References to Boundedness in Gregory of Nyssa
Introduction
The list of terms presented here is by no means exhaustive or fully representative of
Gregory of Nyssa’s view with regards to the notion of boundedness or limitations. I
decided to glean through some texts already available on this Gregory of Nyssa
Home Page using two representative English words (“bound” and “limit”) in order to
see what he was getting at
. The Greek texts obviously contain a richer fare;
transliterated words are inserted along with explanations when necessary to flesh out
the texts. It is not uncommon for Gregory to use insights centered around these two
key words when discussing the most fundamental aspect of human experience, the
vast yet ultimately circumscribed sphere of knowledge. Once this has been
established, Gregory proceeds to discuss both the personhood and divinity of Jesus
Christ. Thus his whole theology revolves around these two spheres, a common
feature to any good theologian, yet one that requires closer attention.
The reason for choosing this concept is actually quite simple. Boundedness is the
rock-bottom foundation upon which all our other concepts rest and are developed.
It tends to be overlooked because it is so fundamental. Unfamiliarity this insight can
run the risk of not being properly grounded when it comes to discussions about
theology or the spiritual life. When reflecting upon the fact that our experience and
knowledge about life (and this includes literally everything) is in the final analysis
restricted and is followed by death, we can despair or be cast into despondency which
colors our thoughts and behavior.
Gregory lived during the fourth century when Christian theology had achieved a fairly
high degree of sophistication within Hellenic culture. For this reason he offers
penetrating insights on human boundedness which remain applicable today. At the
same time, realization that we are inherently circumscribed can be an opportunity of
opening ourselves to the possibility that something may lay outside what we know
and experience. At first no evidence is present to support this possibility because
unconsciously we use boundedness to discern that which lacks bounds. After all, it’s
the only world we know. There comes to mind the familiar image of a fish not aware
of being in the water; it doesn’t come to this realization until it has been on dry land.
Another word we often use to describe awareness of that which exceeds our limited
condition is “faith.” I prefer to stay away from this term because it has certain
connotations ranging all the way from a dogmatic standpoint to an attitude we take
when things get desperate. It is therefore loaded and requires careful application
because of the overlay of interpretations gathered down the centuries. One example:
faith can be a kind of mental gesture reserved for trials and suffering, a grin-and-bear-it approach to life. While this may be true in some circumstances, faith as presented
by Gregory of Nyssa is considerably broader and rests in an appreciation that
anything we perceive is inherently restricted.
Our bounded nature is the stage for inspiration
which steps over this condition and
opens up a communication between the two realms. That is to say, inspiration in the
literal sense implies a breathing-in from a source other than our limited condition.
For this reason I have added at the end of citations from Gregory of Nyssa’s works
five passages from Plato’s Dialogues with which Gregory was acquainted.
The word theopneustos is used only once in the New Testament as inspired by God:
“All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for
correction and for training in righteousness” [2 Tim 3.16]. Gregory frequently uses
theopneustos in the same context when he quotes from Scripture to amplify a point
he wishes to make.
The concept of time is intimately related to that of boundedness. Gregory of Nyssa
uses a special term for this, diastema, which may be found in document also posted
on this Home Page: “References to Diastima in the Writings of Gregory of Nyssa.”
More specifically, diastema may translate roughly as “interval.” Thus we have three
sets of references, those pertaining to limit, time and inspiration.
Most excerpts have been taken from the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, volume
V. Those texts followed by the letter M refer to the Patrologia Graecae. Those
texts followed by the letter J refer to Werner Jaeger’s series of critical texts.
+
Texts
Hexaemeron
For as all beings are established at once by God’s ineffable power (aphrastou
dunameos); “beginning” (arche) as used by Moses which is understood as “head”
(kephalaion) is taken as the existence of all things. With regard to the boundary (ta
akra) of created beings, silence reveals by extremities (tois akrois). I mean this in a
human fashion (aisthesin) because they neither pass under the earth nor ascend into
heaven. M.72
Therefore fire has been begotten in the highest realms (in tois akrois) of creation and
is endowed with a circular movement (kukloeide). It is conveyed (sunelaunomenon) to
everything by the underlying power (dunamis) of nature; it does not have a place to
which it is immediately conveyed, for all perceptible (aisthete) creation is circumscribed
(periechetai) by its own limitations (horos). Having been moved, it advances by
intellectual nature (tes noetes phuseos), for as we have said earlier, fire does not have
the capability to move itself. M.77
The furthest human senses (anthropinen aisthesin) can reach are heaven and earth
for which reason [David] says that “In his hand are the bound (perata) of the earth”
[Ps 104.4], and the middle parts are encompassed (sumperielaben) by bounds
(peraton). Thus Moses says that material creation is circumscribed (dia ton peraton),
a fact with which we concur by the following words, “Earth was not seen and
unfurnished.” M.77
It thus follows that fire enables us to comprehend the firmament, that is, the bounds
(peras) of matter; only by its own bounds (horo) is the firmament circumscribed
(perigraphen), even though its material nature is compared to what lies above (ton
hupokeimenon). Heaven is its name just as the term “light” is called day and
darkness is called “night.” M.81
Water which is not seen, does not flow and is not constrained (ouk horatai) but lies
outside (echo) place and every perceptible (kat’ aisthesin) quality; if the spirit
(pneuma) of God bears this water aloft to the heavens and remains outside (menein
exoteron) all things known by the senses (di’ aistheseos), I would not think to hold
anything else except water which shares the properties which are common with
intellectual substance (ennoein ousian). For we suspect from that everything moved is
circumscribed (perieirgetai) within (entos) by the mind’s nature. Nature’s bounds
(horos) consist of temporal limits (to peras tes diastematikes) with regard to things
that are in motion, whereas the spiritual and adiastematic nature is free from tangible
and diastematic properties. The furthest boundary (akrotaton peras) of perceptible
(aisthetes) nature beyond which it cannot reach and what we know by appearances
(phainomenois) we designate by the name “firmament.” M.84
Since the waters are discerned (diekrithe) from one another, those seen and those
comprehended, and the boundary (horos) set between the two is heaven, that which
was grasped in the beginning with earth and all thing at the constitution (kataskeuen)
of the world, we now have the perfection (teleiotheis) and naming of the firmament
bounded (horisthentos) by the circling fire and the second perimeter of light, again
overshadowed and illumined the heaven above. Such was the name designated in
accordance with the sequence (akolouthian) and is the day. M.85
Air maintains its own bounds (en tois idois horois), nor does fire diminish; how doe
these which are consumed differ from water? M.92
Yet we observe the sea spreading out equally in all places and the course of rivers
maintaining their own bounds (en tois idois metrois); anything moist is witness
enough as not to be consumed through such bounds (peiras). M.93
In this fashion the world’s elements in every place and created thing have the same measure
(metrou) which at its beginning the Creator’s wisdom ordains for the harmony
(euarmostian) of all. M.96
First we have said that the ocean is one self-contained entity (suneches pros heauten)
and is divided into a myriad of seas, the totality of which is not dispersed. Should the
continuous presence of heat coming from the south enter it, those parts feel a
diminution because the flow of water is automatically drawn downward due by a
constant ebb and flow. M.100
Clearly this shows that the firmament was not rendered by saying that rain from the
waters above gushed forth; rather, heaven is called the air which encompasses
(perigeion) the earth, surrounding (horizonta) it with vapors and which is the boundary
(horos) of the more subtle, transcendent (huperkeimenou) nature. Nothing heavy
has the power to ascend beyond it, neither cloud, wind, vapor, moisture nor any
winged creature. M.101
When such water ascends, it becomes vapor in the air; air saturated with moisture
becomes dry in the heat above; what is earthly is separated from moisture through
fire; the coldness present in the earth through into water, and so it goes unceasingly.
There is no impediment nor infringement, but the boundaries (metrois) remain constant
(diamenontos) from the beginning (arche). M.113
If anyone asks us about the third heaven of which Moses is silent, Paul beheld it and
entered it as an inner sanctuary and heard unutterable things [cf. 2 Cor 12.2-4]; we
claim that the third heaven is not outside what we have expounded. It seems to me
that the great Apostle who stretched out (epekteinon) to what was in front of him had
transcended (diabas) the bounds (horous) of physical sensation and entered spiritual
comprehension (eis ten noeten katastasin) which no corporeal vision can accurately
grasp by thoughts. He says in his own words that “whether I was in the body or
outside the body, I did not know. God knows that such a man was snatched up to
the third heaven.” I think that the highest peak (akrotaton) of the perceptible world is
the third heaven which Paul named; by a three-fold division he named everything
visible which is in accord with Scripture and designated each of these parts as heaven.
Scripture names one heaven, the bound (horon)of the denser air where we have the
clouds, winds and the realm of high-flying birds; it names the clouds and birds of
heaven, not simply heaven but the firmament of heaven. M.121
Since he is familiar from childhood with holy words, by his own written words he
designates the third heaven that realm of these three divisions in which the world is
located. Paul left the air, passed through (paredrame) the midst of the circling
(kuklophorian) stars, transcended (eperase) the limit (akran) of ether’s bounds
(horon) and having come to firm and intelligible nature (noete phusei), knows the
beauties of paradise and has heard what human nature cannot utter. M.121
Song of Songs
Let no one be bound up (dundethe) in his own thoughts or drag the pure words of
the bridegroom and the bride down into earthly, irrational passions. J.15
These concepts testify that Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the boundaries (horous) of
human wisdom. What could be more paradoxical than to make nature purify itself of
its own passions and teach detachment (apatheia) in words normally suggesting passion
(pathos)? J.29
To me something like the following is signified through this verse: the unlimited
(aoriston) [divine] nature cannot be accurately contained (perilephthenai) by a name;
rather, every capacity seem to contain something great and befitting God’s glory, are
unable to grasp his reality. But starting from certain traces and sparks, as it were, our
words aim (katastochazetai) at the unknown (adelou), and from what we can grasp
we make conjectures by a kind of analogy about the ungraspable (to akatalepton).
Whatever name we may adopt to signify the perfume of divinity, it is not the perfume
itself which we signify by our expressions; rather, we reveal just the slightest trace of
the divine odor by means of our theological terms. J.37
The blessed, eternal nature surpassing (huperechousa) all understanding contains all
things in itself and is limited (periechetai horou) by nothing. For no name or
concept can impose limits (perieirgousa) to it: not time, place, color, form, image,
bulk, quantity, dimension or anything else. Every good conceived as belonging to
God's nature is present in infinite (apeiron) and unbounded (aoriston) measure. For
evil has no place and the good is boundless (peras). J.157
What the Song says is this: The blessed, eternal nature surpassing (huperechousa) all
understanding (noun) contains all things in itself and is limited (periechetai horou) by
nothing. For no name or concept can impose limits (perigraptikon) to it: not time,
place, color, form, image, bulk, quantity, dimension or anything else. Every good
conceived as belonging to God's nature is present in infinite (apeiron) and unbounded
(aoriston) measure. For evil has no place and the good is boundless (peras). J.157
In changeable (treptes) human nature, good and evil exist by turns because we have
the capacity to choose either one of two contraries. As a result, the good in us
alternates with the evil, and the evil becomes a limit (horos) on the good. All the
activities of our souls, insofar as they are opposed, define (legei) and limit (horizetai)
one another. On the other hand, the divine nature is simple, pure, of one kind,
unmoved, unchangeable, always the same and always self-contained. J.158
Because it is incapable of fellowship with evil, it remains unlimited (aoristos) in the
good. It recognizes no limits (peras) because it contains no opposites in itself. So,
then, when God draws a human soul to participate in himself, he always remains in
equal measure superior to the participating soul because of his superabundant
goodness. On the one hand, the soul continually grows through participation
(metousia) in what is beyond it and never stops growing so that the more the soul
participates in it, the more she recognizes that it transcends (huperanesteken) her as
much as before. J.158
He exhorts her to draw near to the light and to become beautiful by being transformed
(morphotheisan) into a dove's image in the light. The bride at this point partakes
(metaschousan) in the good as much as she can. Then he starts again to draw her
to participate in a higher beauty as if she had never tasted it. As she progresses, her
desire grows with each step; because there is always an unlimited (huperkeimenon)
good beyond what the bride has attained, she always seems to be just beginning
(aptesthai) her ascent. J.159
If I may put it in a few words, the teaching presented to us says that creation is
divided into two distinct classes, one sensible and material (aistheton kai hulodes), the
other being intelligible and spiritual (noeton kai aulon). The sensible is grasped by
sense, while the intelligible transcends (huperpipton) sensible comprehension (aisthetiken
katanoesin). The intelligible is infinite and unbounded (apeiron kai aoriston), while
the material is limited, for everything material is determined by quantity and quality.
Anything with mass, form, appearance and shape limits (peras) our understanding so
that the person who examines material creation can perceive nothing beyond these
bounds (peras) through his imagination (phantasia). J.173
The intelligible and spiritual is free from constraint (perioches); it escapes limitation
(horon) and is circumscribed (peratoumenon) by nothing. Furthermore, a spiritual
(noetes) nature has two aspects. First, the uncreated or Creator of beings always
remains what it is, and always being itself, it does not admit an increase or diminution
(prosthekes kai elattoseos) with respect to the good. The second aspect comes
into existence through creation and always looks back to its first cause. By participation
(metousia) in the transcendent (huperechontos), it continually remains stable in the
good; in a certain sense, it is always being created while ever changing for the better
in its growth in perfection. Neither is it limited (peras), nor can it be circumscribed
(perigraphesthai) in its growth towards the good; however, its present state of
goodness, even if especially great and perfect, is only the beginning (archen) of a more
transcendent (huperkeimenou), better stage. The Apostle's words are thus verified:
stretching out (epektaseos) to what lies before is related to forgetfulness (en lethe) of
earlier accomplishments [Phil 3.13]. The good which is superior to the one already
attained holds the attention of those participating in it while not allowing them to
look at the past; by enjoying what is more worthy, their memory of inferior things is
blotted out (parakrouomenon). J.174
Then, as if the bride has already attained perfection (to teleion), she tells the other
companions of her ardent desire and excites their love by an oath. Who would not
say that the soul exalted to such a height has reached the limit (en to akrotato) of
perfection? But the end (peras) of the bride's advancements becomes a beginning
(arche) for further advancement (ta huperkeimena). All these examples are like
voices summoning the soul to contemplate the [heavenly] mysteries. J.177
It is right for the soul to be glad since she has reached (ephikomenen) in her lofty
ascent the summit (tes hupseloes) of her desires. For what greater happiness can be
conceived of than to see God? But this limit (peras) of her attainment is the beginning
(arche) of her hope for what lies beyond. J.178
By a contemplation of the words before us, we are clearly taught not to limit (tini
perati) the greatness of God's nature. Neither can any measure of knowledge limit
(horon) the comprehension of our objective and prevent us from moving further on.
But the mind running on high through its understanding of transcendent
(huperkeimenon) reality should realize that all perfection of knowledge attainable
(ephikten) by human nature is only the beginning (arechen) of a desire (epithumias)
for more lofty things. J.180
If I may put it in a few words, the teaching presented to us says that creation is
divided into two distinct classes, one sensible and material (aistheton kai hulodes), the
other being intelligible and spiritual (noeton kai aulon). The sensible is grasped by
sense, while the intelligible transcends (huperpipton) sensible comprehension. The
intelligible is infinite (apeiron) and unbounded (aoriston), while the material is limited,
for everything material is determined by quantity and quality. Anything with mass,
form, appearance and shape limits (peras) our understanding so that the person who
examines material creation can perceive nothing beyond these bounds (peras, implied
by touton) through his imagination (phantasia). J.173
Because Solomon in his wisdom signifies true wisdom, no one may contradict this
fact while considering history and the truth. History testifies that Solomon transcended
(parelthe) the bounds (horous) of human wisdom, having held the knowledge of all
things in the breadth (platei) of his heart; he surpassed those before him and was
unable to be matched by those after him. J.202
After hearing the unutterable mysteries of paradise, Paul still continued to move
higher and did not cease to ascend (anabaseos). He never allowed the good already
attained to limit (horon) his desire (epithumias). Paul teaches us here, I believe, that
the blessed nature of the good is eternally much better than what we have received
while what lies beyond (to huperkeimenon) our comprehension is always boundless
(apeiroplasion). Something similar will occur to those who partake of the good;
they will always have a greater participation (metechousi) in God throughout eternity.
According to the true words of the Lord [Mt 5.8], the pure in heart will see God.
They will receive as much as their minds can comprehend. However, the unbounded
(aoriston) incomprehensible (aperilepton) divinity remains beyond (epekena) all
understanding. J.245
Paul teaches us here, I believe, that the blessed nature of the good is eternally much
better than what we have received while what lies beyond (to huperkeimenon) our
comprehension (katalambanomenou) is always boundless (apeiroplasion). Something
similar will occur to those who partake of the good; they will always have a greater
participation in God throughout eternity. According to the true words of the Lord
[Mt 5.8], the pure in heart will see God. They will receive as much as their minds can
comprehend. However, the unbounded (aoriston), incomprehensible (aperilepton)
divinity remains beyond (epekeina) all understanding. God's exceedingly great glory is
endless (ouk peras) as the prophet testifies [Ps 144.5]. God always remains the same
as we contemplate Him in his loftiness. J.246
We learn about the ineffable nature of the good from the Apostle. He says that the
eye has not seen that good even though it sees it (for the eye does not completely see
the good as it is but only as it receives the good). The ear as well does not completely
hear the Word but according to its manifestation even though the ear always listens
to it. Also, the Word does not enter the heart of man even if the pure in heart always
see it. Although the stage attained is indeed greater than what a person had earlier,
this stage does not limit (horizei) his good; rather, the limit (peras) of his
achievement becomes a beginning for the discovery of higher blessings. The person
rising never stands still. He moves from one beginning (arche) to another, for the
beginning of even greater blessings is never limited (teleitai). The desire (epithumia)
of a soul thus rising never remains in its knowledge, but by an ever greater desire, it
moves onwards. The soul thus progresses through higher realms towards the
unbounded (to aoriston). J.247
Also, the Word does not enter the heart of man even if the pure in heart always see it.
Although the stage attained (katalambanomenon) is indeed greater than what a
person had earlier, this stage does not limit (horizei) his good; rather, the limit
(peras) of his achievement becomes a beginning (arche) for the discovery of higher
blessings. The person rising never stands still. He moves from one beginning to
another, for the beginning of even greater blessings is never limited (teleitai). The
desire of a soul thus rising never remains in its knowledge, but by an ever greater
desire (epithumia), it moves onwards. The soul thus progresses through higher realms
towards the unbounded (to aoriston). J.247
As the Fountain himself says in the Gospel, "If anyone thirsts, let him come to me
and let him drink" [Jn 7.37]. By these words [Christ] set no limit (horon) on our thirst,
nor on our movement towards him nor on the satisfaction of our drinking, but by
extending his command indefinitely in time, he exhorts us to thirst, drink and to
move towards him. J.248
You see how boundless (aoristos) is the path for those rising up to God, yet how is it
that what the soul has always comprehended is the beginning (arche) of something
beyond (huperkeimenon) her? We expected that the bride would come to a stop
(stasin) on her way on high because of the words addressed to her. (For what more
could she seek after so great a testimony to her perfection?) We then see her inside,
not outside her house. She has not yet delighted at the appearance of her groom's
face but is still led by hearing to participate in the good. We learn that for those who
are always advancing to what is greater the Apostle's words hold true: "If anyone
thinks he knows something, he does not yet know as he should" [1Cor 8.2]. Hitherto
the soul understands only what she has understood, but what she still does not know
is infinitely (apeiroplasion) greater than what she has already comprehended
(katalephthentos). Because of this, the bridegroom often appears to the soul;
although not present to her sight, he promises the bride by his voice that he will
appear. J.320-1
Wisdom limits (horon) our comprehension (katalepseos) of God and is the sole divine
operation which descends to our mortal existence for the purpose of giving us life.
Similarly, water moved by wind does not remain at the edge of the lake but becomes
a spring gushing forth which rushes on high to its connatural state. J.334
When the soul beholds these wonders, it considers him who is recognized in his
works. Similarly, in the age to come all limitations (to horomenon) will yield to that
life which is beyond anything seen, heard or understood. J.335
Meanwhile our soul's limit (horos) of ineffable knowledge consists in appearances
whose operation in creation we symbolically understand as the bridegroom's hands.
By them the purified soul no longer sets foot upon material existence so that it may
not defile its footsteps by being frustrated in expectation for the bridegroom to enter
its house. J.336
For the time being the bride has enjoyed contemplating only her spouse's hand which
signifies his capacity for action: "My beloved has put his hand through the hole of the
door." Human nature is not able to contain (chorei) the infinite (aoriston), unbounded
(aperilepton) divine nature. "My belly was moved for him," the bride says. The term
"wonder" signifies amazement and astonishment at the sight of this miracle. Every
soul endowed with the faculty of reason is struck by the wonderful deeds of the
divine hand which transcends (huperkeimene) our human capacity, for the divine
nature effecting such wonders can neither be grasped (akatalepton) nor contained
(achoreton). Every created being is the work of that hand which appeared through
the aperture. J.336-7
These two trees could not occupy the same place at the center of paradise: if we allow
one to be at the center, the other must be excluded. The dead center of a completely
bounded (to periechon) object is determined by its equidistance from the
circumference. Since a circle has only one center, it can never have two centers
occupying the same location. If the center of the other circle takes the place of the
one already there, it is necessary to substitute another circle; thus the first center is
excluded from being its center, while a new circle is described about the second
center. J.349
Against Eunomius
For no one can say that he has strayed from ignorance into some silly fancy of
separating, locally, the supreme from that which is below, and assigning to the Father
as it were the peak of some hill, while he seats the Son lower down in the hollows.
No one is so childish as to conceive of differences (diaphoran) in space, when the
intellectual and spiritual is under discussion. Local position (thesis epi topou) is a
property of the material: but the intellectual and immaterial is confessedly removed
from the idea of locality. 1.14
Good, as long as it is incapable of its opposite, has no bounds (horon) to its goodness:
its opposite alone can circumscribe (perigraphesthai) it...Life is limited (periorizetai)
by death alone; darkness is the ending of light: in a word, every good is checked by its
opposite, and by that alone. 1.15
But if the Divine and unalterable nature is incapable of degeneracy, as even our foes
allow, we must regard it as absolutely unlimited (aoristos) in its goodness: and the
unlimited (aoriston) is the same as the infinite (apeiro). But to suppose excess and
defect in the infinite (apeirou) and unlimited (aoristou) is to the last degree
unreasonable: for how can the idea of infinitude remain, if we posited increase and
loss in it? We get the idea of excess only by a comparison of limits (peraton): where
there is no limit (peras), we cannot think of any excess. 1.15
For it is not in the power of time to define for each one the measures (metra) of
nature, but nature abides self-contained, preserving herself through succeeding
generations: and time has a course of its own, whether surrounding, or flowing by,
this nature, which remains firm and motionless within her own limits (horois). 1.15
Strength is stopped only when weakness seizes it; life is limited (periorizetai) by death
alone; darkness is the ending (peras) of light: in a word, every good is checked by its
opposite (enantiois), and by that alone. If then he supposes that the nature of the
Only-begotten and of the Spirit can change for the worse, then he plainly diminishes
the conception of their goodness, making them capable of being associated with their
opposites. 1.15
It was said, moreover, above that good can be diminished by the presence of evil
alone, and that where the nature is incapable of deteriorating, there is no limit (horos)
conceived of to the goodness: the unlimited (aoriston), in fact, is not such owing to
any relation whatever, but, considered in itself, escapes limitation (horon). It is, indeed,
difficult to see how a reflecting mind can conceive one infinite to be greater
or less than another infinite. 1.19
Now the ultimate division (diairesis) of all being is into the Intelligible and the Sensible
(to noeton kai to aistheton). The Sensible world is called by the Apostle broadly
"that which is seen." For as all body has color, and the sight apprehends this, he calls
this world by the rough and ready name of "that which is seen," leaving out all the
other qualities, which are essentially inherent in its framework. The common term,
again, for all the intellectual world, is with the Apostle "that which is not seen:" by
withdrawing all idea of comprehension by the senses he leads the mind on to the
immaterial and intellectual (to asomaton kai noeton). Reason again divides this "which
is not seen" into the uncreate and the created, inferentially comprehending it: the
uncreate being that which effects the Creation, the created that which owes its origin
and its force to the uncreate. In the Sensible world, then, is found everything that we
comprehend by our organs of bodily sense, and in which the differences of qualities
involve the idea of more and less, such differences consisting in quantity, quality, and
the other properties. 1.22
The fountain, the origin, the supply of every good is regarded as being in the world
that is uncreate, and the whole creation inclines to that, and touches and shares the
Highest Existence only by virtue of its part (koinonia) in the First Good: therefore it
follows from this participation (metousia) in the highest blessings varying in degree
according to the amount of freedom in the will that each possesses, that the greater
and less in this creation is disclosed according to the proportion of this tendency
(hormes) in each. 1.22
Whereas uncreate intelligible nature is far removed from such distinctions (diaphoras):
it does not possess the good by acquisition, or participate only in the goodness of
some good which lies above it: in its own essence it is good, and is conceived as such:
it is a source (pege) of good, it is simple, uniform, incomposite, even by the
confession of our adversaries. 1.22
The First Good is in its nature infinite (apeiron), and so it follows of necessity that
the participation (metousia) in the enjoyment of it will be infinite also, for more will
be always being grasped, and yet something beyond that which has been grasped
(katalambanousa) will always be discovered, and this search will never overtake its
Object, because its fund is as inexhaustible as the growth of that which participates
(metousia) in it is ceaseless. 1.22
When he pronounces that the life of the Father is prior to that of the Son, he places a
certain interval between the two; now, he must mean, either that this interval
(diastemati) is infinite, or that it is included (horizomenon) within fixed limits
(perasi). But the principle of an intervening mean (diastema) will not allow him to call
it infinite; he would annul thereby the very conception of Father and Son and the
thought of anything connecting them, as long as this infinite were limited
(horizomenon) on neither side, with no idea of a Father cutting it short above, nor
that of a Son checking it below. The very nature of the infinite is, to be extended in
either direction, and to have (perilambanesthai) no bounds (perati) of any kind. 1.25
Therefore if the conception of Father and Son is to remain firm and immoveable, he
will find no ground for thinking this interval (diastema) is infinite (apeiron): his
school must place a definite interval of time (diastesousi) between the
Only-begotten and the Father. What I say, then, is this: that this view of theirs will
bring us to the conclusion that the Father is not from everlasting, but from a definite
point (apo tinos horismenou) in time. I will convey my meaning by familiar
illustrations; the known shall make the unknown clear. 1.25
The creation, as we have said, comes into existence according to a sequence of order
(kata tina taxeos akolouthian), and is commensurate (parametreitai) with the
duration (diastemati) of the ages, so that if one ascends along the line of things
created to their beginning, one will bound the search with the foundation of those
ages. But the world above creation, being removed from all conception of distance
(diastematikou noematos), eludes all sequence (akolouthian) of time: it has no
commencement of that sort: it has no end in which to cease its advance, according to
any discoverable method of order (taxin). Having traversed the ages and all that has
been produced therein, our thought catches a glimpse of the divine nature, as of
some immense ocean, but when the imagination stretches onward to grasp it, it gives
no sign in its own case of any beginning; so that one who after inquiring with
curiosity into the `priority' of the ages tries to mount to the source of all things will
never be able to make a single calculation on which he may stand; that which he seeks
will always be moving on before, and no basis will be offered him for the curiosity
(polupragmosune) of thought. 1.26
It is clear, even with a moderate insight into the nature of things, that there is nothing
by which we can measure (parametroumenon) the divine and blessed Life. It is not
in time, but time flows from it; whereas the creation, starting from a manifest beginning
(arches), journeys onward to its proper end (skopon) through spaces of time (dia ton
chronikon diasematon); so that it is possible, as Solomon somewhere says, to
detect in it a beginning, an end, and a middle; and mark the sequence (akolouthian) of
its history by divisions of time. But the supreme and blessed life has no time-extension
(diastematos) accompanying its course (sumparodeuontos), and therefore no span
(diametroun) nor measure (dialambanon). Created things are confined within the
fitting measures (horo), as within a boundary (metro), with due regard to the good
adjustment of the whole by the pleasure of a wise Creator; and so, though human
reason in its weakness cannot reach the whole way to the contents of creation, yet
still we do not doubt that the creative power has assigned to all of them their limits
(horon) and that they do not stretch beyond creation. But this creative power itself,
while circumscribing (sumperigraphousa) by itself the growth of things, has itself no
circumscribing bounds (periechon); it buries in itself every effort of thought to mount
up to the source of God's life, and it eludes the busy and ambitious strivings to get to
the end of the Infinite (pros to peras tou aoristou). Every discursive effort of thought
to go back beyond the ages will ascend only so far as to see that that which it seeks
can never be passed through: time and its contents seem the measure (metron) and the
limit (horos) of the movement and the working of human thought, but that which
lies beyond remains outside its reach; it is a world where it may not tread, unsullied by
any object that can be comprehended (katalepsin) by man. No form, no place, no size,
no reckoning of time, or anything else knowable, is there: and so it is inevitable that
our apprehensive (kataleptike) faculty, seeking as it does always some object to grasp,
must fall back from any side of this incomprehensible existence, and seek in the ages
and in the creation which they hold its kindred and congenial sphere. 1.26
But within that transcendent and blessed Power all things are equally present as in an
instant: past and future are within its all-encircling grasp (periektikes) and its
comprehensive view. 1.26
The Divine nature is a stranger to these special marks (idiazontos) in the creation: It
leaves beneath itself the sections (tmemata) of time, the `before' and the `after,' and
the ideas of space: in fact `higher' cannot properly be said of it at all. Every conception
(to nooumenon) about that uncreate Power is a sublime principle, and involves the
idea of what is proper in the highest degree. We have shown, then, by what we have
said that the Only-begotten and the Holy Spirit are not to be looked for in the
creation but are to be believed above it; and that while the creation may perhaps by
the persevering efforts of ambitious seekers be seized in its own beginning (arche),
whatever that may be, the supernatural will not the more for that come within the
realm of knowledge, for no mark before the ages indicative of its nature can be
found. 1.26
There are no intervals (diastema) in that pre-temporal (proaioniou) world: and
difference on the score of being there is none. 1.26
Thus the limit (metron) of the energy is to be found in the work which it produces.
But the question now is not about the amount of the energy, but about the being of
that which has put forth the energy. 1.28
How will he get an idea of a thing which is visible from the Invisible, of the
perishable from the imperishable, of that which has a date for its existence from that
which never had any generation, of that which has duration but for a time from the
everlasting; in fact, of the object of his search from everything which is the very
opposite to it. Let this man who has accurately probed the secret of things tell us how
it is possible that two unlike things (ta anomoios) should be known from each other.
1.30
Whichever way we look, He is equally existing there for ever; He transcends the limit
(peras) of any end, the idea of any beginning, by the infinitude of His life; whatever
be His title, eternity must be implied with it. 1.38
Man is born in a stated time; and a particular place must be the receptacle of his life;
without it it is not in nature that he should have any concrete substance: whence also
it is inevitable that sections of time (chronika tmemata) are found enveloping his life;
there is a Before, and With, and After him. It is true to say of any one whatever of
those born into this world that there was a time when he was not, that he is now, and
again there will be time when he will cease to exist; but into the Eternal world these
ideas of time (ta chronika noemata) do not enter; to a sober thinker they have
nothing akin to that world. He who considers what the divine life really is will get
beyond (diabas) the `sometime,' the `before,' and the `after,' and every mark whatever
of this extension in time (ten chroniken paratasin); he will have lofty views upon a
subject so lofty; nor will he deem that the Absolute is bound by those laws which he
observes to be in force in human generation. 1.39
And by this deliverance the Word seems to me to lay down for us this law, that we
are to be persuaded that the Divine Essence is ineffable and incomprehensible (arreton
kai akatalepton): for it is plain that the title of Father does not present to us the
Essence, but only indicates the relation to the Son. 2.3
NO GREEK INSERTS: Others are the result of material and nature; for nature
orders the generation of animals one from another, effecting her own work by means
of the material subsistence in the bodies of the parents; others again are by material
efflux. In these the original remains as it was before, and that which flows from it is
contemplated by itself, as in the case of the sun and its beam, or the lamp and its
radiance, or of scents and ointments, and the quality given off from them. For these,
while remaining undiminished in themselves, have each accompanying them the
special and peculiar effect which they naturally produce, as the sun his ray, the lamp
its brightness, and perfumes the fragrance which they engender in the air. There is
also another kind of generation besides these, where the cause is immaterial and
incorporeal, but the generation is sensible and takes place through the instrumentality
of the body; I mean the generation of the word by the mind. For the mind being in
itself incorporeal begets the word by means of sensible instruments. So many are the
differences of the term generation, which we discover in a philosophic view of them,
that is itself, so to speak, the result of generation. 2.9
Since, then, these kinds of generation, those, I mean, which arise as the result of
some cause, and are recognized in our every-day experience, are also employed by
Holy Scripture to convey its teaching concerning transcendent mysteries in such wise
as each of them may reasonably be transferred (metalephthenai) to the expression of
divine conceptions. 2.9
It behooves a man to lay aside all material conceptions which enter in by association
with the carnal significance of the word "father," and to form in the case of the God
and Father a conception befitting the Divine nature, expressive only of the reality of
the relationship. Since, therefore, in the notion of a human father there is included
not only all that the flesh suggests to our thoughts, but a certain notion of interval
(diastematike ennoia) is also undoubtedly conceived with the idea of human
fatherhood, it would be well, in the case of the Divine generation, to reject, together
with bodily pollution, the notion of interval (diastematikou noematos) also, that so
what properly belongs to matter may be completely purged away, and the
transcendent generation may be clear, not only from the idea of passion, but from
that of interval. Now he who says that God is a Father will unite with the thought
that God is, the further thought that He is something: for that which has its being
from some beginning (arches), certainly also derives from something the beginning of
its being, whatever it is: but He in Whose case being had no beginning, has not His
beginning from anything, even although we contemplate in Him some other attribute
than simple existence. Well, God is a Father. It follows that He is what He is from
eternity: for He did not become, but is a Father: for in God that which was, both is
and will be. On the other hand, if He once was not anything, then He neither is nor
will be that thing: for He is not believed to be the Father of a Being such that it may
be piously asserted that God once existed by Himself without that Being. 3.3
Learning this, therefore, from Paul, we boldly declare that, not only are the judgments
of God too high for those who try to search them out, but that the ways also that
lead to the knowledge of Him are even until now untrodden and impassable (atribeis kai
anepibatoi). For this is what we understand that the Apostle wishes to signify, when
he calls the ways that lead to the incomprehensible "past finding out," showing by the
phrase that that knowledge is unattainable (anepibatos) by human calculations
(logismois), and that no one ever yet set his understanding on such a path of
reasoning, or showed any trace or sign of an approach, by way of perception, to the
things incomprehensible. 3.5
If His judgments cannot be searched out, and His ways are not traced, and the
promise of His good things transcends (huperkeitai) every representation that our
conjectures can frame, by how much more is His actual Godhead higher and loftier,
in respect of being unspeakable and unapproachable, than those attributes which are
conceived as accompanying it, whereof the divinely instructed Paul declares that there
is no knowledge:-and by this means we confirm in ourselves the doctrine they deride,
confessing ourselves inferior to them in the knowledge of those things which are
beyond the range of knowledge, and declare that we really worship what we know.
Now we know the loftiness of the glory of Him Whom we worship, by the very fact
that we are not able by reasoning (analogizomenoi) to comprehend (katalabein) in our
thoughts the incomparable character of His greatness. 3.5
Now if any one should ask for some interpretation, and description, and explanation
of the Divine essence, we are not going to deny that this kind of wisdom we are
unlearned, acknowledging only so much as this, that it is not possible that which is by
nature infinite (aoriston) should be comprehended in any conception expressed by
words. The fact that the Divine greatness has no limit (horon) is proclaimed by
prophecy, which declares expressly that of His splendour, His glory, His holiness,
"there is no end:" and if His surroundings have no limit (peras), much more is He
Himself in His essence, whatever it may be, comprehended by no limitation (horo) in
any way. If then interpretation by way of words and names implies by its meaning
some sort of comprehension of the subject, and if, on the other hand, that which is
unlimited (aoriston) cannot be comprehended (perilephthenai), no one could
reasonably blame us for ignorance, if we are not bold in respect of what none should
venture upon. For by what name can I describe the incomprehensible? By what
speech can I declare the unspeakable? 3.5
For nothing is Divine that is conceived as being circumscribed (pergraphe) but it
belongs to the Godhead to be in all places, and to pervade all things, and not to be
limited (perieigresthai) by anything: so that those who fight against Christ find the
phrase they adduce against us turned into an accusation of themselves. For, as the
Samaritans, supposing the Deity to be compassed round by some circumscription
(perigraphe) of place, were rebuked by the words they heard, "`Ye worship ye know
not what,' and your service is profitless to you, for a God that is deemed to be settled
in any place is no God,"-so one might well say to the new Samaritans, "In supposing
the Deity to be limited (perieilephthai) by the absence of generation, as it were by
some local limit (topo), `ye worship ye know not what,' doing service to Him indeed
as God, but not knowing that the infinity of God exceeds all the significance and
comprehension (perilepseos) that names can furnish." 3.5
Therefore, as great as God is, so great, clearly, is the Word also that is with Him; so
that if God is limited (perioristai), then will the Word also, surely, be subject to
limitation (horo). But if the infinity (apeiria) of God exceeds limit (horon), neither is
the Word that is contemplated with Him comprehended by limits (horois) and
measures (metrois). For no one would deny that the Word is contemplated together
with the entire Godhead of the Father, so that he should make one part of the
Godhead appear to be in the Word, and another destitute of the Word. 4.1
If then Moses lays down as a law for us some such mark (charaktema) of true
Godhead as this, that we know nothing else of God but this one thing, that He is (for
to this point the words, "I am He that is "); while Isaiah in his preaching declares
aloud the absolute infinity of Him Who is, defining the existence of God as having
no regard to beginning or to end (for He Who says "I am the first, and hereafter am
I," places no limit to His eternity in either direction, so that neither, if we look to the
beginning (archen), do we find any point (semeion) marked since which He is, and
beyond which He was not, nor, if 'we turn our thought to the future, can we cut short
by any boundary (horo) the eternal progress (proodon) of Him Who is),-and if the
prophet David forbids us to worship any new and strange God (both of which are
involved in the heretical doctrine; "newness" is clearly indicated in that which is not
eternal, and "strangeness" is alienation from the Nature of the very God). 8.1
If then Moses lays down as a law for us some such mark of true Godhead as this, that
we know nothing else of God but this one thing, that He is (for to this point the
words, "I am He that is"); while Isaiah in his preaching declares aloud the absolute
infinity of Him Who is, defining the existence of God as having no regard to
beginning or to end (for He Who says "I am the first, and hereafter am I," places no
limit to His eternity in either direction, so that neither, if we look to the beginning, do
we find any point marked since which He is, and beyond which He was not, nor, if
'we turn our thought to the future, can we cut short by any boundary the eternal
progress of Him Who is) 8.1
The ultimate division (diairesis) of all that exists is made by the line between
"created" and "uncreated," the one being regarded as a cause of what has come into
being, the other as coming into being thereby. Now the created nature and the Divine
essence being thus divided, and admitting no intermixture in respect of their
distinguishing properties (gnoristikas idiotetas), we must by no means conceive both by
means of similar terms, nor seek in the idea of their nature for the same
distinguishing marks in things that are thus separated. Accordingly, as the nature that
is in the creation, as the phrase of the most excellent Wisdom somewhere tells us,
exhibits "the beginning, ending, and midst of the times in itself, and extends concurrently
(sumparateinomenes) with all temporal intervals (chronikois diastemasi), we take
as a sort of characteristic of the subject this property, that in it we see some beginning
(archen) of its formation, look on its midst, and extend (sumparateinesthai) our
expectations to its end (peras). For we have learnt that the heaven and the earth were
not from eternity, and will not last to eternity, and thus it is hence clear that those
things are both started from some beginning, and will surely cease at some end. But
the Divine Nature, being limited in no respect, but passing all limitations (peras) on
every side in its infinity (en to aoristo), is far removed from those marks which we
find in creation. For that power which is without interval (adiastatos), without
quantity, without circumscription, having in itself all the ages and all the creation that
has taken place in them, and over-passing at all points, by virtue of the infinity of its
own nature, the unmeasured extent of the ages, either has no mark which indicates its
nature, or has one of an entirely different sort, and not that which the creation has.
Since, then, it belongs to the creation to have a beginning, that will be alien from the
uncreated nature which belongs to the creation. 8.5
Now as the book of Wisdom speaks of "midst" and "end" as well as of
"beginning," if we assume in the Nature of the Only-begotten, according to the
heretical dogma, some beginning of existence defined by a certain mark
(horizomenen) of time, the book of Wisdom will by no means allow us to refrain
from subjoining to the "beginning" a "midst" and an "end" also. If this should be
done we shall find, as the result of our arguments, that the Divine word shows us that
the Deity is mortal. For if, according to the book of Wisdom, the "end" is a necessary
consequence of the "beginning," and the idea of "midst" is involved in that of
extremes, he who allows one of these also potentially maintains the others, and lays
down bounds of measure and limitation (metra kai peras horizon) for the infinite
(aoristo) Nature. And if this is impious and absurd, the giving a beginning to that
argument which ends in impiety deserves equal, or even greater censure; and the
beginning of this absurd doctrine was seen to be the supposition that the life of the
Son was circumscribed (perigegrammenen) by some beginning. 8.5
That the Divine generation, therefore, may be clear of every idea connected with
passion, we shall avoid conceiving with regard to it even that extension which is
measured by intervals (diastematiken paratasin). Now that which begins and ends is
surely regarded as being in a kind of extension (en parateasei), and all extension is
measured by time, and as time (by which we mark both the end of birth and its
beginning) is excluded, it would be vain, in the case of the uninterrupted generation,
to entertain the idea of end or beginning, since no idea can be formed to mark either
the point at which such generation begins or that at which it ceases. If on the other
hand it is the inanimate creation to which he is looking, even in this case, in like
manner, place, and time, and matter, and preparation, and power of the artificer, and
many like things, concur to bring the product to perfection. And since time assuredly
is concurrent (sumparateinetai) with all things that are produced, and since with
everything that is created, be it animate or inanimate, there are conceived also bases
of construction relative to the product, we can find in these cases evident beginnings
and endings of the process of formation. For even the procuring of material is
actually the beginning of the fabric, and is a sign of place, and is logically connected
with time. 9.3
What measure (metron) can he find for that which has no quantity, or what interval
(diastema) for that which has no extension? or how can any one define the infinite
(to aoriston) by "end" and "beginning?" for "beginning" and "end" are names of
limits of extension (ton diastematikon peraton), and, where there is no extension
(diastaseos), neither is there any limit (peras). Now the Divine Nature is without
extension (adiastatos), and, being without extension (adiastatos), it has no limit
(peras); and that which is limitless is infinite, and is spoken of accordingly. Thus it is
idle to try to circumscribe (perigraphein) the infinite (apeiron) by "beginning" and
"ending"-for what is circumscribed (perigegrammenon) cannot be infinite (apeiron).
9.3
But how can any one measure or treat as extended that which is without quantity and
without extension? What measure can he find for that which has no quantity, or what
interval for that which has no extension? or how can any one define the infinite by
"end" and "beginning?" for "beginning" and "end" are names of limits of extension
(diastematikon peraton), and, where there is no extension (diastaseos), neither is
there any limit (peras). Now the Divine Nature is without extension (adiastatos), and,
being without extension, it has no limit; and that which is limitless (aperatoton) is
infinite (apeiron), and is spoken of accordingly. 9.3
But that which is not eternal is of course limited (proskairon) in duration. And such a
kind of life is common to the irrational animals as well as to men. 10.2
On the Making of Man
I admit it to be true that the intellectual part (dianoetikon) of the soul is often
disturbed by prevalence of passions; and that the reason is blunted by some bodily
accident so as to hinder its natural operation; and that the heart is a sort of source of
the fiery element in the body, and is moved in correspondence with the impulses of
passion; and moreover, in addition to this, I do not reject (as I hear very much the
same account from those who spend their time on anatomical researches) the
statement that the cerebral membrane (according to the theory of those who take
such a physiological view), enfolding in itself the brain, and steeped in the vapours
that issue from it, forms a foundation for the senses; yet I do not hold this for a
proof that the incorporeal nature is bounded (emperieilephthai) by any limits
(perigraphais) of place. 10.3
Now just as any particular man is limited (perieirgetai) by his bodily dimensions, and
the peculiar size which is conjoined with the superficies of his body is the measure
(metron) of his separate existence, so I think that the entire plenitude of humanity
was included by the God of all, by His power of foreknowledge, as it were in one
body, and that this is what the text teaches us which says, "God created man, in the
image of God created He him." For the image is not in part of our nature, nor is the
grace in any one of the things found in that nature, but this power extends equally to
all the race: and a sign of this is that mind is implanted alike in all: for all have the
power of understanding and deliberating, and of all else whereby the Divine nature
finds its image in that which was made according to it: the man that was manifested
at the first creation of the world, and he that shall be after the consummation of all,
are alike: they equally bear in themselves the Divine image. 16.17
Now that which is always in motion, if its progress (proodon) be to good, will never
cease moving onwards to what lies before it, by reason of the infinity (aoriston) of the
course to be traversed:-for it will not find any limit (peras) of its object such that
when it has apprehended it, it will at last cease its motion: but if its bias be in the
opposite direction, when it has finished the course of wickedness and reached the
extreme limit (akrotaton) of evil, then that which is ever moving, finding no halting
point for its impulse natural to itself when it has run through the lengths that can be
run in wickedness, of necessity turns its motion towards good: for as evil does not
extend to infinity (aoriston), but is comprehended by necessary limits (perasi), it
would appear that good once more follows in succession upon the limit (peras) of
evil; and thus, as we have said, the ever-moving character of our nature comes to run
its course at the last once more back towards good, being taught the lesson of
prudence by the memory of its former misfortunes, to the end that it may never again
be in like case. 21.2
And this it seems to me the Divine apostle considered when he declared in his
epistle to the Corinthians the sudden stoppage of time, and the change of the
things that are now moving on back to the opposite end where he says, "Behold, I
show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a
moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet." For when, as I suppose, the
full complement of human nature has reached the limit (metron) of the pre-determined measure (peras), because there is no longer anything to be made up in the
way of increase to the number of souls, he teaches us that the change in existing
things will take place in an instant (akarei) of time, giving to that limit of time which
has no parts or extension (adiastaton peras) the names of "a moment," and "the
twinkling of an eye"; so that it will no more be possible for one who reaches the
verge of time-which is the last and extreme point (akrotaton tes akmes), from the
fact that nothing is lacking to the attainment of its extremity (akroteti)-to obtain by
death this change which takes place at a fixed period, but only when the trumpet of
the resurrection sounds, which awakens the dead, and transforms those who are left
in life, after the likeness of those who have undergone the resurrection change, at
once to incorruptibility. 22.6
For as the body proceeds (proeisin) from a very small original to the perfect state
(teleion), so also the operation of the soul, growing in correspondence with the
subject, gains and increases with it. For at its first formation there comes first of all its
power of growth and nutriment alone, as though it were some root buried in the
ground; for the limited nature of the recipient does not admit of more; then, as the
plant comes forth to the light and shows its shoot to the sun, the gift of sensibility
blossoms in addition, but when at last it is ripened and has grown up to its proper
height, the power of reason begins to shine forth like a fruit, not appearing in its
whole vigour all at once, but by care increasing with the perfection of the instrument,
bearing always as much fruit as the powers of the subject allow. 29.8
Ecclesiastes
If the sun's course consists in this, it too has no limit (horon); neither is there any
succession (diadoche) between day and night, and the earth is condemned to remain
ever unmoved. The rivers also labor in vain, for they are consumed by the insatiable
sea which receives this constant inflow to no avail. If this is true, what about man
who is subject to such elements? Why are we astonished at the rise and fall of a
generation which follows a natural course because a generation of men always
succeeds the one before it and so forth? J.286
In similar fashion pleasures arising from human nature with its present limit (metrois)
cannot expand its gluttonous appetite to keep pace with their great number; rather,
the influx [of pleasures] does not cease even though our capacity for enjoyment is
limited (horo). If enjoyment cannot exceed the limit (metron) of nature, why are we
pressed by an onrush of harmful forces which are never beneficial since they have
surpassed what had been added earlier? J.289
"I have looked," Ecclesiastes says, "on all my works which my hands have made and
on my labor which I have labored to perform, and behold, all was vanity and
waywardness of spirit, and there is no advantage under the sun" [2.11]. Each sense
perception has its limits (horon) and operation under the sun, but further on he says
that the senses cannot comprehend transcendent reality (huperkeimenon agathon).
Ecclesiastes teaches us that we should not admire wealth, honor, authority, banquets,
parties and so forth. Instead, he sees that their one end is vanity whose abundance is
unlimited. J.352
On the Inscriptions of the Psalms
Thus the blending into a whole from various, separate elements in the universe
through an ordered, constant rhythm results. It harmonizes all the parts and sings in
all of them this supremely consonant melody. The mind becomes a hearer though in
no way is it limited (sugchromenos) to this voice; rather, by surpassing
(huperkupton) corporeal senses and becoming heavenly, it perceives the celestial
hymns. It seems to me that the great David perceived these things when he beheld
the graceful, subtle of heavenly bodies and exclaimed that they proclaim the glory of
God (cf. Ps 18.2). J.31
The psalms' sublime teaching points out to us a way to blessedness which constantly
leads persons progressing (odegoumenous) in the exalted life of virtue until they attain
that measure (phthase to metron) of blessedness where the mind subjects
transcendental reality neither to circumstantial evidence nor to opinions; neither can
reason discover anything further about this reality. But the movement of desire (kinesis
tes epithumias) based upon hope always outstrips us...Beyond this lies a better
hope to which the psalm testifies by a careful order of words. J.67
On Perfection
While seeking the reason for material existence they do not show curiosity when
asking "How does matter come from what is immaterial?" And, "How does quality
come from what lacks quality, form from formlessness, color from what is invisible
and the limited from the unbounded? If no quality pertains to what is simple and
uncompounded, why is matter subject to measurement (emperatoumenon)?" The
person asking these questions finds a solution because the Word bears everything by
his word of power from non-existence into existence. Everything with a material or
immaterial nature has one cause, the Word of inexpressible power. This teaches us to
look to him, the source of created beings. If we have come into existence and are
established in him, we must believe that nothing lies outside his knowledge in whom
we are, from whom we have come into existence and to whom we return. J.189
+
References on inspiration from Plato: Complete Works (edited by John M. Cooper,
Indianapolis, 1997).
Almost all the bystanders might have explained the poems better than their authors
could. I soon realized that poets do not compose their poems with knowledge, but
by some inborn talent and by inspiration, like seers and prophets who also say many
fine things without any understanding of what they say. Apology 22c.
For a poet is an airy thing, winged and holy, and he is not able to make poetry until
he becomes inspired and goes out of his mind and his intellect is no longer in him.
As long as a human being has his intellect in his possession he will always lack the
power to make poetry or sing prophecy. There fore because it’s not by mastery that
they make poems or say many lovely things about their subjects–but because it’s by a
divine gift–each poet is able to compose beautifully only that for which the Muse has
aroused him...You see, it’s not mastery that enables them to speak those verses, but a
divine power, since if they knew how to speak beautifully on one type of poetry by
mastering the subject, they could do so for all the others also. That’s why the god
takes their intellect away from them when he uses them as his servants, as he does
prophets and godly diviners, so that we who hear should know that they are not the
ones who speak those verses that are of such high value, for their intellect is not in
them: the god himself is the one who speaks, and he gives voice through them to us.
Ion 534cd
There is an old proverb, legislator, which we poets never tire of telling and which all
laymen confirm, to the effect that when a poet takes his seat on the tripod of the
Muse, he cannot control his thoughts. He’s like a fountain where the water is allowed
to gush forth unchecked. His art is the art of representation, and when he represents
men with contrasting characters he is often obliged to contradict himself, and he
doesn’t know which of the opposing speeches contains the truth. Laws IV 719c
Socrates: Therefore, if it is not through knowledge, the only alternative is that it is
through right opinion that statesmen follow the right course for their cities. As
regards knowledge, they are no different from soothsayers and prophets. They too
say many things when inspired, but they have no knowledge of what they are
saying.–That is probably so.
Socrates: And so, Meno, is it right to call divine also those soothsayers and prophets
whom we just mentioned, and all the poets, and we should call no less divine and
inspired those public men who are no less under the gods’ influence and possession,
as their speeches lead to success in many important matters, though they have no
knowledge of what they are saying.–Quite so. Meno 99cd
for just this reason it is fair that only a philosopher’s mind grows wings, since its
memory always keeps it as close as possible to those realities by being close to which
the gods are divine. A man who uses reminders of these things correctly is always at
the highest, most perfect level of initiation, and he is the only one who is perfect as
perfect can be. He stands outside human concerns and draws close to the divine;
ordinary people think he is disturbed and rebuke him for this, unaware that he is
possessed by god...Only a few remain whose memory is good enough; and they are
beside themselves, and their experience is beyond their comprehension because they
cannot fully grasp what it is that they are seeing. Phaedrus 249d & 250a
+ The End +