This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

themselves to be good and right, but those of others to be deceptive and against Nature original: "Naturam". Or they applied foreign theories, opinions, and terms of the Art original: "Artis," referring here to the "Great Art" of alchemy.—which were unknown even to themselves—to their own private process, which was known to them alone (as I shall declare elsewhere through many examples). By this very act, they have overshadowed this Art with such thick layers of clouds that, until now, hardly any ability has remained for either Masters or Disciples to impart any benefit to the learned world.
It is greatly to be wondered at—or rather, it is a cause for grief—to see such imperfect philosophical systems as have been handed down to us by the Masters of this art until now. These systems are not infrequently in contradiction both with Nature and with themselves, even though, through the medium of this art, they could have truly and clearly explained the miracles of Nature without such a distortion of words. In this regard, using a bit of "philosophical license," I would even dare to affirm here that many of the **Adepts** <term>Adepts: (Latin: *Adepti*) Individuals who have successfully completed the "Great Work" of alchemy, gaining the Philosopher's Stone.</term> have, through their writings, shown themselves to the world as better **chemists** <note>original: "chymiistas"</note> than **philosophers** <note>original: "philosophos," meaning those who understand the underlying laws of natural philosophy.</note>. What, I ask, could have been achieved more excellently in **medical matters** <note>original: "re medica"</note> than to have devoted effort to this subject by imitating the diligence and industry of **Paracelsus** <note>Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim, known as Paracelsus (1493–1541), was a Swiss physician and alchemist who pioneered the use of chemicals and minerals in medicine.</note>? But alas—I might even say, what a shame!—out of all of them, perhaps three or four se-