Preface 2, no date (1581), Gerhard Dorn to the Reader (BP185)
| Author: | Gerhard Dorn |
| Recipient: | Reader |
| Type: | Preface |
| Date: | no date |
| Place: | 1581 |
| Pages: | 4 |
| Language: | Latin |
| Quote as: | https://www.theatrum-paracelsicum.com/index.php?curid=2050 |
| Editor: | Edited by Julian Paulus |
| Source: | Gerhard Dorn, Fasciculus Paracelsicae medicinae, Frankfurt am Main: Johann Spieß 1581, f. 14r-15v [BP185]
|
| CP: | Not in Kühlmann/Telle, Corpus Paracelsisticum |
| Translation: | Raw translation see below |
| Abstract: | The text discusses Paracelsus' views on the mysteries of natural things, particularly the primary matter and the homunculus. The author explains the allegorical nature of Paracelsus' language and criticizes those who interpret his words too literally. Paracelsus believes that true physics and all arts depend on the word of God, and he discusses the two lives of man: the eternal life sustained by the eternal bread and nourished by the word of God, and the natural life sustained by daily bread. Paracelsus posits that man has two bodies, two seeds, and a double blood, and he discusses the roles of mercy and justice in sustaining these bodies. The author concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding Paracelsus' enigmatic language and the value of studying the physical and chemical secrets of nature. (generated by Chat-GPT) |
| Back to Paratexts Back to Texts by Gerhard Dorn |
[f. 14r] Praefatio ad lectorem.
De naturalium rerum arcanis dicturi, quid sit arcanum priùs in hanc sententiam operæpretium fuerit aperire. Substantiam propemodum incorpoream esse dicimus, à suo crasso domicilio naturali separatam, & per chemicum artificium ad supremum suæ simplicitatis gradum adductam, vt communicatione quadam cum immortali, per similitudinem simplicitatis, si non immortalis, incorruptibilis tamen, ac vitæ longæ fiat particeps. Hæc autem studio & industria philosophiæ, non eius quæ docetur in scholis, at ea quæ in luce naturæ per chimisticum ignem illucescit, atque per experientiam addiscitur, haberi potest. Quatuor itaque sunt arcana rerum præcipua, iuxta Paracelsi doctrinam. Primum quidem posuit materiæ primæ, quam in rebus creatis non sensatis, earum semina, & in rebus sensatis spermata esse docet: non ea quæ natura producit in istis naturaliter, sed quæ per chemicam artem artificialiter ex earum substantia præstantissima producuntur. Hûc citatos iterum eos volumus, qui ænigmatica verba Paracelsi rudi nimirum ingenio suo ad literam reuocantes, in semetipsos potiùs quàm in illum inuchi videntur, dum veris philosophis ignorantiam suam produnt. Ad hunc locum est quòd referant quicquid alibi scriptum offendunt de homunculo, hunc videlicet non generari ex naturali spermate, sed ex artificiali in giganteam naturam & complexionem adduci, hoc est in robustissimam corporis & animi valetudinem, & non in staturæ proceritatem, vt supra tra- [f. 14v] ctatu primò. Mentem suam apertè prodit his verbis. Prima (inquit) materia depromenda non est ex eis ex quibus creatum hoc, vel illud creuit, sed ex ea prima materia, quæ ex illo producitur & generatur: ac si diceret. Natura ex suo semine sua creata generat. Ars verò, non ex eodem naturæ semine ex quo nata sunt creata naturalia, sed ex suo semine quod produxit ex eiusmodi naturalibus, naturaliter producta regenerat. Proinde cùm non fiat arte naturalis generatio, at solùm artificalis regeneratio, pariformiter non est opus naturali semine, sed potiùs artificiali artificialiter regenerante. Itidem de homunculo sentire videutr sub allegorico sensu, quem etiam detegit, his verbis: In dies (inquit) nutriendus est homunculus philosophicus, arcano sanguinis hominis, summa quidem industria in quinquagesimam septimanam, & quæ sequuntur. Iam considerent in Paracelsum calumniatores, quid ipsimet ex sua schola doceant. Ex eisdem (inquiunt) nutrumur ex quibus sumus, & econtrà. Qui fit igitur vt non intelligant Paracelsum docentem ex arcano sanguinis nutrimenti generari homunculum, & non ex spermate? Error interpretis vertentis Dampra in sperma, non est adscribendus autori. Non parui refert sanè Paracelsi scripta interpretari germanica, quæ etiam à Germanis ipsis vt plurimùm non intelliguntur, licet à quodam olim dum viueret conquestum sit, Germanos inferiores, aut Belgas interpreati hæc scripta. Sed vt ipsi ob amicitiam viuent parcendum esse duxi, mortuo magis remittendum: potuit admonere priùs quàm editis scriptis amicum reprehendere, tum quæ pollicebatur meliora dare. Vitiosa sunt, & incorrecta, quæ ab indoctis passim venalia circumferuntur exemplaria manu scripta, vt plerisque locis non nisi per coniecturam intelligibilia se præbeant. His tantisper fruimur, donec meliora contingant. Vt ad primam redeamus materiam. Hæc vt cuiq́ue rei peculiaris est, haud secus ad cuiusque instaurationem sua præstantior erit, quamquam & externa, vel ab alieno prolecta non est inefficax, neque inutilis, modò similitudinem cum interno habeat naturalem. Natura similitudine plurimùm gaudet in omnibus, cùm substantiæ [f. 15r] tum qualitatis. Hoc etiam adduximus infidelium dictum, ex eorum schola etsi cum alio nuperrimè citato prolatum, non tamen ortum habuisse putamus, cùm illi qui hæc in medicum adferunt non intelligant, alioqui meliùs de Paracelso iudicarent, istorum discipuli, quibus scripta sua declararunt olim infinitis commentarijs. Non tamen eo deuenerunt infideles, vt cognoscerent veram physicam & artes omnes ex verbo Dei pendere. In sudore vultus tui vesceris pane tuo, & quæ sequuntur. Item: Non ex solo pane viuit homo, sed ex omni verbo quod procedit ex ore Dei. Quid per hoc suos docet Christus? nunquid in homine duplicem vitam esse considerandam: priorem ac potiorem æternam videlicet, æterno pane ciboq́ue nutriri ac potu, verbo Dei nimirum: posteriorem verò quotidiano pane opus habere, de quo etiam alibi vult hominem sollicitum non esse, modò spiritualem cibum quærat in regno Dei, reliquum vltro aduenturum pollicetur, quicquid ad caducam hanc & naturalem vitam est necessarium? Si ergo vita naturalis est quotidiano pane sustentanda, cur non in pane hoc ea quæ faciunt ad eius vitæ conseruationem quæremus, cùm per sudorem iniunctum sit nobis à Domino creatore nostro, post æternum panem? Ex isto posteriore pane quotidiano, concludit Paracelsus hominem habere duo corpora, duoq́ue semina, sanguinemq́ue duplicem. Prius corpus esse dicit ex spermate parentum, & hoc viuere non posse nisi per posterius, quod ex spermate est nutrimenti, sustentetur & ex verbo Dei, quod huic pani dat baculum vitæ naturalis. Hoc ipsum corpus vocat misericordiæ, alterum verò quod habetur à parentibus, iusticiæ. De his lege latiùs primo libro suorum scriptorum in Paramiricis, cap[ite] 7. Proinde ex nutrimento misericordiæ sanguinem sibi parat Paracelsus, & ex isto per concoctionem in artificiato stomacho spermaticum semen etiam misericordiæ vel sudoris, per Dei misericordiam in eius verbo, quandam similitudinis energiam habet cum corpore iusticiæ, non secus atque istud iusticiæ tempore [f. 15v] cum fructib[us]] ligni Paradysi habebat olim. Hoc autem pane iusticia propter suam iniustitiam priuatus homo, vitam pariter iusticiæ perpetuam in Paradyso viuere desijt. Verum eius loco pane misericordiæ extra Paradysum donatus, vitam longam viuere potuit ac sanam, modò non abuteretur eo, alioqui labilem in vitam breuem & infirmam. Haud aliter intelligendum quod autor de generatione, vt etiam præcedente tractatu exposuimus. Quis tam solidus philosophus, qui sibi temere persuadeat, naturale semen, extra naturalem sibiq́ue destinatam terram, aliud quàm contra naturam quid posse producere, virulentumq́ue Basilisci, aut alterius serpentis monstrum? Fatuum est sanè credere tantum virum eò lapsum, vt ignari censores eius perperam intelligunt. Aenigmatica sunt omnia quæ scribit, nec aliter quàm ænigmatico sensu perceptibilia. Quod quidem in eo nisi deprehendissem ad literam non esse detorquenda, facilè cum alijs ipsum insimulassem alicuius impietatis. At contra video hunc Philosophum, in verbo diuino Physicam, atque medicam rationem prorsus fundatam esse velle, quod etiam videtur suos & non alios docere discipulos, id est eos qui ad ænigmata resoluenda nati sunt. Non omnes enim ad medicinam & physicam vocati fuerunt naturaliter, qui violentè has profitentur scientias, at maior pars eorum per fenestras intrusa, vt ad eas apta, non meliùs illas etiam exercet. Quapropter abdita naturæ, abdito sensu propalare non inconsideratè conatus est, quo probarentur illi, qui his arcanis dignis sunt à tractationis intellectu: reliqui verò procul arcerentur. hæc erant lectoribus proponenda, & ex primo tractatu in memoriam reuocanda, priusquàm arcanum primæ materiæ tractaretur, ne forte mox ab exordio, tractandi inaudito sibi modo perrerriti, à prima lecturæ facie adstinerent, alia reijcientes etiam arcana, etsi non minùs ac ista studio laboreq́ue maximo, ad ea, cùm intelligendum, tum acquirendum, sint præ cæteris arcanis physicis & chemicis dignissima, quæ natura recondit in penitioribus.
English Raw Translation
Generated by ChatGPT on 5 April 2023. Attention: This translation is a machine translation by artificial intelligence. The translation has not been checked and should not be cited without additional human verification.
Preface to the reader.
Before we discuss the mysteries of natural things, it is worth opening with an explanation of what exactly is meant by "mystery." We say that the substance is almost incorporeal, separated from its natural, dense abode and brought to the highest degree of simplicity through chemical art, so that it may, through a certain communication with the immortal, become a participant in a life that is not necessarily immortal, but at least incorruptible and long-lasting, through the similarity of simplicity. This knowledge can be obtained through the study and industry of philosophy, not the kind taught in schools, but the kind that shines forth in the light of nature through chemical fire and is learned through experience.
According to Paracelsus' doctrine, there are four principal mysteries of things. Firstly, he posits the primary matter, which he teaches to be the seeds of things that are not felt in created things, and the sperm in felt things—not those which are produced in these naturally by nature, but those that are artificially produced from their most excellent substance through chemical art. We would like to cite again those who, by interpreting Paracelsus' enigmatic words too literally, seem to reveal their own ignorance to true philosophers rather than to him.
To this point, they should refer to everything else written about the homunculus that they encounter elsewhere, namely that it is not generated from natural semen, but is instead brought into a giant nature and temperament through artificial means, that is, into the most robust physical and mental health and not into tall stature, as discussed in the first treatise. He openly reveals his mind with these words: "The first matter to be extracted is not from those from which this or that creature grew, but from that first matter which is produced and generated from it," as if to say, "Nature generates from its own seed." On the other hand, art does not regenerate natural things from the same seed of nature from which they were naturally produced, but rather from its own seed that was naturally produced from these natural things. Therefore, just as there is no natural generation by art, but only artificial regeneration, there is likewise no need for natural seed, but rather for artificial regeneration by artificial means.
Likewise, the homunculus should be understood in an allegorical sense, as Paracelsus also reveals with these words: "The philosophical homunculus must be nourished daily with the secret blood of man, with the utmost diligence in the fiftieth week and those that follow." Now let the detractors of Paracelsus consider what they themselves teach in their school.
They say, "We are nourished from the same things from which we are made, and vice versa." So how is it that they do not understand Paracelsus teaching that the homunculus is generated from the secret blood nutrient and not from semen? The error of the interpreter Dampra, who translated "sperm" instead of "blood," should not be attributed to the author. It is certainly important to interpret Paracelsus' writings in the German language, which are often not understood even by Germans themselves, although it was once complained by someone during his lifetime that Germans or even Belgians were interpreting his writings. However, out of friendship, I thought it necessary to spare them while they are alive and criticize them only after their death. Paracelsus could have warned his friend before publishing his writings, and then delivered on his promises of better things. The manuscripts that are widely circulated and sold by the uneducated are defective and incorrect, making them only understandable in some places through guesswork. We must make do with these manuscripts until better ones come along.
Returning to the primary matter, just as it is peculiar to each thing, it will be more excellent for each thing's restoration, although external matter, or matter taken from another source, is not ineffective or useless, provided it has a natural similarity with the internal matter. Nature delights greatly in similarity in both substance and quality. We also brought up the saying of the infidels, although it was recently quoted with another saying, but we do not think it originated from them, since those who bring this against Paracelsus do not understand him and would have judged him better otherwise, unlike their disciples who have explained his writings through countless commentaries. However, the infidels did not come to the realization that true physics and all arts depend on the word of God. "In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread" and what follows. Likewise, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." What does Christ teach his followers with these words? Is it not that in man there are two lives to be considered: the prior and more superior eternal life, sustained by the eternal bread and nourished by the word of God; and the latter, requiring daily bread, of which he also wants man not to be anxious, provided that he seeks spiritual food in the kingdom of God, and promises that the rest will come automatically for whatever is necessary for this mortal and natural life? If, therefore, the natural life is to be sustained by daily bread, why do we not seek in this bread what is necessary for its preservation, since it has been commanded to us by the Lord our creator to do so after the eternal bread? From this latter daily bread, Paracelsus concludes that man has two bodies, two seeds, and a double blood.
Paracelsus says that the first body is from the parents' semen, and it cannot live except through the second body, which is sustained by the semen nutrient and the word of God that gives the staff of natural life to this bread. He calls this body "mercy," and the other body, which is from the parents, "justice." He discusses this further in the first book of his writings, "Paramiricis," chapter 7. Paracelsus therefore prepares blood for himself from the nutrient of mercy, and from this, through digestion in the artificial stomach, he creates spermatic semen, also of mercy or sweat, which, through the mercy of God in His word, has some energy of similarity with the body of justice, just as justice once had the fruits of the tree of paradise in its time. However, man, deprived of justice because of his injustice, ceased to live perpetually in the paradise of justice. But in its place, he was given the bread of mercy outside of paradise, and he could live a long and healthy life, provided that he did not abuse it, otherwise his life would be short and weak. This should not be understood differently from the author's views on generation, as explained in the previous chapter. What solid philosopher would foolishly believe that natural semen, outside of its natural and destined earth, could produce anything other than something against nature, such as the venomous basilisk or the monster of another serpent? It is certainly foolish to think that such a man would fall so low that his ignorant critics would misinterpret him. Everything he writes is enigmatic and can only be understood through an enigmatic sense. If I had not detected this, I would have accused him of some impiety. On the contrary, I see that this philosopher wants to base physics and medicine entirely on the divine word, and this seems to be what he teaches his disciples, namely those who are born to unravel enigmas. Not everyone was naturally called to medicine and physics, but most of them entered these sciences by force, and even those who are suited to them do not necessarily exercise them better. Therefore, he has tried to reveal the secrets of nature with hidden meaning, so that those who are worthy of handling these secrets may be tested, while others may be kept at a distance. These things should be presented to the readers and recalled from the first chapter before discussing the secret of the primary matter, so that they do not give up reading from the very beginning, terrified by the unfamiliar way of discussing, and rejecting other secrets, even though they are most worthy of study and acquisition, among all the physical and chemical secrets that nature conceals in its innermost parts.
