Itinerarium mentis in deum the journey of the mind into god

 

 

p. 308

 

ex quarto. Manuducimur nihilominus per hierarchicas operationes, scilicet purgationis, illuminationis et perfectionis mentium humanarum, per hierarchicas revelationes sacrarum Scripturarum nobis per Angelos datarum, secundum illud Apostoli, quod Lex data est per Angelos in manu Mediatoris.^1 Et tandem manuducimur per hierarchias et hierarchicos ordines, qui in mente nostra disponi habent ad instar supernae Ierusalem.	the fourth (step).  Nevertheless we are lead by hand through hierarchical activities, that is of the purgation, illumination and perfection of human minds, through the hierarchical revelations of the Sacred Scriptures given to us through the Angels, according to that (saying) of the Apostle, that the Law has been given through the Angels into the hand of the Mediator.^1  And last in order [tandem] we are lead by hand through hierarchies and hierarchical orders, which have to be arranged in our mind after the likeness of the supernal Jerusalem.
8. Quibus omnibus luminibus intellectualibus mens nostra repleta, a divina Sapientia tanquam domus Dei inhabitatur, effecta Dei filia, sponsa et amica; effecta Christi capitis membrum, soror et coheres; effecta nihilominus Spiritus sancti templum, fundatum per fidem, elevatum per spem et Deo dedicatum per mentis et corporis sanctitatem. Quod totum facit sincerissima caritas Christi, quae diffunditur in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis,^2 sine quo Spiritu non possumus scire secreta Dei. Sicut enim quae sunt hominis nemo potest scire nisi spiritus hominis, qui est in illo; ita et quae sunt Dei nemo scit nisi spiritus Dei.  —  In caritate igitur radicemur et fundemur, ut possimus comprenhendere cum omnibus Sanctis, quae sit longitudo aeternitatis, quae latitudo liberalitatis, quae sublimitas maiestatis et quod profundum sapientiae iudicantis.	8. Having been filled full by all these intellectual lights, our mind is inhabited by Divine Wisdom as a house of God, made a daughter, bride and friend of God; made a member, sister and coheir with Christ the Head; made nevertheless the temple of the Holy Spirit, founded through faith, elevated through hope and dedicated to God through holiness of mind and body.  Which together [totum] causes the most sincere charity for Christ, which is diffused in our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us,^2 without which Spirit we cannot know the secrets of God.  For as what are of a man no one can know except the spirit of the man, which is in him; so also what are of God no one can know except the Spirit of God.  —  In charity therefore we are rooted and founded, to be able to comprehend with all the Saints, what is the length of the eternity, what is breadth of the liberality, what is the sublimity of the majesty and what is the depth of the wisdom of the Judge [judicantis].
CAPUT V   DE SPECULATIONE DIVINAE UNITATIS PER EIUS NOMEN PRIMARIUM, QUOD EST ESSE	CHAPTER V   ON THE SIGHT OF THE DIVINE UNITY THROUGH ITS PRIMARY NAME, WHICH IS ‘BEING’
1. Quoniam autem contingit contemplari Deum non solum extra nos et intra nos, verum etiam supra nos: extra per vestigium, intra per imaginem et supra per lumen, quod est signatum supra mentem nostram,^3 quod est lumen Veritatis aeternae, cum « ipsa mens nostra inmediate ab ipsa Veritate formetur »; qui exercitati sunt in primo modo intraverunt iam in atrium ante tabernaculum; qui vero in secundo, intraverunt in sancta; qui autem in tertio, intrat cum summo Pontifice in sancta sanctorum; ubi supra arcam sunt Cherubim gloriae obumbrantia propitiatorium; per quae intelligimus duos modos seu gradus contemplandi Dei invisibilia et aeterna, quorum unus versatur circa essentialia Dei, alius vero circa propria personarum.	1. Moreover since it happens that God is contemplated not only outside of us and within us, but also above us: outside through vestige, within through image [imaginem] and above through the light, which has been marked upon our mind,^3 which is the light of Eternal Truth, since  « our very mind is formed immediately by Truth Itself »; those who have been exercised in the first manner, have entered already into the entrance-hall before the Tabernacle; but they who in the second, have entered into the Holies; moreover they who in the third, enter with the supreme Pontiff into the Holy of Holies; where above the Ark are the Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Propitiatory; through which we understand two manners or steps of contemplating the invisible and eternal things of God, of which one hovers around the things essential to God, but the other around the things proper to the persons.
2. Primus modus primo et principaliter defigit aspectum in ipsum esse, dicens, quod qui est^4 primum nomen Dei. Secundus modus defigit aspectum in ipsum bonum, dicens, hoc esse primum nomen Dei. Primum spectat potissime ad vetus testamentum, quod maxime praedicat divinae essentiae unitatem; unde dictum est Moysi:^5 Ego sum qui sum; secundum ad novum, quod determinat personarum pluralitatem, baptizando in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti. Ideo magister noster Christus, volens adolescentem, qui servaverat Legem, ad evangelicam levare perfectionem, nomen bonitatis Deo principaliter et praecise attribuit. Nemo, inquit, bonus nisi solus Deus. Damascenus^6 igitur sequens Moysen dicit, quod qui est primum nomen Dei; Dionysius sequens Christum dicit, quod bonum est primum nomen Dei.	2. The first manner at first and principally fixes [defigit] its power of sight upon ‘being’ itself [ipsum esse], saying, that He who is^4 is the first Name of God.  The second manner fixes its gaze upon the good itself, saying, that this is the first Name of God.  First it looks [spectat] most powerfully towards the Old Testament, which preaches most the unity of the Divine Essence; whence it is said by Moses:^5 I am who am; according to the New, which determines the plurality of persons, by baptizing in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.  For that reason Christ Our Teacher, wanting to raise the youth, who observed the Law, towards evangelical perfection, attributed the name of goodness to God principally and precisely.  No one he said, is good except God alone. Therefore (St. John) Damascene^6 following Moses says, that He who is is the first Name of God; (St.) Dionysius (the Areopagite) following Christ says, that ‘the Good’ is the first Name of God.
3. Volens igitur contemplari Dei invisibilia quoad essentiae unitatem primo defigat aspectum in ipsum esse^7 et videat, ipsum esse adeo in se certissimum, quod non potest cogitari non esse, quia ipsum esse purissimum non occurrit nisi in plena fuga non-esse, sicut et nihil in plena fuga esse. Sicut igitur omnino nihil habet de esse nec de eius conditionibus; sic econtra ipsum esse nihil habet de non-esse, nec actu nec potentia, nec secundum veritatem rei nec secundum aestimationem nostram. Cum autem non-esse privatio sit essendi, non cadit in intellectum nisi per esse;^8 esse autem non cadit per aliud, quia omne, quod intelligitur, aut intelligitur ut non ens, aut ut ens in potentia, aut ut ens in actu. Si igitur non-ens non potest intelligi nisi per ens, et ens in potentia non nisi per ens in actu; et esse nominat ipsum purum actum entis: esse igitur est quod primo cadit in intellectu, et illud esse est quod est actus purus.^9 Sed hoc non est esse particulare, quod . . .	3. Wanting therefore to contemplate the invisible things of God in regard to His unity of essence, let (the mind) first fix its power of sight upon ‘being’ itself [ipsum esse]^7and see, that ‘being’ itself to this extent is in itself most certain, because it cannot be thought not to be, because most pure ‘being’ itself does not occur [occurrit] except in full flight from ‘non-being’ [non-esse], just as nothing is also in full flight from ‘being’.  Therefore as it has entirely nothing from ‘being’ or from its conditions; so conversely ‘being’ itself has nothing from ‘non-being’, neither in act nor in power, nor according to the truth of a thing nor according to our estimation. Moreover since ‘non-being’ is a privation of the act of being [privatio essendi], it does not fall in the intellect except through ‘being’;^8 moreover ‘being’ does not fall through another, because everything, which is understood, either is understood as a non-being [non ens], or as a being in potency [ens in potentia], or as a being in act. If therefore ‘non-being’ cannot be understood except through a being, and a being in potency not except through a being in act; and ‘being’ names the pure act itself of a being: therefore ‘being’ is what first falls in the intellect, and ‘being’ is that which is a pure act.^9  But this is not particular ‘being’, which . . .
^1  Gal. 3, 19.  —  Inferius pro mens [A, 1 et 2 anima ] nostra repleta maior pars codd. spiritus noster repletus, quae etiam subinde post inhabitatur addit sicque anima nostra, sed parum congrue. ^2  Rom. 5, 5. (Post nostris plures codd. addunt et corporibus).  —  Seq. locus est I. Cor. 2, 11;  tertius Eph. 3, 17. seq. ^3  Psalm. 4, 7:  Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui, Domine.  —  Seq. sententia est Augustini; cfr. supra pag. 180, nota 10.  —  Subinde respicitur Exod. 25-28, ubi describitur tabernaculum. ^4  Exod. 3, 14. ^5  Exod. 3, 14.  —  Seq. locus est Matth. 28, 19; tertius Luc. 18, 19. ^6  Libr. I. de Fide orthod. c. 9.  —  Dionys., de Div. Nom. c. 3. § 1. et c. 4. § 1.  Cfr. I. Sent. d. 22. q. 3. in corp. ^7  Non in quodlibet esse, scil. non in esse creatum sive arctatum, neque in illud esse, quod communissimo conceptu entis repraesentatur, sive in esse analogum, sed in illud quod exprimitur verbis:  Ego sum qui sum, et quod, ut ait Damasc. loc. cit., est « totum esse in se comprehendens velut quoddam pelagus substantiae infinitum et interminatum ».  Solum tale esse ex adverso opponitur nihilo.  Cfr. I. Sent. d. 8. p. I. a. 1. q. 2. ^8  Cfr. supra pag. 304, nota 3.  —  Avicenna, Metaph. tr. 1. c. 6:  Dicemus igitur, quod ens et res et necesse talia sunt, quod statim imprimuntur in anima prima impressione, quae non acquiritur ex aliis notioribus se etc.  (Notandum, quod Avicenna dicit ens, non esse, de quo hic agitur). ^9  Bene observari debet differentia inter intellectum apprehendentem et resolventem, inter intellectum simpliciter reflectentem et quintum gradum contemplationis (de quibus vide infra scholion).  Cum creatura sit ens, per ipsam quidem congnosci potest non ens;  cum quaedam creatura in aliquo genere sit ens in actu, per ipsam cognosci potest ens in potentia; sed tunc non agitur de perfecta cognitione creaturae in se, de qua est sermo in hoc capitulo.  Nam creatura, in quantum est non ens et ens in potentia, non cognoscitur plene nisi per esse, quod est actus purus.  Haec perfecta cognitio competit animae solum in hoc quinto gradu; in quo Deus est etiam primum cognitum, a quo omnia alia cognita illustrantur, ita ut in ordine exsecutionis sit primum, dum respectu praecedentium graduum ipse est primum cognitum in ordine tantum intentionis, in quantum cognitio imperfecta tendit naturaliter ad perfectam.  —  Inferius vocibus cum potentia plures codd. praefigunt esse.	^1  Gal. 3:19.  —  Below this in place of having been filled full . . ., our mind  [mens nostra repleta], A, 1 and 2, have our soul [anima], a majority of the codices have having been filled full . . ., our spirit [spiritus noster repletus], which also adds after is inhabited as a house of God by Divine Wisdom [a divina Sapientia tanquam domus Dei inhabitatur] and thus our soul [sicque anima nostra], but scarcely congruously. ^2  Rom. 5:5.  (After our hearts [cordibus nostris] very many codices add and bodies [et corporibus]).  —  The following citation is 1 Cor. 2:11; the third is Eph. 3:17 ff. ^3  Psalm 4:7 :  Marked upon us is the light of Thy Face, O Lord.  —  The following sentence is (St.) Augustine’s;  cf. above p. 180, footnote 10.  —  Then there is a reference to Exod. chs. 25-28, where the tabernacle is described. ^4  Exod. 3:14. ^5  Exod. 3:14.  —  The following passage is Mt. 28:19; the third is Lk. 18:19. ^6  In De Fide orthod., Bk. I, ch. 9.  —  (St.) Dionysius (the Areopagite), De Divinis Nominibus, ch. 3, § 1, and ch. 4, §1.  Cf. Sent., Bk. I, d. 22, q. 3, in corp. ^7  Not in any ‘being’, scil. non in created or constrained ‘being’, nor in that ‘being’, which is represented by the most common concept of a being, or in analogous ‘being’, but in that which is expressed by the words:  I am who am, and which, as (St. John) Damascene says in the work cited, is « ‘being’ entire in itself, as if comprehending a certain infinite and unending, open sea of substance ».  Only such ‘being’ opposes nothing as an adversary.  Cf. Sent., Bk. I, d. 8, p. I, a. 1. q. 2. ^8  Cf. above p. 304, footnote 3.  —  Avicenna, in his Metaphysics, tr. 1, ch. 6, says:  We will, therefore, say, that being [ens] and thing and  the necessary are such, that immediately they are impressed in the soul by a first impression, which is not acquired from others more known than itself etc..  (It must be noted, that Avicenna says being [ens], not ‘being’ [esse], which is what is being discussed here). ^9  One ought to observe well that there is a difference between the intellect apprehending and resolving, between the intellect simply reflecting and the fifth step of contemplation (concerning which matters, v. infra Scholium).  Since a creature is a being, through it there can indeed be cognized a non being; since a certain creature in some genus is a being in act, through it there can be cognized a being in potency; but then one does not deal with the perfect cognition of a creature in itself, of which the discussion in this chapter deals.  For a creature, inasmuch as it is a non being and a being in potency, is not cognized fully except through ‘being’, which is the pure act.  The soul is capable of this perfect cognition only on this fifth step; in which God is also the first cognized, by Whom all other cognized things are illustrated, so that in the order of execution He is first, while in respect to the preceding steps He is the first cognized in the order only of intention, inasmuch as imperfect cognition tends naturally to the perfect.  —  Below this [at the very top of p. 309] to the words commingled with potency [permixtum est cum potentia] very many codices prefix ‘being’ [esse].

 

 

P. 309

 

est esse arctatum, quia permixtum est cum potentia, nec esse analogum, quia minime habet de actu, eo quod minime est. Restat igitur, quod illud esse est esse divinum.	is constrained ‘being’ [esse arctatum], because it is commingled with potency, nor « analogous ‘being’, because it has the least actuality [minime de actu], for the reason that it scarcely is [minime est].  It follows [restat] therefore, that that ‘being’ is the Divine ‘Being’.
4. Mira igitur est caecitas intellectus, qui non considerat illud quod prius videt et sine quo nihil potest cognoscere. Sed sicut oculus intentus in varias^1 colorum differentias lucem, per quam videt cetera, non videt, et si videt, non advertit; sic oculus mentes nostrae, intentus in entia particularia et universalia, ipsum esse extra omne genus, licet primo occurrat menti, et per ipsum alia, tamen non advertit. Unde verissime apparet, quod « sicut oculus vespertilionis se habet ad lucem, ita se habet oculus mentis nostrae ad manifestissima naturae »;^2 quia assuefactus ad tenebras entium et phantasmata sensibilium, cum ipsam lucem summi esse intuetur, videtur sibi nihil videre; non intelligens, quod ipsa caligo summa est mentis nostrae illuminatio,^3 sicut, quando videt oculus puram lucem, videtur sibi nihil videre.	4. Wonderful therefore is the blindness of the intellect, which does not consider that which it sees first and without which it can become acquainted with nothing.  But as the eye intent upon various^1 differences of colors does not see the light, through which it sees other things, and if it sees it, it does not advert to it; so the eye of our mind, intent upon particular and universal beings [entia], though ‘being’ itself outside of every genus first occurs [occurrat] to the mind and through it other (beings), it does not however advert to it.  Whence it most truly appears, that « as the eye of the evening holds itself towards the light, so the eye of our mind holds itself towards the most manifest things of nature »;^2 because accustomed [assuefactus] to the shadows of beings and to the phantasms of sensibles, when it looks upon [intuetur] the light itself of Most High ‘Being’, it seems to it that it sees nothing; not understanding, that that darkness is the Most High Illumination of our mind,^3 just as, when the eye sees pure light, it seems to it that is sees nothing.
5. Vide igitur ipsum purissimum esse, si potes, et occurrit tibi, quod ipsum non potest cogitari ut ab alio acceptum; ac per hoc necessario cogitatur ut omnimode primum, quod nec de nihilo nec de aliquo^4 potest esse. Quid enim est per se, si ipsum esse non est per se nec a se?  —  Occurrit etiam tibi ut carens omnino non-esse ac per hoc ut nunquam incipiens, nunquam desinens, sed aeternum  —  Occurrit etiam tibi ut nullo modo in se habens, nisi quod est ipsum esse, ac per hoc ut cum nullo compositum, sed simplicissimum.  —  Occurrit tibi ut nihil habens possibilitatis, quia omne possibile aliquo modo habet aliquid de non-esse, ac per hoc ut summe actualissimum. Occurrit ut nihil habens defectibilitatis, ac per hoc ut perfectissimum. Occurrit postremo ut nihil habens diversificationis, ac per hoc ut summe unum.	5. Therefore see that most pure ‘Being’, if you can, and it occurs to you, that It cannot be thought of as accepted from an other; and through this [per hoc] It is necessarily thought of as first in every manner [omnimode], because It can be neither from nothing nor from something.^4  For what is It per se, if ‘Being’ itself is not through itself nor from itself [per se nec a se]?  —  It occurs also to you as lacking entirely in ‘non-being’ and through this as never beginning, never stopping, but eternal.  —  It occurs to you also as having in no manner (anything) in itself, except that which is ‘being’ itself, and through this as composed with nothing, but most simple.  —   It occurs to you as having nothing of possibility, because every possible has in some manner something from ‘non-being’, and through this as most actual.  —  It occurs as having nothing of defectibility, and through this as most perfect.  It occurs lastly as having nothing of diversification, and through this as most highly one.
Esse igitur, quod est esse purum et esse simpliciter et esse absolutum, est esse primarium, aeternum, simplicissimum, actualissimum, perfectissimum et summe unum.	‘Being’ therefore, which is pure ‘being’ and simply ‘being’ and absolute ‘being’, is the primary, the eternal, the most simple, the most actual, the most perfect and the most highly one ‘being’.
6. Et sunt haec ita certa, quod non potest ab intelligente ipsum esse cogitari horum oppositum, et^5 unum necessario infert aliud. Nam quia simpliciter est esse, ideo simpliciter primum; quia simpliciter primum, ideo non est ab alio factum, nec a se ipso potuit, ergo aeternum. Idem, quia primum et aeternum; ideo non ex aliis, ergo simplicissimum. Item, quia primum, aeternum et simplicissimum; ideo nihil est in eo possibilitatis cum actu permixtum, et ideo actualissimum. Item, quia primum, aeternum, simplicissimum, actualissimum; ideo perfectissimum; tali omnino nihil deficit, neque aliqua potest fieri additio. Quia primum, aeternum, simplicissimum, actualissimum, perfectissimum; ideo summe unum. Quod enim per omnimodam superabundantiam dicitur respectu omnium. « Quod etiam simpliciter per superabundantiam, dicitur, impossibile est, ut conveniat nisi uni soli ».^6 Unde si Deus nominat esse primarium, aeternum, simplicissimum, actualissimum, perfectissimum; impossibile est, ipsum cogitari non esse, nec esse nisi unum solum. Audi, igitur, Israel, Deus tuus Deus unus est.^7  —  Si hoc vides in pura mentis simplicitate, aliqualiter perfunderis aeternae lucis illustratione.	6. And these are so certain, that the opposite of these cannot be thought by one understanding ‘being’ itself, and^5 one necessarily infers the other.  For because It is simply ‘being’, for that reason It is simply first; because It is simply first, for that reason It has not been made from another, nor by itself could It, therefore It is eternal.  Likewise, because it is first and eternal; for that reason it is not from others, therefore it is most simple.  Likewise, because It is first, eternal, most simple; for that reason there is nothing in It of possibility mixed with act, for that reason it is most actual.  Likewise, because It is first, eternal, most simple, most actual; therefore It is most perfect; to such nothing is lacking [deficit], nor can there be any addition to it.  Because It is first, eternal, most simple, most actual, most perfect; for that reason most highly one.  For what is through an omnimodal [omnimodam] superabundance is said in respect to all things.  « It is impossible that what is said (to be) simply through superabundance, convene except with one alone ».^6 Whence if ‘God’ names the primary, eternal, most simple, most actual, most perfect ‘being’; it is impossible that It is thought to not to be, nor to be but the Only One.  Listen therefore, O Israel, God thy God is one.^7  —  If you see this in the pure simplicity of (your) mind, you will in some wise [aliqualiter] be filled with the brightening of eternal light.
7. Sed habes unde subleveris in admirationem. Nam ipsum esse est primum et novissimum, est aeternum et praesentissimum, est simplicissimum et maximum, est actualissimum et immutabilissimum, est perfectissimum et immensum, est summe unum et tamen omnimodum.  —  Si haec pura mente miraris, maiore luce perfunderis, dum ulterius vides, quia ideo est novissimum, quia primum. Quia enim est primum, omnia operatur propter se ipsum; et ideo necesse est, quod sit finis ultimus, initium et consummatio, alpha et omega.^8  —  Ideo est praesentissimum, quia aeternum. Quia enim aeternum, non fluit ab alio nec deficit a se ipso nec decurrit ab . . .	7. But you have that from which you will be lifted into admiration.  For ‘Being’ itself is first and last [novissimum], is eternal and most present, is most simple and greatest, is most actual and most immutable, is most perfect and immense, is most highly one and nevertheless omnimodal [omnimodum].  —  If you wonder at these things with a pure mind, you shall be filled with a greater light, while you see further, that It is for that reason last, because it is first.  For because It is first, It works all things on account of Its very self; and for that reason it is necessary, that It be the last end, the start [initium] and the consummation, the Alpha and Omega.^8  —  For that reason It is the most present, because It is eternal.  For because It is eternal, It does not flow from an other nor fails by itself nor runs down [decurrit] from . . .
^1  K L distentus per varias (etiam B H M N per varias). ^2  Aristot., II. Metaph. text. 1. (I. brevior, c. 1.).  Textus originalis post lucem addit diei (A Q, solis), et pro oculus mentis nostrae substituit intellectus animae nostrae (A intellectus noster, B H K L M N P oculus noster, qui etiam cum textu originali post ita omittunt se habet; cfr. supra pag. 109, nota 5.). ^3  Psalm. 138, 11:  Et nox illuminatio mea in deliciis meis.  Cfr. c. 7. et Breviloq. p. V. c. 6. in fine.  —  Quodsi quis praedicta intelligi velit de esse analogo sive de esse, quod repraesentatur communissimo conceptu entis;  tunc contextus et constantissima et indubitata doctrina s. Doctoris eo tantum sensu hoc accipi permittunt, quod esse communissimum sub aliquo respectu considerari potest tanquam umbra divini esse, qua implicite et non proprie cognoscitur primum esse (vide infra scholion).  —  Pro intuetur plures codd. contuetur.  Inferius pro nihil [H K L M N non] videre B nihil valere videre. ^4  Vat., 3 et 4 ab alio (perperam, quia hoc iam dictum fuit), 1 et 2 de alio.  Superius post quod ipsum D H K L M N addunt esse.  Codd., quos sequimur, communissime et constanter substituunt occurrit pro occurret, quod habet edd. ^5  Pro et H K L quia. Infra ante potuit supple: fieri. ^6  Aristot., V. Topic. c. 3. (c. 5).  Cfr. ibid. VII. c. 1.  —  Mox pro nominat D H K L M N nominatur. ^7  Deut. 6, 4:  Audi Israel, Dominus Deus noster Dominus unus est. ^8  Vide supra pag. 307, nota 6.  —  Prov. 16, 4:  Universa propter semetipsum operatus est Dominus.  —  Post pauca pro fluit, quod exhibent B F I O, 1 et 2, plures alii codd. fuit. Vat., 3 et 4, finitur (cf. Boeth., V. de consolat. prosa 6.).	^1  K L have distended through various [distentus per varias]; B H M N also have through various [per varias]. ^2  Aristotle, Metaphysics, Bk. II, text 1 (shorter version, Bk. I, ch. 1).  The original text after the light [lucem] adds of day [diei], and in place of the eye of our mind [oculus mentis nostrae] it substitutes the intellect of our soul [intellectus animae nostrae] (A has our intellect [intellectus noster], B H K L M N P our eye [oculus noster], and also with the original text after so [ita] omit holds itself [se habet];  cf. above p. 109, footnote 5). ^3  Psalm 138:11 :  And the night (is) my illumination among my delights.  Cf. ch. 7 and Breviloquium, p. V, ch. 6 at the end.  —  Which if anyone wanted that the aforesaid be understood of analogous ‘being’ [esse analogo] or of the ‘being’ [esse], which is represented by the most common concept of being [entis]; then the context and most constant and indubitable doctrine of the Seraphic Doctor permit it to be accepted only in this sense, that  most common ‘being’ [esse communissimum] can be considered under any respect as a shadow of the Divine ‘Being’, by which implicitly and not properly there is cognized the first ‘Being’ [primum esse] (see the Scholium below).  —  In place of looks upon [intuetur] very many codices have surveys [contuetur].  Below this in place of that it sees nothing [nihil videre], or in H K L M N that it does not see [non videre], B has that it prevails to see nothing [nihil valet videre]. ^4  The Vatican text, editions 3 and 4, have from an other [ab alio], faultily, because this has already be said; 1 and 2 have from an other [de alio].  Above this after that It [quod ipsum] D H K L M N add ‘being’ [esse].  The codices, which we follow, most commonly and constantly substitute it occurs [occurrit] in place of it will occur [occurret], which the editions have. ^5  In place of and [et] H K L have because [quia].  Below after could It [potuit] supply be made [fieri] . ^6  Aristotle, Topics, Bk. V, ch. 3 (ch. 5).  Cf. ibid., Bk. VII, ch. 1.  —  Then in place of names [nominat] D H K L M N have is named [nominatur]. ^7  Deut. 6:4 :  Hear O Israel, the Lord, our God, the Lord is One. ^8  See above p. 307, footnote 6.  —  Prov. 16:4 :  The universe for Thine own sake has been wrought, O Lord.  —  After a few words in place of does not flow [non fluit], which B F I O, editions 1 and 2, exhibit, very many of the other codices have was not [non fuit], the Vatican text, editions 3 and 4, have is not finished [non finitur]:  cf. Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae, Bk. V, prose 6).