2

was the addition superfluous? No, for; both lie in the same book. Ecclesiastes speaks of natural things. I say, the nature of beings is twofold: "God" ... made "visible and invisible things". And distinguishing these "visible and invisible things" from themselves and from manifest things, the apostle himself says: "The things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal." And so the "eternal" things, which are like God and are referred to God, and the "temporal" things have a certain wise reason, according to which they came to be. For these sensible and "visible" things themselves also came to be by a certain wise reason. Therefore we need instruction in both. The greater part in Ecclesiastes is said concerning sensible and seen things, not only creations but also practices. But in the Song of Songs all things are intelligible, contemplative, super-celestial. At any rate, no one, not even those who are very "poor" in understanding, takes the Song of Songs literally. Only Seras the Arian wished to interpret it thus, ... saying that this daughter of Pharaoh was the "bride" being praised in the book. And we have refuted it many times, bringing forward literal expressions which cannot be taken literally. For when it says that "your two breasts are like two fawns of a gazelle, feeding among the lilies, until the day breathes and the shadows flee," what beauty do the "breasts" have, when they are compared to these? And since they are compared simply to "fawns of a gazelle," for this reason it says: "feeding among the lilies"; for they are otherwise, when they "feed among the lilies." And there are many literal expressions. Here therefore are the things that have gone beyond the natural, the eternal things, which those must consider who look "to the things that are above," those who are "laying up treasures in heaven." Since: here it speaks of sensible things with a riddle? It wishes to teach that sensible things also are governed by the providence of God and that all practices concerning "human affairs" are "vanity," rather ... not so as to be completely cast out; but by comparison with the super-cosmic things, these are small. For both "the things seen" and "the things not seen" are "God's creations"; but when "the things seen" are compared to "the things not seen," they might seem to be "vanity." Since: as with respect to those who attend only to "the visible things"? Yes; with respect to those who consider these things to be great and nothing more. And in order that from... using a word... the thought; Those who say, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die," are bewildered by only the "temporal" things. Those "who love the world and the things in the world," not considering that "the world is passing away, and the lust of it," have their mind on "vain things." If, however, the seen things are compared to the unseen things, by comparison they appear as nothing, not simply as nothing. And I can show such things from scripture. The saint in the 72nd psalm, having said many things, then having shown that he condemned the things said by the wicked and he himself... has come to the contemplation of these things, says: "I was brutish before you." He has not become so absolutely, but "before you." And again Moses: "But I am slow of speech," as in relation to you, the true Word; for he would not have chosen one who had become "slow of speech" to be an instructor and general and lawgiver. And in a way also, "But I am a worm and not a man" suggests this thought, and Abraham: "Since I have begun to speak to the Lord, I who am but earth and ashes." Since: "the words of Ecclesiastes" are from the person of the writer? Properly, indeed, in the case of the "divinely-inspired scriptures," the writer is the Spirit who prompted it to be spoken, but is served by some wise man. For the Spirit did not invisibly inscribe the letters and set down the words, but breathes these things into some soul. And either Solomon himself is the one writing them or some of the wise men wrote them. And perhaps

2

ην περισσὴ ἡ προσθήκη; μὴ γάρ· ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ βιβλίῳ ἀμφότερα κεῖται. ὁ ἐκκλησια στὴς φυσικὰ λέγει. λέγω, διττή ἐστιν ἡ φύσις τῶν ου̣ντων· "ὁ θ̣ε̣ὸ)̣ς" ·ε̣...ε̣···· ἐποίησεν "ὁρατὰ καὶ ἀόρατα". καὶ ταῦτα "τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ ἀόρατα" διαστέλλων ἀ̣φ̣' ἑαυτῶν καὶ φα νερῶν αὐτὸς ὁ ἀπόστολος λέγει· "τὰ βλεπόμενα πρ̣όσκαιρα, τὰ δὲ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια." καὶ τὰ "αἰώνια" ουν τὰ τῷ θεῷ ἐοικότα καὶ ἀνακείμενα πρὸς τ̣ὸν̣ θ̣εὸν καὶ τὰ "πρόσκαιρα" ευ̣χει τινὰ λόγον σοφόν, καθ' ον γέγονεν. καὶ α̣ὐτὰ γὰρ τὰ αἰσθητικὰ καὶ "ὁρατὰ" λόγῳ τινὶ σοφῷ γέγονεν. ἀμφοτέρων ουν χρῄζομεν διδασκαλίᾳ. τὸ πλεῖον μέρος ἐν τῷ ἐκκλησιαστῇ περὶ τῶν αἰσθητῶν καὶ ὁρωμένων οὐ μόνον κτισμάτων ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπιτηδευμάτων λέγεται. ἐν δὲ τῷ ᾳυ̣σματι τῶν ᾀςμάτων πάντα νοητά εἰσιν, ἐφοπτικά, ὑπερουράνια. οὐδεὶς γοῦν, οὐδὲ ο̣ἱ αυ̣γαν "πτωχοὶ" τὴν διάνοιαν, ἐπὶ ῥητοῦ λαμβάνουσιν τὸ ᾳσμα τῶν ᾀσμάτων. μόνος Σερᾶς ὁ ̓Αριανὸς ουτως αὐτὸ ηυ̣θελεν ἑρμηνεύειν, ...·· τὴν θυγατέρα τοῦ Φαραῶ ταύτην ευ̣λεγεν "νύ̣μφην" ειναι ὑμνου μένην ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ. κα̣ὶ̣ ἐξε̣τ̣άξαμεν αὐτὴ̣ν πολλάκις ῥητὰ προφέροντες, α ἐπὶ ῥητοῦ οὐ δύναται ληφθῆναι. οταν γὰρ λέ γῃ οτι "δύο μαστοί σου ὡς δύο νεβροὶ δορκάδος νεμόμενοι ἐν το̣ῖς κρίνοις, εως ου διαπνεύσῃ ἡ ἡμέρα καὶ κινηθῶσιν αἱ σκιαί", πο̣ῖον κάλλος ευ̣χουσιν οἱ "μαστοί", οταν τούτοις παραβάλλονται; καὶ ἐπεὶ ἁπαξαπλῶς "νεβροῖς δορκάδος" παρα β̣άλλονται, διὰ τοῦτο λέγει· "νεμομένοις ἐν το̣ῖς κρί νοις"· αυ̣λλως γάρ εἰσιν, οταν "νέμωνται ἐν τοῖς κρίνοις". καὶ πολλά γέ ἐστιν ῥητά. ἐνταῦθα ουν τὰ ὑπεραναβεβηκότα τὰ φυσικά, τὰ αἰώνια, α δεῖ σκοπεῖν τοὺς "τὰ αυ̣νω" βλέποντας, τοὺς "θησαυρίζοντας ἐν οὐρανοῖς". ἐπερ· ἐνταῦθα περὶ τῶν αἰσθητῶν μετ' αἰνι̣γ̣μοῦ λέγει; βούλεται διδάξαι οτι καὶ τὰ αἰσθητὰ ὑπὸ προνοίας τοῦ̣ θεοῦ διοικεῖται καὶ οτι τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα π̣άντα τὰ περὶ τὰ "ἀνθρώπινα" "μάταια", μᾶλλον ·· οὐχ ωστε παντάπασιν ἐκβληθῆναι· ἀ̣λλὰ σ̣υνκρίσει τῶν ὑπερκοσμίων βραχέα εἰσὶν ταῦτα. ἀμφότερα γὰρ καὶ "τὰ βλεπόμενα" καὶ "τ̣ὰ μὴ βλε πόμενα" "θεοῦ ποιήματά" εἰσιν· συνκρινόμενα δὲ "τὰ βλε πόμενα" πρὸς "τὰ μὴ βλε̣πόμενα" δόξαιεν αν "ματαιότης" ειναι. ἐπερ· ὡς πρὸς τοὺς προσέχοντας μόνοις "τοῖς ὁρα τοῖς"; ναί· πρὸς̣ τ̣ο̣ὺς μεγάλα ταῦτα ἡγουμένους ειναι καὶ μη δὲν πλέον. καὶ ινα απο······· λ̣έξει χρησάμενος ····· ·αι······ς̣ τὴν νόησιν· οἱ λέγοντες "φάγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν, αυυ̣ριον γὰρ ἀποθνῄσκομεν" μόνα τὰ "πρόσκαιρα" τετήφασιν. οἱ "ἀγαπῶντες τὸν κόσμον καὶ τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ" μὴ λογιζόμε νοι οτι "ὁ κόσμος παράγεται καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία αὐτοῦ" ἐπὶ "ματαίοις" ευ̣χουσι τὴν γνώμην. εἰ μέντοι συνκρίνηται τὰ 7 ὁρώμενα τοῖς ἀοράτοις, κατὰ σύνκρισιν τὸ μηδὲν φαίνονται, οὐχ ἁπλῶς τὸ μηδέν. καὶ ευ̣χω γε ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς τοιαῦτα δεῖξαι. ὁ αγιος ἐν οʹ καὶ βʹ ψαλμῷ πολλὰ εἰρηκώς, ειτα δείξας οτι κατέγ̣νω τῶν λεχθέντων ὑπὸ τῶν φαύλων καὶ αὐτο̣······ γέγονεν πρὸς τὴν θεωρίαν τούτων, λέγει· "κτηνώδης ἐγενόμην παρὰ σοί". οὐ καθάπαξ γέγονε̣ν ἀλλὰ "παρὰ σοί". καὶ πάλιν Μωϋσῆς· "ἐγὼ δὲ αυ̣λογός εἰμι", ὡς πρὸς σέ, τὸν λόγον τὸν ἀληθινόν· οὐδὲ γὰρ "αυ̣λογον" γενόμενον παιδευτὴν καὶ στρατηγὸν καὶ νομοθέτην ἐξελέγετο̣. κ̣αὶ τρόπον τινὰ καὶ τὸ "ἐγὼ δέ εἰμι σκώληξ καὶ οὐκ αυ̣νθρωπος" ταύτην ὑποβάλλει τὴν διά νοιαν, καὶ ὁ ̓Αβραὰμ· "ἐπεὶ ἠρξάμην λαλῆσαι πρὸς τὸν κύριον, ἐγὼ δέ εἰμι γῆ καὶ σποδός". ἐπερ· "ῥήματα ἐκκλησιαστοῦ" ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ συνγρα φέως; κυρίως μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν "θεοπνεύστων γραφῶν" συνγραφεύς ἐσ τιν τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ὑποβαλὸν αὐτὸ̣ λαληθῆναι, ὑπηρετεῖται δὲ ὑπό τινος̣ σοφοῦ. οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸ πνεῦμα ἀοράτως ἐχάραξεν τὰ γράμματα καὶ τὰς λέξεις ευ̣θηκεν, ἀλλ' ἐνπ̣νεῖ ψυχῇ τινι ταῦτα. καὶ ηυ̣τοι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ γράφων αὐτὰ ὁ Σολομὼν η τῶν σοφῶν τινες ευ̣γραψαν αὐτά. καὶ τάχα