65

will be established, with the one lacking in power proceeding 1.1.507 to the opposite side. And thus the dogma of the Manicheans will slip in, with two things opposite to each other appearing in the concept of origin, being severed towards the opposite by the difference of their nature and will. And for them, the construction of diminution becomes the beginning of the Manichean dogmas. For the discord of the substance establishes the dogma in two principles, as the argument has shown, divided into the created and the uncreated. 1.1.508 But perhaps the many will find fault with these things for having a forced construction of absurdity and will demand that they not be written at all with the rest. So be it; we do not contradict it. For we were not led to cast the argument out of its proper sequence into such a minute inquiry by our own impulse, but because of our opponents. But if one ought not to say these things, it is much more fitting for the argument of our opponents to be silenced, which provides the starting-points for such a refutation. For it is not possible otherwise to restrain one who argues against the wicked, without removing the hypothesis of the 1.1.509 refutation. Nevertheless, I would gladly advise those so disposed to step outside their contentiousness for a little while and not to fight too ardently for their own suppositions, by which they happen to have been already preoccupied, nor to seek from every quarter how they might gain the upper hand over their opponents, but, as if the race were for their very soul, to be persuaded by what is expedient alone and to give the prize of victory to the truth. If, therefore, someone, having desisted from contention, were to examine the argument by himself, he would not find it difficult to discover the absurdity apparent in the dogma. 1.1.510 For let us suppose it is granted, according to the argument of our opponents, that 20unbegottenness20 is substance and again likewise that generation is taken up into substance. Therefore, if anyone should follow what is said with precise understanding, the Manichean dogma will be refashioned for them by this path, since it seems to the Manicheans to dogmatize about the opposition of evil to good and of light to darkness and of all such things according to the contrariety of nature. 1.1.511 And that I say these things truly, I think that one who has not carelessly passed over the argument will readily agree. Let us consider it in this way. For each of the subjects, certain fitting characteristics are in every case observed, through which the particularity of the underlying nature is recognized, whether you examine the argument in the case of the difference of animals or in the case of all other things. For wood and an animal are not characterized by the same things, nor in animals do the distinctive signs of a man have communion with the irrational nature, nor again do the same things show both life and death, but on all things altogether, as has been said, the distinction of the subjects is something unmixed and incommunicable, being in no way confused with the characteristics of the things observed through any communion. 1.1.512 Therefore, let the argument of our opponents be examined according to this sequence. They say that 20unbegottenness20 is substance and likewise they refer generation to substance. But just as a man and a stone have different and not the same characteristics (for you would not give the same account of each, the animate and the inanimate, defining what it is), so they will in every case grant that the unbegotten is known by some signs, and the begotten by others. Therefore, let us consider the particular properties of the unbegotten God, as many as we have learned from Holy Scripture to piously say and think about him. 1.1.513 What then are these? I think no Christian is ignorant that he is good, that he is kind, that he is holy, just and pious, invisible and immortal, insusceptible of corruption and of change and of alteration, powerful, wise, a benefactor, Lord, judge, all such things. For why is it necessary, dwelling on what is 1.1.514 acknowledged, to prolong the argument? If, then, we apprehend these things in the unbegotten nature, and to be begotten is contrary to not to be begotten according to the concept, there is every necessity for those who define unbegottenness and generation to be substance to agree that

65

κατα στήσεται, τῷ ἀνενδεεῖ τῆς δυνάμεως εἰς τὸ ἀντίπαλον προϊ 1.1.507 οῦσα. καὶ οὕτω τὸ τῶν Μανιχαίων δόγμα παρεισδύσεται, δύο τινῶν ἐναντίων ἀλλήλοις ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἀντι φανέντων, τῷ διαλλάσσοντι τῆς φύσεως καὶ τῆς προαιρέσεως πρὸς τὸ ἀντικείμενον διατμηθέντων. καὶ γίνεται αὐτοῖς ἡ τῆς ἐλαττώσεως κατασκευὴ τῶν Μανιχαϊκῶν δογμάτων ἀρχή. τὸ γὰρ τῆς οὐσίας ἀσύμφωνον εἰς δύο ἀρχὰς περι ΐστησι τὸ δόγμα, καθὼς ὁ λόγος ὑπέδειξε, τῷ κτιστῷ καὶ τῷ ἀκτίστῳ διῃρημένας. 1.1.508 Ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ἴσως βεβιασμένην ἔχοντα τὴν τοῦ ἀτόπου κατασκευὴν οἱ πολλοὶ αἰτιάσονται καὶ οὐδὲ γεγρά φθαι τὸ παράπαν μετὰ τῶν λοιπῶν ἀξιώσουσιν. ἔστω ταῦτα· οὐδὲ ἡμεῖς ἀντιλέγομεν. οὐδὲ γὰρ κατ' οἰκείαν ὁρμήν, ἀλλὰ διὰ τοὺς ἀντιμαχομένους εἰς τὴν τοιαύτην περιεργίαν ἐκβαλεῖν τὸν λόγον ἐκ τῆς ἀκολουθίας προήχθημεν. εἰ δὲ οὐ χρὴ ταῦτα λέγειν, πολὺ πρότερον σιωπᾶσθαι προσήκει τῶν ἐναντίων τὸν λόγον τὸν τῆς τοιαύτης ἀντιρρήσεως τὰς ἀφορμὰς παρεχόμενον. οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἑτέρως ἐπισχεῖν τὸν τοῖς πονηροῖς ἀντιλέγοντα, μὴ τὴν ὑπόθεσιν ἐξελόντα τῆς 1.1.509 ἀντιρρήσεως. πλὴν ἡδέως ἂν συμβουλεύσαιμι τοῖς οὕτω διακειμένοις μικρόν τι τῆς φιλονεικίας ἔξω γενέσθαι καὶ μὴ λίαν ἐκθύμως τῶν οἰκείων ὑπερμαχεῖν ὑπολήψεων, αἷς ἤδη προειλημμένοι τυγχάνουσι, μηδὲ πανταχόθεν ἀναζητεῖν, ὅπως ἂν τὸ πλέον ἔχοιεν τῶν ἀντιτεταγμένων, ἀλλ' ὡς ὑπὲρ ψυχῆς ὄντος τοῦ δρόμου, μόνῳ τῷ συμφέροντι πείθεσθαι καὶ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ διδόναι τὰ νικητήρια. εἰ τοίνυν τοῦ φιλο νεικεῖν τις ἀποστὰς αὐτὸν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ διασκοποῖτο τὸν λόγον, οὐ χαλεπῶς εὑρήσει τὴν ἐμφαινομένην ἀτοπίαν τῷ δόγματι. 1.1.510 Ὑποθώμεθα γὰρ συγχωρεῖσθαι κατὰ τὸν λόγον τῶν ὑπεναντίων τὴν 20ἀγεννησίαν20 οὐσίαν εἶναι καὶ πάλιν ὡσ αύτως τὴν γέννησιν εἰς οὐσίαν ἀναλαμβάνεσθαι. οὐκοῦν εἴ τις ἀκριβῶς τῇ διανοίᾳ τῶν λεγομένων ἀκολουθήσειε, τὸ Μανιχαϊκὸν αὐτοῖς δόγμα διὰ τῆς ὁδοῦ ταύτης ἀναπλασθή σεται, εἴπερ κακοῦ πρὸς ἀγαθὸν καὶ φωτὸς πρὸς σκότος καὶ πάντων τῶν τοιούτων κατὰ τὸ ἐναντίον τῆς φύσεως τὴν 1.1.511 ἀντίθεσιν δογματίζειν τοῖς Μανιχαίοις δοκεῖ. καὶ ὅτι ταῦτα ἀληθῆ λέγω, ῥᾳδίως οἶμαι συνθήσεσθαι τὸν μὴ ῥᾳθύμως παραδραμόντα τὸν λόγον. οὑτωσὶ δὲ διασκε ψώμεθα. ἑκάστῳ τῶν ὑποκειμένων προσφυῆ τινα πάντως ἐπιθεωρεῖται γνωρίσματα, δι' ὧν τὸ ἰδιάζον τῆς ὑποκει μένης ἐπιγινώσκεται φύσεως, εἴτε ἐπὶ τῆς τῶν ζῴων δια φορᾶς ἐξετάζοις τὸν λόγον εἴτε καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάν των. οὐ γὰρ τοῖς αὐτοῖς τὸ ξύλον καὶ τὸ ζῷον χαρακτη ρίζεται, οὐδὲ ἐν τοῖς ζῴοις ἐπικοινωνεῖ τὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου γνωριστικὰ σημεῖα πρὸς τὴν ἄλογον φύσιν, οὐδ' αὖ πάλιν τὰ αὐτὰ δείκνυσι τήν τε ζωὴν καὶ τὸν θάνατον, ἀλλ' ἐπὶ πάντων ἁπαξαπλῶς, καθὼς εἴρηται, ἄμικτός τίς ἐστι καὶ ἀκοινώνητος ἡ τῶν ὑποκειμένων διάκρισις, οὐδὲν τοῖς τῶν ἐπιθεωρουμένων γνωρίσμασι διά τινος κοινωνίας συγχεομένη. 1.1.512 κατὰ τοίνυν τὴν ἀκολουθίαν ταύτην ἐξετασθήτω τῶν ὑπε ναντίων ὁ λόγος. τὴν 20ἀγεννησίαν20 οὐσίαν φασὶ καὶ τὴν γέννησιν ὡσαύτως εἰς οὐσίαν ἀνάγουσιν. ἀλλ' ὥσπερ ἀν θρώπου καὶ λίθου ἕτερα καὶ οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ γνωρίσματα (οὐ γὰρ ἂν τὸν αὐτὸν ἀποδοίης ἑκατέρου λόγον ἐμψύχου τε καὶ ἀψύχου τὸ τί ἐστιν ὁριζόμενος), οὕτω πάντως ἄλλοις μὲν γνωρίζεσθαι τὸν ἀγέννητον σημείοις δώσουσιν, ἑτέροις δὲ τὸν γεννητόν. οὐκοῦν θεωρήσωμεν τὰ ἰδιάζοντα τοῦ ἀγεν νήτου θεοῦ ὅσα εὐσεβῶς λέγειν τε καὶ νοεῖν παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας γραφῆς περὶ αὐτοῦ μεμαθήκαμεν. 1.1.513 Τίνα οὖν ἔστι ταῦτα; οὐδένα οἶμαι τῶν Χριστιανῶν ἀγνοεῖν ὅτι ἀγαθὸς ὅτι χρηστὸς ὅτι ἅγιος δίκαιός τε καὶ ὅσιος ἀόρατός τε καὶ ἀθάνατος, φθορᾶς τε καὶ τροπῆς καὶ ἀλλοιώσεως ἀνεπίδεκτος, δυνατὸς σοφὸς εὐεργέτης κύ ριος κριτὴς πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα. τί γὰρ δεῖ τοῖς ὁμολογου 1.1.514 μένοις ἐνδιατρίβοντα παρατείνειν τὸν λόγον; εἰ οὖν ταῦτα ἐν τῇ ἀγεννήτῳ φύσει καταλαμβάνομεν, τὸ δὲ γεννηθῆναι τῷ μὴ γεννηθῆναι ὑπεναντίως ἔχει κατὰ τὴν ἔννοιαν, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα συνθέσθαι τοὺς τὴν ἀγεννησίαν καὶ τὴν γέννησιν οὐ σίαν εἶναι ὁριζομένους κατὰ