Chapter Ten Question. What knowledge is chiefly necessary and required for this Art? How is it to be acquired, and what other qualifications and qualities must an investigator of the Art possess?

Answer. As for the first part of this question, the principal requirements are: first, knowledge of Nature; second, knowledge of the matter; third, the process; and fourth, a Christian life. Just as one cannot attain knowledge of the matter without knowledge of Nature, so without knowledge of the matter every process and practice, every effort and labour, is in vain. Without a Christian life, one will reach no successful conclusion.

Conversely, knowledge of Nature readily leads to knowledge of the matter. Once one knows both Nature and the matter, the process too is readily found, especially if the labours are undertaken in accordance with Nature. Through them one is introduced to Nature’s greatest secrets. Knowledge of God’s omnipotence, perfect wisdom, and mercy is increased, and with it faith and trust in his divine mercy—for no discipline can accomplish this more fully than this one. One is consequently encouraged to gratitude for that mercy and to a Christian life.

Second, to learn all this one must likewise persevere in prayer, reading, meditation, and labour. I say prayer because every good and perfect gift comes down from above, from the Father of lights—especially wisdom, the mistress of every art, as Wisdom, chapter 7, calls her. Dionysius Zacharius also writes specifically of this discipline: “Our science is so divine that it has always been, and still remains, impossible for men to learn it through any study or diligence whatever, even if they are the wisest and most learned philosophers of all, unless it is first inspired by God,” and so forth.

Reading and meditation must certainly not be neglected. When by these means one has acquired sound theory and knowledge of the matter, one may confidently proceed to the remaining tasks and undertake the labour. Through it one can better understand the philosophers’ obscure sayings and attain actual knowledge of Nature. Moreover, without manual labour the Work can never be completed. Yet here too one must first earnestly implore God to grant success, so that our reading, meditation, and labour may not be fruitless, but attain their purpose.

Thus, as to the third part of the question, anyone who pursues this often-mentioned Art should possess not only a subtle intelligence, according to the frequently cited Son of Sendivogius, but also a patient and steadfast disposition. He must not let sophistry, fraud, or idle talk unsettle him—such talk as “This man or that spent thirty or forty years on it, another fifty, and expended a great deal without achieving anything.” Nor should vexation make him abandon the Work and relinquish his purpose prematurely.

In my own observation, this happens especially to those who have first acquired neither theory nor sound foundations. As soon as they obtain some process or other, they rush straight into the Work and attempt to carry it out. Often, even when they have the right matter, they fall into doubt because the Work will not succeed as they expect. They begin it differently, now in one way, now in another, and finally, when they accomplish nothing, abandon it altogether. They may even dare to burst out in denunciation and declare the Art false.

Whether these men will have more to answer for before God, or those who regard this Art as the devil’s work and denounce it as proceeding from his inspiration, remains an open question.

There would be more to say about these and other slanderers. In particular, one might answer the otherwise celebrated historian Zeiller, who attacks Theophrastus sharply on this point. But the epitaph erected in his honour at Salzburg gives a different account. It includes these words: “Here lies Philippus Theophrastus, a distinguished doctor of medicine, who by his wonderful art removed those grievous afflictions, leprosy, gout, dropsy, and other incurable diseases of the body,” and so forth. Moreover, the celebrated theologian Johann Arndt, so often mentioned, himself calls him the excellent German philosopher. For the present, then, I shall leave the matter here.

I must nevertheless praise Theophrastus for this as well: I have found useful illumination in him concerning the second operation, and especially multiplication. From his writings I have also learned that he acknowledged the Lord God as his Creator, to whom he gave the honour for his Art. Remembering the fall of Adam and Eve and consequently his own birth in sin, he acknowledged Jesus Christ as the Saviour of the world, believed in the resurrection of the dead and a Last Judgment, and took comfort in eternal life. He faithfully demonstrated that belief through love of his neighbour, not only in the manner already described but also by distributing his possessions among the poor. His epitaph bears witness to this too: “And he honoured his possessions by assigning and distributing them to the poor,” and so forth.

I am no disciple of Theophrastus. Indeed, apart from the matters touched upon here, I have read little of his writings. Nevertheless, in pursuit of my purpose I did not wish to omit what I had drawn from the writings just mentioned. For the same purpose, and also to make clear that I have no desire to support Theophrastus in his errors, I include the following chapter.

But first I return to the subject, to finish answering the present question and its last part. Anyone who pursues this Art must be free of other burdensome business. He must also have adequate means and use them sparingly, so that distracting thoughts do not hinder his meditations, other business does not prevent him from attending to the Work, and a lack of the money it requires does not force him to abandon it prematurely. Hence Geber, according to the Lamp of the Philosophers’ Salt, advises: “It is also fitting that the artist should preserve his money and not presumptuously squander it, lest, when he has already come close to the truth, he should no longer have the means to continue his labour.”