PDA

View Full Version : What happens if disclosure takes place?



Lunsola
03-23-2013, 12:03 PM
First off this isn't a thread about if it will or will not or if disclosure is possible. This thread would just be about what if it does happen.

Someone discovers fully the matter, posts it to a million websites. But that's not all. Lets say this person describes the matter and their method so perfectly that any average person could do it with little effort. Basically it becomes something everyone or almost everyone has.

What happens?

Side note: I believe it is important to mention that someone basically already tried this if those reading don't know. Unfortunately for the writer of that Book of Aquarius, the understanding of the principles of alchemy are most likely wrong. Granted he isn't wrong about everything. I've been keeping up with his forum's progress and no one has moved past what they call black stage. If it even is possible with his method it will most likely take far longer than a lifetime to complete.

Things I would like to discuss are the good, bad, ugly, and anything else.

Would God destroy the world if he didn't want it that way?
Would the world be ruined?
Would things simply be better for everyone?
Would the world be a paradise?
Would everything turn to chaos as some people still love evil? Example: Everyone gets bored of perpetual happiness and starts playing a first person shooter for real, player participation not optional.

In my opinion it would be quite unpleasant if dying couldn't even get you away from an enemy. If someone who was stronger could just beat you to death, revive you, and do it again the next day that would be something else. Basically torture gets the potential to get kicked up to a new level.

Illen A. Cluf
03-23-2013, 02:21 PM
What happens if disclosure takes place?

Great question!

However, this has already happened. Read The Secrets of Alchemy, by Lawrence M. Principe.

What happens is that the alchemical community just ignores it, because humans' belief in long-held old traditions is much stronger than any modern evidence which goes contrary to it.

Could Principe be wrong? Although he addresses the philosophical side of alchemy quite well, is fully aware of the use of decknamen and metaphors, and was able to successfully repeat some of the experiments using modern understanding and special techniques, it's still possible that his academic chemical background biased his interpretation of some of the more subtle hints contained in the texts. He does leave the door open a little, but the evidence to date seems to go against the existence of a Philosophers' Stone that can transmute base metals into gold.

There have been no samples of alchemically created gold witnessed by reliable people, or prepared under controlled conditions, for at least a couple of centuries, and any claims are only hearsay.

"Belief" can be the greatest roadblock to understanding, if it's not followed up by rational, open-minded experimentation. This is not to say that "belief" is not often a requirement for new discoveries in the first place.

solomon levi
03-23-2013, 06:08 PM
what if disclosure is unnecessary and we already each possess the stone and this, one's life, is what they're making of it. :)
as we do more eagles, it becomes more apparent that we already possess the stone and are god. eagles just raise vibration (frater Albertus' definition of alchemy) exponentially and make things more intense. there is no end to the eagles, but there are transmutations... the materia passing through the (looking?) glass...

Illen A. Cluf
03-23-2013, 06:14 PM
what if disclosure is unnecessary and we already each possess the stone and this, one's life, is what they're making of it. :)

Or perhaps, it's always just the pursuit of knowledge with the goal being an unobtainable archetype (like the Philosophers Stone or the Holy Grail), which is necessary for our constant advance in understanding.

Isn't the constant "striving" for something the only worthwhile activity?

solomon levi
03-23-2013, 06:23 PM
i edited... and sort of was responding while you were to the same thoughts.

solomon levi
03-23-2013, 06:50 PM
Perhaps alchemy is a dream which manifests after 1000s of years of that dream being dreamt, carried genetically, but our conceptualization is so narrow we say "he's an alchemist" as if it all happened in one lifetime. maybe the idea of man speeding up nature is just the natural 1000 year process... nature still the alchemist and man her instrument. :)
so disclosure... my view is nothing would change any differently than it's already changing all the time, allowing drastic fluctuations... disclosure could be such a fluctuation. consider the internet.

Lunsola
03-23-2013, 09:29 PM
This has been getting off topic a little bit. This isn't a discussion about if disclosure is possible, will happen, or anything else.

Hypothetically disclosure took place, what happens now?

glenerson
03-23-2013, 09:52 PM
It will be a disclosure if everyone believes in a Single absolute truth. In the case in this forums, it seems like almost all are content that one is all and all is one. that is different paths will lead you there, which is like saying that there is no Single absolute truth.

So i assure you that there won't be a disclosure. people will still disbelieve you and won't be convinced and will throw their illusionary arguments from different people and books.

Krisztian
03-23-2013, 10:02 PM
Hypothetically disclosure took place, what happens now?

I would say certain portions of the populace (viz., referring to North America) will get, as usual, very scared, confused. Then that initial shock turns to anger. Then, that seems to turn to "Tell me what to think" so the Media would likely bring in their usual "experts" in such matters. Who would quite likely confuse things more, since each topic seems to bring in those who're for and those who're against the subject-at-hand.


Would God destroy the world if he didn't want it that way?

Come on, let's keep this discussion serious.


Would the world be ruined?

Depends what you mean by the word "ruined"?

You would still have people who're wounded emotionally. It is very likely, you'll also have people who're afraid of any type of solution, and would either call it "The Devil's work" or try to control the matter by putting laws and regulations around it.


Would things simply be better for everyone?

No. People can't live with their emotions generally. They can't tolerate intimate relationships generally.


Would the world be a paradise?

Only if the inner, the Kingdom, is at peace. No outside help can remedy any solutions for inner turmoil.

The world doesn't need universal panacea.


Would everything turn to chaos as some people still love evil? Example: Everyone gets bored of perpetual happiness and starts playing a first person shooter for real, player participation not optional.

Communism has provided some initial success in providing all the same benefits. Eventually the system fails because people tend to get lazy and there isn't a need for productivity. All people get the same, regardless of work. That gets boring eventually, it turns to complaints, loss of touch with reality, then to the downfall of the system. When Communism fell, people cried out and wanted it back - that's not a comment from reading history books.

Illen A. Cluf
03-24-2013, 12:45 AM
This has been getting off topic a little bit. This isn't a discussion about if disclosure is possible, will happen, or anything else.

Hypothetically disclosure took place, what happens now?

Read the responses more carefully. You will find that your question was answered very directly.

Lunsola
03-24-2013, 01:51 AM
Read the responses more carefully. You will find that your question was answered very directly.

Your first response was fine. I don't usually point fingers as I find that to be unnecessary. I'm sorry if you took it personal.

Lunsola
03-24-2013, 02:18 AM
I think one of the most interesting aspects of disclosure would be about suffering.

Would suffering increase or decrease? I can't easily come up with a clear answer for this one. I often think there's only one way to find out but that could be pretty risky.

I've also read a lot in the older alchemist texts that people who disclose can get punished. Usually it says they get death or some misfortune. If that's true then I can't imagine what kind of punishment would be used for trying to spread it all over the world on purpose and being successful.

Obviously people would get a lot lazier and society could collapse if everyone had the stone.

Of course I've also read some positive points on disclosure that some people say the stone will make a bad person good. Of course a lot of those might just be wishful thinking or unsuccessful alchemists seeking disclosure for their own gain.

solomon levi
03-24-2013, 03:29 AM
Your first response was fine. I don't usually point fingers as I find that to be unnecessary. I'm sorry if you took it personal.

:) you're still not reading carefully... Illen said "THE responses", which includes everyone...
my response answered your question, even if it wasn't what you expect.
the alchemist in the book "the red lion" said he could shout it from the rooftops and nothing would change. :)

Lunsola
03-24-2013, 04:26 AM
I never said there was just one. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

So if disclosure has taken place I think the nature of relationships would change. Maybe we'd all live the same amount of time but completely healthy. I suppose death would change a lot as well. If we all had the stone maybe death would come more peacefully like in sleep or painlessly.

I really have to wonder if we would be able to gain a much better technology than we have now or if we'd all end up back in the stone age.

Maybe if everyone had the stone then playing a real first person shooter would be possible in a controlled environment. Go into an arena with gear and stuff. When a player dies they drag them off and revive for the next round. As a gamer I also wonder if disclosure would end games or take them to a new level. In a sense of real play I might see it as possible but for gaming itself the stone might bring people more so in tune with other needs and spirituality too.

Kiorionis
03-24-2013, 06:05 AM
I've also read a lot in the older alchemist texts that people who disclose can get punished. Usually it says they get death or some misfortune.

I remember it as the old authors being in fear of punishment. This might sound like the same thing, but it's not. There are times when the Hand seizes the pen, or the Finger is held to the lips. I feel that if you break this Silence, you're breaking a contract.


I really have to wonder if we would be able to gain a much better technology than we have now or if we'd all end up back in the stone age.

lol. I think we'd end up in a new stone age ;)


As a gamer I also wonder if disclosure would end games or take them to a new level. In a sense of real play I might see it as possible but for gaming itself the stone might bring people more so in tune with other needs and spirituality too.

From my understanding the Stone is Heaven manifested on earth. Working beneath this definition, its influence can only be one which fits the rule of 'Like increases Like'.

edit: Also, I remember reading something along the lines that the Holy Spirit is incapable of causing illness, misfortune, or any sort of 'evil' as it is popularly defined; also that it is the only part of the Godhead which is unforgivable to blaspheme against. I forget the reason why though...

solomon levi
03-24-2013, 08:13 AM
hi lunsola.
i'm fine to disagree. it's my fault... i don't care much for speculations. i prefer to see directly. so the resistance is mine. i could play along in hypotheticals, but i wouldn't feel i am giving you my best.
i think you equate disclosure with acceptance. i'm saying the disclosure has already happened and look... people do not accept it. this agrees with the prophets. jesus said "the kingdom of heaven is spread out before you, but men do not see it." when we think, we intend dualism, automatically, which doesn't allow perception of unity, wholeness, peace, the kingdom of heaven.
if the whole world accepted/ingested the stone things would be... beautiful beyond words, as they are now for me, probably even more so. and it would feel incredible not to feel alone anymore.

zoas23
03-24-2013, 08:29 AM
The classical "touchable" aims that alchemy always held in its different versions... i.e, creating gold, extending life, etc...
These aims, in my opinion, will be achieved by the most vulgar/profane science in not such a long time.
The obvious result is that if creating gold becomes easy, then gold will lose its economical value... and the world won't change much because of that.
Something VERY similar has already happened actually. Did you know that Aluminium USED to be more valuable than gold? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History

"Before the Hall-Héroult process was developed in the late 1880s, aluminium was exceedingly difficult to extract from its various ores. This made pure aluminium more valuable than gold. Bars of aluminium were exhibited at the Exposition Universelle of 1855. Napoleon III of France is reputed to have given a banquet where the most honoured guests were given aluminium utensils, while the others made do with gold"

As for extending life... medicine has been doing it and will keep on doing it.
I would be VERY surprised if the average lifespan or life expectancy of the generation of our grand-sons is not 2 or 3 times longer than the life expectancy that our generation has.

It is likely that both things will be achieved following methods that have very little to do with the alchemical tradition... and yet the practical result, at least in the most "touchable" sense, will be mostly identical.
What happens if someone discloses the secret formula of the Coca Cola? Hmmm.... probably not much!

But then alchemy also has a "spiritual" side, which can't be "disclosed", because it is not a formula.
Philosophy has been "disclosed" since a long time ago... and yet very few people care about it.

Illen A. Cluf
03-24-2013, 03:23 PM
As Solomon has already mentioned, the whole question of "disclosure" brings up some very interesting perspectives. Several past alchemists have written that when they tried to explain the secrets of alchemy directly to their friends, they totally missed the disclosure and continued practicing other approaches that matched their expectations.

Philosophers have long realized that any disclosure can not take place directly and openly. For most people, Truth unveiled, or naked Truth is far too simple and plain for comprehension. It's always expected that whenever a profound truth is presented, the heavens will open, trumpets will sound, lightning will strike, angels will appear, and all sorts of other visual and auditory effects will accompany the disclosure. That's why the great philosophers of the past have always attempted to present simple truths in colorful allegories, symbols and metaphors.

Many authors have attempted to present truths in boring, factual books, without any success. There's hundreds of such books that are unknown to most. It's long been realized than truth can never be presented starkly, and thus many authors have turned to fiction to present their truths, often with great success. Dan Brown is a perfect example, although many of his "facts" have long been dismissed as inaccurate. I belonged to the first discussion group to discuss the many "facts" Dan Brown presents in his book (the first discussion group I ever belonged to back in the 1980s/1990s), and that was many years before he presented them. I personally know the originators of many of his disclosures, and they have never been given their due credit, nor has their later refinements or corrections been acknowledged.

It has become so common to expect to realize the greatest truths from fictional sources (books, movies, etc.), that often I find that when I offer a personal realization to a friend, their first response in trying to confirm my realization, is to tell me something like "..yes, that must be true because I saw a movie a few months ago that basically said the same thing". The confirmations are seldom, if ever, drawn from a personal, real life situation.

As humans, we are basically incredibly dramatic people. Our entire reactions with each other are a form of theater. The better we are at role playing, the more "accepted" and "popular" we become. The best known philosophers today are the ones who are most dramatic in their presentations, such as Deepak Chopra, Ken Wilber and many others. In my opinion, the much more profound philosophers are the humble, quiet ones, such as J. Krishnamurti. These are not value judgements, just observations.

So, I agree with Solomon, that some of the greatest truths have already been disclosed. But as in so many philosophical disciplines, the truths were presented openly and simply, and thus were unheard. They were not what people "expected" to hear, so they literally went into one ear and out the other. When people ask questions, they have generally already limited or predefined, in their minds, the types of answers that they are ready to accept. It's part of the great drama, the great stage production, the minute details of which we have already been taught since the day we were born. Anything that does nor fit that picture is immediately discarded as absurd. We are not taught to look behind the curtains, like in the Wizard of Oz, to see the boring, plain, undramatic machinations behind the drama. They are so mundane that they could not possibly be true.

So, unless the "disclosure" is presented with full and exaggerated drama (as all of the great Alchemists have already done repetitively for many centuries), people will not listen. And if it is presented with full drama, it will only be misunderstood or redefined, since it comes with limitless interpretations. If it's presented in a naked fashion, as it already has been numerous times, people will continue to dismiss it.

In short, it's my opinion, that most people are far more interested in exciting drama and entertainment, than naked philosophy. Most members likely come to this forum to see exciting Harry Potter drama and join in weaving incredible fantasies, rather than deal with boring truths. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone or making any value judgements. There's nothing wrong with drama, entertainment and fantasies if that helps get you through life. I'm just saying that there may be other, less exciting ways to explore truths that can be seen when we remove deeply imbedded cultural expectations, and look behind the curtains to see what we never expected to see.

Krisztian
03-24-2013, 11:44 PM
I think one of the most interesting aspects of disclosure would be about suffering.

Would suffering increase or decrease? I can't easily come up with a clear answer for this one.

Suffering could easily come with ingestion of what we call Philosopher's Stone. No medicine can take away suffering. There're karmic issues with the ingestion. Maria Szepes' novel Red Lion discussed such soul conflicts.

Plus, not all people would desire to take it. Some, happy to live 50 to 70 years only, they wouldn't want to outlive perhaps their children.


I've also read a lot in the older alchemist texts that people who disclose can get punished. Usually it says they get death or some misfortune. If that's true then I can't imagine what kind of punishment would be used for trying to spread it all over the world on purpose and being successful.

To be trapped in physicality, say, for 400 years is a form of punishment, would be, for many people. Some can hardly 'survive' a pitiful 40 years, why trap an unevolving soul into a physical vessel that long?

Also, there's no need to 'save' people. We're all creators, wherever one is, that's where we needs to be. Once we're bored of that 'stage', then we create new adventures, and learnings. So in a way, the Lapis doesn't need to be part of the play.

Alchemists of Old maintained great respect for Nature. I also believe there's some kind of karmic issue with the ingestion of the Lapis that is best not to be abused.

solomon levi
03-25-2013, 12:03 AM
IMO of an alchemist, they would not punish... an alchemist would know that punishment coarises
with certain choices as a natural consequence. For the alchemist to take it upon themselves to
punish does not seem alchemical or natural to me. For example, I think it was Buddha who said,
"You are not punished for your anger. You are punished by your anger."
To me, that is an alchemical view.
Whereas brotherhoods exist which extract promises of silence and dole out punishments for transgressions...
doesn't seem so alchemical to me. I am of the opinion that alchemy protects itself by its spiritual nature, it being
hidden in plain sight to non-spiritual eyes.

Lunsola
04-19-2013, 04:54 PM
Thanks everyone for your responses to one of my more serious threads. The opinions of my fellow alchemists are very important to me. I know it would have been a much harder road or none at all if it weren't for those that came before me. For example I had no idea alchemy texts even existed before BoA, never even thought to look.

I imagine many of you have already been inclined to think I have been considering writing my own guide and if so you would be right. Unfortunately I'm not a perfect master of the art just yet and even if I was I'm still not sure how I feel about disclosing or releasing information to people. It's not like I don't know anything about alchemy but I certainly don't know every single detail of all the paths.

I'll probably start out writing something small first and work my way up. If I do decide to write a more in depth guide or disclose then I'll start a thread first. I wouldn't try to make something as clear as BoA but if I do end up writing something I'll probably put it in a PDF file just because I love those. This thread has pretty much served it's purpose so some casual replies would be great and if not then PMs would be welcomed too.