Here is one of alchemy books that has caused many difficulties to students of the Art concerning the interpretation of its images. Nevertheless erudite alchemists such as Magophon (Pierre Dujols) and Eugène Canseliet have written commentaries about it.

We have, at least four different editions with commentaries on The Mutus Liber. The Hipotypose of Magophom, L'Alchimie et son Livre Muet of Eugène Canseliet, Mutus Liber by Jean Laplace and Comentaires Sur Livre Muet by Serge Hutin; all seek to extract its knowledge.

Of these books, only the first two, in our opinion, are of interest because the last two merely repeat what was said in the first two, without adding anything of value to the interpretations.

Of the first two, we prefer the comments of Eugène Canseliet because they agree more with practical alchemy.

Canseliet was a scholar of Greek and Latin as we already know from his other works. In the commentary on the Mutus Liber he concentrates on theoretical and symbolic explanations, making references the texts of other authors intercalated with his own explanations. In this case he moved away considerably (or purposely, who knows,) from the true modus operandi. He focuses on understanding the plates, not a true and practical interpretation of the images of the Mutus Liber.

In our opinion, the interpretation key of the Mutus Liber images is in Tablets IV and V. It is not worth continuing if there is no understanding of their symbolic meaning and the modus operandi, because without this understanding, it will be completely impossible to interpret the images that follow these two tablets.

For some years we have tried to understand the symbolism of these two tablets, but sadly without positive results as we explain:

Tablet IV. The image is very explicit. There is no room for doubt that the image shows us the collection of dew by way of hemp sheets attached to wood stacks. In the centre of the image a " cone " is seen representing cosmic radiation. On the left side on top there is the image of the Sun and on the right side, that of the Moon. It may seem strange to you to see the image of the Sun when the dew will have obligatorily to be collected before dawn when it is most abundant. This fact shows perfectly that the light that we receive from our nocturnal star is the solar light reflected as polarized light.

Pg. 87. « Without the intervention of the sky, the work of the man is useless. The trees do not graft and the grain does not sow in all the stations. Each thing in each time. The philosophical work is called Celestial Agriculture. »

Dew collection will have to be done in the spring, in the months from March to May as shown to us allegorically by the sheep (Aries) on the left side of the image and the bull (Taurus) on the right.

Magophon does not interpret these images as representing the vernal months. Canseliet says that he does it purposely.

Until here everything seems to agree, but it is not so simple as the image shows us. In this image we see also a couple of alchemists twisting one of sheets over a wide plain basin to squeeze out enough dew from the sheet, but the basin is already full.

If you try to collect the dew in the same way that is showed in this tablet and when squeeze the first sheet of a common size you will see the result. You will obtain little more than a half litre even on an excellent and propitious night for dew collection!

Therefore, the operation represented by Tablet IV, in our opinion, is fallacious, because by this method it is completely impossible to collect the hundred litres of dew necessary to extract some tens grams of salt. Therefore, we started to collect the dew in fields whose grass was as free as possible of animal excrement and other polluting agents. Near cities, it is completely impossible these days. Canseliet also seems to be of our opinion, as you will see:

Canseliet is very clear when he says that the dew ennobles any salt, mainly the " saline couple " (melting) used in the antimony dry way.

We believe that there is no doubt about that in Tablet IV, Altus pictographically describes the dew collection process by means of hemp sheets attached on stacks, but we saw that, for this process, so many sheets would be necessary to collect enough dew what it would be impractical.

One has suggested more expeditious methods to collect dew, as by means of devices that extract humidity from the air, etc. We must remember, however, that the celestial moisture never can have contact with metallic objects.

Canseliet says on pg.103 Tablet IX would logically follow Tablet IV. We would agree with the Master, because we know that after the dew is collected, it has to be exposed to lunar radiation, so that it is charged with the greatest amount of astral fluid possible. But in this image there is a small problem. In the lower part on the left side you can see that the woman is pouring out the contents of a great plate into a vase that she delivers to a person who seems to represent Mercury.

However, if this Tablet was to follow to Tablet IV, the woman would not pour out the contents of the plate that would contain the raw dew into the vase: she would deliver the plate to the husband so that they could both pour the contents into the great cucurbit to be distilled as we see in Tablet V. This seems, to us, to be obvious.

Tablet V: We see the couple pouring the full dew basin into the alembic cucurbit that, judging by the size of the oven, will have to contain more than twenty of litres of dew. Then a suitable helm is put into place and we see the dew distilled in a container that is almost full. The fire in the oven used in this operation is an alive fire.

Let us review, for a moment, this delicate operation of dew distillation.

Then, in the dew distillation shown in Tablet V we find a contradiction between the images and reality. Canseliet refers to the "secret distillation" and that there is a reason to refer to the alembic as a rosary.

But, before that, the Master says that it is necessary use it in all its freshness, filtering it only.

This is not the way that we learned in the Solazaref Filtration, or in the writings published by that Filiation that, as far as we are concerned, is not without reason.

The dew that has been recently collected will have carefully been filtered of all its vegetal impurities that pollute it but will still presents a tea-like colour, having in suspension microscopic particles of vegetal matter.

The test for these particles is to leave some dew to rest for a few days in a 20-litre glass bottle in the basement it will putrefy and exhale a nauseating smell. Only after that dew putrefaction can it be transfused by siphoning and filtration. Then it can be distilled, still sheltered from the light.

This is the secret distillation that Canseliet refers to, but he does it without first putrefying the dew.

Why does Canseliet say that the distillatory (alembic) was designed to be known as a rosary? Here is a very interesting symbolic comparison that only a few will comprehend has an actual, practical meaning.

The rosary it is constituted for small spheres, not unlike the drops that fall from the beak of the alembic to the receiver. In any distillation that happens, but here, because of the symbolism, in our opinion, it is quite unique.

The dew distillation is made in the absence of solar light at low temperature, no greater than 60Cº, and each drop will have to fall into the receiver at intervals close to the time that it takes to pray an Ave Maria! Solazaref make reference to this in his writings about dew distillation.

Having said this, if we observe Tablet V, we will see that the dew distillation was made with a hot fire, that is, beyond the recommended 60ºC! Here it is, therefore, the first contradiction between the allegory and the practice.

But there are more. One knows that the dew contains a subtle salt (ammonium nitrite) but as soon as this salt is put into contact with the solar light, even indirectly, the nitrite of the salt is changed into ammonium nitrate, which is not a volatile salt.

In the central image we see the woman removing from the cucurbit, with a wooden spoon, a substance that is placed into a glass bottle. There are four symbols that Canseliet uses for "coagulation symbols". Later it is delivered to a person who catches in the lap, with the left hand, a child that has the lunar symbol printed on the left side of its chest.

Canseliet says to us that is Vulcanus, but without much certainty apparently.

But it is not this that intrigues us, as we will see. Whoever has done dew distillation knows that after distillation there remains in the cucurbit a caput from which a salt can be extracted by calcinations that is identical to the dew was previously putrefied. Let us imagine that the dew was collected by sheets. That caput would be an ammonium nitrate that the woman delivered in the bottle to the person described above.

In these circumstances, what passes into the receiving flask after the dew is distilled? A limpid water without any salt, because the nitrate is not volatile and does not pass in the distillation.

If the dew had two distinct salts, one volatile and the other fixed, this second distillation would have produced it. But we know from experience that the dew contains only one salt, that is, the ammonium nitrite that inevitably will be changed into nitrate if exposed, even indirectly to the sun and this is not a volatile salt.

Then, in the bottom part of the image we see the man pour the contents of the container filled with the product of the first distillation (dew distilled already without salt) in four vases with covers. These are placed in an oven for coagulation (of what?), which, later, in Tablet VI, is poured into another alembic, and he proceeds to another distillation whose caput is a substance assigned with a flower.

For the reasons pointed out above, we ask: what is the source this matter represented by a flower if the salt proceeding from the dew already was in the cucurbit in the first distillation?

We stop here because we cannot find a logical answer that makes the system clear. No one, not even the erudite Canseliet, was able to give this work a credible explanation.

Therefore, in our opinion, and in the face of concrete facts about the modus operandi of collection and distillation of dew, which we have done several times, we are forced to doubt the method described symbolically in the Mutus Liber of Altus.

We would be grateful if anyone who can explain the modus operandi of the V and VI Tablets would do so. We would be thankful that if it could be done, because we and other brothers will benefit but as we have said, in the face of demonstrated facts, we are absolutely convinced that the Mutus Liber will remain Mutus ad eternum!