Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Controversy between al-Kindī and Yayā b. Adī on the Trinity, (part one): A Revival of the Controversy between Eunomius and the Cappadocian Fathers

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Buy this article

Price:
$30.00+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of Oriens

AbstractThis article deals with the reasoning of the neo-Arian Eunomius of Cyzicus and the Arabic philosopher al-Kindī against the consubstantiality (τ µοοσιον) of God the Father and God the Son and of three divine hypostases respectively. I wish to make evident that al-Kindī attacks the doctrine of Eunomius’ main adversaries Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa as well as the doctrine of John Philoponus by taking up Aetius’ and Eunomius’ argument of the logical impossibility that the Ingenerate becomes generate. The philosophical and logico-semantic issue of dispute in the controversy is undistributed commonness versus distributed commonness (κοινωνα/cf. umūm), in other words intension versus extension. An investigation of Yayā b. Adī’s counter-refutation is forthcoming in one of the next volumes of Oriens.

1. Alcinoos Enseignement des doctrines de Platon 1990 Paris Les Belles Lettres Introduction, texte établi et commenté par John Whittaker, et traduit par Pierre Louis.
2. Alkinoos Didaskalikos: Lehrbuch der Grundsätze Platons 2007 Berlin, New York Walter de Gruyter Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Anmerkungen Orrin F. Summerell and Thomas Zimmer.
3. Aristotle Ross William D. Aristotelis analytica priora et posteriora 1964 Oxford Clarendon [ Anal. pr., Anal. post:]
4. Aristotle Minio-Paluello Lorenzo Aristotelis Categoriae et Liber de interpretatione 1949 Oxford Clarendon [ Cat., De int.:]
5. Aristotle Ross William D. "Aristotelis" De anima 1956 Oxford Clarendon [ De an:]
6. Aristotle Badawī ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān Manṭiq Arisṭū 1980 Vol vol. 1-3 Beirut Dār al-Qalam
7. Aristotle Ross William D. Metaphysics. A revised text with introduction and commentary 1956 Vol vol. 1-2 Oxford Clarendon [ Met:]
8. Aristotle Jabre Farid An-Naṣṣ al-kāmil li-manṭiq Arisṭū, 1999 Vol vol. 1-2 Beirut Dār al-Fikr al-Lubnānī
9. Aristotle Ross William D. Physica 1966 Oxford Clarendon [ Phys.:]
10. Aristotle Ross William D. Aristotelis Topica et Sophistici elenchi 1958 Oxford Clarendon [ Top:]
11. Basil of Caesarea Courtonne Yves Saint Basile: Lettres 1957-1966 Vol vols. 1 3 Paris Société d’édition «Les belles lettres»
12. Barnes Jonathan Porphyry: Introduction 2006 Oxford Clarendon
13. Bluck Richard S. Plato’s Sophist 1975 Manchester Univ. Press
14. Boer Tjitze J. , Bezold Carl "“Kindī wider die Trinität”" Orientalische Studien Theodor Nöldeke zum siebzigsten Geburtstag (2. März 1906): gewidmet von Freunden und Schülern 1906 Giessen A. Töpelmann 279 291
15. Bronowski Ada "“The Stoic View on Universals”" Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 2007 Vol 18 71 87
16. DelCogliano Mark Basil of Caesarea’s Anti-Eunomian Theory of Names 2010 Leiden Brill http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004183322.i-302
17. Dillon John M. Alcinous: The Handbook of Platonism 1993 Oxford Clarendon
18. Dillon John M. The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220 1996 Ithaca, N.Y. Cornell University Press
19. Ebied R.Y. , A. van Roey , Wickham L.R. Peter of Callinicum: Anti-Tritheist Dossier 1981 Leuven Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
20. Escobar Gómez Santiago , Gonzáles López Juna Carlos "“La polémica trinitaria entre Yaḥya ibn ʿAdī y al-Kindī”" Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofia 2006 Vol 23 75 79
21. Fowler Harold N. Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes 1925 Vol vol. 9. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press and London: William Heinemann Ltd.
22. Frank Richard M. "“‘ Lam yazal’as a formal term in Muslim theological discourse”" MIDEO 1995 Vol 22 243 270 reprint in Richard M. Frank. Philosophy, Theology and Mysticism in Medieval Islam, vol. 1, ed. Dimitri Gutas. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/MID.22.0.2003177
23. Gregory of Nyssa Mueller Fridericus Gregorii Nysseni Opera Dogmatica Minora, pars 1 1958 Leiden Brill
24. Horn Christoph Dixsaut Monique , Morel Pierre-Marie , Tordo-Rombaut Karine "“L’auto-déclaration de l’un dans l’ EnnéadeV, 3 [49] et son arrière-plan dans la théorie Plotinienne de la prédication”" La connaissance de soi: études sur le traité 49 de Plotin 2002 Paris Vrin 41 71
25. Hübner Reinhard M. Wickham Lionel R. , Bammel C.P. "“Basilius von Caesarea und das HOMOOUSIOS”" Christian Faith and Greek Philosophy in Late antiquity 1993 Leiden/New York/Köln 70 91
26. Jaeger Wernerus " Contra Eunomium Libri, Pars Prior, Liber I et II (vulgo I et XIIb). Gregorii Nysseni Opera " Contra Eunomium Libros I-II Continens 1960 Vol vol. 1 Leiden Brill
27. Jaeger Wernerus " Contra Eunomium Libri, Pars Altera, Liber III (vulgo III-XII);" Refutatio Confessionis Eunomii (vulgo Lib. II). Gregorii Nysseni Opera, vol. 2. Contra Eunomium Librum III et Refutationem Confessionis Eunomii Continens 1960 Leiden Brill
28. Kahn Charles H. Essays on Being 2009 Oxford University Press
29. Kindī al-. Abū Rīda M.A. Rashed Roshdi , Jolivet Jean " K. al-Kindī ilā al-Muʿtaṣim bi-llāh fī al-Falsafa al-ūlā " Rasāʾil al-Kindī al-falsafiyya 1998 Leiden, Boston, Köln Brill 7 111 (Cairo: Dār al-Fikr al-ʿArabī,1369/1950), 97-162; OEuvres philosophiques es scientifiques d’al-Kindī, vol. 2, Métaphysique et cosmologie,
30. Kopecek Thomas A. A History of Neo-Arianism 1979 Vol vols. 1-2 Cambridge The Philadelphia Patristic Foundation
31. Lightfoot Joseph Barber The Apostolic Fathers, part 2, vol. 2: S. Ignatius, S. Polycarp 1889 Vol 2 Hildesheim, New York Olms 1973
32. Mates Benson Knuuttila Simo , Hintikka Jaakko "“Identity and predicaton in Plato”" The Logic of Being 1986 D. Reidel Publishing Company 29 47 Dordrecht et al
33. McKenna Stephen Plotinus: The Enneads 1969 London Faber & Faber 4th rev. ed.
34. Périer Auguste "“Défense du dogme de la Trinité contre les objections d’al-Kindî (1)”" Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 1920-21 Vol 22 3 21 reproduced and improved translation of the French translation In Petits traités apologétiques de Yaḥyâ ben ʿAdî, ed. and French transl. Auguste Périer. Paris: J. Gabalda and Paul Geuthner, 1920, 118-28.
35. Périer Auguste "“Un traité de Yaḥyâ ben ʿAdî (1): Défense du dogme de la Trinité contre les objections d’al-Kindî (2). Texte arabe publié pour la première fois et traduit”" Revue de l’Orient Chrétien 1920-21 Vol 22 3 21
36. Plato Burnet Ioannes Platonis Opera 1964 Vol Vol. 2 Oxford Clarendon ( 11901)
37. Plotin Bréhier Emile Ennéades 1936 Vol VI Paris Les Belles Lettres
38. Porphyry Busse Adolf Porhyrii Isagoge et in Aristotelis categorias commentarium 1887 Berlin Reimer [ Isag.:]
39. Ramón Guerrero Rafael , Tornero Poveda Emilio Obras filosóficas de Al-Kindi 1986 Madrid Coloquio
40. Rashed Roshdi , Jolivet Jean Rashed Rashed , Jolivet Jean "“Témoignage de Yaḥyā b. ʿAdī: Objections d’al-Kindī contre la trinité”" Œuvres philosophiques es scientifiques d’al-Kindī vol. 2, Métaphysique et cosmologie 1998 Leiden, Boston, Köln Brill 119 128
41. Rijk Lambert M. de. Plato’s Sophist: A Philosophical Commentary 1986 Amsterdam North-Holland Publ. Co.
42. Ritter Adolf M. Andresen Carl , Ritter Adolf M. "“Dogma und Lehre in der Alten Kirche”" Handbuch der Dogmen- und Theologiegeschichte vol. 1: Die Lehrentwicklung im Rahmen der Katholizität 1999 2nd rev. Göttingen Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 99 283
43. Ross William D. Barnes Jonathan "“Metaphysics”" The Complete Works of Aristotle 1995 Vol vol. 2 Princeton University Press 1552 1728
44. Sesboüé, Bernard avec collaboration de Georges-Matthieu de Durand et Louis Doutreleau. Basile de Césarée: Contre Eunome, suivi de Eunome: Apologie 1982-3 Vol vols. 1-2 Paris Cerf
45. Silvas Anna M. Gregory of Nyssa: The Lettres. Introduction, Translation, Commentary 2007 Leiden, Boston Brill
46. Stead George Christopher Divine Substance 1977 Oxford Clarendon http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198266303.001.0001
47. Stead George Christopher "“The Thaliaof Arius and the Testimony of Athanasius”" Journal of Theological Studies 1978 Vol 29 20 52 N.S. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jts/XXIX.1.20
48. Turcescu Lucian Gregory of Nyssa and the Concept of Divine Persons 2005 Oxford University Press http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0195174259.001.0001
49. Vaggione Richard Paul Eunomius: The Extant Works 1987 Oxford Clarendon
50. Wickham Lionel R. "“The Syntagmationof Aetius the Anomean”" Journal of Theological Studies 1985 N.S., 19 532 569
51. Williams Rowan D. Arius: Heresy and Tradition 2002 Grand Rapids, MI and Cambridge, UK William B. Eerdmans
52. Williams Rowan D. "“The Logic of Arianism”" Journal of Theological Studies, 1983 Vol 34 56 81 N.S. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jts/34.1.56
53. Wolfson Harry A. Amīn ʿUṯmān "“The Philosopher Kindi and Yahya ibn ʿAdi on the Trinity”" Études philosophiques offertes au Dr. Ibrahim Madkour 1974 Cairo al-Hayʾa al-Miṣriyya al-ʿĀmma li-l-Kitāb, 49 64
54. FN0 * I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Alexander Kalbarczyk and James Weaver for proofreading this article and helping me to improve the English style. Needless to say, all deficiencies of this article are mine alone.
55. FN1 1A. Périer, “Un traité de Yaḥyâ ben ʿAdî (1): Défense du dogme de la Trinité contre les objections d’al-Kindî (2). Texte arabe publié pour la première fois et traduit”, Revue de l’Orient Chrétien22 (1920-21), 3-21.
56. FN2 2Périer, “Traité”, 4.1-3.
57. FN3 3Périer, “Traité”, 4.4-5.
58. FN4 4T.J. de Boer, “Kindī wider die Trinität”, in Orientalische Studien Theodor Nöldeke zum siebzigsten Geburtstag (2. März 1906): gewidmet von Freunden und Schülern, ed. C. Bezold (Giessen: A. Töpelmann, 1906), 279-91.
59. FN5 5Cf. note 1; A. Périer, “Défense du dogme de la Trinité contre les objections d’al-Kindî (1) [reproduced and improved translation of the French translation Revue de l’Orient Chrétien22 (1920-21), 3-21], in Petits traités apologétiques de Yaḥyâ ben ʿAdî, ed. and French transl. A. Périer (Paris: J. Gabalda and Paul Geuthner, 1920), 118-28. Ramón Guerrero and E. Tornero Poveda, Obras filosóficas de Al-Kindi(Madrid: Coloquio, 1986), 279-83. R. Rashed and J. Jolivet, “Témoignage de Yaḥyā b. ʿAdī: Objections d’al-Kindī contre la trinité” [extract of the part ascribed to al-Kindī], in Œuvres philosophiques es scientifiques d’al-Kindī, vol. 2, Métaphysique et cosmologie, ed. R. Rashed and J. Jolivet (Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 1998), 119-28. S. Escobar Gómez and J.C. Gonzáles López, “La polémica trinitaria entre Yaḥya ibn ʿAdī y al-Kindī”, Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofia23 (2006), 75-79.
60. FN6 6H.A. Wolfson, “The Philosopher Kindi and Yahya ibn ʿAdi on the Trinity”, in Études philosophiques offertes au Dr. Ibrahim Madkour, ed. ʿUṯmān Amīn (Cairo: al-Hayʾa al-Miṣriyya al-ʿĀmma li-l-Kitāb, 1974), 49-64.
61. FN7 7S. Escobar Gómez and J.C. Gonzáles López, “La polémica trinitaria entre Yaḥya ibn ʿAdī y al-Kindī”, Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofia23 (2006), 75-79.
62. FN8 8Plato, Parmenides139e 4-8: . . . ἀδύνατον ἄρα καὶ τῷ ἑνὶ ἢ ἑτέρου ἕτερον εἶναι ἢ ἑαυτῷ ταὐτόν. — Ἀδύνατον. — Οὕτω δὴ ἕτερόν γε ἢ ταὐτὸν τὸ ἓν οὔτ᾿ ἂν αὑτῷ οὔτ᾿ ἑτέρῳ εἴη. Platonis Opera, vol. 2, ed. Io. Burnet (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964; 11901); transl. H.N. Fowler, Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes, vol. 9 (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press and London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1925).
63. FN9 9Alcinoos, Didaskalikos165.13-15: . . . οὔτε µέρος τινός, οὔτε ὡς ὅλον ἔχον τινὰ µέρη, οὔτε ὥστε ταὐτόν τινι εἶναι ἢ ἕτερον· οὐδὲν γὰρ αὐτῷ συµβέβηκε καθ᾿ ὃ δύναται τῶν ἄλλων χωρισθῆναι. Alcinoos, Enseignement des doctrines de Platon, ed. J. Whittaker, French transl. P. Louis (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1990), 24; Engl. transl. J. Dillon, Alcinous: The Handbook of Platonism(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 18 (ch. 10.4); cf. Alkinoos, Didaskalikos: Lehrbuch der Grundsätze Platons, Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Anmerkungen O.F. Summerell and Th. Zimmer (Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), 26.
64. FN10 10Cf. Ch. Horn, “L’auto-déclaration de l’un dans l’ EnnéadeV, 3 [49] et son arrière-plan dans la théorie Plotinienne de la prédication”, in La connaissance de soi: études sur le traité 49 de Plotin, ed. M. Dixsaut, P.-M. Morel and K. Tordo-Rombaut (Paris: Vrin, 2002), 41-71; esp. 56-66.
65. FN11 11Cf. Eunomius’ master Aetius who took as starting point of his Syntagmation“whether the ingenerate Deity can make the generate ingenerate. L.R. Wickham, “The Syntagmationof Aetius the Anomean”, Journal of Theological Studies, N.B., 19 (1985), 545, cf. 535.
66. FN12 12The translations ‘God-Father’ and ‘God-Son’ are more appropriate to Basil of Caesarea’s and Gregory of Nyssa’s argument that it is correct to say: “I believe in God-Father’ (πιστεύω εἰς Θεὸν Πατέρα) and . . . in God-Son (εἰς Θεὸν Υἱόν)” than the translations ‘God the Father’ and ‘God the Son’. Cf. below 32-33 n. 121.
67. FN13 13On the logical reasons for Arius’ denial of substantial unity of the Father and the Son, and of the Son’s eternity see R.D. Williams, “The Logic of Arianism”, Journal of Theological Studies,N.S., 34 (1983), 56-81.
68. FN14 14Williams, “The Logic of Arianism”, 58.
69. FN15 15According to Socrates Scholasticus, Arius is “not bereft of dialectic discussion” (οὐκ ἄµοιρος τῆς διαλεκτικῆς λέσχης). See Williams: “The Logic of Arianism”, 59 n. 21.
70. FN16 16A.M. Ritter, “Dogma und Lehre in der Alten Kirche”, in Handbuch der Dogmen- und Theologiegeschichte, vol. 1, ed. C. Andresen und A.M. Ritter (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2nd ed., 1999), 147.
71. FN17 17Williams: “The Logic of Arianism,” 59-60.
72. FN18 18R.P. Vaggione, Eunomius: The Extant Works(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 13.
73. FN19 19Eunomius, Apologia, 21.6-8 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 60; translation modified); cf. B. Sesboüé, Basile de Césarée: Contre Eunome, suivi de Eunome: Apologie, vol. 2 (Paris: Cerf, 1982-3), 276.
74. FN20 20Ed. and French transl. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 177-299; ed. and Engl. transl. Vaggione, Eunomius, 35-75.
75. FN21 21Ed. and French transl. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 1, 137-vol. 2, 175.
76. FN22 22Reconstructed from the fragments quoted by Gregory of Nyssa in his Contra Eunomiusand transl. into English by Vaggione, Eunomius, 79-127.
77. FN23 23W. Jaeger (ed.), Contra Eunomium Libri, Pars Prior, Liber I et II (vulgo I et XIIb). Gregorii Nysseni Opera, vol. 1: Contra Eunomium Libros I-II Continens(Leiden: Brill, 1960); id. (ed.) Contra Eunomium Libri,Pars Altera, Liber III (vulgo III-XII); Refutatio Confessionis Eunomii(vulgo Lib. II). Gregorii Nysseni Opera, vol. II: Contra Eunomium Librum III et Refutationem Confessionis Eunomii Continens(Leiden: Brill, 1960).
78. FN24 24Ed. with intr. and English transl. Vaggione, Eunomius, 131-61. On the chronology of the controversy see in detail Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 1, 15-18; Vaggione, Eunomius, xiii-xvii; 79-89.
79. FN25 25Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 1, 122-3.
80. FN26 26I translate ἀγέννητος/ἀγέννητον and ἀγεννησία by ‘ingenerate’ and ‘ingeneracy’ throughout this article, but ‘unbegotten’ and ‘unbegottenness’ must always be simultaneously conceived.
81. FN27 27Cf. R. Williams, Arius: Heresy and Tradition, rev. ed., (Grand Rapids, Mich. and Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans, 2002), 68-70.
82. FN28 28Cf. Williams, Arius, 270.
83. FN29 29Cf. G.C. Stead, “The Thaliaof Arius and the Testimony of Athanasius”, Journal of Theological Studies, N.S. 29 (1978), 49.1.
84. FN30 30Cf. Wickham,“The Syntagmationof Aetius the Anomean”, 540 paenult.
85. FN31 31Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 296-99; Vaggione, Eunomius, 74-75.
86. FN32 32The term ἄναρχος stands for ‘beginningless’ from the aspect of being ‘uncaused’ and therefore exactly corresponds to al-Kindī’s use of the term azalī. See below 36.
87. FN33 33Eunomius, Apologia, 28.1-4 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 74; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 296): Εἷς ἔστι θεός, ἀγέννητος καὶ ἄναρχος, οὔτε πρὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἔχων τινὰ ὄντα (οὐδὲν γὰρ πρὸ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου εἶναι δύναται), οὔτε σὺν αὐτῷ (εἷς γὰρ καὶ µόνος θεὸς ὁ ἀγέννητος), οὔτ᾿ ἐν αὐτῷ (ἁπλοῦς γὰρ καὶ ἀσύνθετος). Translation slightly modified.
88. FN34 34See below 18-19.
89. FN35 35E.g. Aristotle, Cat. 5, 3b 10-21; Met. VII 4, 1030a 3-6; 10; 1030b 10.
90. FN36 36Eunomius’ refutation is directed against the consubstantiality of the Son, but his arguments can be extended against the formula “one substance/essence, three hypostases” (µία οὐσία τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις) as well.
91. FN37 37On the distinction between “the one who is substance” (ὁ ὤν οὐσίᾳ) and to have something “by participation” (µετοχῇ; µετουσίᾳ) see Williams, “The Logic of Arianism,” 75.
92. FN38 38Cf. Aristotle, Cat. 5, 3b 14.
93. FN39 39The most famous passage where the Platonic ideas or forms and the Aristotelian universals are referred to by the terms ‘genera’ and ‘species’ and where the question is posited whether they are bare thoughts or concepts (ἐπίνοιαι) is Porphyry’s preface to his Isagoge. Isag.1.9-14. On ἐπίνοιαι see below 17; 18-19; 27 n. 99.
94. FN40 40This doctrine is usually charged as Sabellianism or Modalism.
95. FN41 41See below 21-22.
96. FN42 42The Aristotelian form (εἶδος) in the sense of the universal that is posterior (ὕστερον) to the singular being is not Eunomius’ target, since the universal inasmuch it is the product of abstraction is excluded anyway as ‘mere thought’ (ἐπίνοια). See below 18-19.
97. FN43 43See Williams, “The Logic of Arianism”, 58-81.
98. FN44 44Besides the phrase δέδεικται (“it is proven”) (see below 11 n. 46) Eunomius uses the term ἀπόδειξις in Apologia, 9.1 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome,vol. 2, 250).
99. FN45 45On the Stoic term ‘conception’ (ἔννοια) see A. Bronowski, “The Stoic View on Universals”, Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale18 (2007), 71-78; esp. 76: “. . . whilst ἐννόηα is the result or product, and thus the content of ‘having something in one’s mind’ (ἐννοεῖν), ἔννοια is the noun which corresponds to the activity expressed by the verb it derives from, it is the having something in the mind.” The author of the Didaskalikosapplies the term “natural conception” (φυσικὴ ἔννοια) for the act of thinking of the embodied soul, in other words a natural, innate idea or concept, in contrast to the act of thinking (νόησις) of the soul before it enters the body. See Alcinoos, Didaskalikos156.21 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 8); transl. Dillon, Handbook, 18 (4.8); cf. J.M. Dillon, The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1996), 271; 276; 278. Cf. also al-Kindī’s distinction between existence by itself and natural existence, below 38.
100. FN46 46Eunomius, Apologia, 7.1-11 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 40; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 244-246): Εἷς τοίνυν κατά τε φυσικὴν ἔννοιαν καὶ τὴν τῶν πατέρων διδασκαλίαν ἡµῖν ὡµολόγηται θεός, µήτε παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ µήτε παρ᾿ ἑτέρου γενόµενος, ἑκάτερον γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐπίσης ἀδύνατον. ἐπειδή γε δεῖ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν τό τε ποιοῦν τοῦ γενοµένου προϋπάρχειν καὶ τὸ ποιούµενον τοῦ ποιοῦντος εἶναι δεύτερον, µήτε δ᾿ αὐτὸ ἑαυτοῦ πρότερον ἢ ὕστερον εἶναι δύνασθαι, µήτε ἕτερόν τι πρὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. ἦ γὰρ ἂν ἐκεῖνο πρὸ τοῦ δευτέρου τὸ τῆς θεότητος ἔσχεν ἀξίωµα, τὸ γάρ τοι δυνατὸν εἶναι λέγειν ὑφ᾿ ἑτέρου τι γίνεσθαι ἀληθὲς ὄν ἐπὶ γενητῶν ἂν ἔχοι χώραν, κἀπὶ τῶν ὑπὸ θεοῦ γενοµένων τάττοιτο δικαιῶς. οὐκοῦν εἰ µήτε αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ µήθ᾿ ἕτερόν τι αὐτοῦ προϋάρχειν δέδεικται, πρὸ δὲ πάντων αὐτός, ἀκολουθεῖ τούτῳ τὸ ἀγέννητον, µᾶλλον δὲ αὐτός ἐστιν οὐσία ἀγέννητος. Engl. transl. T.A. Kopecek, A History of Neo-Arianism, Cambridge: The Philadelphia Patristic Foundation, 1979), vol. 2, 311; translation modified, numbering added; cf. French transl. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome,vol. 2, 245-247.
101. FN47 47Cf. Plato, Parmenides1034d 4: ὡµολόγηται ἡµῖν.
102. FN48 48Pace Vaggione who translated: “It is in accordance, therefore, both with innate knowledge and the teaching of the fathers that we have made our confession that God is one, and that he was brought into being neither by his own action nor by that of any other.” Vaggione, Eunomius, 41, emphasis added.
103. FN49 49Alcinoos, Didaskalikos159.24-30 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 13); transl. Dillon, Handbook12 (6.7).
104. FN50 50Cf. Aristotle, Met. V 2, 1013a 29-33: ἔτι ὅθεν ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς µεταβολῆς ἡ πρώτη ἢ τῆς ἠρεµήσεως, οἷον ὁ βουλεύσας αἴτιος, καὶ ὁ πατὴρ τοὺ τέκνου καὶ ὅλως τὸ ποιοῦν τοῦ ποιουµένου καὶ τὸ µεταβλητικὸν τοὺ µεταβάλλοντος (“[we call a cause . . .] further that from which the change or the rest first begins, e.g. the one who has deliberated is a cause, and the father a cause of the child, and in general the maker a cause of that which is made, and the change-producing of the changing”); transl. W.D. Ross, “Metaphysics”, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. J. Barnes (Princeton: University Press, 1995), vol. 2, 1600, slightly modified.
105. FN51 51Aristotle, Met. IV 6, 1011b 15-18: ἐπεὶ δ᾿ ἀδύνατον τὴν ἀντίφασιν ἅµα ἀληθεύεσθαι κατὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ, φανερὸν ὅτι οὐδὲ τἀναντία ἅµα ὑπάρχειν ἐνδέχεται τῷ αὐτῷ (“since it is impossible that contradictories should be at the same time true of the same thing, obviously contraries also cannot belong at the same time to the same thing”); transl. Ross, “Metaphysics”, 1597.
106. FN52 52Cf. Aristotle, Met. XII 7, 1072a 25-26: . . . ἔστι τι ὃ οὐ κινούµενον κινεῖ, ἀΐδιον καὶ οὐσία καὶ ἐνέργεια οὖσα (“there is something which moves without being moved; something eternal which is both substance and actuality”); XII 7, 1072a 31-32: καὶ ταύτης ἡ οὐσία πρώτη, καὶ ταύτης ἡ ἁπλῆ καὶ κατ᾿ ἐνέργειαν (“in this series substance stands first, and of substance that which is simple and exists actually”); Met. XII 7, 1072b 28-30: φαµὲν δὴ τὸν θεὸν εἶναι ζῷον ἀΐδιον ἄριστον, ὥστε ζωὴ καὶ αἰὼν συνεχὴς καὶ ἀΐδιος ὑπάρχει τῷ θεῷ· τοῦτο γὰρ ὁ θέος (“we hold, then, that God is a living being, eternal, most good; and therefore life and a continuous eternal existence belong to God; for that is what God is”); transl. Ross, “Metaphysics”, 1694; 1695.
107. FN53 53Cf. above, the first argument in combination with the third argument.
108. FN54 54“A true being” for Eunomius is a being that does not exist in thought only. Cf. below 18-19.
109. FN55 55Cf. Aristotle, Met. IV 7, 1011b 23-24: ἀλλὰ µὴν οὐδὲ µεταξὺ ἀντιφάσεως ἐνδέχεται εἶναι οὐθέν, ἀλλ᾿ ἀνάγκη ἢ φάναι ἢ ἀποφάναι ἓν καθ᾿ ἑνὸς ὁτιοῦν (“nor indeed can there be any intermediate between contrary statements, but of one thing we must either assert or deny one thing, whatever it may be”); transl. Ross, “Metaphysics”, 1597.
110. FN56 56Cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 1, 96-97.
111. FN57 57Regarding the passage in question here the manuscripts do not transmit the variant γεννητόν instead of γενητόν, but rather the variant ἀγένητος instead of ἀγέννητος. See Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 246; Vaggione, Eunomius, 40. Lightfoot points out, that Athanasius used the term ἀγένvητος “in two ways, signifying either (1) τὸ ὂν µέν, µήτε δὲ γεννηθὲν µήτε ὅλως ἔχον τὸν αἴτιον, or (2) τὸ ἄκτιστον. In the former sense the Son cannot be called ἀγέννητος, in the latter he may be so called. Both uses, he [sc. Athanasius] says, are found in the fathers . . .” Lightfoot concludes: “The distinction between the two terms, as indicated by their origin, is that ἀγένητος denies the creation, and ἀγέννητος the generation or parentage.” J.B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, part II, 2: S. Ignatius, S. Polycarp, repr. of the 2. ed. London 1889 (Hildesheim, New York: Olms, 1973), 91-92.
112. FN58 58Eunomius, Apologia, 12.6-7; 13.7-9 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 48; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome,vol. 2, 258-60); for ποίηµα cf. 18.10 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 56; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 270).
113. FN59 59Cf. above 15.
114. FN60 60Eunomius uses the term λεγόµενον, but he does not use the term τρόπος.
115. FN61 61Cf. above 4-5.
116. FN62 62Eunomius, Apologia, 8.14-18; cf. below 27 n. 99.
117. FN63 63Cf. below 29 n. 105.
118. FN64 64Eunomius, Apologia, 8.1-7 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 40-42; Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 246-48): Ἀγέννητον δὲ λέγοντες, οὐκ ὀνόµατι µόνον κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν ἀνθρωπίνην σεµνύειν οἰόµεθα δεῖν, ἀποτιννύναι δὲ κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν . . . τὰ γάρ τοι κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν λεγόµενα ἐν ὀνόµασι µόνοις καὶ προφορᾷ τὸ εἶναι ἔχοντα ταῖς φωναῖς συνδιαλύεσθαι πέφυκεν, ὁ δὲ θεός, καὶ σιωπώντων καὶ φθεγγοµένων καὶ γεγενηµένων καὶ πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι τὰ ὄντα, ἦν τε καὶ ἔστιν ἀγέννητος. Translation modified.
119. FN65 65Cf. Aristotle, Cat. 1, 1a 16.
120. FN66 66On ἐπίνοια cf. above 9 n. 39.
121. FN67 67Cf. Aristotle, De int.1, 16a 16-17.
122. FN68 68Aristotle, De an. I 1, 402b 7-8.
123. FN69 69Cf. above 8 n. 35.
124. FN70 70Eunomius, Apologia, 8.7-10 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 248): ἀλλὰ µὴν οὐδὲ κατὰ στέρησιν· εἴ γε τῶν κατὰ φύσιν αἱ στερήσεις εἰσὶ στερήσεις, καὶ τῶν ἕξεων δεύτεραι. οὔτε δὲ κατὰ φύσιν ἦν τις τῷ θεῷ γένεσις, οὔτε προτέραν ἔχων ταύτην εἶτα στερηθεὶς γέγονεν ἀγέννητος. Translation modified.
125. FN71 71Cf. also Aristotle, Met. V 22.
126. FN72 72Cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 248-49 n. 3.
127. FN73 73Aristotle, Cat. 10, 12a 26.
128. FN74 74Aristotle, Phys.I 7, 190a 14-17: ὅτι δεῖ τι ἀεὶ ὑποκεῖσθαι τὸ γιγνόµενον, καὶ τοῦτο εἰ καὶ ἀριθµῷ ἐστὶν ἕν, ἀλλ᾿ εἴδει γε οὐκ ἕν· τὸ γὰρ εἴδει λέγω καὶ λόγῳ ταὐτόν.
129. FN75 75Aristotle, Phys.I 7, 190a 20: τὸ ἐξ ἀµφοῖν συγκείµενον.
130. FN76 76Eunomius, Apologia, 8.8 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 248): τῶν ἕξεων δεύτεραι.
131. FN77 77Cf. Aristotle, De int.7, 17a 38-17b 1.
132. FN78 78Cf. Wickham, “The Syntagmationof Aetius”, 540.
133. FN79 79Cf. Aristotle, Cat. 1, 1a12-15; Cat. 5, 3b 14; 8, 10b 13-18.
134. FN80 80I.e. τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι with predicative dative.
135. FN81 81 Met. VII 6, 1031a 25.
136. FN82 82 Cat. 5, 2a 26-34.
137. FN83 83See Plotin, EnnéadesVI, 3, 4.20-26, ed. E. Bréhier, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1936, 129: Ὃ οὖν ἄλλου ὂν ἐκείνου λέγεται, οὐκ οὐσία· οὐσία τοίνυν, ὃ ὅπερ ἔστιν αὑτοῦ ἔστιν, ἢ µέρος ὂν τοιούτου συµπληρωτικόν ἐστι συνθέτου, ὄντος µὲν αὐτοῦ ἕκαστον µὲν ἢ ἑκάτερον αὑτοῦ, πρὸς δὲ τὸ σύνθετον ἄλλον τρόπον ἑκείνου λεγόµενον· ᾗ εἰ µὲν µέρος, πρὸς ἄλλο λεγόµενον, καθ᾿ αὑτὸ δὲ φύσει ἐν τῷ εἶναι ὅ ἐστιν, οὐχ ἑτέρου λεγόµενον. (“We conclude that nothing belonging to something else and predicated of it can be Substance. Substance is that which belongs essentially to itself, or, in so far as it is a part of the differentiated object, serves only to complete the Composite. Each or either part of the Composite belongs to itself, and is only affirmed of the Composite in a special sense: only qua part of the whole is it predicated of something else; qua individual it is never in its essential nature predicated of an external.”) Transl. S. McKenna, Plotinus: The Enneads, 4. rev. ed., London: Faber & Faber, 1969; cf. Ch. Horn, “L’auto-déclaration”, 60-61.
138. FN84 84Eunomius, Apologia, 9.3-7 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 250): εἰ γάρ τις κοινοποιεῖν πρὸς ἕτερον ἢ µεταδιδόναι τινὶ τῆς οὐσίας ταύτης ἐθελήσειεν, ἤτοι κατὰ διάστασιν καὶ µερισµὸν ἢ κατὰ σύγκρισιν τοῦτο κατασκευάσειεν ἄν· ὁπότερον δ᾿ ἂν λέγηται τούτων, πολλαῖς ἀτοπίαις . . . ὁ λόγος ἐνεσχεθήσεται. Translation modified.
139. FN85 85Cf. Porphyry, Isag.6.13-23; J. Barnes, Porphyry: Introduction(Oxford: Clarendon, 2006), 128-141; Dillon, The Middle Platonists277.
140. FN86 86Alcinoos, Didaskalikos156.34-35 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 8); transl. Dillon, Handbook, 8 (5.2).
141. FN87 87 Gregorii Nysseni Opera Dogmatica Minora, pars 1, ed. F. Mueller. Leiden: Brill, 1958, 30.6-31.12.
142. FN88 88Alcinoos, Didaskalikos158.1-4 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 10); transl. Dillon, Handbook, 10 (5.7).
143. FN89 89Cf. Alcinoos, Didaskalikos155.28-156.10 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 6-7); transl. Dillon, Handbook, 7 (4.6-7).
144. FN90 90Cf. below 30-31.
145. FN91 91Eunomius, Apologia, 25.19-20 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 68): οὐδ᾿ ἕτερον µὲν ἀριθµῷ παρὰ τὸν θεόν ἀγέννητόν δὲ (εἷς γὰρ καὶ µόνος ἀγέννητός ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα γέγονεν).
146. FN92 92Eunomius, Apologia, 10.10-11.3 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 44-46; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, suivi de Eunome: Apologie, vol. 2, 254: οὐ γὰρ µόνον ἀσεβές, ἀλλὰ καὶ κοµιδῇ καταγέλαστον, τοὺς ἕν µόνον παραδεξαµένους ἀγέννητον ἢ προϋπάρχειν τι τοῦτου φάσκειν ἢ συνυπάρχειν ἕτερον. εἴτε γὰρ προϋπάρχοι τι, τοῦτο δικαίως λεγοιτ᾿ ἂν ἀγέννητον, οὔ τὸ δεύτερον· εἴτε συνυπάρχοι, τῇ πρὸς θάτερον κοινωνίᾳ τοῦ συνυπάρχειν ἑκάτερον ἀφαιρεθήσεται τὸ ἓν µόνον εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἀγέννητον εἶναι, οἷα δὴ µετὰ τῆς οὐσίας ἀποκλήρωσίν τινα καὶ περιγράφην ἀµφοῖν συνεισαγόντων, σύνθήκην τε αὖ καὶ τὸ τῆς συνθήκης αἴτιον. ἀλλὰ µὴν οὐδ᾿ ἐνυπάρχειν τι ταύτῃ δύνατον οἷον εἶδός φαµεν ἢ ὄγκον καὶ πηλικότητα, διὰ τὸ πάντη συνθήκης ἐλεύθερον εἶναι τὸν θεόν. Translation modified.
147. FN93 93Cf. the doctrine of Basil of Caesarea, ep. 236, 6 below 32.
148. FN94 94I deviate from Vaggione’s translation: “When spoken of the unbegotten, does ‘light’ signify an entity other than that signified by ‘the Unbegotten’, or does each word signifythe same entity?” Emphasis added.
149. FN95 95Eunomius, Apologia, 18.13-14; 19.3; 19. 8-12 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 56-58; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 270-72): . . . παρηλλαγµένων τῶν ὀνοµάτων παρηλλαγµένας ὁµολογεῖν καὶ τὰς οὐσίας . . . καθὸ µὲν ἀγέννητον καὶ γεννντὸν παρηλλὰχθαι φαµέν . . . ὅτι τὸ µέν ἐστιν ἀγέννητον φῶς, τὸ δὲ γέννητον. πότερον ἄλλο τι σηµαίνει τὸ φῶς ἐπ᾿ ἀγεννήτου λεγόµενον παρὰ τὸ <ἀ>γέννητον, ἢ ταὐτὸν ἑκάτερον; εἰ µὲν γὰρ ἕτερόν τι καὶ ἕτερον, εὔδηλον ὅτι καὶ σύνθετον τὸ ἐξ ἑτέρου καὶ ἑτερου συγκείµενον, τὸ δὲ σύνθετον οὐκ ἀγέννητον. Translation significantly modified. Cf. Alcinoos, Didaskalikos164.16 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 22); transl. Dillon, Handbook, 17 (10.1).
150. FN96 96Cf. above 10 n. 45.
151. FN97 97Eunomius, Apologia, 19.16-18 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 58): εἰ τοίνυν πᾶν ὅπερ λέγεται τῆς τοῦ πατρός οὐσίας σηµαντικόν, ἴσον ἐστὶ κατὰ τὴν τῆς σηµασίας δύναµιν τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ διὰ τὸ ἀµερὲς καὶ ἀσύνθετον, . . .: Translation slightly modified.
152. FN98 98Eunomius, Apologia, 8.10-11 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 248).
153. FN99 99Eunomius, Apologia, 8, l. 14-18 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome,vol. 2, 250): εἰ δὲ µήτε κατ᾿ ἐπίνοιαν µήτε κατὰ στέρησιν, ὡς ὁ ῥηθεὶς ἔδειξε λόγος, µήτε ἐν µέρει τὸ ἀγέννητον (ἀµερὴς γάρ), µήτε ἐν αὐτῷ ὡς ἕτερον (ἁπλοῦς γὰρ καὶ ἀσύνθετος), µήτε παρ᾿ αὐτὸν ἕτερον (εἷς γὰρ καὶ µόνος αὐτός ἐστιν ἀγέννητος), αὐτὸ ἂν εἴη οὐσία ἀγέννητος. Translation modified.
154. FN100 100Pace DelCogliano who argues that Eunomius intends to rule “out the view that ‘unbegottenness’ names something other than God himself and concludes that it must be an essential predication that refers to God’s substance.” M. DelCogliano, Basil of Caesarea’s Anti-Eunomian Theory of Names(Leiden: Brill, 2010), 36; cf. also 37: “Thus [according to Eunomius] divine simplicity entails that all predication of God be essential.” This is not correct. Eunomius rather rules out essential as well as non-essential predication regarding divine substance. Cf. above 21-23.
155. FN101 101Plato, Parmenides, 132a 10-11. Cf. B. Mates, “Identity and predicaton in Plato,” in The Logic of Being, ed. S. Knuuttila and J. Hintikka (Dordrecht et al.: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1986), 32.
156. FN102 102Eunomius, Apologia, 9.1-3 (Vaggione, Eunomius, 42; cf. Sesboüé, Contre Eunome, vol. 2, 250: Ἀγέννητος δὲ ὢν κατὰ τὴν προλαβοῦσαν ἀπόδειξιν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε πρόσοιτο γένεσιν ὥστε τῆς ἰδίας µεταδοῦναι τῷ γεννωµένῳ φύσεως, ἐκφύγοι τ᾿ ἂν πᾶσαν σύγκρισιν καὶ κοινωνίαν τὴν πρὸς τὸ γεννητόν. Translation modified. Cf. Aetius who starts his reductio ad impossibilein his Syntagmationwith the question “whether it is possible that the ingenerate God can make the generate ingenerate” (εἰ δυνατόν ἐστι τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ θεῷ τὸ γεννητὸν ἀγέννητον ποιῆσαι). Wickham, “The Syntagmationof Aetius the Anomean”, 540.
157. FN103 103Eunomius does not reason that these questions cannot be posited, but it is evident that his arguments can be explained this way.
158. FN104 104Alcinoos, Didaskalikos165.5-7 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 23): Ἄρρητος δ᾿ ἐστὶ καὶ νῷ µόνῳ ληπτός, ὡς εἴρηται, ἐπεὶ οὔτε γένος ἐστὶν οὔτε εἶδος οὔτε διαφορά, ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲ συµβέβηκέ τι αὐτῷ, . . . Transl. Dillon, Handbook, 18 (10.4), slightly modified. Note that ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲ συµβέβηκέ τι αὐτῷ refers to all kinds of non-substantial parts, whether accidents or proper features. Cf. above 22; 27 n. 100 and below 35; 45.
159. FN105 105Alcinoos, Didaskalikos165.34-40 (Whittaker, Enseignement, 25): Ἀµερῆ τε διὰ τὸ µὴ εἶναι πρότερόν τι αὐτοῦ· τὸ γὰρ µέρος καὶ τὸ ἐξ οὗ πρότερον ὑπάρχει τούτου οὗ µέρος· . . . µέρη γε µὴν οὐκ ἔχων ἀκίνητος ἂν εἴη κατὰ τόπον καὶ ἀλλοίωσιν. Transl. Dillon, Handbook, 19 (10.7).
160. FN106 106The term ilzām, lit. “to oblige s.o. to s.th.,” namely to oblige someone to accept an absurd consequence of his supposition, is used by Yaḥyā b. ʿAdī in his counter-refutation. Périer, “Traité”, 9, l. 13.
161. FN107 107Not al-Kindī himself, but Yaḥyā b. ʿAdī calls al-Kindī’s argument demonstration ( burhān). Périer, “Traité”, 6.6.
162. FN108 108Cf. below 45 n. 168.
163. FN109 109Basil of Caesarea, Saint Basile: Lettres, vol. 3, ed. and French transl. Y. Courtonne (Paris: Société d’édition «Les belles lettres», 1966), 53-54.
164. FN110 110Basil of Caesarea, Saint Basile: Lettres, vol. 1, ed. and French transl. Y. Courtonne (Paris: Société d’édition «Les belles lettres», 1957), 81-92. On the manuscripts see A.M. Silvas, Gregory of Nyssa: The Lettres. Introduction, Translation, Commentary(Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2007), 247-48.
165. FN111 111Gregory of Nyssa, Gregorii Nysseni Opera,pars 1, 17-33.
166. FN112 112Gregory of Nyssa, Gregorii Nysseni Opera,pars 1, 35-57.
167. FN113 113The first half finishs Gregory of Nyssa, Gregorii Nysseni Opera,pars 1, 28.8.
168. FN114 114See below 44.
169. FN115 115Or: confess ( yuqirrūna).
170. FN116 116Périer, “Traité”, 4.10-13: . . . wa-ḏālika anna firaqahum ğamīʿan yuqirrūna anna ṯalāṯata aqānīma lam tazal ğawharun wāḥidun yurīdūna bi-l-aqānīmi ašḫāṣan wa-bi-ğawharin wāḥidin anna kulla wāḥidin minhum mawğūdun bi-ḫāṣṣatihī fa-iḏan maʿnā l-ğawhari fī kulli wāḥidin mina l-aqānīmi wa-hiya fīhi muttafiqatun wa-li-kulli wāḥidin ḫāṣṣatun lam tazal bihā tuḫālifu baynahū wa-bayna ṣāḥibayhi.
171. FN117 117See above 30 n. 109.
172. FN118 118See above 30 n. 110.
173. FN119 119Cf. Met. VII 13, 1038b 9.
174. FN120 120Cf. Aristotle, Met. VII 13, 1038b 10-11.
175. FN121 121Basil, ep. 236, 6.1-22 ( Saint Basile: Lettres, vol. 3, ed. Courtonne 53-4): Οὐσία δὲ καὶ ὑπόστασις ταὺτην ἔχει τὴν διαφορὰν ἣν ἔχει τὸ κοινὸν πρὸς τὸ καθ᾿ ἕκαστον, οἷον ὡς ἔχει τὸ ζῷον πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα ἄνθρωπον. Διὰ τοῦτο οὐσίαν µὲν µίαν ἐπὶ τῆς θεότητος ὁµολογοῦµεν, ὥστε τὸν τοῦ εἶναι λόγον µὴ διαφόρως ἀποδιδόναι· ὑπόστασιν δὲ ἰδιάζουσαν, ἵν᾿ ἀσύγχυτος ἡµῖν καὶ τετρανωµένη ἡ περὶ Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ καὶ Ἁγίου Πνεύµατος ἔννοια ἐνυπάρχῃ. Μὴ γὰρ νοούντων ἡµῶν τοὺς ἀφωρισµένους περὶ ἕκαστον χαρακτῆρας, οἷον πατρότητα καὶ υἱότητα καὶ ἁγιασµόν, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τῆς κοινῆς ἐννοίας τοῦ εἶναι ὁµολογούντων Θεόν, ἀµήχανον ὑγιῶς τὸν λόγον τῆς πίστεως ἀποδίδοσθαι. Χρὴ οὖν τῷ κοινῷ τὸ ἰδιάζον προστιθέντας, οὕτω τὴν πίστιν ὁµολογεῖν· κοινὸν ἡ θεότης, ἴδιον ἡ πατρότης· συνάπτοντας λέγειν· πιστεύω εἰς Θεὸν Πατέρα. Καὶ πάλιν ἐν τῇ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὁµολογίᾳ τὸ παραπλήσιον ποιεῖν, τῷ κοινῷ συνάπτειν τὸ ἴδιον καὶ λέγειν· εἰς Θεὸν Υἱόν. Ὁµοίως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ Πνεύµατος τοῦ Ἁγίου κατὰ τὸ ἀκόλουθον τῆς ἐκφρωνήσεως τὴν προφορὰν σχηµατίζοντας λέγειν· πιστεύω καὶ εἰς τὸ θεῖον Πνεῦµα τὸ Ἅγιον, ὧστε δι᾿ ὅλου καὶ τὴν ἑνότητα σῴζεσθαι ἐν τῇ τῆς µιᾶς θεότητος ὁµολογίᾳ, καὶ τὸ τῶν προσώπων ἰδιάζον ὁµολογεῖσθαι ἐν τῷ ἀφορισµῷ τῶν περὶ ἕκαστον νοουµένων ἰδιωµάτων. Transl. L. Turcescu, Gregory of Nyssa and the Concept of Divine Persons(Oxford: University Press, 2005), 48-9; significantly modified.
176. FN122 122The question whether Basil or Gregory of Nyssa might be the author of this document is beyond my expertise.
177. FN123 123This semantical theory goes back to Plato’s Sophistes, where Plato poses the question how it is possible that one and the selfsame thing can be signified by different names. Plato’s answer to this question is that every thing existing in extramental reality is a ‘communion’ (κοινωνία) ( Soph. 250b 9), a ‘mixing together’ (σύµµειξις) ( Soph. 252b 6), a ‘combination’ (συµπλοκή) of forms (εἴδη) ( Soph. 240c1), and a ‘partaking’ (µεταλαµβάνειν) [of forms] in one another ( Soph. 251e 7). See R.S. Bluck, Plato’s Sophist(Manchester: Univ. Press, 1975), 106-116; L.M. de Rijk, Plato’s Sophist: A Philosophical Commentary, (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publ. Co., 1986), 75; 113-114; 122-25.
178. FN124 124Emphasis added.
179. FN125 125Emphasis added.
180. FN126 126Emphasis added.
181. FN127 127Basil, ep. 38, 2.1-19 ( Saint Basile: Lettres, vol. 1, ed. Courtonne 81-2): Πάντων τῶν ὀνοµάτων τὰ µὲν ἐπὶ πλειόνων καὶ τῷ ἀριθµῷ διαφερόντων λεγόµενα πραγµάτων καθωλικοτέραν τινὰ τὴν σηµασίαν ἔχει, οἷον ἄνθρωπος. Ὁ γὰρ τοῦτο εἰπών, τὴν κοινὴν φύσιν διὰ τοῦ ὀνόµατος δείξας, οὐ περιέγραψε τῇ φωνῇ τὸν τινὰ ἄνθρωπον, τὸν ἰδίως ὑπὸ τοῦ ὀνόµατος γνωριζόµενον. Οὐ γὰρ µᾶλλον Πέτρος ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ἢ καὶ Ἀνδρέας καὶ Ἰωάννης καὶ Ἰάκωβος. Ἡ οὖν κοινότης τοῦ σηµαινοµένου, ὁµοίως ἐπὶ πάντας τοὺς ὑπὸ τὸ αὐτὸ ὄνοµα τεταγµένους χωροῦσα, χρείαν ἔχει τῆς ὑποδιαστολῆς δι᾿ ἧς οὐ τὸν καθόλου ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸν Πέτρον ἢ τὸν Ἰωάννην ἐπιγνωσόµεθα. Τὰ δὲ τῶν ὀνοµάτων ἰδικωτέραν ἔχει τὴν ἔνδειξιν δι᾿ ἧς οὐχ ἡ κοινότης τῆς φύσεως ἐνθεωρεῖται τῷ σηµαινοµένῳ, ἀλλὰ πράγµατός τινος περιγραφή µηδεµίαν ἔχουσα πρὸς τὸ ὁµογενὲς, κατὰ τὸν ἰδιάζον, τὴν κοινωνίαν, οἷον ὁ Παῦλος ἢ ὁ Τιµόθεος. Οὐκέτι γὰρ ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ ἐπὶ τὸ κοινὸν τῆς φύσεως φέρεται, ἀλλὰ χωρίσασα τῆς περιληπτικῆς σηµασίας περιγεγραµµένων τινῶν πραγµάτων ἔµφασιν διὰ τῶν ὀνοµάτων παρίστησιν. Cf. transl. L. Turcescu, Gregory of Nyssa and the Concept of Divine Persons(Oxford: University Press, 2005), 49; transl. Anna M. Silvas, Gregory of Nyssa: The Letters, 250.
182. FN128 128See below 42-46.
183. FN129 129Cf. below 44.
184. FN130 130Cf. below 37.
185. FN131 131Cf. above 4-5; 8; 17.
186. FN132 132On the term lam yazalcf. R.M. Frank, “‘ Lam yazal’as a formal term in Muslim theological discourse,” MIDEO22 (1995), 243-270; reprint in R.M. Frank, Philosophy, Theology and Mysticism in Medieval Islam, vol. 1, ed. D. Gutas (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005).
187. FN133 133Cf. above 7 n. 33; 14-16.
188. FN134 134 Mahmūlhere does not stand for “predicate-term”, but for “predicated,” like mawḍūʿdoes not stand for “subject-term”, but for substrate. It stands for any one of the predicables, not for the accidental ones only: for genus, species, difference, general accident, special accident. By ‘he does not have something predicated ( maḥmūl), is meant: neither genus, nor species, nor difference, nor general accident, nor special accident.
189. FN135 135Al-Kindī, K. al-Kindī ilā al-Muʿtaṣim bi-llāh fī al-Falsafa al-ūlā, in Rasāʾil a-Kindī al-falsafiyya, vol. 1, ed. M.A. Abū Rīda (Cairo: Dār al-Fikr al-ʿArabī, 1369/1950), 113.1-4; Œuvres philosophiques es scientifiques d’al-Kindī, vol. 2, Métaphysique et cosmologie, ed. R. Rashed and J. Jolivet (Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 1998), 27.9-11.
190. FN136 136See below 38 n. 140.
191. FN137 137 Isag.4, 12.20-22; cf. 1.8; 1.15.
192. FN138 138 Isag.2, 7.19-27.
193. FN139 139On this sense of εἶναι see Ch. H. Kahn, Essays on Being, Oxford: Clarendon, 2009, 134.
194. FN140 140. . . iḏ kullu mudrakin bi-l-ḥissi awi l-ʿaqli immā an yakūna mawğūdan fī ʿaynihī aw fī fikrinā wuğūdan ṭabīʿiyyan wa-immā fī lafẓinā aw ḫuṭūṭinā wuğūdan ʿaraḍiyyan). K. al-Kindī ilā al-Muʿtaṣim bi-llāh fī al-Falsafa al-ūlā, ed. Abū Rīda, Rasāʾil al-Kindī al-falsafiyya, vol. 1 (Kairo 1369/190), 154, l. 10-11; Oeuvres philosophiques et scientifiques d’al-Kindī, ed. R. Rashed et J. Jolivet (Leiden e.a.: Brill, 1998), 85, l. 7-8.
195. FN141 141Cf. above 10; 23.
196. FN142 142Périer, “Traité”, 12.14-15.
197. FN143 143Cf. above 24 n. 92.
198. FN144 144Gregory of Nyssa, Ad Graecos( Ex communibus notionibus), in Gregory of Nyssa, Gregorii Nysseni Opera Dogmatica Minora, pars 1, 20.20-21.1: µὴ διαιρουµένης δὲ τῆς οὐσίας ἐν ἑκάστῳ τῶν προσώπων ὥστε καὶ τρεῖς εἶναι οὐσίας κατὰ τὰ πρόσωπα, δῆλον ὅτι οὐδὲ τὸ ὄνοµα διαιρεθήσεται, ὅπερ σηµαίνει τὴν οὐσίαν, τουτέστι τὸ θεός, εἰς τὸ εἶναι τρεῖς θεούς. ἀλλ᾿ ὥσπερ οὐσία ὁ πατήρ, οὐσία ὁ υἱός, οὐσία τὸ ἄγιον πνεῦµα καὶ οὐ τρεῖς οὐσίαι, οὕτω καὶ θεὸς ὁ πατήρ, θεὸς ὁ υἱός, θεὸς τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ οὐ τρεῖς θεοί. εἷς γὰρ θεὸς καὶ ὁ αὐτός, ἐπεὶ καὶ µία οὐσία καὶ ἡ αὐτή, εἰ καὶ λέγεται ἕκαστον τῶν προσῶπων καὶ ἐνούσιον καὶ θεός.
199. FN145 145Transl. Ross, “Metaphysics”, 1612.
200. FN146 146On ‘the same in substance’ (ὁµοούσιος) see Ch. Stead, Divine Substance(Oxford: Clarendon, 1977), 223-66; R.M. Hübner, “Basilius von Caesarea und das HOMOOUSIOS”, in Christian Faith and Greek Philosophy in Late antiquity, ed. L.R. Wickham C.P. Bammel (Leiden/New York/Köln 1993), 70-91.
201. FN147 147Or: encompasses [the three of] them.
202. FN148 148Périer, “Traité”, 4.15-18: fa-yağibu min hāḏā anna kulla wāḥidin minhā mutarakkabun min al-ğawhari llaḏī yaʿummuhā wa-min al-ḫāṣṣati llatī ḫaṣṣathū wa-kullu maʿlūlin laysa bi-azaliyyin wa-hiya azaliyyatun lā azaliyyatun wa-hāḏā min ašnaʿi l-muḥāli.
203. FN149 149Périer, “Traité”, 4.6; cf. above 2.
204. FN150 150Cf. above 23-26.
205. FN151 151Périer, “Traité”, 6.18-7.3: wa-hāḏā ḥīnun narā fasāda daʿwa n-Naṣārā ʿalā aṣli l-manṭiqi bi-l-maʿāni l-muẓhirati ḏālika li-man qaraʿa l-kitāba l-marsūma bi-l-Isāġūğī wa-hāḏā kitābu l-Madḫal fa-naqūlu inna hāḏihī ṯalāṯata in kānat ağnāsan lam tazal wa-l-ğinsu ğinsu anwāʿin wa-n-nawʿu nawʿu ašḫāsḷn fa-lam tazal iḏan ṯalāṯatu ağnāsi anwāʿi ašḫāsin wa-l-ğinsu mawğūdun fī ṭabīʿati l-ašḫāṣi maʿa aʿrāḍin fa-mā lam yazal murakkabun wa-kullu murakkabin maʿlūlun wa-kullu maʿlūlin laysa lam yazal fa-iḏan mā lam yazal laysa lam yazal wa-hāḏā min ašnaʿi l-muḥāli.
206. FN152 152Porphyry, Isag.12.13.
207. FN153 153Basil, ep. 236, 6; cf. above 32; 36-37.
208. FN154 154General accidents ( aʿrāḍ ʿāmmiyya) are common to [two ore more than two] species ( taʿummu anwāʿan). Cf. Périer “Traité”, 9.8-9. Cf. These are those properties which according to Porphyry belong to more than one species, but not necessarily to all members of those species. Cf. Porphyry, Isag.12.13-22.
209. FN155 155‘Special accidents’ ( aʿrāḍ ḫāṣṣiyya) belong to all members of one species only. Cf. Périer, “Traité”, 9.14. These are according to Porphyry what the old masters call ‘properties in the strict sense.’ Cf. above 37.
210. FN156 156Cf. Périer, “Traité”, 7.10.
211. FN157 157Cf. above 42 n. 151.
212. FN158 158Périer, “Traité”, 7.8.
213. FN159 159Périer, “Traité”, 8ult.- 9.1.
214. FN160 160Cf. n. 155.
215. FN161 161Périer, “Traité”, 9.9. — That is to say, each special accident belongs to one species. Cf. n. 155.
216. FN162 162See above 40-41.
217. FN163 163Périer, “Traité”, 10.5-8: wa-in kānati ṯ-ṯalāṯatu aqānīmu bi-l-ḥaqīqati ašḫāṣan lam tazal wa-l-ašḫāṣu taḥta nawʿin wa-hiya muḥtamilatun aʿrāḍan wa-n-nawʿu murakkabun min ğinsin wa-fuṣūlin wağaba min ḏālika ayḍan annahā akṯaru min ṯalāṯatin azaliyyatin al-azaliyyatu lā azaliyyatun wa-hāḏā muḥālun.
218. FN164 164Cf. above 18-19.
219. FN165 165R.Y. Ebied et al., Peter of Callinicum: Anti-Tritheist Dossier(Leuven: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 1981), 27 with n. 91.
220. FN166 166See R.Y. Ebied et al., Peter of Callinicum, 78.5-9, quoting form Philoponus’ second discourse Against Themistius: “For we have proved that the nature called ‘common’, has not reality of its own alongside any of the existents either, but is either nothing at all — which is actually the case — or only derives its existence in our minds from particulars.” Transl. R.Y. Ebied et al., Peter of Callinicum, 51; cf. 26-7 (with further references).
221. FN167 167See above 40-41.
222. FN168 168Périer, “Traité”, 11.3-5: ammā qawluhum inna ṯalāṯatan wāḥidun wa-wāḥidan ṯalāṯatun fa-ḥāḏā ẓāhiru l-ḫaṭaʾi wa-ḏālika anna ma naqūlu innahū huwa huwa wāḥidan innamā naqūlu wāḥidan bi-ṯalāṯāti wuğūhin ka-mā qīla fī kitābi Ṭūbīqā. . . The reference obviously is to Aristotle, Top.I 7-8; cf. Met.V 9, 1017b 27-1018a.
223. FN169 169Périer, “Traité”, 11.12-15.
224. FN170 170Périer, “Traité”, 11penult.-12.1.
225. FN171 171Cf. Aristotle, De an. I 1, 402b 7-8.
226. FN172 172Cf. above 26-27, with n. 99.
227. FN173 173Arist., Cat.1, 1a7-12: συνώνυµα δὲ λέγεται ὧν τό τε ὄνοµα κοινὸν καὶ ὁ κατὰ τοὔνοµα λόγος τῆς οὐσίας ὁ αὐτός, oἷον ζῷον ὅ τε ἄνθρωπος καὶ ὁ βοῦς· τούτων γὰρ ἑκάτερον κοινῷ ὀνόµατι προσαγορεύεται ζῷον, καὶ ὁ λόγος δὲ τῆς οὐσίας ὁ αὐτός· ἐὰν γὰρ ἀποδιδῷ τις τὸν ἑκατέρου λόγον τὶ ἐστιν αὐτὼν ἑκατέρῳ τὸ ζῷῳ εἶναι, τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον ἀποδώσει.
228. FN174 174Arist., Cat. 1, 1a10-12; An-Naṣṣ al-kāmil li-manṭiq Arisṭū, ed. F. Jabre (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr al-Lubnānī, 1999), vol. 1, 25.2-4: wa-ḏālika anna muwaffiyyan in waffā fī kulli wāḥidin minhumā mā maʿnā annahū ḥayawānun kāna l-qawlu llaḏī yuwaffī wāḥidan bi-ʿaynihī.
229. FN175 175Cf. above 32 n. 122.
230. FN176 176Cf. above 23-28.
231. FN177 177Emphasis added.
232. FN178 178Emphasis added.
233. FN179 179Badawī 1947, vol. 1, 33, l. 10-11: wa-ḏālika anna muwaffiyyan in waffā kulla wāḥidin minhā mā maʿnā annahū ḥayawānun kāna l-qawlu llaḏī yuwaffī wāḥidan bi-ʿaynihī.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187783712x634652
2012-01-01
2015-08-31

Affiliations: 1: Ruhr-Universität Bochum, URL: http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to email alerts
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Your details
    Name:*
    Email:*
    Department:*
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
     
     
     
    Other:
     
    Oriens — Recommend this title to your library

    Thank you

    Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation