I will propose another approach to solve the question. Since $\mathfrak g$ is semisimple then we can decompose $$\mathfrak g = \mathfrak n^- \oplus \mathfrak h_1 \oplus\mathfrak n^{+}$$ where
$$ \mathfrak n^{+} = \sum_{\alpha >0} \mathfrak g_\alpha$$
$$ \mathfrak n^{-} = \sum_{\alpha <0} \mathfrak g_\alpha$$
such that each $\alpha$ is a root.
Now, we can consider the isomorphism of Lie Algebras
\begin{align*}\varphi:& \mathfrak g \to \mathfrak g \\
H &\mapsto e^{\text {ad} (X_{\alpha_1})} \cdot \ldots\cdot e^{\text {ad} (X_{\alpha_n})}(H)\end{align*}
where $\{X_{\alpha_1},...,X_{\alpha_n}\}$ is a basis of $\mathfrak n^+$, such that, $X_{\alpha_i} \in g_{\alpha_i}$.
Note that $e^{\text{ad}(X_{\alpha_i})}$ is well defined since $\text{ad}(X_{\alpha_i})$ is nilpotent. Moreover it is an isomorphism, because $\text{ad}(X_{\alpha_i})$ is a derivation and $e^{\text{ad}(X_{\alpha_i})}$ is an invertible linear transformation.
Consider $H \in \mathfrak h_1\setminus \{0\}$ since $H \neq 0$, there exists a root $\alpha$, such that $\alpha (H) \neq 0$, otherwise we would conclude that $H \in \mathfrak z (\mathfrak g)$, because $[H,H_1] =0,$ $\forall H_1 \in \mathfrak h_1$ and $[H,X_\alpha] = \alpha(H) X_\alpha =0$ $\forall$ root $\alpha$ which implies that $H \in \mathfrak z (\mathfrak g) \Rightarrow H = 0$ since $\mathfrak g$ is semisimple.
Since there exists a root $\alpha$ such that $\alpha(H) \neq 0$ we conclude that $\varphi (H) \not\in \mathfrak h_1$ for all $H \in \mathfrak h_1 \setminus \{0\}$. Then $\mathfrak h_2 = \varphi (\mathfrak h_1)$ is a Cartan subalgebra that satisfies the required properties.
Edit: 14/02/2020
In order to check that $\varphi (H) \not\in \mathfrak h_1$. Note that if $\alpha(H)\neq 0$, then $\text{ad}(X_\alpha)(H) = \alpha(H) X_\alpha \in \mathfrak g_\alpha $. Let $\pi_\alpha: \mathfrak g\to \mathfrak g_{\alpha}$ be the natural projection into the subspace $\mathfrak g_{\alpha}$. Since $[\mathfrak g_{\alpha},\mathfrak g_{\beta}] = \mathfrak g_{\alpha + \beta}$ (if $\alpha + \beta$ is not a root the $g_{\alpha + \beta}:= \{0\}$) one can conclude that
$$\pi_\alpha \left(e^{\mathrm{ad}(X_\alpha)}(H)\right) =\pi_\alpha \left(\sum_{n=0}^{m} \frac{1}{n!}\mathrm{ad}(X_\alpha)^{n}(H)\right) =\pi_\alpha \left(H + \alpha(H) X_\alpha + ...\right) = \alpha(H) X_\alpha. $$
Since $\varphi$ is the product of exponencials of $\text{ad}(X_\beta)$ and we are considering only positive roots. Coupled with the fact that the identity matrix appears summed up in the operator $e^{\mathrm{ad}(X_\beta)}$, i.e. $$e^{\mathrm{ad}(X_\beta)} =\color{blue}{\text{Id}} + \text{ad}(X_\beta) + ... + \frac{1}{n!}\text{ad}(X_\beta)^n.$$
This implies that the term $\alpha(H)X_\alpha$ cannot be vanished by the successive application of the operators $e^{\text{ad}(X_\beta)}$, $\beta>0$. Therefore
$$\pi_\alpha(\varphi(H)) =\pi_{\alpha}\left( e^{(\text {ad} (X_{\alpha_1})} \cdot \ldots\cdot e^{\text {ad} (X_{\alpha_n})}(H)\right)\neq 0,$$
implying $\varphi(H)\not\in\mathfrak h_1$, because $g_\alpha$ is l.i. with the subspace $\mathfrak h_1$.