alchemy

The ancient art of Alchemy is believed to have been alive in our species since 1900bc, founded by the great Egyptian King Hermes Trismegistus. Because so much is shrouded in here-say it is hard to tell apart the fact from the fiction, especially as Emperor Diocletian ordered the destruction of all Egyptian books relating to Alchemy and other occult sciences, to stem a revolt in Alexandria in the year 296.

What is clear from the few fragments that survived, is that to the ancients, the practice of Alchemy had little to do with making money out of thin air, W B Yates made this point clearly in his work Rosa Alchemica, when he wrote;  “I had discovered, early in my researches, that their doctrine was no mere chemical fantasy, but a philosophy they applied to the world, to the elements, and to man himself.”

An example of this can be found in 35ad, when it was reported that Chang Tao-Ling, the first Taoist Pope “declined all offers to enter the service of the state,” instead preferring to “take up his abode in the mountains where he persevered in the study of Alchemy and in cultivating the virtues of purity and mental abstraction.”

Alchemy is synonymous with a quest for the discovery of the Philosophers Stone, the mythical element that was the secret ingredient required for transforming base matter into gold or silver, and unlocking the secrets of immortality.

But it was not until 8th-century Persian Alchemist Jabir ibn Hayyan (Latinized as Geber – and from which we get the word gibberish) came along that anyone had ever applied this as a scientific method. Geber theorized that a thorough understanding of the natures and qualities of the basic elements (fire, water, air, earth), combined with a magic “red powder” made from the philosophers stone, would lead to the transmutation of one metal into another.

Many scientific minds of the time rejected the theory, one opponent of Geber’s stating: "Those of the chemical craft know well that no change can be effected in the different species of substances, though they can produce the appearance of such change."

However, during the Middle Ages a crusade began to discover the stone (some going so far as to link it with the wisdoms of King Solomon’s temple).  And “according to legend, the 13th-century scientist and philosopher Albertus Magnus is said to have discovered the philosopher's stone and passed it to his pupil Thomas Aquinas, shortly before his death circa 1280.” Wikipedia

It wasn’t until the 17^th Century when an Alchemist by the name of Robert Boyle wrote a book called “The Skeptical Chymist”, that modern chemistry evolved and eventually disenfranchised itself from the fanciful thinking’s of Geber. But we in the West are a literalist lot, and still we crowd our minds with images of witches and warlocks lurking over bubbling cauldrons whenever we conjure up the word Alchemy.

German theosophist Franz Hartmann wrote in 1902:

“It is erroneous to confuse alchemy with chemistry. Modem chemistry is a science dealing only with the outward manifestations of matter. It never produces anything new. One can mix, compose and decompose two or three chemical substances any number of times, and make them reappear in different forms, but in the end there is no increase in substance; there is only the combination of the substances used at the outset. Alchemy neither composes nor mixes: it increases and activates that which already exists in a latent state. Therefore alchemy can be more accurately compared with botany or agriculture than with chemistry. In fact, the growth of a plant, a tree or an animal is an alchemical process taking place in the alchemical laboratory of nature and conducted by the Great Alchemist, the active power of God in nature.”

It is such a beautiful idea when the transmutation of lead into gold is presented as an analogy for personal transmutation, from the mundane into the spiritual, or the ignorant into the enlightened.  It is a gorgeous idea that our ancestors have left us to consider: that we were all born with unlimited potential, and as Gerhardt Dorn said, all have the power to “transmute themselves from dead stones into living philosophical stones.”

the bravest ten year old: he's doing it her way!

Did anyone read the Metro today?

It featured a story about a ten-year old lad who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria in the summer break, a complex condition which is defined by the NHS website as affecting people “who believe that they were somehow born into the wrong body, and they often prefer to live as a member of the opposite sex.”

He returned to school in Worcester as a she (or rather, dressed as a she as sex changes are not legal to anyone under the age of 18 in this country) and was welcomed back with great applause by teachers, who went so far as to hold special assemblies in order to inform other pupils of the transformation.

Now, that is what I call education.

Not to mention progress; there is simply no way that would have ever happened in my school days.  I was brought up in the North East, a place where (still) if a man wears a jumper on a cold day he is referred to as a homosexual.  

Gender plays a big part in North Eastern life, and perhaps this is why this story has touched my heart a little. There are so many staggering elements to this story it is difficult to know what makes it so wonderful.

As well as the truly admirable attitude of the school, the child’s mother is just a gorgeous woman, in the face of certain adversity, willing to accept and support her child with unconditional love.

She talked to the Metro about her son: ‘She is within her mind a girl but she has a boy’s body. She is a girlie girl.  She has suffered bullying but is happier to be going to school as a girl.

‘When we made her dress as a boy, she would get into a right state – it just doesn’t feel natural to her.

‘It’s going to be a hard school life for us and for her as well. But she is a strong person and I’m sure we will get through it as a family. The other pupils have been little stars who have accepted my daughter into the fold.’

Of course, there are many who have bullied and tortured this child, simply because he is prepared to be who she is, without compromise.  And they were not children as the child’s mother “revealed her child had been branded ‘a freak’ by other adults and reduced to tears by one man while shopping.”

I was bullied as a child for being different, but at least I now have the consolation to say that my torturer’s were children: literally, they didn’t know any better. But for an adult to reduce a child to tears, because that child chose to express himself freely in this free country, is the kind of cowardice that really takes some beating.

Truth is, to reduce a child to tears you must be very threatened, frightened, insecure and lets face it, alone. Nothing frightens a conformist more than someone who is doing it in his or her way. It threatens the sheep when one of the flock refuses to follow.  It confuses them.  But humanity did not get to where it is by everyone going in the same direction.

There is total ignorance around this subject, and it is only through paying attention to the brave actions of people like this child and all who support him, and ignoring the stupid reactions we have built into conformity, that we will ever be able to educate ourselves of the endless diversity of our wonderful species.

It makes for a very exciting future.

expectations

It is simply amazing how much misery one person will endure, how unhappy one person can be, when reality does not conform to their expectations.  As the 18^th Century English poet Alexander Pope put it "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."

However, no matter how many times we warn against crossing bridges before we come to them, or counting chickens before they are hatched, we as a species are still too busy building high hopes to live for one second in the moment.  When our hopes crumble, we crumble with them.  Animals don’t have this problem. It is uniquely human. Perhaps this is why it is so often remarked that this is a dog’s life!

There are levels to all of our expectancy, how we expect others to behave, ourselves to react, or events to unfold are largely dictated to us by our social/religious/economic conditioning. We have expectations built into our programming. Our parents teach us that if we behave well, we will be rewarded, and like domestic pets, we train our needs to be rewarded.

Not everyone is conditioned in exactly the same way, yet everyone designs their expectations on what they believe will make them happy – and most people seem to agree that money would make them a lot happier.

How often do you ask yourself: am I happy right now? It is not as if it is an unimportant question.  In comparison, how often do you ask yourself the question: will I have enough money tomorrow?  Are you really rich (or guaranteed happiness) if the answer to the first question is no, and the answer to the second question is yes?

We all want happiness, so why aren’t we happy? Why do we wait for/expect something external (such as a lottery win) to happen before we allow ourselves to be happy, instead of letting go of the past and the security of the familiar that we know makes us unhappy?  It is a paradigm that everyone suffers with; we are at total conflict with ourselves.

Even those who are “stuck”, who don’t look forward to anything, are living in the fantasy realms of their expectations everyday, and without even realising it this is why most take things for granted, including the power of their own free will.

Most people do not expect change. They are in the same job and married to the same person, rear children, buy homes and endure family holidays for years upon years of unquestioning misery. There are thousands upon thousands of people who are discontent with work, or argue with their spouse everyday, and loathe everyday as it unfolds, yet consign them selves to being this way for the rest of their lives. They’ve made their beds…

And we wonder why people have nervous breakdowns, mid-life crisis and heart attacks? Most “content” people are plodding along with only memories of good times and expectations of more to come to keep them happy. How many people are happy within every moment of their lives?

As Alan Watts proposed in The Wisdom of Insecurity “If my awareness of the past and future makes me less aware of the present, I must begin to wonder whether I am actually living in the real world. After all, the future is quite meaningless and unimportant unless, sooner or later, it is going to become the present.”

Of course, not all expectations are detrimental. If an athlete enters a competition and expects to win because of her training, dedication and fitness levels, then only someone with a greater dedication would defeat her.  “For, he that expects nothing shall not be disappointed, but he that expects much, if he lives and uses that in hand day by day, shall be full to running over.” Edgar Cayce.

But that takes focus, and “the powers of memories and expectations are such that for most human beings the past and the future are not as real, but more real than the present” Alan Watts, The Wisdom of Insecurity.

The future maybe wonderful, it may not. The world could end in 2012, or could continue for another 2012+ years. Does it matter? Should it matter? Do we need to know what is going to happen tomorrow to be happy today?  

chapter five: church of nine

Snow fell like salt from a generous shaker, seasoning the windscreen of Valentine’s car.  He watched Hak’s apartment building as if it were a film about to start, smoking the last embers of his cigarette before throwing the putrid stump onto the pavement.

The passenger door opened and a fat man joined him, sniffing the air with deep disapproval. The suspension creaked, buckling under his weight as he squashed into the car, snacking on a large portion of chips.

“You’ve been smoking that human poison again, haven’t you.”

            Valentine heaved a sigh of hatred. “Nice to see you Valentine” He said to the air. “Been a while…How have you been? These are all of the ways people begin conversations Hoffman.”

“Haven’t you?” Repeated Hoffman, gorging himself.

“Hoffman,” Said the thin, slick Valentine in repulsion at his obese companion. “If I wanted to be judged I would have handed myself in years ago.  Also, if I wanted a lecture in over-indulgence I doubt I would ask for it from you, Mr Snack Attack. So, be a quiet hypocrite, there’s a good chap, something very interesting is happening.”

            “Interesting enough to get me out of bed at this hour?” Hoffman finished his chips, rolled down the window, and threw the litter into the street.

            “It’s five o clock in the afternoon.” Said Valentine.

            “Valentine, just tell me what is so important. I’m missing my favourite TV quiz for this. Not to mention central heating!”

            “See for yourself.”

“See what?”

Valentine pointed across the street. Harry flopped Hak’s lifeless body into the rear seats of a Mini as Aunty took her shotgun position up front, while prompting him to hurry along.

“Those people over there are kidnapping that woman.”

Hoffman rolled his lazy eyes and sighed, deeply frustrated. “So? What do you want me to do about it? Congratulate them for their anti-social behaviour and buy them a pint?”

 “Are you not interested at all to know why?”

“Are we going to play these games all evening? Because I am not interested, if we are.”

Valentine smiled. “So it wouldn’t interest you to know that their victim was delivered unto by a Consort of Destiny this morning at her fathers funeral?”

Hoffman’s jaw dropped. He tried to form words, but they could not stick between his slack lips.

Valentine signalled as the Mini drove away. He waited, and when the time was right, pulled out with just enough speed to ensure they could follow undetected two cars behind. He knew he would not lose them. He rarely lost.

“You’re not joking, are you?” Hoffman finally stuttered.

“No.”

They drove on through the frozen streets, Hoffman chewing his fingernails like a nervous squirrel. “Holy crap! Do you know what this means Val?”

“It means we could be less than 24 hours away from discovering the Prize.”

Hoffman pondered the idea in a humble one-minute silence before allowing a wide serpentine smile to spread across his round face. “I was beginning to believe we might never return.”

Valentine almost crashed. “Return? Are you bloody mental?”

“You make it sound as if there is an alternative.” Said Hoffman, taking his turn to swerve.

“Hoffman, the Prize is one of the most powerful evolutionary forces in this universe. It has been resident on this planet for 2000 years, and has transformed a race of monkeys from abacus stroking fools to rocket launching maniacs in less time than it took our own race to learn how to tame fire.  That is power.  Anyone who holds that power could rule over any race they chose. Holy Hell, you could even start your own race, given the right conditions!”

Hoffman gasped. “Do not tell me you believe that superstitious hokum!”

“You’re telling me you don’t believe in the power of the Prize?”

“Of course I am.”

“Then answer me this: How do human beings know about Quantum Physics yet not understand it?”

Hoffman stuttered. “There is a perfectly reasonable explanation.”

“Of course there is, because they are more advanced then their abilities. Name one other species who is in this predicament?”

Hoffman huffed.

“I take from your silence that you can’t. I rest my case.”

Hoffman shuffled uncomfortably in his seat. “Valentine, if the boss could here you now, you would be burned for eternity, and I would be tortured for his amusement, forever, for just listening to you.  The Prize was stolen from our Master and was hidden here, now the Consorts are back in town we are more likely to find it. When we find it, we take it back. End of story.”

“Do you believe everything you are told?”

“From reliable sources, yes, it’s called an education. Perhaps you should try it yourself someday.”

They stopped at a red traffic light.

“You honestly believe that our Master would have the balls to take us on if we decided to keep the Prize?”

“Okay.” Said Hoffman, biting on the last straw. “I am going to say this very clearly, and very slowly to you, as I believe you are one step away from jumping out of your mind. The Prize is the Prize possession of our Dark Lord and Master. We, being his favourites, have been assigned the task of returning it to him. As it has already taken us 2000 years, I assume he is quite pissed at us. If we never return it, he is going to be very pissed. If we steal it from him, he will find us and we will die ten thousand consecutive and painful deaths and still live to feel the pain of them all.”

Valentine smiled. “If that were true, it would have already happened.”

Hoffman frowned.

Valentine, knowing his charm was winning, continued. “Think about it, back in the good old days, when our Dark Lord and Master had his Prize trinket, no one messed with him. He would never have let 2000 years pass without retribution. He tortured people for using the wrong toothpaste on the wrong day. Think about it. Is that a coincidence?”

 Hoffman considered the thought deeply, smiling at his personal conclusion. “You might be on to something here, Val.” 

The light turned green, and they were away.

“Do you have a plan?” Asked Hoffman, preying the answer would be yes.

“No.”

“Then what are we doing?”

“Winging it.”

They parked four cars down from the Mini, allowing just enough time to see the kidnappers carry Hak into a small cottage on the outskirts of town.

 Valentine lifted a carton of cigarettes from the glove compartment, lit up and inhaled. “There is only one person on this rock who can lead us to the Prize, and she is in that cottage.”

“So…what are we going to do?”

Valentine frowned. “That is the question.”

martyrdom: what god wants

It is amazing the lengths that some people will go to, to please god.

It is difficult to look at religion without sooner or later stumbling across the word martyr (which means witness).  In the early days of Christianity bearing witness (martyrdom) was not intended to lead to the death of the witness, but often did as Christians were persecuted heavily in Rome for their beliefs.

Especially by the middle of the third century, as the Roman Empire was on the verge of collapse, and in order to impose order the emperor Diocletian decreed that everyone in the Roman army should make a sacrifice to appease the gods (whose neglect, he believed, was the root of the problem.) Many Christians (a large demographic of his army) refused, and in response, Diocletian ordered the destruction of churches, arrested many of the Christian leaders and demanded that all make sacrifice to his gods, or be put to death.

Many chose brutal and horrific self-sacrifice, no doubt inspired by the tales of the passion of Christ. According to Wikipedia: “The early Christian period before Constantine I was the "classic" age of martyrdom. A martyr's death was considered a "baptism in blood," cleansing one of sin as baptism in water depicts; while the act of baptism does not provide the forgiveness of sins, it is a clear picture of it. The "baptism in blood" provides an even greater picture, showing both the loyalty and love the martyr has for his/her Savior.”

Tertullian (160-220ad), one of the most prolific early Christian authors, wrote: “The more you mow us down, the more we grow. The blood of our martyrs is the seed of the Church.” (What is truly terrifying is the author from Carthage could have written this yesterday, and it would still bare significance to our modern world.)

However, it is worth noting that not every religious leader subscribes to this interpretation of martyrdom. Baha u llah, the founder of the Bahai faith, “discouraged the literal meaning of sacrificing one’s life, and instead offered the explanation that martyrdom is devoting oneself to service for humanity,” the truest form of martyrdom being, “a life-long sacrifice to serve humanity in the name of god.” (A far cry from strapping a backpack of C4 to your chest in order to be delivered to 72 virgins and be handed an AAA pass to eternity for your kin.)

In this modern age, martyrdom has taken on a whole new level of meaning. Gone are the days of saints being burned at crosses for defending their personal faith in the face of discrimination. Today, we live in a world of religious terrorism.

Kamikaze tactics have been recorded in military procedure since 1661, when Dutch soldiers fighting against Koxinga’s forces for control of Taiwan were said to use gunpowder to blow up themselves and their opponents rather than be captured. In the 18^th century, John Paul Jones described how Ottoman sailors would set their ships on fire and ram into their enemies. It was nihilist suicide bombers who assassinated Tsar Alexander 2 of Russia in 1881, launching hand made grenades at his coach while he was driving on one of the central streets in St Petersburg, killing themselves in the process. And of course, there were the Kamikaze pilots of World War 2…

So suicide terrorism is hardly a new concept, however suicide bombings in Iraq since 2003 have killed thousands of people, mostly civilians, allowing a new and ugly phenomenon to raise its head in the political/religious battlefield.

There were 478 suicide bombings in Iraq in 2005, and according to a report released by the Human Right Watch in the same year "The groups that are most responsible for the abuse, namely al-Qaeda in Iraq and its allies, Ansar al-Sunna and the Islamic State of Iraq, have all targeted civilians for abductions and executions. The first two groups have repeatedly boasted about massive car bombs and suicide bombs in mosques, markets, bus stations and other civilian areas. Such acts are war crimes and in some cases may constitute crimes against humanity, which are defined as serious crimes committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population."

However, numbers have dropped rapidly over the years, with 76 suicide bombings in 2009, and 53 in 2010.

Is this not something for us all in the West to consider?  I think we should take the upcoming anniversary of 9/11 to remind ourselves of just how safe we all are in comparison.  Yet there are so many conspiracies and theories as to how 9/11 happened and who did it that we can easily lose sight (in my opinion) of the important questions this event, and others that leave families torn apart all over the world, asks humanity to reflect on.

What god wants has never been more important than life, it can never be more important than life, because without life, god would cease to exist. Fear is an enemy of our own making, not of god’s. In the words of Albert Camus: “Martyrs, my friend, have to choose between being forgotten, mocked or used. As for being understood - never.”

death - the final frontier?

I’ve always been a little perplexed by the question “is there life after death?” Especially as I find it more interesting to consider life before death, but mostly, because death is not the opposite of life, it is the opposite of birth.

Life has no opposite; it is the cycle of which death and birth are just a part, and lets face it, dying is a lot easier than being born.  People come back from the afterlife with experiences of bliss and happiness; if you could remember your birth would the same be true? As Mark Twain put it: “All say, "How hard it is that we have to die" - a strange complaint to come from the mouths of people who have had to live.” 

Death has it’s own customs that feature in every culture in the world, to the sky burials of Tibet to the mummifications of the East. Not every culture mourns death in the same way, according to James Michael Dorsey in his article Extraordinary Burials from around the World, “the way mankind deals with its dead says a great deal about those left to carry on, and burial practices are windows to a culture that speak volumes about how it lives. As we are told in Genesis, man comes from dust, and returns to it. We have found many different ways to return.”

But it seems that nothing is able to occupy our cultures more (when it comes to death) than the concept of the afterlife.

Since before the early Greeks devised of Hades, there have been as many theories to the afterlife as there are applications, some believe you are greeted by God’s servants and family members, others believe you are thrown back onto the Samsaran conveyer belt to be born again, while others simply assume that you are sucked into a void of nothingness…which is getting off lightly, when you consider what could happen to you in hell.

Since Dante’s Divine Comedy, those with a European mindset have conceived of hell as eternal punishment awaiting those who refused to conform to God’s will (the will of the Sea of Rome) in life.  However, the corrupt agenda of the Catholic Church can barely be trusted to give any kind of guidance in such matters, especially in modern times (although, its not like the behaviour has worsened, its just become public.) The scandals that surround priests and the flagrant displays of wealth that surround Vatican City demonstrates how prepared the leaders of the Christian Faith are to follow the teachings of Jesus, who lets face it, had death nailed.

Was Jesus not here to lead by example? Was the story of his rising not meant as a hint that death was nothing more than another doorway in life?

The idea of reincarnation has always appealed to me, but is life really just a buffet of experience we each gorge ourselves on, and death the price we pay for each feast? Johann Wolfgang von Goethe believed that “as long as you are not aware of the continual law of Die and Be Again, you are merely a vague guest on a dark Earth."

He is by no means the only one to believe so. One of my favorite thinkers of all time had this to say on the matter. "The soul comes from without into the human body, as into a temporary abode, and it goes out of it anew it passes into other habitations, for the soul is immortal. It is the secret of the world that all things subsist and do not die, but only retire a little from sight and afterwards return again. Nothing is dead; men feign themselves dead, and endure mock funerals… and there they stand looking out of the window, sound and well, in some strange new disguise." Ralph Waldo Emerson

Not one of us can say with absolute certainty what is going to happen to us when we die. And even though we may witness the termination of biological functions that sustained people, loved ones, animals surrounding us, can we honestly testify that that is their total end?

Samuel Butler said: “To himself everyone is immortal; he may know that he is going to die, but he can never know that he is dead.” Can anyone know they are dead? What are ghosts (if you believe in such things) if not spirits without a machine? How do mediums (the genuine ones) contact the dead?

There are so many incredible mysteries in life that we may never know the answers to until we die, and when you look at it like that, death could be the most illuminating experience you have ever had (since the last time you died?). Until then the purpose of life must be to live. "Live so that thou mayest desire to live again - that is thy duty - for in any case thou wilt live again!" Freidrich Nietzsche

the truth, the whole truth, but I don't know the truth...

“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” Arthur Conan Doyle

The truth has always been a battleground from which very few (if any at all) can claim absolute victory. Philosophers and freethinkers that pre-date Socrates have grappled with how to decode life’s mysteries into one agreeable coherent understanding, but so far, everyone is just giving it their best guess.

There are those who think that, for a belief to be true, it must correspond to the actual state of affairs in the external world.  But can what is true be defined purely on the merit of how well it describes/copies “reality”? 

Does a camera really never lie? Is seeing believing? Do we even share the same reality? Thirteenth century theologian and philosopher Thomas Aquinas thought so; he was a great believer that the truth was something we could all externally agree upon, saying “a judgement is said to be true when it conforms to the external reality.”

But Aquinas was writing in the days when only the Catholic Church could claim their opinions to be the absolute truth, a fact that many Lutheran’s of the time contested with their lives (a truly dark age).

Thankfully times change, and truth follows (or vice versa)…but it rarely happens everywhere at once.

Still today, when giving testimony in some (most) courts in the west, you are asked to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth while swearing on the Bible and asking for gods help. Which is bizarre, considering that the Bible is crammed with staggeringly inaccurate propositions, such as the world being created in six days. 

And as modern philosophers Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy proposed in their brilliant book The Laughing Jesus, “what if the old testament was a work of fiction? What if Jesus never existed? What if the Bible is a political work of propaganda created by Taliban-like fundamentalists to justify the sort of religious violence we are witnessing in the world today?”

What if indeed…

In the days of Aquinas such inquiries would have had you burned at the stake (in some parts of the world, the same fate could await Freke today), but we can take nothing for granted if we want to discover the truth.  According to Freke: “None of the stories we tell to help us navigate towards the truth are the truth, but some come closer to being true stories than others…most of us are so wrapped up in our stories that we mistake them for certain knowledge. We treat our stories, which are at best relatively true, as the absolute truth.”

This cannot be more truly stated than for some in the scientific community. Just as the Catholic priests of their day claimed their knowledge to be the only truth, our priests in lab coats have transformed the test tube into the scepter to guide us into the new ages.  

If something is stated as “scientifically proven”, we must bow down to it as if not to do so would transform us into an irrational heretic. Yet how much of science is absolute? Even Einstein remarked: “Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”

All the greatest minds in the world, the greatest thinkers, artists and scientists of our time have all had one thing in common: they were absolutely unprepared to accept the truth as other people perceived it. Nothing would progress if everyone simply accepted the status quo.

The world would still be flat.

Certainly one thing going for science is the language of mathematics. A mathematician in Iraq and a physicist in Wales may be brought up in two very different cultures, but the principles of mathematics are the same for both of them. There is something very beautiful about this. Because it seems that whatever the truth is, nothing serves as a greater barrier to it than language. There are now close to 7 billion people inhabiting Earth, speaking 6’809 different languages (most of them are spoken by fewer than 1,000 people)

According to Wikipedia: “All languages have words that are not easily translatable into another. The German word Zeitgeist is one such example: one who speaks or understands the language may "know" what it means, but any translation of the word apparently fails to accurately capture its full meaning.”

What truth we create we do so in our own reality, but nothing is certain, you can never know everything, and nothing can really prepare you for what you can find out: gnosis is limitless. If we cannot agree on any other thing, perhaps this is a good place to start.