operations, and the Mirror Seventeen: Gold in the Art

FORetUORD
For Julius Evola (1898-1974) alchemy was nor—as is generally believed—a single specialized subject con­cerning itself exclusively with metals and their corre­spondences in man, but rather a comprehensive physical and metaphysical system embracing cosmology as much as anthropology (in the sense of a complete knowledge of man in body, soul, and spirit).² Everything—nature and supernature— can be found in it. To Evola, hermetism and alchemy are one and the same.
The goal of this system is the understanding and experiencing of an ensouled "holy” organism, replete with living powers, in whom everything is wonderfully interwoven, connected to and communized with everything else. Man stands in the middle where he is microcosm in analogy to the whole macrocosm: As above, so below—in the words of the Emerald Tablet. The alchemical symbol language as the expression of this universal system must therefore also have correspondences in all the other mysteriosoph ic spheres and can consequently serve as a universal key in these spheres, just as, vice versa, any other mystery teaching has the power to fill in the lacunae of esotericism in alchemy.
Alongside Arturo Reghini (1878-1946)—and surely also at his suggestion— Evola was one of the few in those years who were aware of this parallel, especially to ancient theurgical practice. In 1926 Evola published an article in Ultra (the newspaper of the unusually liberal Theosophical lodge in Rome) on the cult of Mithras in which he placed major emphasis on the similarities of these mysteries with hermetism. In the UR group (1927-29), of which Evola was a member, specific alchemical symbols were employed in the teaching of "Magic.”³ It is this practical aspect that is emphasized here, for alchemy cannot be grasped by abstract thought alone, much less is it just a psychic process in the unconscious (C. G. Jung’s theory),⁴ but much more than that: it is an exercise of soul and spirit in the best Platonic tradition.
Where did Evola’s early preoccupation with alchemical symbolism come from? After his Dadaist and philosophical period, Evola came in contact with Theosophi- cal and Freemason circles.⁵ Here we can especially point to Reghini, of whom Evola writes in his autobiography,⁶ that he either lent him the essential alchemical texts or at least informed him of them. Through the very significant esoteric magazines, Athanor and Ignis (1924-1925), edited by Reghini, Evola became acquainted with a whole series of contributions to alchemy that were enough to give him his first hints of knowledge.⁷ Reghini’s influence must have been decisive because so many of his quotations are also favorite quotations of Evola’s ⁸ In his autobiography Evola quotes from early translations of Rene Guenon’s Le voile dlsis (later the Etudes rradicionelles), which also gave him suggestions for his vision of alchemy.
Jacopo da Coreglia⁹ writes that it was a priest, Father Francesco Oliva, who had made the most far-reaching progress in hermetic science and who—highly prizing the keen spirit and intellectual honesty of the young seeker—gave Evola access to records strictly reserved for adepts of the narrow circle. These were concerned primarily with the teachings of the Fraternity of Myriam (Fratellanza Terapeutica Magica di Myriam), founded by Doctor Giuliano Kremmerz (pseudonym of Ciro
Formisano, 1861-1930). Evola mentions in the notes to chapter 11 that the Mvriam’s "Pamphlet D”⁹ laid the groundwork for his understanding of the four elements. Where this group in turn got its knowledge remains a secret. In its own view, and Jacopo da Coreglia also shares this opinion, the Myriam (which seems :o have split into many groups) is the last torch-bearer of a tradition that has been handed down—under constantly changing names—from the classical times of Pvthagorean paganism and it is independent of the Freemasons or similar contem­porary movements. In his Pour la Rose Rouge et la Croix dXDr Count J. P. Giudicelli do C'ressac Bachellerie reveals its inner structure and current grading process.
In addition, there is the decisive influence of Ercole Quadrelli, who under the pseudonyms of Abraxas and Tikaipos, made some especially important contribu­tions to the UR group. And it should be mentioned in this regard that Quadrelli was trained by Giuliano Kremmerz and the Myriam.¹⁰
The freely accessible works of Kremmerz— / dialoghi sull’ermccismo (Dialogues on henneries) and his magazine Commentarium (1910-12)—also did much for Evola s spiritual development in the realm of alchemy. His acquaintance with the Chymica vannus and with the alchemist Philalethes probably go back to these works.
The strongest and perhaps decisive influence on the Evolian conception of alchemy as a universal system is probably Cesare Della Riviera's II mondo magico degii herd (The magical world of the heroes), (Mantua, 1603; Milan, 1605). This is one of the few texts of that time that helps itself to a hermetico-alchemical language, but is of an unequivocally holo-cosmological character. Alchemy is always placed in perspective with the other hermetic disciplines—such as magic and asrrology—and is not regarded as an autonomous and specific teaching. For an alchemical book the unusually many references co the Abbot Johannes Tridiemius (1462-1516) in this work point also in this direction.
The first tangible, result of these studies was shown in the periodical Krur (sequel to UR)ⁿ There Evola presented a first shot at discussing the hermetic tradition and anticipated the essential content of the later book. The alchemical tradition was still portrayed only as pagan and not as a royal tradition, an attribute that in the final edition received so central a position that it brought Evola into conflict with other representatives of the traditional Weltanschauung.
A broader and altogether different influence on Evola at this time came as a result of his meeting the Indian alchemist C. S. Narayana Swami Aiyar of Chingleput, ^{10 11} who expounded on the great importance of tine breathing techniques in alchemy and how it helped to ingest certain substances.
In 1930 Evola wrote "The Doctrine of Transmutation in Medieval Hermetics” lor Bilychnis (no. 275). In abridged form, the articled contained the fundamental precepts oi La tradizione ermetica, which was published by Laterza in 1931. (The 1931 edition was insignificantly altered and expanded in 1948. This was followed in 1971 by Evola’s last revision, which is the basis for this translation.)
Tt is interesting in this regard that Benedetto Croce was instrumental in helping Evola to make contact with this eminent publishing house. Tn the archives of Laterza are several of Evola’s unpublished letters that refer to The Hermetic Tradition, and in which Croce’s mediation appears again and again. One letter in particular is important, for in it Evola seems to answer the publisher’s reproaches that the work was overloaded with annotations and had too little public appeal. Evola argued that it was not written for public appeal but only and simply to show for the first time that alchemy was not just the beginning of chemistry but a profound and forgotten mystery-science; and without the abundance of quotations Evola would be marked as a visionary and the publisher criticized for not being serious.
Evola’s conviction that alchemy was a universal system clarifies his endeavor to see this work as the completion and synthesis of all his earlier works in philosophy, magic, and Tantrism. Hence his emphasis on the pre- or, more cor­rectly, super-Christian character of the hermetic tradition.
Naturally Evola’s belief in the all-inclusive character of hermetism did not go unchallenged. Certainly his most important critic was the second great herald of Tradition, Rene Guenon, to whom Evola, nevertheless, was indebted for outstand­ing insights (and the idea of the Tradition in the first place).
In his review of The Hermetic Tradition in the Voile d'Isis in April of 1931, though basically positive, Guenon rejects quite strongly the idea that alchemy is a complete metaphysical doctrine and reduces it to the status of a mere cosmo­logical system. According to him, a true tradition could never have come from an Egypto-Hellenic origin, then passed on to Islamic esotericism, and from there to Christian esotericism. In addition, alchemy had always been integrated into these various currents, whereas a pure and complete tradition has no need for some other tradition serving as an auxiliary vehicle. Moreover, it is an indication of the special character of alchemy that this path of knowledge in traditional societies should be a domain of the second caste, of the Kshatriyas (warrior caste), whereas only the Brahmins were truly dedicated to metaphysics. The last argument was correct, as far as Evola was concerned, for he had always seen himself as Kshatriya ¹² and for him alchemy and the possibility of continuing to experiment on the spiritual plane—the "art” aspect—were extremely important. Nevertheless, the presenr work and its representation of alchemy is no willful or special interpreta­tion on Evola's part, although on the ground of his "personal equation” some aspects may have been given a stronger emphasis—especially the active and the inner alchemy (ad-tan).
Guenon's opposition was consistent; it is known that the "Redness” represents the highest stage in alchemy and is above the "Whiteness.” The Red (or Purple) embodies an active state, which naturally stood in a contrast to the White, which the contemplative Brahmin exhibits. (Evola points this up quite clearly in chapter 23). Against Guenon’s view that the "white” Brahmin caste unequivocally held the highest place in the traditional world, Evola set the "purple” king as "pontifex” (bridge-builder) uppermost between Heaven and Earth. With the priority of the symbolic color red over white in hermetism, Evola seems to have a point. But Guenon could only call alchemy a specialisation and he could never assign it the universal character that Evola did.
In spite of Evola’s decided rejection of Jung’s psychological interpretation of alchemy Jung described The Hermetic Tradition as a "detailed account of Her­metic philosophy,” and he cites approvingly an entire section in translation.^{13 14 15} Evola never saw himself as a shaper or creative interpreter of alchemy, but only as one who did no more than deliver this knowledge, clarifying it, to be sure, but broadcasting it unchanged.
Guenon repeated the reproach against universality in his review of Evola's 1.932 edition of Della Riviera’s 11 inondo magicu degli heroi (published with Evola’s commentary). Guenon also blamed Evola for the assimilation of alchemy by
■ 14
magic.
To be sure, Guenon's authority to judge alchemy has now and then been questioned, considering that he himself had never written a work on the subject. Eugene Canseliet, for example, rhe alleged disciple and publisher of the works of Fulcanel!t,^ doubted Guenon’s competence on this matter.¹⁶ On the other hand, neither docs Guenon hold his criticism back from Fulcanelli, especially his Freres d Heliopolis ,¹⁷
Evola’s work after the publication of Mondo magico degli heroi was more and more politically defined, and aside from die insignificant changes in the revised editions of The Hermetic Tradition and single reviews and articles, Evola was silent about alchemy. Mention is found of course in his Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex. where the sexual background of alchemical sym­bolism is illuminated.
An essential complement of Evola s alchemical work was his interest in Chinese alchemy revealed in his editions of two Chinese alchemical treatises.¹⁸ This interest is also evident in the title of his spiritual autobiography 11 cammino del cinabro (The path of cinnabar). In Chinese alchemy the path of liberation is the journey from the ''lower” to the "higher” cinnabar; chemically as well as alchemically cinnabar derives from the union of Sulfur (the masculine principle) and Mercury (the feminine principle).
Despite the widest coverage in the present work by the author himself, one point must also be emphasized here again: if we are now really to understand the following—not just intellectually but also spiritually and in body and soul, in a word, completely- our consciousness must risk a leap. Tn its profundity the meta­phorical world of alchemy is simply not accessible to the contemporary abstract understanding. We must, for once, turn off the continual din of reason and listen with the "ear of the heart” if we want to have the symbols strike responsive chords in ourselves. Two worlds are met with here: on the one hand a timeless world, lying beyond reason, prehistorical, and beyond history, and on the other, a time-bound, historical world that is chained to dialectical reason. Between them there is now no gradual passage, but an abyss, which we must leap over. What does Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling say? "Accordingly historical and prehistoric times are not merely relative, differences between one and the same time, they are cwo essentially different kinds of time completely removed from one another, and mutually exclusive. We call it completely different time . . . full of events, but of quite another sort, and conforming to quite a different /aw.”¹⁹
Since modern man is so slow to lay aside his belief in progress, which stamps his thought patterns and distorts his yardsticks—it seems to him almost monstrous that there a ho exist completely different ways of thinking and that is why the astronomer does not understand the astrologer (in the ancient sense), the modem priest does not understand the Egyptian hierophant, the philosopher does not understand the initiate, and the chemist does not understand the alchemist. Al­chemical symbolism has now admittedly been found to have widely influenced literature, painting, and sculpture in the past. Literati and art historians concern themselves about the interpretation of this work. They can immediately discover worthwhile suggestions in this book, if they wish to penetrate this other world.
H. T Hansen