From the book
The Secret Work of the Hermetic Philosophy
Attributed to Jean d’Espagnet · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordsSeparation distinguishes what is to be retained from what is extraneous; purification removes impediments; philosophical sublimation also supplies what is lacking.
- In the bookThe three are related but not synonymous. Canon 51 makes sublimation a double work of removal and supplementation. Canons 31–33 deny that every apparent separation yields an independent, useful tincture.
- In this edition“Accidents” means nonessential conditions; sublimation includes supplying what is lacking.
- A place to readCanons 47–51 explains why the difference between substance and accidental impurity is indispensable.
Meaning
Separa in Canon 47 means “Separate,” the imperative governing the pure and impure, substance and accidents. mundationem in the same canon is “cleansing,” an antecedent preparation without which the hidden part cannot be called forth. sublimatio in Canon 51 is “sublimation,” specified as philosophical, and defined through two complementary actions.
Its two actions are removal of what is superfluous and deficientia introducendo, “introducing what is lacking” (Canon 51). The latter phrase shows that sublimation is not described merely as subtraction.
Use in the book
The book opens its account of practice with analysis and renewed conjunction (Canon 3). Principles are investigated and made more perfect before being joined again. This sets a problem that later canons continually refine: what can be separated, and in what sense can a constituent be perfected without destroying the relevant body? The work does not approve every separation simply because the practitioner names it philosophical.
Canon 6 attacks the multiplication of ingenious operations that turns seekers away from nature's simple path. Sublimations, distillations, dissolutions and congealings all appear in that criticism, although the author later employs the same families of words positively. The fault is not the bare name of an operation but the manner and aim of its use. A vocabulary list detached from argument would therefore reverse the force of an early passage by treating its criticized procedures as straightforward instructions.
Canons 31–33 impose another limit. The solar tincture cannot, the author maintains, be entirely separated from its natural body. What appears to be an extracted tincture may only be some of the body in a liquefied condition. The next canon's hypothetical concession is not a retraction: even if separability were admitted, corruption would defeat the intended advantage. This boundary is important when the later account repeatedly demands separation. It is not a universal permission to isolate any desirable property from any body.
The preparation of mercury gives separation a more specific object. Its inward hidden part is rooted in nature, while its outward part is described as accidental (Canon 47). Canon 50 calls the impurities not of mercury's root and substance and therefore separable. The reasoning moves from an ontological distinction to an operative possibility. Because the unwanted condition is not constitutive of the substance sought, removing it need not destroy that substance. The theological language of original sin and the medical language of leprosy and dropsy dramatize impediment and cleansing, without providing modern diagnostic or chemical identities.
Canon 51 prevents purification from becoming a merely negative ideal. Philosophical sublimation removes superfluities but also supplies what is lacking. Mercury already possesses a grain and ferment of nature's sulphur sufficient for itself; the desired work is to make that power sufficient for others. The added perfection is directed towards communicability. The difference between “enough for itself” and “enough for others” is a major organizing thought, repeated in the discussion of multiplied fire (Canon 96).
The element sequence applies separation to an ordered redistribution within the work. At the second digestion waters separate from waters and elements are drawn from chaos (Canon 69). These divisions must be proportioned so that the earth is neither submerged nor deserted. Separation is therefore accountable to the subsequent union. Evacuation makes the risk explicit: excessive intensity carries impure and pure together, while excessive duration strips the earth of too much spirit (Canon 86). What matters is not the greatest possible removal but a discriminating division that leaves the next stage possible.
Sublimation also has a narrower connection with volatility. Canon 40 says that what is sublimed in each governance is called mercury because the name properly belongs to a volatile thing. The fixed elixir can be called “their mercury” only improperly. The lexicon must therefore distinguish philosophical sublimation's broad preparatory role from every instance of upward movement. Related terms are not equivalent in every context.
Places to read
- Canon 3Latin(1623, printed pp. 10, 10 [sequence pp. 10, 11]) — Analysis, perfection and renewed conjunction define practice.
- Canon 6Latin(1623, p. 12) — Criticism of proliferating ingenious operations.
- Canons 31–33Latin(1623, pp. 25–27) — The denied separation of solar tincture and its hypothetical concession.
- Canons 38–42Latin(1623, pp. 30–33) — First preparation and philosophical sublimation; the relation to volatile mercury and Herculean labour.
- Canons 47–51Latin(1623, pp. 35–38) — Cleansing, substance and accidents, separable impurities, removal and supplementation.
- Canon 69Latin(1623, pp. 51, 52) — Separation of waters requires weight and measure.
- Canons 85–86Latin(1623, pp. 61–62) — Evacuation must neither confuse its fractions nor exhaust the body.
- Canon 133Latin(1623, pp. 92, 93) — Sublimations and digestions figure in the final explanation of released fiery power.
Translation in this edition
“Accidents” in these passages means nonessential accompaniments or conditions, not mishaps. “Sublimation” retains the source's word but does not guarantee identity with a modern laboratory operation. At Canon 51 the two gerund phrases make the practical definition double: removal and introduction. A gloss saying only “purification by removing impurities” would omit half the canon's account.
Lemma mini-records. Separa (Canon 47), separate the pure from the impure; mundationem (Canon 47), preparatory cleansing; sublimatio (Canon 51), philosophical sublimation as removal and supplementation; deficientia introducendo (Canon 51), introducing what is lacking; superflua (Canon 51), superfluities identified as external accidents.
supplying what is lacking — deficientia introducendo
Attested form. deficientia introducendo.
Meaning. Introducing what is lacking, the second component of philosophical sublimation. It means supplying a needed contribution, not introducing defects or deficiencies into mercury.
Read. Canon 51.
cleansing — mundatio
Attested form. mundationem.
Meaning. Prior cleansing required before the hidden inward part of quicksilver can be called forth. The preparation removes an impediment and is not itself identified with the hidden essence.
Read. Canon 47.
separate — separare
Attested form. Separa.
Meaning. Separate, the command distinguishing pure from impure and substance from accidents. The objects restrict what is to be removed rather than authorizing indiscriminate destruction of the material.
Read. Canon 47.
sublimation — sublimatio
Attested form. sublimatio.
Meaning. Philosophical sublimation is explicitly twofold: remove superfluities and introduce what is lacking. A definition limited to taking away impurities would omit its augmenting function.
Read. Canon 51.
superfluities — superfluus
Attested form. superflua.
Meaning. Superfluities identified here as external accidents clouding the desired power. They are removed in a preparation that also supplements what is lacking.
Read. Canon 51.