109

of commands 2.1.207 and using him as a servant? But if one were to grant that it is pious to say this, who, for his own part, has needed words and speeches, even if he were a man? For to each the movement of the mind is sufficient to produce the impulse of choice. But he will say that He was conversing with the Son. And what need was there of a voice for this? For it is characteristic of embodied nature to declare the thoughts of the heart through words; whence also the declaration devised through letters 2.1.208 has been found, being equivalent to the use of the voice; for equally, by speaking and by writing, we declare what is thought, but in the case of those who are not very far away, we reach their hearing with the voice, while to those far off we declare our mind by letters, and in the case of those present, in proportion to the distance, we either raise the pitch of our voice or lower it, and there are times when, by only nodding, we have made clear to our neighbors what is to be done and the choice in the soul both an eye disposed in a certain way has indicated and a certain movement of the hand has either forbidden or approved something that was happening. 2.1.209 If, therefore, those who are enclosed in a body often make known to their neighbors the hidden movements of the mind even without voice or word or conversation in letters, and silence has brought no harm to the matter at hand, is there, in the case of the immaterial and intangible and, as Eunomius says, 20the highest and first substance20, a need for words to make clear the Father's thought and make known His will to the Only-begotten? Words which, as he himself says, 20are by nature dispersed along with the voice20? I do not know if anyone who has a mind will accept these things as true, especially since every sound is necessarily poured out into the air (for it is not possible for a voice to be produced unless it is formed in the air), they must of absolute necessity posit something in between the one speaking and the one to whom the speech is addressed. 2.1.210 For if there is no intermediary, how will the voice travel from the speaker to the hearer? What, then, will they say is the medium by which they separate the Son from the Father? For in the case of bodies, the space occupied by the air becomes the medium, being something else in its own nature besides the substance of human bodies. But the intangible and formless God, who is pure of all composition, sharing His own counsels with the Only-begotten God in a like, or rather, in the same immaterial and incorporeal way, if He were to make the communication through a voice, what intermediary would He have, through which the flowing and travelling word would take up residence in the ears of the Only-begotten? 2.1.211 If indeed we must also pass this by unexamined, that the Godhead is not divided into perceptive faculties, as with us each of the sense-organs distinctly grasps what is kindred to it, sight grasping the visible, and the sense of hearing grasping the audible, and touch does not taste, nor does hearing have the perception of vapors or flavors, but each remains in the one faculty to which it was appointed by nature, remaining in a way insensible to that for which it is not naturally suited and tasteless of the enjoyment which the neighboring sense reaps. 2.1.212 But it is not so there; rather, the Godhead, whole through whole, is sight and hearing and knowledge. For it is not right to apply the more animal-like senses to the undefiled nature. Unless we must suppose something lowly and bring the divine down to groveling conceptions, so as to think that the Father speaks words through a mouth, and the hearing of the Son is active, what medium do we suppose conveys the Father's voice to the Son's hearing? 2.1.213 Must this be created or uncreated? But one cannot say it is created; for before the creation was established, the word came to be; but nothing is uncreated except the divine nature. If, therefore, there was no creation, and the word mentioned in the creation of the world was older than creation, then he who says that words and the sound of a voice are signified by the "word," what will he suppose is between the Son and the Father, by which the voice formed the words? For if there is a medium, it certainly exists in a distinct nature, such that it is neither the same as the Father nor agrees in nature with the Son, but being something altogether different, it separates from one another the

109

προσταγμάτων 2.1.207 καὶ ὑπηρέτῃ χρώμενον; εἰ δὲ καὶ τοῦτο δοίη τις εὐαγὲς εἶναι λέγειν, τίς ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ ῥημάτων ἐδεήθη καὶ λόγων, κἂν ἄνθρωπος ᾖ; ἀρκεῖ γὰρ ἑκάστῳ τῆς διανοίας ἡ κίνησις τὴν τῆς προαιρέσεως ὁρμὴν ἐμποιῆσαι. ἀλλὰ τῷ υἱῷ διαλέγεσθαι πάντως ἐρεῖ. καὶ τίς ἦν χρεία πρὸς τοῦτο φωνῆς; ἴδιον γὰρ τῆς ἐνσωμάτου φύσεως τὸ διὰ ῥημάτων ἐξαγγέλλειν τὰ τῆς καρδίας νοήματα· ὅθεν καὶ ἰσοδυνα μοῦσα τῇ χρήσει τῆς φωνῆς ἡ δι' ἐπινοίας τῶν γραμμάτων 2.1.208 ἐξεύρηται δήλωσις· ἐπίσης γὰρ φθεγγόμενοί τε καὶ γράφοντες τὸ νοηθὲν ἐξαγγέλλομεν, ἀλλ' ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν μὴ λίαν ἀφεστηκό των φωνῇ τῆς ἀκοῆς καθικνούμεθα, πρὸς δὲ τοὺς πόρρωθεν γράμμασι δηλοῦμεν τὴν γνώμην, καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν παρόντων πρὸς λόγον τῆς ἀποστάσεως ἢ ἐπιτείνομεν τὸν τόνον τῆς φωνῆς ἢ ὑφίεμεν, ἔστιν δὲ ὅτε καὶ διανεύοντες μόνον τὸ πρακτέον τοῖς πέλας διεσαφήσαμεν καὶ τὴν ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ προαίρεσιν καὶ ὀφθαλμὸς τοιῶσδε διατεθεὶς ἐνεδείξατο καὶ χειρὸς ποιὰ κίνησις ἢ ἀπεῖπέ τι τῶν γινομένων ἢ κατεδέξατο. 2.1.209 εἰ τοίνυν οἱ σώματι περιειλημμένοι τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς διανοίας κινήματα καὶ δίχα φωνῆς ἢ ῥήματος ἢ τῆς ἐν γράμμασιν ὁμιλίας πολλάκις τοῖς πέλας γνωρίζουσι καὶ οὐδεμίαν ἤνεγκε τῷ σπουδαζομένῳ πράγματι ζημίαν ἡ σιωπή, ἆρ' ἐπὶ τῆς ἀΰλου καὶ ἀναφοῦς καί, ὥς φησιν ὁ Εὐνόμιος, 20ἀνωτάτω καὶ πρώτης οὐσίας20 ῥημάτων χρεία τῶν καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς διασαφούντων τὸ νόημα καὶ τῷ μονογενεῖ γνωριζόντων τὸ βούλημα; ῥημάτων τῶν, καθὼς αὐτός φησι, 20τῇ φωνῇ πεφυκότων συνδιαλύεσθαι20; Οὐκ οἶδα εἴ τις τῶν νοῦν ἐχόντων ταῦτα ὡς ἀληθῆ παραδέξεται, ἄλλως τε παντὸς φθόγγου πάντως εἰς ἀέρα προχεομένου (οὐδὲ γὰρ δυνατὸν γενέσθαι φωνὴν μὴ ἐν ἀέρι συνισταμένην) ἀνάγκη πᾶσα μέσον τι τοῦ φθεγγο μένου καὶ τοῦ πρὸς ὃν ὁ λόγος γίνεται καὶ αὐτοὺς ὑπο 2.1.210 θέσθαι. μὴ γὰρ ὄντος τοῦ μεσιτεύοντος, πῶς ἐκ τοῦ λαλοῦντος ἡ φωνὴ διοδεύσει πρὸς τὸν ἀκούοντα; τί οὖν ἐροῦσι τὸ μέσον ᾧ τὸν υἱὸν [ἐκ] τοῦ πατρὸς διορίζουσι; τῶν μὲν γὰρ σωμάτων ὁ κατὰ τὸν ἀέρα τόπος γίνεται μέσος, ἄλλο τι ὢν κατὰ τὴν ἰδίαν φύσιν παρὰ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρω πίνων σωμάτων οὐσίαν. ὁ δὲ ἀναφὴς καὶ ἀνείδεος καὶ πάσης συνθέσεως καθαρεύων θεός, τῷ μονογενεῖ θεῷ παραπλησίως, μᾶλλον δὲ ὡσαύτως ἀΰλως τε καὶ ἀσωμάτως τῶν ἰδίων κοινωνῶν βουλευμάτων, εἴπερ διὰ φωνῆς ἐποιεῖτο τὴν κοινωνίαν, τί τὸ μεσιτεῦον εἶχε, δι' οὗ ῥέων ὁ λόγος καὶ μεθιστάμενος ταῖς ἀκοαῖς τοῦ μονογενοῦς εἰσῳκίζετο; 2.1.211 εἴγε χρὴ καὶ τοῦτο παραδραμεῖν ἀθεώρητον, τὸ μὴ μεμε ρίσθαι τὸ θεῖον ταῖς ἀντιληπτικαῖς ἐνεργείαις, ὡς παρ' ἡμῖν διῃρημένως ἕκαστον τῶν αἰσθητηρίων τοῦ συγγενοῦς ἐπιδράσσεται, τοῦ ὁρατοῦ μὲν ἡ ὅρασις τοῦ ἀκουστοῦ δὲ ἡ κατὰ τὴν ἀκοὴν αἴσθησις, καὶ οὔτε γεύεται ἡ ἁφὴ οὔτε ἡ ἀκοὴ τὴν τῶν ἀτμῶν ἢ τῶν χυμῶν ἀντίληψιν ἔχει, ἀλλὰ παραμένει ἕκαστον τῇ μιᾷ ἐνεργείᾳ εἰς ἣν ἐτάχθη παρὰ τῆς φύσεως, ἀναίσθητον τρόπον τινὰ πρὸς ὃ μὴ πέφυκε διαμένον καὶ ἄγευστον τῆς ἀπολαύσεως ἧς καρποῦται ἡ 2.1.212 γείτων αἴσθησις. ἐκεῖ δὲ οὐχ οὕτως, ἀλλ' ὅλον δι' ὅλου τὸ θεῖον ὅρασίς ἐστι καὶ ἀκοὴ καὶ γνῶσις. οὐ γὰρ δὴ θέμις καὶ τὰς ζῳωδεστέρας τῶν αἰσθήσεων ἐφαρμόζειν τῇ ἀκηράτῳ φύσει. πλὴν εἰ χρή τι καὶ ταπεινὸν ὑποθέσθαι καὶ καταγαγεῖν εἰς χαμαιζήλους ὑπολήψεις τὸ θεῖον, ὥστε λαλεῖν μὲν οἴεσθαι ῥήματα διὰ στόματος τὸν πατέρα, ἐν εργεῖν δὲ τὴν ἀκοὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ, τί τὸ μέσον ὑποτιθέμεθα τὸ διάγον τὴν πατρικὴν φωνὴν εἰς τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ ἀκοήν; 2.1.213 κτιστὸν εἶναι χρὴ τοῦτο ἢ ἄκτιστον; ἀλλὰ κτιστὸν μὲν οὐκ ἔστιν εἰπεῖν· πρὸ γὰρ τοῦ συστῆναι τὴν κτίσιν ὁ λόγος ἐγένετο· ἄκτιστον δὲ πλὴν τῆς θείας φύσεώς ἐστιν οὐδέν. εἰ οὖν κτίσις οὐκ ἦν, ὁ δὲ μνημονευθεὶς ἐν τῇ κοσμογενείᾳ λόγος τῆς κτίσεως πρεσβύτερος ἦν, ἄρα ὁ λέγων ῥήματα καὶ φωνῆς ἦχον διὰ τοῦ λόγου σημαίνεσθαι τί τὸ μεταξὺ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑποθήσεται, ᾧ διετυποῦτο ἡ φωνὴ τὰ ῥήματα; εἰ γὰρ ἔστι μέσον, ἐν ἰδιαζούσῃ φύσει πάντως ἐστίν, ὡς μήτε τῷ πατρὶ ταὐτὸν εἶναι μήτε τῷ υἱῷ κατὰ τὴν φύσιν συμβαίνειν, ἀλλ' ἕτερόν τι πάντως ὂν διΐστησιν ἀπ' ἀλλήλων τὸν