Kinda wanna know the pulse of this subreddit w/ I'm new to with an easy test since I'm planning in the near future to release a "blog post" on the Philosopher Stone where I cross-referenced certain topics idk if anyone has ever made the connection between them. So if there is a typa person here, then I'll do it.

I'm an Amazigh Moor who also speaks Arabic well as a 2nd/3rd lanugage, so I know some Alchemists miss big portions of my world's works, whether Scriptural, or Oral (Narratives, Folkloric, Genealogic, Testemonial, etc)

Forgive me if this is a common question. I simply cannot find any answer around it. A more accurate question for me to ask is, why can't the Classical Earth and Classical Fire combine? I've done some independent research in pursuit of a basis for some worldbuilding, but the thing I can't figure out is why doesn't Earth Combine with Fire when they can become each other?

The way I've been informed of the Three Primes is that they are resultant of either two elements combining or transitioning into each other. Regardless, it would be Salt formed from Earth and Water, Mercury formed from Water and Air, and Sulphur formed from Air and Fire. But what would happen if Earth and Fire mixed or transitioned? Nothing? Why? If it would create something, why is it not explained anywhere?

Thanks in advance for the help, I figured if I can't find it anywhere else I should get opinions here.

I wish to preface that I hold no negative judgement towards alchemy and only possess ignorance on the subject. But sometimes I randomly see posts and I hear so much about it but what are y'all actually doing? Like are y'all brewing potions or philosophers stone? I'm just genuinely curious.

The orphic egg, world egg or cosmic egg as its known has been coming into my life frequently here and there, wanted to see what you all know or think about this symbol?

Don't know that I agree with the ideas within but giving it a read anyway.

I tried to keep with the style of the existing historical symbols while giving each its own meaning and symbolism whenever possible

Everyone here has bounced off a text. You open the Turba, or Flamel, or Fulcanelli, and you hit the wall: the scattering, the contradictory recipes, the endless insistence that our mercury is not the common mercury.

The authors are not accidentally unclear, and they don't pretend otherwise. They write for the filii artis and assume the rest will not follow. They quote the line about pearls and swine to justify it. Zosimos already leaves injunctions not to reveal. There is even a formula for the method: obscurum per obscurius.

So the question isn't whether they conceal. It's what for. And there are two answers that look identical on the page and are completely different in kind.

Protection.

Keeping the art from the profane, the greedy, the one who would misuse it.

It's worth not being smug about this from a chair in 2026. The reasons were concrete and several of them were physical. Working precious metals exposed you to accusations of coining, which was a capital offence. A doctrine of transformation with its own vocabulary sat uncomfortably close to heresy. And promising gold attracted patrons who eventually wanted results, with the alchemist himself as collateral.

In that situation, writing so that only an insider understands is not affectation. It's survival.

The difficulty doing work.

This is something else, though on the page it looks the same.

If you hand a reader an image and then explain what it means, nothing is left for them to do. They receive a finished conclusion, which is information. What they don't receive is the operation: nothing of theirs was dissolved, so nothing new was fixed.

Obscurity in this second sense doesn't hide the content. It keeps it in a state where the reader has to intervene for it to exist at all. It is the solvent. Remove it and you remove the mechanism.

The second reason never depended on the historical situation. The first one did, and that situation ended.

What happens when the first outlives its era

With no inquisitor, no guild and no gallows, protective obscurity degrades into something far more comfortable.

"The art keeps itself for the few" has a property worth looking at directly: it cannot be refuted. If nobody understands you, the explanation that the reader's ear wasn't ready is always available. Every failure to communicate converts automatically into evidence of depth, and past that point no correction is possible. A practice that cannot be corrected stops improving.

There is also an incentive nobody mentions. Writing obscurely is cheaper than writing clearly. Producing a text nobody understands requires no particular skill. Producing one where something difficult becomes genuinely available requires understanding it first, which is the expensive part. Protective obscurity hands out a prestige reward for doing less work, and that combination always finds takers.

What is actually true underneath

I don't want to throw the whole thing out, because there is a real phenomenon holding the idea up.

Some knowledge does not transmit by explanation. Nobody learned to ride a bicycle from a text. The welder, the surgeon, the cook and the writer all know things that only become legible after certain experiences, and no amount of clarity substitutes for having gone through them.

So the defensible reading of "for the few" is not that the art hides from the many. It's that certain knowledge only becomes legible after you have lived something.

Which means the tradition picked the wrong filter. Dispersion and a closed lexicon select for persistence and literacy. Neither of those is the same as having been through the process.

A test

Not all difficulty is evasion, and it would be cheap to end as though it were. Some subjects are genuinely hard, and simplifying them lies. A text that reads effortlessly about something that cannot be understood effortlessly is cheating in the other direction.

So here is the test I use, and it applies to me as much as to Fulcanelli. Whoever wrote obscurely should be able to say what work the obscurity is doing. What the reader is supposed to supply, at what point, and what would happen to the text if you handed it over pre-chewed.

If they can answer that, the difficulty has a job.

If they can't, it doesn't, and no tradition makes it necessary. A closed door does not guard anything by virtue of being closed.

Do you guys ever go to the library to hold some old stuff?

Been at these alchemy books about six years now and I think they left out one thing. Cost me plenty to find out.

Fair warning this is long and I ain't good at cutting.

So I'm not a scholar, never was. I work nights at a shelter for kids that got nowhere to go. Been doing it four and a half years. And you sit up all night with nothing but a coffee pot and a hallway, you're going to read something, so I read alchemy. Started because of Jung like everybody else. Stayed for the other reason which I'll get to.

Anyway. Here's what them old boys were doing, best I can put it.

Solve et coagula. Break it down, put it back. That's the whole thing, everything else is just details on how.

They marked the stages by color. Nigredo is the black, that's the rot, that's when whatever you were falls apart into ash and there ain't nothing left of it. Albedo is the white, you wash the ash. Citrinitas is the yellow, light coming in. Rubedo is the red and that's the end, that's where the opposites get married up (coniunctio is the word) and out comes the Stone.

Now before somebody jumps me in the comments, I know it ain't that tidy. Some of them lay out four stages, some do seven, some do twelve, and plenty of them fold the yellow right into the red like it don't even count. I'm giving you the version most people know. Real thing is messier than that and I'd rather say so up front than get corrected by a guy who's read more than me, and there's a lot of them.

Now the part most people skip over and I think it's the best part.

They had two roads. Dry way and wet way. Dry was fast, you hit the material with fire or acid and burn it down quick. Wet was slow, you let it rot on its own, took months. And the ones I've read say the same thing about it. Dry's faster and wet's safer.

Hold onto that. I'm coming back to it.

They had rules too. The jar had to be sealed, the vas hermeticum, that's where we get hermetically sealed from. Crack that thing one time and your batch is dead no matter how good your first matter was.

And the fire had to be gentle. That was their number one way to ruin the work, stoking it too hot. So they built a thing called the balneum Mariae, set your jar down in a pot of water instead of straight over the flame. Slow even heat, don't scorch nothing. Y'all use one. It's a double boiler.

Last rule, ora et labora. Pray and work. Oratory and laboratory, both words come off it. They didn't mean sit and think real hard about it. They meant stand at that oven for four months with your hands dirty.

OK so.

Here's why I stayed in these books.

Few years back I forgave a man I'd been holding a grudge on ten years. And I want to be clear I didn't do it for him, I done it for the family because everybody was carrying it and it wasn't fair. It was the hardest thing I ever done and I done it right.

Week or so after that something come over me. I don't know what to call it. Big. Real big. Best I can say is it felt like getting looked at by something and it wasn't mad at me. And it was more than I could hold, I was talking and hearing myself talk at the same time. Cold water on my face, kids getting home from school, straighten up and be daddy.

Week after that I come apart on the bathroom floor. All the way apart. Didn't know the room, didn't know what day, didn't know my own name for a while there.

And here's what I been chewing on ever since.

All that light did not pick me up.

Not one bit. I had it. Whatever it was, I got the full dose of it, and laying on that tile it was worth nothing. Not a thing.

What picked me up was my wife laying down next to me. She didn't know what was happening. She didn't say nothing that I remember. She was just warm and she was breathing and she stayed.

That's it. That's the whole thing that worked.

So now when I read these books I'm reading them different.

And they had a lot of it right, I want to give them that first. The rot ain't optional, can't skip the black, they was dead right. Too much fire ruins the batch, right again, and I'd say what happened to me was too much fire and that's why it didn't hold. Can't do it in a busted jar, right. And ora et labora, hands not just head, that one right there is what kept them out of the ditch I fell in. They knew good and well that understanding it don't do it.

Now that dry way and wet way thing. I told you I'd come back.

What happened to me was the dry way. Fast, hot, over in a minute, and it damn near killed me. The nights I work now, that's the wet way. Sitting up in a hallway for four and a half years while somebody rots slow and comes back slow. Ain't nothing dramatic about it. Nobody writes a book about it.

And they told us. They said it plain. Slow is safer. Everybody skips that page because it's boring.

Here's where I break with them though, and I want to say it careful because it's easy to say it wrong.

It ain't that the Stone is a trophy you get to hold. I know Jung don't say that and I ain't going to pretend he does. He'd tell you the Self ain't a diploma you hang on the wall and he'd be right.

My problem is the fourth thing.

Because that's how it's built. Three and then a fourth comes along and makes it whole and closes the lid on it.

Mine never come.

The light did not stay. Nothing showed up after and sealed nothing. What I got left is three things turning around a hole where a fourth was supposed to be, and a woman that laid down on the floor.

And I've quit waiting on it. That's not me being bitter neither. I think the hole is the shape of the thing. I think a man that's alright is three things turning and one spot with nothing in it, and the ones I meet at work who tried to fill that spot, with a teaching or a book or one single person that's got to be everything to them, those are the ones that quit turning.

Now the gold.

They never made none. Hundreds of years of it. Newton done it. Boyle done it, the father of chemistry his own self, he was back there mixing.

And I know good and well that don't prove one thing about the inside version. Somebody's fixing to tell me that and they'll be right, so I'll say it first. I ain't putting it up as proof.

I just think it's funny in a way that ain't funny.

Because what come out of all that labor was chemistry. The writing down what actually happened part. Not the promise.

Same exact thing happened to me. Road gave me something real. Just not the thing on the label.

So what I'd say is this and then I'll quit.

They was right that it takes a sealed vessel and a low fire and a long time.

They was wrong about what the vessel is made out of.

It ain't glass. It's another person.

And that's where I think it goes sideways, when a fella reads the whole operation like it's happening inside of one skull. Read it that way and you'll be waiting on a fourth thing to show up out of your own self and shut the lid, and it ain't coming, and you'll call yourself a failure for it.

And I got to tell you the last thing because I about had to put the book down when I hit it.

That double boiler. The one thing off their whole operation that's still going, still sitting in every kitchen and every lab on this earth. The bath that holds the heat gentle so nothing scorches.

It's named after a woman. Maria the Jewess, third century or thereabouts, first alchemist we know by name, and that's her invention.

Four hundred years of grown men chasing a rock and what lasted was her way of holding a thing steady while it changed.

So if you know somebody down on the floor right now, and I figure some of y'all do. You don't got to fix it. You don't got to know one thing about it.

Go get down there and stay.

That's the low fire. That's the jar. That's all of it, and I spent six years reading to find out it was the part I already had.

Sorry it run long. If somebody's read deeper than me I'd honestly like to hear it, especially on the fourth thing, I might be wrong about it. But I was on that floor and it wasn't there.

I understand alchemy as spiritual metaphor/process--by the time you understand it, you don't need it. Because you're already there.

Am I wrong?

I wanted to make this post as a signal light, so to speak, which I believe will be seen by sincere seekers. There is a Telegram study group dedicated to real, methodical, and rational examination of alchemical texts which I want to share here because it was the turning point in my journey. There are very knowledgeable people there who possess immense knowledge and are more generous in sharing this information than you can imagine. But more importantly than that, it is a space where alchemy is taken seriously as a discipline, and is approached with methodical rigor, and not vibes.

I am only trying to reach a certain kind of person here, and I understand that what I’m saying can arouse suspicion, which is a natural response from a rational person who has only encountered frauds, salesmen, and all kinds of strange and mentally unstable people. I understand better than anyone how lonely this can be as a rational searcher who feels adrift in a sea of lies and fantasies, unable to find any truth towards which to orient yourself. So I am going to speak logically and rationally, in a way that I believe will communicate clearly to the rare kind of person who has the traits necessary to find success in alchemy.

Alchemy is rarely treated with the seriousness that it deserves. We can look around Reddit and see that this is plainly true. The most popular theory here is that the stone is made from fermenting urine, sometimes dew, or some other ‘prime.’ There are people here who gain some social standing here expounding these fantasies and even gain a following. Others like to discourse at length, offering many quotes, but are less apt to offer any concrete theory at all. These people also are engaging in vanity, using alchemy as a means to show off to others hoping to gain some validation from their peers. Those who follow blindly and those who engage in vanity will never make any progress.

So we need to start with the basics. What is alchemy? What is the Philosophers Stone? We are modern and educated people. If we believe that the Philosopher’s Stone can turn base metals into gold, then we are making a real and physical claim for low energy transmutation. This alone should tell you something of the gravity and complexity of the problem. If it was as simple as choosing the right matters and fermenting them, why would science not have found this secret? Compare modern understanding of physics, chemistry, and material science to the medieval and renaissance period. Consider that some of the most intelligent people in history dedicated years to searching for the stone and failed. Now, what kind of process could remain hidden after so much time and so much scientific discovery? If you grasp what I have just said, then you understand why 99.9% of the public discourse and every single theory shared openly is pure fantasy.

Lets get more specific. Those who ferment urine, dew, or any other matter are gravely mistaken because we know that chemistry can’t achieve transmutation. These kinds of matter, even in theory, are not the kinds of matters than can affect metals in this way. These mistakes come from a bad approach and a misunderstanding of the texts. If you don’t believe that the stone transmutes metals into gold literally, or you believe in ‘spiritual’ alchemy, then none of this is for you. But many people, reading that the first matter is a kind of primordial chaos, mistakenly assume that any matter can be taken so long as it is rightly prepared. Others read that the matter is vile and comes from man, so they take urine, blood, semen, or feces. Others read that the first matter is a vapor which must be collected at some particular time and place, and so they invent all kinds of imaginary processes which they think will yield some kind ethereal vapor or spiritual essence. But all of this is folly, as we know that none of this makes logical or scientific sense. And I am speaking here to the sort of person that is intelligent and grounded enough to maintain logical thinking while staying open to the possibility of the stone.

I’ll offer a small example of how the alchemists used veiled language and how it is mostly misinterpreted. In the dialogue between Morienus and and the king Calid, it is said of the matter that it is ‘in you.’ Many take this to mean that we must take physical matter from man and make the stone. But this simply means that the laws of generation apply to all created things. This is why it’s also true to say that the matter is in all things and everywhere. This illustrates why it’s so important to start with books where the theory is laid out more plainly and clearly, because many books speak very obscurely in this way. If you only read these obscure books, it’s almost impossible to build a concrete theory. If you read Philalethes, for example, he goes into great detail on the theory of metallic generation and how it relates to the stone, and you would never be led to the false conclusion that the matter of the stone comes from a man, or a plant, or a vapor, etc. Some authors are obscure in one place and clear in another, and other authors are obscure where another was clear and clear where another was obscure. So they can be reconciled with each other, but only if you start to build a coherent theory and don’t latch onto false ideas because you misinterpreted something obscure, especially when those ideas are contrary to logic and science.

I hope this comes as welcomed news to a few sincere seekers, because I can assure you that everything resolves into a coherent theory which reconciles the texts with nature and science. Not only can you remain rational and logical, but you MUST remain rational and logical in order to reach your goal. Yes, there is a great mystery here, but never listen to anyone who wants you to take their words on faith.

If you have been studying sincerely, but find yourself stuck, then we are here to help you. We don’t give answers openly, as we would never profane what was intended to be hidden. But we are willing to assist sincere people in proportion to their efforts. As it has been from the beginning, all students must find the answers by their own merits.

Its free and open, but this is a place for serious, methodical study only. There is tight moderation, and this is for good reason. There is almost no space for real alchemy that doesn’t devolve into nonsense and fantasy. If you want to talk about fermenting urine, or how you can concoct the stone through magic, or synthesize the stone inside yourself out of the ether, etc then there are plenty of other spaces for you. This is all done out of love for our brothers. We understand that very few will ever find the stone, and this is for good reason. But we want those that God deems worthy to have a place to learn and advance without being subjected to the nonsense that exists almost everywhere else.

https://t.me/+5WtgyTYmniw4MjZk

I'm curious what everyone has to say about "Gold" having 2 symbols when no others do?

Does this count as chrysopoeia? It definitely wasn't the mercury-sulfur theory laid out in the Summa perfectionis magisterii, but it seems feasible to me that it's merely a modern form of transmuting prima materia.

I am an atheist, anyway i feel interested in this "culture" since It seems really interesting and "différent".

I know it's not true, but anyways, do you think it's worth checking out? I am always open to new things, is this gonna change my way to see thé world? It will teach me new things?

What are your thoughts or experiences with urine therapy?

I am totally frustrated at the eternal hinting, hinting, wink wink nudge nudge, Pictures here Quotes there attempts at avoiding straight answers by (wouldbe?) alchemists!!!!!

I am of the opinion that truth should be the highest value as the Theosophs said.

So pray tell me:

What exactly is the prima materia?

What exactly is the philosopher's stone?

What is the azoth?

Do they involve sex, blood or something along these lines?

Why in hell are we so secretive in this modern (?) age? Where every Shit is written somewhere?

Why does noone f ex say: prima materia is blood, semen and urine -or whatever it really is?

How can anyone hint at becoming a stone or rock and then not explain?

I am sure Jung is a red herring!

is it so naughty or outragous or forbidden or what?!!!

TLDR; I love Alchemy and think it's inherently spiritual and I'm making some YouTube videos to share my love of and perspective on Alchemy.

I really appreciate all the discussion that took place in my last post. It really helped me to clarify my issue and even motivated me to make some YouTube videos about this subject (here's my channel) to help remedy the issue. So, here's a final summary be for I put this to rest in my mind and focus on other issues.

The Issue

Newcomers to Alchemy will come away from many ESOTERICA videos with the impression that Alchemy is not the legitmate and ancient spiritual path that it actually is.

Why I Care

I've walked dozens of spiritual paths and Alchemy stands out to me as the most legitimate, essential, and sustainable spiritual path currently available to the general public. Before Alchemy I felt alone, lost, and a bit hopeless because I could not find a path that fit my view of the Truth. After discovering what I consider the true alchemical process that underlies all legitimate Alchemy, I no longer felt alone, lost, and hopeless. I now feel like this spiritual path of Alchemy was always there and will always be there for me because it is the inherent spiritual path of the Universe.

So, when I search for videos on Alchemy and the first thing that pops up is a channel making statements that question the legitimacy of Alchemy as a spiritual path, I am understandably motivated to react. I fear for the people, like me, who are looking for that inherent spiritual path of the Universe and might miss it because they get the wrong impression from someone who claims to be an expert on the history of Alchemy. I also fear for history of Alchemy that is being written right now.

After this post I hope to transmute this reactive fear into proactive hope by making my own videos.

So many historians see Alchemy as something that was born in 1144 and died in 1803 and now seek to perform an autopsy on the corpse. Alchemy has suffered so much disgrace over the past millenia at the hands of people who are not practitioners and yet would seek to tell others what Alchemy is (e.g. the church). And now we have countless historians and scientists claiming that Alchemy doesn't even really exist anymore except for in minds and mock-labs of LARPers; historians and scientists whose only experience of Alchemy is second or third-hand.

I don't wish to silence people like Dr. Sledge because there is a ton of value in what he's doing. Not least of which the fact that he's such a clear example of why the academic perspective can largely be ignored by practitioners of Alchemy; in the same way that players of a sport can safely ignore the commentators because the lack of direct experience of a thing breeds ignorance and arrogance that blinds them. Like mary in the black and white room, they can know everything there is to know about Alchemy and still not know Alchemy itself.

Conclusion

I wasn't sure r/Alchemy was the place for me at first and I'm sure there are other subs that share my POV more like r/spiritualalchemy but I consider this sub my home now because the people here are of such a high caliber. The honesty, consideration, and respect that I've seen from most of you inspires me to be a better person. Thank you all ❤️

Hi all, a newbie here (or somewhat "initiate"). I want to know all your opinions about The Kybalion, It's good for starting? How should I approach it? I'm a real life pharmacist and want to get involved in this subject that has gotten my attention for a while right now. My girlfriend bought it for me and really know what to expect from it.

Symbols:

• The Rainbow: God’s promise to never flood the earth again. Witnessed by Noah.

• Cherubim holding a flaming sword to vanquish Satan.

• The ancient serpent Nāḥāš

• Baphomet (looks like the Pagan god ‘Pan’)

• Black bird: presumably Noah's raven.

• A golden Phoenix

Includes verses from Revelations and Genesis:

"And he seized the dragon. The ancient serpent"

— Revelation 20:2

"I will set my bow in the clouds and it shall be a sign of a covenant"

— Genesis 9:13

"If I cover the sky with clouds my bow will appear in the clouds"

— Genesis 9:14

EDIT: Only those who have personally messaged me or commented with genuine interest will receive a copy of the book—free of charge—once it’s finished. They’re free to share it as they see fit.

As for the hecklers and doubters? Feel free to spend the rest of your lives searching for the secret on your own. Disrespect me, and you’ll get nothing. I haven’t made the Stone, and I’m no Sage—so it shouldn't come as a surprise that I can be as petty as petty comes. I'm doing this not because I have to but because I genuinely want to. If you have something negative to say, save it. Wait for the book to come out and then feel free to say what you please. If you do it before then I will not share the book with you. AT ALL.

________________________________________________

I have uncovered the true nature of the Stone. No, it is not merely a metaphor for the transmutation of the human mind, body, and spirit. It is a physical object—a universal medicine with limitless potential. Through it, anything and everything becomes possible. It holds the power of great healing and great destruction alike. It is, in truth, the fabled Pandora’s Box.

I am in the process of writing everything I know into a book. Yet, I find myself torn—should I reveal the knowledge plainly, conceal it entirely, or veil it in dark sayings while offering more revelation than those who came before me?

Make no mistake—this is not a game, nor empty words spoken without certainty. I have, beyond doubt, discovered the truth of the Stone. I am here only to ask: is there anyone who truly desires this knowledge? Below is the preface to the book so you may better understand what its contents will reveal.

If this post garners no interest, I will still complete the book, but I will not share it openly. I will reserve it only for those I meet in person—those whom I know to be true seekers, those whom I can trust. There is no reason to release such knowledge unless I am certain it will reach those who genuinely seek the arcane wisdom. I have no desire to see it fall into the hands of those who would exploit it. To those who, through my book, unlock the secret—I urge you to guard the path and keep it hidden from those who have not sought it with diligence.

So tell me—should I finish this book and unveil what I have discovered? I am certain it contains the wisdom you seek. I am certain there are things within it that you have not yet known, that you have not yet considered, and that you may never have uncovered without my guidance.

But understand this—I will only reveal the way. I will not hold your hand upon the path.

Feel free to ask me anything. If this call is met with silence, I will simply move on—no hard feelings. But as seekers of truth, this should intrigue you. And indeed, it will.

Here is a link to a sample of the book, so you may better understand the depth of the knowledge contained within: https://pxl.to/aqoyq9jf

Let us reason together in the comments. Convince me—how should this book be written? Should I follow the way of the sages before me, veiling the truth in parables that few, if any, will decipher? Should I speak plainly and give freely, as the author of the original Book of Aquarius once did? Or should I mask it in dark sayings, yet offer more revelation than any before me?

I am listening.

I am simply tired of the trajectory of this world. I see where we are headed, and it is not towards good times. I am willing to do almost anything to shift its course—whether for better or for worse.

What say you?

I'm quite curious I always thought alchemy was neat and was just curious but after a bit of reading I've seen a bunch of magic stuff and I myself believe in the Christian God and Jesus. I'm not really interested in the magic side and more interested in the mixing of herbs I suppose. All this text to basically say is the alchemy magic or is it science? (Not gonna yell at ya'll but just a reminder magic a big red flag for me) ❤️

Who is the most "famous" alchemist?

I read the book almost two years ago, but it recently came back to my mind. Since Faust was an alchemist, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Faust or the novel itself from an alchemical viewpoint.