Itinerarium mentis in deum the journey of the mind into god

 

 

P. 303

est omnis creaturae origo, exemplar et finis, et omnis effectus est signum causae, et exemplatum exemplaris, et via finis, ad quem ducit: partim ex propria repraesentatione; partim ex prophetica praefiguratione; partim ex angelica operatione; partim ex superaddita institutione. Omnis enim creatura ex natura est illius aeternae sapientiae quaedam effigies et similitudo, sed specialiter illa quae in libro Scripturae per spiritum prophetiae assumpta est ad spiritualium praefigurationem; specialius autem illae creaturae, in quarum effigie Deus angelico ministerio voluit apparere; specialissime vero ea quam^1 voluit ad significandum instituere, quae tenet non solum rationem signi secundum nomen commune, verum etiam Sacramenti.	is the Origin, Exemplar and End, of every creature, and (because) every effect is a sign of a cause, and an example [exemplatum] of an exemplar, and a way for the end, towards which it leads: partly from its own representation; partly from a prophetic prefiguration; partly from angelic activity; partly from a superadded institution.  For every creature by its nature [ex natura] is a certain likeness and similitude of that eternal Wisdom, but especially that which has been employed [assumpta est] in the book of Scripture through the spirit of prophecy for the prefiguration of spiritual things; moreover, more especially those creatures, in the likeness of which God has willed to appear by angelic ministry; but most especially that which^1 He willed to institute for signification [ad significandum], which not only has a reckoning of ‘sign’ in the common sense of the word [secundum nomen commune], but also that of ‘Sacrament’.
13. Ex quibus omnibus colligitur, quod invisibilia Dei a creatura mundi, per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta conpiciuntur; ita ut qui nolunt ista advertere et Deum in his omnibus cognoscere, benedicere et amare inexcusabiles sint,^2 dum nolunt transferri de tenebris in admirabile lumen Dei. Deo autem gratias per Iesum Christum, Dominum nostrum, qui nos de tenebris transtulit in admirabile lumen suum, dum per haec lumina exterius data ad speculum mentis nostrae in quo relucent divina, disponimus ad reintrandum.	13. From all of which is gathered, that the invisible things of God from the creatures of the world, through those which have been made, are perceived as things understood [intellecta]; so that those who do not want to advert to these and to acquaint themselves with, bless and love God in all these are inexcusable,^2 so long as [dum] they do not want to be transferred from darkness into the admirable light of God.  But thanks to God through Jesus Christ, Our Lord, who has transferred us from darkness into His own admirable light, while through these lights given exteriorly to the mirror [speculum] of our mind in which divine things glitter, we dispose (ourselves) to reenter (it).
CAPUT III   DE SPECULATIONE DEI PER SUAM IMAGINEM NATURALIBUS POTENTIIS INSIGNITAM	CHAPTER III   ON THE SIGHT OF GOD THROUGH HIS IMAGE MARKED UPON NATURAL POWERS
1. Quoniam autem duo gradus praedicti, ducendo nos in Deum per vestigia sua, per quae in cunctis creaturis relucet, manuduxerunt nos usque ad hoc, ut ad nos reintraremus, in mentem scilicet nostram, in qua divina relucet imago; hinc est quod iam in tertio loco, ad nosmetipsos intrantes et quasi atrium forinsecus relinquentes, in sanctis,^3 scilicet anteriori parte tabernaculi, conari debemus per speculum videre Deum; ubi ad modum candelabri relucet lux veritatis in facie nostrae mentis, in qua scilicet resplendet imago beatissimae Trinitatis.	1. Moreover, since the two aforesaid steps, by leading us into God through His vestiges, though which He glitters in all other creatures, has lead us by hand even unto this, to reenter ourselves, that is our mind, in which the Divine Image glitters; hence it is that already in the third place, entering our very selves and as if relinquishing the outer entrance hall [atrium forinsecus], in the Holies,^3 that is in the anterior part of the Tabernacle, we ought to begin to see God as through a mirror [per speculum]; where after the manner of a candlestick the Light of Truth glitters upon the face of our mind, in which, that is, the Image of the Most Blessed Trinity is reflected [resplendet].
Intra igitur ad te et vide, quoniam mens tua amat ferventissime semetipsam; nec se posset amare, nisi nosset; nec se nosset, nisi sui meminisset, quia nihil capimus per intelligentiam, quod non sit praesens apud nostram memoriam; et ex hoc advertis, animam tuam triplicem habere potentiam, non oculo carnis, sed oculo rationis.^4 Considera igitur harum trium potentiarum operationes et habitudines, et videre poteris Deum per te tanquam per imaginem, quod est videre per speculum in aenigmate.	Enter therefore into yourself and see, that your mind most fervently loves [amat] itself; nor would it be able to love itself, unless it knew itself [nosset]; nor would it know itself, unless it remembered itself, because we seize nothing through our understanding [intelligentiam], that is not present among [apud] our memory; and from this you advert, that your soul has a threefold power, not in the eye of the flesh, but in the eye of the reason.^4 Consider, therefore, the activities and characteristics [habitudines] of these three powers, and you will already be able [poteris] to see God through yourself as through an image, which is to see (Him) through a mirror in mystery [per speculum in aenigmate].
2. Operatio autem memoriae est retentio et repraesentatio non solum praesentium, corporalium et temporalium, verum etiam succedentium, simplicium et sempiternalium.  —  Retinet namque memoria praeterita per recordationem, praesentia per susceptionem, futura per praevisionem.  —  Retinet etiam simplicia, sicut principia quantitatum continuarum et discretarum,^5 ut punctum, instans et unitatem, sine quibus impossibile est meminisse aut cogitare ea quae principiantur per haec.  —  Retinet nihilominus scientiarum principia et dignitates ut sempiternalia et sempiternaliter, quia nunquam potest sic oblivisci eorum, dum ratione utatur, quin ea audita approbet et eis assentiat, non tanquam de novo percipiat, sed tanquam sibi innata et familiaria recognoscat; sicut patet, si proponatur alicui: « De quolibet affirmatio, vel negatio »; vel: « Omne totum est maius sua parte », vel quaecumque alia dignitas, cui non est contradicere « ad interius rationem ».^6	2. Moreover the activity of the memory is the retention and representation not only of things present, corporal and temporal, but also of things successive [succendentium], simple and sempiternal.  For the memory retains things past [praeterita] through remembrance, things present through capture [susceptionem], things future through foresight [praevisionem]. It also retains simple things, like the principles of continuous and discrete quantities,^5 such as [ut] point, presence [instans] and unity, without which it is impossible to remember or think of those things which are derived [principiantur] by means of them. Nevertheless it retains the principles and axioms [dignitates] of the sciences, as sempiternal things and in a sempiternal manner, because it can never so forget them, while it uses reason, it on the contrary [quin] approves those things heard and assents to them, perceives (them) not as from something new, but recognizes [recognoscat] them as things innate and familiar to itself; as is clear, if one propose to anyone (a statement of this kind): « The affirmation and/or negation of anything »; and/or « Every whole is greater than its part », and/or whatever other axiom, of which there is no contradiction [contradicere] « according to its internal reckoning ».^6
Ex prima igitur retentione actuali omnium temporalium, praeteritorum scilicet, praesentium et futurorum, habet effigiem aeternitatis, cuius praesens indivisibile ad omnia tempora se extendit. Ex secunda apparet, quod ipsa non solum habet ab exteriori formari per phantasmata, verum etiam a superiori suscipiendo simplices formas, quae non possunt introire per portas sensuum et sensibilium phantasias.^7 Ex tertia habetur, . . .	Therefore from the first, actual retention of all temporal things, that is of all things past, present, and future, it has a likeness to eternity, whose indivisible presence extends itself to all times.  From the second it appears, that it not only has to be itself formed from the exterior through phantasms, but also from the superior by taking up simple forms, which cannot not enter through the gates of the senses and the fantasies of sensibles.^7 From the third is had, . . .
^1  Codd. A B H L M N quae. ^2  Rom. 1, 29.  —  Seq. textus est I. Cor. 15, 57; tertius I. Petr. 2, 9, ubi pro transtulit Vulgata vocavit.  —  Pro cognoscere plures codd. agnoscere. ^3  Cfr. Exod. 26, ubi describitur tabernaculum Moysaicum, v. 34. et 35. mentio fit sancti santorum et candelabri.  —  Ps. 4, 7:  Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui, Domine.  Gregor., X. Moral. c. 15. n. 27:  Interna quippe facies hominis mens est, in qua nimirum recognoscimur, ut ab auctore nostro diligamur. ^4  Cfr. August., IX. et X. de Trin. (vide I. Sent. d. 3. p. II.).  —  De oculo carnis et rationis cfr. supra Breviloq. p. II. c. 12. in fine.  —  Inferius allegatur I. Cor. 13, 12.  —  Superius pro ad te plures codd. in te, 1 et 2 ad te et in te.  Subinde pro quoniam A quantum, D G quo modo, et pro intelligentiam G M intellectum. ^5  Vide Aristot., de Praedicam. c. de Quanto, ubi quantitati continuae annumeratur linea, superficies, corpus, locus et tempus; discretae numberus et oratio.  —  Quomodo memoriae sit praevisio futurorum, exponit August., XV. de Trin. c. 7. n. 13:  Nec ex futuris praeterita, sed futura ex praeteritis, non tamen firma cognitione coniicimus . . .. Ut praevideamus, non providentia nos instruit, sed memoria etc.  —  Inferius pro dum ratione edd. et aliquod codd. dummodo ratione. ^6  Ut ait Aristot., I. Poster. c. 8. (c. 10.), huis dictioni opponendo alteram, scil. « ad exterius orationem     », contra quam licet semper instantiam ferre (cfr. tom. I. pag. 155, nota 10.).  Vat., 3, 4 cum pluribus codd. admittitur ratione.  —  Prima dignitas:  de quolibet affirmatio etc., exhibetur ab Aristot., IV. Metaph. text. 15. (III. c. 4.); secunda colligitur ex V. Metaph. text. 30. seq. (IV. c. 25. seq.).  — Per verba superius posita:  « quin ea audita approbet » etc., respicitur a Boethio data et supra pag. 79, nota 6. allata definitio communis animi conceptionis, qualis secundum Euclid., I. Geomet., est:  Omne totum est maius sua parte (n. 9.). ^7  Cfr. II. Sent. d. 39. a. 1. q. 2. in fine et IV. d. 49. p. I. q. 2. ad 1-3.  —  De seq. propositione vide supra Quaest. de scientia Christi, q. 4.	^1  Codices A B H L M N have the plural which [quae]. ^2  Rom. 1:29.  —  The following text is 1 Cor. 15:57; the third is 1 Pt. 2:9, where in place of He has transferred [transtulit] the Vulgate has He has called [vocavit].  —  In place of  to acquaint themselves with [cognoscere] very many codices have acknowledge [agnoscere]. ^3  Cf. Ex. ch. 26, where the Tabernacle Moses constructed is described; in vv. 34 and 35 mention is made of the Holy of Holies and of the candlesticks.  —  Ps. 4:7 :  Signed upon us is the Light of Thy Face, O Lord.  (Pope St.) Gregory (the Great), Moralia, Bk. X, ch. 15, n. 27:  Indeed, the internal face of a man is his mind, in which undoubtedly we recognize, that we are loved by our Author. ^4  Cf. (St.) Augustine, De Trinitate, Bks. IX and X (see Sent., Bk. I, d. 3, p. II).  —  On the eye of the flesh and that of the reason, cf. above Breviloquium, p. II, ch. 12 at the end.  —  Below there is quote from 1 Cor. 13:12.  —  Above in place of into yourself [ad te] very many codices have into yourself [in te], 1 and 2 have toward yourself and into yourself [ad te et in te].  Then in place of that [quoniam] A has how much [quantum], D G in what manner [quo modo], and in place of  understanding [intellegentiam] G M have intellect [intellectum]. ^5  See Aristotle, De Praedicamenta, ch. On Quantity, where under continuous quantity there is enumerated line, surface, body, place and time; under discrete number and discourse [oratio].  —  In what manner the memory is a foreseeing of future things, (St.) Augustine expounds in De Trinitate, Bk. XV, ch. 7, n. 13:  And we do not conjecture past things from future ones, but future ones from ones past, not however by a firm cognition . . ..  That we may foresee, it is not foresight [providentia] that instructs us, but memory etc..  —  Below this in place of while we use reason [dum ratione utamur] the editions and some of the codices read so long as we use reason [dummodo ratione utamur]. ^6  As Aristotle says in Posterior Analytics, Bk. I, ch. 8 (ch. 10), opposing another term to this saying, scil. « according to its exterior discourse     », against which it is always licit to bring another instance (cf. tome I, p. 155, footnote 10).  The Vatican edition, 3 and 4, together with very many codices add is admitted by reason [admittitur ratione].  —  The first proposition:  the affirmation and/ or negation etc., is cited by Aristotle, Metaphysics, Bk. IV, text. 15, (Bk. III, ch. 4); the second is gathered from Metaphysics, Bk. V, text 30 ff. (Bk. IV, ch. 25 ff.).  —  For the words placed before this:  « on the contrary it approves those things », etc. refer to the definition cited from Boethius and cited above on p. 79, in footnote 6, of a concept common to the mind, of which according to Euclid, Geometry, Bk. I, (one such) is:  Every whole is greater than its part (n. 9). ^7  Cf. Sent., Bk. II, d. 39, a. 1, q. 2 at the end, and Bk. IV, d. 49, p. I, q. 2, ad 1-3.  —  Concerning the following proposition see above Questions regarding the Knowledge of Christ, q. 4.

 

 

P. 304

 

quod ipsa habet lucem incommutabilem sibi praesentem, in qua meminit invariabilium veritatum.  —  Et sic per operationes memoriae apparet, quod ipsa anima est imago Dei et similitudo adeo sibi praesens et eum habens praesentem, quod eum actu capit et per potentiam « capax eius est et particeps esse potest ».^1	that it has itself a thoroughly unchangeable light present to itself, in which it remembers the truth of invariables.  And thus through the activities of memory it appears, that the soul itself is an image and similitude of God, to this extent, that present to itself and having Him present, it seizes Him by act and through power  « it is capable of Him and can be a participant » (in Him).^1
3. Operatio autem virtutis intellectivae est in perceptione intellectus terminorum, propositionum et illationum.  —  Capit autem intellectus terminorum significata, cum comprehendit, quid est unumquodque per definitionem. Sed definitio habet fieri per superiora, et illa per superiora definiri habent, usquequo veniatur ad suprema et generalissima, quibus ignoratis, non possunt intelligi definitive inferiora.^2 Nisi igitur cognoscatur quid est ens per se, non potest plene sciri definitio alicuius specialis substantiae. Nec ens per se cognosci potest, nisi cognoscatur cum suis conditionibus, quae sunt; unum, verum, bonum. Ens autem, cum possit cogitari ut diminutum et completum, ut imperfectum et ut perfectum, ut ens in potentia et ut ens in actu, ut ens secundum quid et ut ens simpliciter, ut ens in parte et ut ens totaliter, ut ens transiens et ut ens manens, ut ens per aliud et ut ens per se, ut ens permixtum non-enti et ut ens purum, ut ens dependens et ut ens absolutum, ut ens posterius et ut ens prius, ut ens mutabile et ut ens immutabile, ut ens simplex et ut ens compositum: cum « privationes et defectus nullatenus possint cognosci nisi per positiones »,^3 non venit intellectus noster ut plene resolvens intellectum alicuius entium creatorum, nisi iuvetur ab intellectu entis purissimi, actualissimi, completissimi et absoluti; quod est ens simpliciter et aeternum, in quo sunt rationes omnium in sua puritate. Quomodo autem sciret intellectus, hoc esse ens defectivum et incompletum, si nullam haberet cognitionem entis absque omni defectu? Et sic de aliis conditionibus praelibatis.	3. Moreover the activity of intellective virtue belongs to the intellect in the perception of terms, propositions, and illations.  Moreover the intellect seizes the things signified by terms, when it comprehends, what each thing [unumquodque] is by definition.  But definition has to occur through things superior, and these latter have to be defined by things superior, until one comes to things supreme and most general, which when ignored [ignoratis], inferiors cannot be definitively understood.^2 Therefore unless one become acquainted with what being [ens] is per se, there cannot be fully a definition of anything of a special substance. Nor can one become acquainted with being per se, unless one become acquainted with it together with [cum] its conditions, which are: the one, the true, the good. Moreover being, when it can be thought of [cogitari] as diminished and complete, as imperfect and as perfect, as being in potency and as being in act, as being secundum quid and as being simply-speaking, as partly being [ens in parte] and wholly being [ens totaliter], as transient being and as stable being [ens manens], as being through another and as being through itself [per se], as being commingled with a non-being [permixtum non-enti] and as pure being, as dependent being and as absolute being, as posterior being and as prior being, as mutable being and as immutable being, as simple being and as composite being: since « its privations and defects can be in nowise be cognized except through its positions »,^3 our intellect does not come to resolve [venit ut resolvens] fully the understanding of any of the created beings, unless it be aided by the understanding of the most pure, most actual, most complete and absolute Being; which is Being simply and eternal, in which there are reasons for all things in its purity. Moreover, in what manner does the intellect know [sciret], that this being is defective and incomplete, if it has no acquaintance with the Being apart from any fault?  And thus concerning the other things already touched upon [praelibatis].
Intellectum autem propositionum tunc intellectus dicitur veraciter comprehendere, cum certitudinaliter scit, illas veras esse; et hoc scire est scire, quoniam non potest falli in illa comprehensione. Scit enim, quod veritas illa non potest aliter se habere; scit igitur, illam veritatem esse incommutabilem. Sed cum ipsa mens nostra sit commutabilis, illam sic incommutabiliter relucentem non potest videre nisi per aliquam lucem omnino incommutabiliter radiantem, quam impossibile est esse creaturam mutabilem. Scit igitur in illa luce, quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, quae est lux vera et Verbum in principio apud Deum.^4	Moreover the intellect is said next to truly comprehend the understanding of propositions, when it knows [scit] with certitude, that they are true; and to know this is to know, since it cannot fail in its comprehension.  For it knows, that that truth cannot otherwise be regarded [se habere]; therefore it knows, that that truth is not thoroughly changeable.  But since our mind itself is thoroughly changeable, it cannot see that (truth) glittering in so thoroughly an unchangeable manner unless through another light radiating entirely in a thoroughly unchangeable manner, which cannot possibly be [impossible est esse] a mutable creature. Therefore it knows it in that Light, which illumines every man coming into this world, which is the True Light and the Word in the beginning with God.^4
Intellectum vero illationis tunc veraciter percipit noster intellectus, quando videt, quod conclusio necessario sequitur ex praemissis; quod non solum videt in terminis necessariis, verum etiam in contingentibus, ut: si homo currit, homo movetur. Hanc autem necessariam habitudinem percipit non solum in rebus entibus, verum etiam in non entibus. Sicut enim, homine existente, sequitur: si homo currit, homo movetur; sic etiam, non existente. Huiusmodi igitur illationis necessitas non venit ab existentia rei in materia, quia est contingens, nec ab existentia rei in anima, quia tunc esset fictio, si non esset in re: venit igitur ab exemplaritate in arte aeterna, secundum quam res habent aptitudinem et habitudinem ad invicem secundum illius aeternae artis repraesentationem. Omnis igitur, ut dicit Augustinus De Vera Religione,^5 vere ratiocinantis lumen accenditur ab illa veritate et ad ipsam nititur pervenire.  —  Ex quo manifeste apparet, quod coniunctus sit intellectus noster ipsi aeternae veritati, dum non nisi per illam docentem nihil verum potest certitudinaliter capere. Videre igitur per te potes veritatem, quae te docet, si te concupiscentiae et phantasmata non impediant et se tanquam nubes inter te et veritatis radium non interponant.	But our intellect next truly perceives the understanding of an illation, when it sees, that the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises; because not only does it see in necessary terms, but also in contingents, as, if a man run, a man is moved.  Moreover it perceives this necessary characteristic not only in things existing [rebus entibus], but also in non-existing ones.  For as, with man existing, it follows: if man runs, man is moved; so also, (when) non-existing.  Therefore the necessity of an illation of this manner does not come from the existence of a thing in matter, because this is contingent, nor from existence of a thing in the soul, because this then would be a fiction, if did not exist [esset] in the thing: therefore it comes from the exemplarity in the Eternal Art, according to which the thing has an aptitude and characteristic alternatively [ad invicem] according to the Eternal Art's representation of it. Therefore, as (St.) Augustine says in De Vera Religione,^5 the light of everyone who reasons truly is enkindled by that Truth and exerts itself [nititur] to arrive at It.  —  From which it manifestly appears, that our intellect has been conjoined to Eternal Truth itself, while it cannot with certitude seize a truth except by means of that One teaching it.  Therefore you can see through yourself the Truth, which teaches you, if concupiscences and fantasies do not impede you and do not interpose themselves as clouds between you and the ray of Truth.
4. Operatio autem virtutis electivae attenditur in consilio, iudicio et desiderio.  —  Consilium autem est in inquirendo, quid sit melius hoc an illud. Sed melius non dicitur nisi per accessum ad optimum; accessus autem est secundum maiorem assimilationem:^6 nullus ergo scit utrum hoc sit illo melius, nisi sciat, illud optimo magis assimilari. Nullus autem, . . .	4. Moreover the activity of elective virtue is tended towards in counsel, judgment and desire.  —  Moreover counsel is in inquiring, what be better, this or that.  But it is not called better unless through access to the best; however access is according to the greater assimilation:^6  therefore no one knows whether this be better than that, unless he knows, that it is more assimilated to the best. However, no one . . .
^1  August., XIV. de Trin.c. 8. n. 11. ^2  Secundum Aristot., VI Topic. c. 3. (c. 4.).  Cfr. etiam Porphyr., de Praedicab. c. de Specie, ex quo supra pag. 71, nota 3. quaedam allata sunt.  —  De conditionibus entis vide supra pag. 215, nota 1. ^3  Averroes, in III. de Anima, text. 25:  Et universaliter omnes privationes non cognoscuntur nisi per contraria, scilicet per cognitionem habitus et per cognitionem defectus habitus.  Cfr. tom. III. pag. 802, nota 8. et supra pag. 19, nota 8.  —  De rationibus rerum in Deo agitur supra Quaest. de scientia Christi, q. 2. seq.  — Multi codd., 1 et 2, positionem. ^4  Ioan. 1, 1. et 9.  Vide supra Quaest. de scientia Christi, q. 4.  —  Pro in illa luce D G H K L M N illam lucem.  Vocibus aliquam lucem edd. interserunt  aliam. ^5  Cap. 39. n. 72:  Noli foras ire, in te ipsum redi, in interiore homine habitat veritas; et si tuam naturam mutabilem inveneris, transcende et te ipsum.  Sed memento, cum te transcendis, ratiocinantem animam te transcendere.  Illuc ergo tende, unde ipsum lumen rationis accenditur.  Quo enim pervenit omnis bonus ratiocinator nisi ad veritatem?  cum ad se ipsam veritas non utique ratiocinando perveniat, sed quo ratiocinantes appetunt ipsa sit. Pro omnis D F G H K L M omne, et pro vere ratiocinantis D F G M verae rationis.  —  Haec de triplici operatione virtutis intellectivae doctrina refertur quasi ad verbum a Fr. Matthaeo ab Aquasparta, Quest. prima disputata in corp. a nobis edita in opusculo:  de Humanae cognitios ratione (pag. 98 seq.); ubi notanda sunt quae ibid. praemittuntur contra ontologismum.  —  Superius pro quia est et quia tunc non pauci codd. quae est et quae tunc. ^6  Aristot., IV. Metaph. text. 18. (III.c. 4.):  Ipsum magis et minus inest entium naturae . . . Si igitur quod magis est propinquius est, profecto erit aliquid verum, cui propinquius est quod magis verum est.	^1  (St.) Augustine, De Trinitate, Bk. XIV, ch. 8, n. 11. ^2  According to Aristotle, Topics, Bk. VI, ch. 3 (ch. 4).  Cf. also Porphyry’s, De Praedicabilibus, ch. de Specie, from which above on p. 71, in footnote 3, certain things have been cited.  —  On the conditions of being see above p. 215, footnote 1. ^3  Averroes, in De Anima, Bk. III, text 25, says:  And universally all privations are not cognized except through their contraries, scil. through the cognition of the habit and through the cognition of the defect of the habit.  Cf. tome III, p. 802, footnote 8, and above p. 19, footnote 8.  —  The reckonings of things in God are dealt with above in the Questions concerning the Knowledge of Christ, q. 2 ff..  —  Many codices, and editions 1 and 2, have position [positionem]. ^4  Jn 1:1,9.  See above Questions concerning the Knowledge of Christ, q. 4.  —  In place of  in that Light [in illa luce] D G H K L M N have that Light [illam lucem]. ^5  Chapter 39, n 72:  Don’t go outside, return into yourself, in the interior man does truth dwell; and if you find that your nature is mutable, transcend even your very self.  But remember, when you transcend yourself, to transcend your reasoning soul.  Therefore tend there, where the light of reason itself is kindled.  For where does every good reasoner arrive except at the truth? since to reason itself truth does not indeed arrive by reasoning, but where those reasoning hunger for it, it is there.  In place of Every [omnis] D F G H K L M have the neuter form every [omne:  which would render the passage, every light of one reasoning truly],and in place of reasoning truly [vere ratiocinantis] D F G M true reason [verae rationis].  —  This doctrine concerning to the threefold activity of intellective virtue is quoted nearly word for word by Fr. Matthew of Aquasparta, Disputed Questions, q. 1, in corp., edited by us in the short work:  de Humanae cognitios ratione (p. 98 ff.); where it must be noted that in the same work there is a preface against Ontologism.  —  Above this in place of because this is [quia est] and because this then [quia tunc] not a few codices have which is [quae est] and which then [quae tunc]. ^6    Aristotle, Metaphysics, Bk. IV, text 18 (Bk. III, ch. 4):  The (notion of) more and less itself is in the nature of beings . . . If therefore what is more is closer (to perfection),  indeed there will be some truth, for which ‘what is closer is that which is more true’.

 

 

P. 305

 

scit, aliquid alii magis assimilari, nisi illud cognoscat; non enim scio, hunc esse similem Petro, nisi sciam vel cognoscam Petrum: omni igitur consilianti necessario est impressa notio summi boni.^1	knows, that anything is assimilated more to another, unless he becomes acquainted with it; for not I do not know [scio], that this is like Peter, unless I know [sciam] or become acquainted with Peter; therefore upon everyone giving (true) counsel there is necessarily impressed the notion of the Most High Good.^1
Iudicium autem certum de consiliabilibus est per aliquam legem. Nullus autem certitudinaliter iudicat per legem, nisi certus sit quod illa lex recta est, et quod ipsam iudicare non debet; sed mens nostra iudicat de se ipsa: cum igitur non possit iudicare de lege, per quam iudicat; lex illa superior est mente nostra, et per hanc iudicat, secundum quod sibi impressa est. Nihil autem est superior mente humana, nisi solus ille qui fecit eam:^2 igitur in iudicando deliberativa nostra pertingit ad divinas leges, si plena resolutione dissolvat.	Moreover certain judgment [iudicium certum] concerning those things able to be counseled [de consiliabilibus] is through some law. However no one judges with certainty through law, unless he be certain that that law is upright [recta], and that one ought not judge it; but our mind judges about [de] its very self: therefore since it cannot judge about the law, through which it judges; that law is superior to our mind, and it judges through this, according to that which is impressed upon itself. However nothing is superior to the human mind, except the One alone who made it:^2 therefore in judging our deliberative (power) extends itself to divine laws, if it would give a full explanation [plena resolutione dissolvat].
Desiderium autem principaliter est illius quod maxime ipsum movet. Maxime autem movet quod maxime amatur; maxime autem amatur esse beatum; beatum autem esse non habetur nisi per optimum et finem ultimum: nihil igitur appetit humanum desiderium nisi quia summum bonum, vel quia est ad illud, vel quia habet aliquam effigiem illius. Tanta est vis summi boni, ut nihil nisi per illius desiderium a creatura possit amari, quae tunc fallitur et errat, cum effigiem et simulacrum pro veritate acceptat.^3	Moreover desire is principally for that which most moves it.  However that moves most which loves most; however to be blessed is loved most; however to be blessed is not had except through the best and last end: therefore human desire seeks after [appetit] nothing except because (it is) the Most High Good, and/or because it is for That, and/or because it has come likeness to It.  So great is the force of the Most High Good, that nothing can be loved by a creature except through a desire for It, which (creature) thereby [tunc] fails and errs, since it accepts a likeness and imitation [simulacrum] in place of the Truth [pro veritate].^3
Vide igitur, quomodo anima Deo est propinqua, et quomodo memoria in aeternitatem, intelligentia in veritatem, electiva potentia ducit in bonitatem summam secundum operationes suas.	Therefore see, in what manner the soul is nigh to God, and in what manner the memory leads into eternity, the intelligence into Truth, the elective power into the Most High Goodness according to their activities.
5. Secundum autem harum potentiarum ordinem et originem et habitudinem ducit in ipsam beatissimam Trinitatem.  —  Nam ex memoria oritur intelligentia ut ipsius proles, quia tunc intelligimus, cum similitudo, quae est in memoria, resultat in acie intellectus, quae nihil aliud est quam verbum; ex memoria et intelligentia spiratur amor tanquam nexus amborum. Haec tria scilicet mens generans, verbum et amor, sunt in anima quoad memoriam, intelligentiam et voluntatem, quae sunt consubstantiales, coaequales et coaevae, se invicem circumincedentes.^4 Si igitur Deus perfectus est spiritus, habet memoriam, intelligentiam et voluntatem, habet et Verbum genitum et Amorem spiratum, qui necessario distinguuntur, cum unus ab altero producatur, non essentialiter, non accidentaliter, ergo personaliter.	5. Moreover according to the order and origin and characteristic of these powers (the soul) leads into the Most Blessed Trinity Itself.  For from memory there arises intelligence as its offspring [proles], because we next understand, when the similitude, which is in the memory, resounds in the keenness [resultat in acies] of the intellect, which (similitude) is nothing other than a word; from memory and intelligence is spirated love [amor] as the connection [nexus] of both. These three, that is the generating mind, the word, and love, are in the soul in regard to the memory, intelligence and the will, which are consubstantial, coeternal and coeval, marching round-about [circumincedentes] one another.^4 Therefore if the perfect God is a spirit, he has memory, intelligence and will, he has also a begotten word and a spirated love, which are necessarily distinguished, since one is produced from the other, not essentially, not accidentally, therefore personally.
Dum igitur mens se ipsam considerat, per se tanquam per speculum consurgit ad speculandam Trinitatem beatam Patris, Verbi et Amoris, trium personarum coaeternarum, coaequalium et consubstantialium, ita quod quilibet in quolibet est aliorum, unus tamen non est alius, sed ipsi tres sunt unus Deus.	Therefore while the mind considers its very self, through itself as through a mirror it rises together to gaze upon the Blessed Trinity of the Father, the Word and the Love, of the three coeternal, coequal and consubstantial Persons, so that Whoever in Whomever belongs to the Others, One is nevertheless not the Other, but the Three are Themselves the One God.
6. Ad hanc speculationem quam habet anima de suo principio trino et uno per trinitatem suarum potentiarum, per quas est imago Dei, iuvatur per lumina scientiarum, quae ipsam perficiunt et informant et Trinitatem beatissimam tripliciter repraesentant.  —  Nam omnis philosophia aut est naturalis, aut rationalis, aut moralis. Prima agit de causa essendi, et ideo ducit in potentiam Patris; secunda de ratione intelligendi, et ideo ducit in sapientiam Verbi; tertia de ordine vivendi, et ideo ducit in bonitatem Spiritus Sancti.^5	6. Towards this speculation which the soul has concerning its own beginning, triune and one through the trinity of its powers, through which it is an image of God, one is assisted through the lights of the sciences [scientiarum], which perfect it and inform it and represent the Most Blessed Trinity in a threefold manner.  For every philosophy either is natural, or rational, or moral.  The first deals with [agit de] the cause of existing, and for that reason leads unto the power of the Father; the second with the reason for understanding, and for that reason leads unto the wisdom of the Word; the third with the order of living, and for that reason leads unto the goodness of the Holy Spirit.^5
Rursus, prima dividitur in metaphysicam, mathematicam et physicam. Et prima est de rerum essentiis, secunda de numeris et figuris, tertia de naturis, virtutibus et operationibus diffusivis. Et ideo prima in primum principium, Patrem, secunda in eius imaginem, Filium, tertia ducit in Spiritus sancti donum.	Again, the first is divided into metaphysics, mathematics and physics.  And the first concerns the essences of things, the second numbers and figures, the third natures, virtues and diffuse activities.  And for that reason the first leads unto the First Principle, the Father, the second unto His Image, the Son, the third unto the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Secunda dividitur in grammaticam, quae facit potentes ad exprimendum; in logicam, quae facit perspicaces ad arguendum; in rhetoricam, quae facit habiles ad persuadendum sive movendum. Et hoc similiter insinuat mysterium ipsius beatissimae Trinitatis.	The second is divided into grammar, which makes us able [potentes] to express; into logic, which makes us perspicacious to argue; into rhetoric, which makes us skillful [habiles] to persuade or move.  And this similarly intimates the Mystery [mysterium] of the Most Blessed Trinity Itself.
Tertia dividitur in monasticam, oeconomicam et politicam. Et ideo prima insinuat primi principii innascibilitatem, secunda Filii familiaritatem, tertia Spiritus sancti liberalitatem.	The third is divided into the monastic, the domestic [oeconomicam] and the political. And for that reason the first intimates the unbegottenness of the First Principle, the second the Son's being-in-a-family [familiaritas], the third the liberality of the Holy Spirit.
7. Omnes autem hae scientiae habent regulas certas et infallibiles tanquam lumina et radios descendentes a lege aeterna in mentem nostram. Et ideo mens nostra tantis splendoribus irradiata et superfusa, nisi sit caeca, manuduci potest per semetipsam ad contemplandam illam lucem aeternam. Huius autem lucis irradiatio et consideratio sapientes suspendit in admirationem et econtra insipientes, qui non . . .	7. Moreover all these sciences have certain and infallible rules as lights and rays descending from the eternal law in our mind. And for that reason our mind irradiated and super-fused by so great splendors, unless it be blind, can be lead by hand through its very self to contemplate that Eternal Light. Moreover the irradiation and consideration of this Light suspends wise men into admiration and conversely it leads the foolish, who do not . . .
^1  August., VIII. de Trin. c. 3. n. 4:  Bonum hoc et bonum illud, tolle hoc et illud et vide ipsum bonum, si potes; ita Deum videbis, non alio bono bonum, sed bonum omnis boni.  Neque enim in his omnibus bonis . . . diceremus aliud alio melius, cum vere iudicamus, nisi esset nobis impressa notio ipsius boni, secundum quod et probaremus aliquid et aliud illi praeponeremus.  — Pro notio Vat., 3 et 4 notitia. ^2  Secundum August., locc. superius pag. 302, nota 1. allegatis.  —  Mox pro deliberativa H K L deliberate mens. ^3  Haec ratio exponitur a Boeth., III. de Consol. per totum.  Cfr. August., II. de Lib. Arb. c. 9. n. 26, et Aristot., I. Ethic. c. 1. seqq.  —  Superius pro igitur, quod D G M omittunt, A enim, edd. autem; deinde post nisi supplevimus ex A B C E P quia, pro quo B F G H L M N propter. ^4  Vide I. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. III. c. 2. seq., ubi loci ex Augustino allati sunt; cfr. ibid. Comment. p. II. et supra Breviloq. p. II. c. 12.  —  D F G L M N se invicem non excedentes (de circimincessione cfr. I. Sent. d. 19. p. I. q. 4.).  Mox post spiritus D H N addunt qui, L quia. ^5    Vide supra pag. 19, nota 7. verba Augustini.  —  De divisione philosophiae cfr. infra opusculum de Reductione artium ad theologiam.  —  Superius pro per quas est imago Dei F G H K L M N per quas imago Dei exprimitur; subinde plures codd., inter quos B P, omittunt ducit secunda et tertia vice.	^1  (St.) Augustine, De Trinitate, Bk. VIII, ch. 3, n. 4:  This good and that good: take away this and that and see the good itself, if you can; thus you shall see that God is good, not by another good, but as the Good of every good.  For neither among all these goods . . . would we say that one is better than the other, when we judge truly, unless there had been impressed upon us the notion of the Good itself, according to which we would even prove something and prefer another to it.  —  In place of notion [notio] the Vatican edition, and editions 3 and 4, have knowledge [notitia] ^2  According to Augustine, locc. citt. above on p. 302, footnote 1.  —  In place of deliberative (power) [deliberativa] H K L have mind in a deliberate manner [deliberate mens]. ^3  This reckoning is explained by Boethius, On the Consolation of Philosophy, Bk. III throughout.  Cf. (St.) Augustine, Ethics, Bk. I, ch. 1 ff.  —  Above this in place of therefore [igitur], which D G M omit, A has for [enim], the editions moreover [autem]; then after unless [nisi] we have supplied from A B C E P because (it is) [quia], in place of which B F G H L M N have for the sake of [propter]. ^4  See Sent., Bk. I, text of Master (Peter), d. III, ch. 2, where the passages taken from (St.) Augustine have been cited; cf. ibid., in the Commentaria, p. II, and above in the Breviloquium, p. II, ch. 12.  —  D F G L M N have not exceeding one another [se invicem non excedentes]; concerning circumincession cf. Sent., Bk. I, d. 19, p. I, q. 4).  Then in place of spirit, he [spiritus] D H N have spirit, who [spiritus qui], L spirit, because [quia]. ^5  See the words of (St.) Augustine above on p. 19, footnote 7.  —  On the division of philosophy cf. below the little work De Reductione artium ad theologiam.  —  Above this in place of through which it is an image of God [per quas est imago Dei] F G H K L M N have through which the Image of God is expressed [per quas imago Dei exprimitur], then very many codices, among which are B P, omit leads [ducit] the second and third occurrences.