248

incorruptible, but to signify that it is such. so that the indefinite in each respect is a property of the divine life of the subject, while the concepts observed in the subject in this way or that are spoken of only with respect to the word that indicates the signified concept. One concept concerning the divine life is that it is not from a cause; this the word 'unbegotten' indicates. Another concept concerning the divine life is that it is indefinite and without end; this the appellation 'incorruptible' presents. So that the subject is what it is, beyond every name and concept, while that it is neither from a cause nor ever passes into non-existence, these things are signified through the conception of these names. 2.1.514 What then from our words has moved him to this foolish game, so that taking up the same point again he says in these words: 20therefore, with respect to being without beginning, he will be at the same time unbegotten and corruptible, and with respect to being without end, incorruptible and at the same time begotten20. But this, even if it is not clarified by our argument, is completely obvious to anyone who has any share of intelligence how ridiculous and foolish it is, or rather, impious 2.1.515 and condemnable. For by the argument with which he constructs the pairing of 'corruptible' with 'without beginning', in the same way he trifles with every pious and God-befitting name. For not only are these two things contemplated concerning the divine life, being without beginning and not admitting corruption, but he is also called immaterial and without wrath, unchangeable and incorporeal, invisible and unformed, true and just, and there are myriad other concepts concerning the divine life, each of which by itself is announced through significant 2.1.516 words according to some particular idea. Therefore, with every name—I mean one that signifies a God-befitting conception—it is possible to weave together the strange pairing devised by Eunomius. For instance, both 'immaterial' and 'without wrath' are said of the divine life, but not each according to the same thought; for we understood the divine to be pure from material mixture through the word 'immaterial', while in 'without wrath' the 2.1.517 alienation from the passion of wrath is signified. Therefore, Eunomius will likely run to these as well and will dance the same jig on the things that have been said. For he will speak, weaving together the absurdity in the same sequence: 'If in that he is separate from material mixture, he is called immaterial, in that respect he will not be without wrath, and if because he does not admit wrath he is without wrath, it is not possible for 'immaterial' to be confessed of him, but by all necessity in being pure from matter he will be shown to be at the same time immaterial and wrathful, and in not admitting wrath he will be found at the same time without wrath and material.' Thus he will also do with all 2.1.518 the others. And if you please, let us set forth another such pairing of names, I mean 'unchangeable' and 'incorporeal'. For since each of these two names is said of the divine life according to its particular emphasis, likewise upon them the wisdom of Eunomius will construct the absurdity. For if that which is always in the same state is signified by the word 'unchangeable', and the appellation 'incorporeal' represents the intelligible nature of the substance, Eunomius will surely say the same things about these too, that the concepts contemplated in these names are incompatible and alien and have no fellowship with one another. 2.1.519 'For in being always in the same state the divine will be only unchangeable and not incorporeal, and in the intelligible and formless nature of its substance it has the incorporeal, but is separate from the unchangeable; so that it happens that when the unalterable is contemplated in the divine life, it is constructed to be a body along with being unchangeable, and when the intelligible is examined, it is determined to be at the same time incorporeal and changeable.' 2.1.520 These are the wise discoveries of Eunomius against the truth. For why is it necessary to prolong the argument in idle talk by going through all of them? For it is possible to see this same absurdity being constructed in all cases. For both 'the true' and 'the just' in the same way

248

ἄφθαρτον, ἀλλὰ σημαίνειν οὖσαν τοιαύτην. ὥστε τὸ μὲν ἀόριστον καθ' ἑκάτερον εἶναι τὴν θείαν ζωὴν τοῦ ὑποκει μένου ἴδιον εἶναι, τὸ δὲ οὕτως ἢ οὕτως τὰ ἐπιθεωρούμενα τῷ ὑποκειμένῳ νοήματα λέγεσθαι περὶ τὴν φωνήν ἐστι μόνον τὴν ἐνδεικτικὴν τοῦ σημαινομένου νοήματος. ἓν νόημα περὶ τὴν θείαν ζωὴν τὸ μὴ ἐξ αἰτίας αὐτὴν εἶναι· τοῦτο ἡ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου λέξις ἐνδείκνυται. ἕτερον νόημα περὶ τὴν θείαν ζωὴν τὸ ἀόριστον αὐτὴν εἶναι καὶ ἀτελεύ τητον· τοῦτο ἡ τοῦ ἀφθάρτου προσηγορία παρίστησιν· ὥστε τὸ μὲν ὑποκείμενον εἶναι, ὅπερ ἐστίν, ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομά τε καὶ νόημα, τὸ δὲ μήτε ἐξ αἰτίας αὐτὸ εἶναι μήτε εἰς τὸ ἀνύπαρκτόν ποτε περιΐστασθαι, ταῦτα διὰ τῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων τούτων ἐπινοίας σημαίνεσθαι. 2.1.514 Τί τοίνυν ἐκ τῶν ἡμετέρων αὐτὸν πρὸς τὴν ἀνόητον ταύτην παιδιὰν παρεκίνησεν, ὥστε πάλιν ἐπαναλαβόντα τὸ ἴσον εἰπεῖν ἐν τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασι· 20ἔσται ἄρα κατὰ μὲν τὸ ἄναρχον ἀγέννητος ὁμοῦ καὶ φθαρτός, κατὰ δὲ τὸ ἀτελεύτητον ἄφθαρτος ὁμοῦ καὶ γεννη τός20. τοῦτο δὲ κἂν μὴ παρ' ἡμῶν διευκρινηθῇ τῷ λόγῳ, παντὶ πρόδηλόν ἐστι τῷ καὶ ὁπωσοῦν διανοίας μετέχοντι ὅπως ἐστὶ καταγέλαστον καὶ ἀνόητον, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀσεβὲς 2.1.515 καὶ κατάκριτον. ᾧ γὰρ λόγῳ κατασκευάζει τὴν τοῦ φθαρτοῦ πρὸς τὸ ἄναρχον συζυγίαν, τῷ αὐτῷ τρόπῳ παντὸς εὐσεβοῦς τε καὶ θεοπρεποῦς καταπαίζει ὀνόματος. οὐ γὰρ μόνον τὰ δύο ταῦτα περὶ τὴν θείαν θεωρεῖται ζωήν, τὸ ἀνάρχως τε εἶναι καὶ φθορὰν μὴ προσδέχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἄϋλός τε καὶ ἀόργητος λέγεται ἄτρεπτός τε καὶ ἀσώματος ἀόρατός τε καὶ ἀσχημάτιστος ἀληθής τε καὶ δίκαιος, καὶ ἄλλα μυρία περὶ τὴν θείαν ζωήν ἐστι νοήματα, ὧν ἕκαστον ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ κατά τινα ἰδιάζουσαν ἔννοιαν ταῖς σημαντικαῖς 2.1.516 φωναῖς ἐξαγγέλλεται. παντὶ τοίνυν ὀνόματι, τῷ σημαντικῷ λέγω τῆς θεοπρεποῦς ὑπολήψεως, ἔξεστι συμπλέξαι τὴν ἐπινοηθεῖσαν παρὰ τοῦ Εὐνομίου κατὰ τὸ ἀλλόκοτον συζυ γίαν. οἷον τὸ ἄϋλόν τε καὶ τὸ ἀόργητον ἀμφότερα λέγεται περὶ τὴν θείαν ζωήν, ἀλλ' οὐ κατὰ τῆς αὐτῆς διανοίας ἑκάτερον· τὸ μὲν γὰρ καθαρεύειν ὑλικῆς ἐπιμιξίας τὸ θεῖον διὰ τῆς τοῦ ἀΰλου φωνῆς ἐνοήσαμεν, ἐν δὲ τῷ ἀοργήτῳ ἡ 2.1.517 ἀλλοτρίωσις τοῦ κατὰ τὴν ὀργὴν πάθους σημαίνεται. ἐπι δραμεῖται τοίνυν καὶ τούτοις κατὰ τὸ εἰκὸς ὁ Εὐνόμιος καὶ τὸ ἴσον ἐν τοῖς εἰρημένοις ὀρχήσεται. λέξει γὰρ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν εἱρμὸν τὴν ἀτοπίαν συμπλέκων· εἰ καθὸ κεχώρισται τῆς ὑλικῆς ἐπιμιξίας, ἄϋλος λέγεται, κατὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἔσται ἀόργητος, καὶ εἰ διὰ τὸ μὴ προσίεσθαι τὴν ὀργήν ἐστιν ἀόργητος, οὐκ ἔστι δυνατὸν ἐπ' αὐτοῦ ὁμολογεῖσθαι τὸ ἄϋλον, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πᾶσαν ἀνάγκην ἐν μὲν τῷ καθαρεύειν ὕλης ἄϋλος ὁμοῦ καὶ ὀργίλος ἀναδειχθήσεται, ἐν δὲ τῷ τὴν ὀργὴν μὴ προσίεσθαι ἀόργητός τε καὶ ὑλικὸς κατὰ ταὐτὸν εὑρεθήσεται. οὕτως καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων ποιήσει 2.1.518 πάντων. καὶ εἰ δοκεῖ, προθῶμεν ἑτέραν συζυγίαν ὀνομάτων τοιαύτην, τὸ ἄτρεπτον λέγω καὶ τὸ ἀσώματον. τῶν γὰρ δύο τούτων ὀνομάτων ἑκατέρου κατὰ τὴν ἰδιάζουσαν ἔμφασιν ἐπὶ τῆς θείας λεγομένων ζωῆς, ὁμοίως καὶ ἐπ' αὐτῶν ἡ τοῦ Εὐνομίου σοφία κατασκευάσει τὴν ἀτοπίαν. εἰ γὰρ τὸ ἀεὶ ὡσαύτως ἔχον τῇ φωνῇ τοῦ ἀτρέπτου σημαίνεται καὶ τὸ νοερὸν τῆς οὐσίας ἡ τοῦ ἀσωμάτου προσηγορία παρί στησιν, ἐρεῖ πάντως τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τούτων ὁ Εὐνόμιος, ὅτι ἀσύμβατά ἐστι καὶ ἀλλότρια καὶ ἀκοινωνήτως ἔχει πρὸς ἄλληλα τὰ τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ἐνθεωρούμενα τούτοις νοήματα. 2.1.519 ἐν μὲν γὰρ τῷ πάντοτε ὡσαύτως ἔχειν τὸ θεῖον μόνον ἄτρεπτον ἔσται καὶ οὐκ ἀσώματον, ἐν δὲ τῷ νοερῷ τε καὶ ἀειδεῖ τῆς οὐσίας τὸ μὲν ἀσώματον ἔχει, τοῦ δὲ ἀτρέπτου κεχώρισται· ὥστε συμβαίνειν ὅταν μὲν τὸ ἀναλλοίωτον ἐπὶ τῆς θείας θεωρῆται ζωῆς, μετὰ τοῦ ἀτρέπτου καὶ σῶμα αὐτὴν εἶναι κατασκευάζεσθαι, ὅταν δὲ τὸ νοερὸν ἐξετάζηται, ὁμοῦ τε ἀσώματον αὐτὴν εἶναι καὶ τρεπτὴν διορίζεσθαι. 2.1.520 ταῦτα τοῦ Εὐνομίου τὰ σοφὰ κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας εὑρήματα. τί γὰρ δεῖ πᾶσιν ἐπεξιόντα παρατείνειν ἐν ἀδολεσχίᾳ τὸν λόγον; ἔστι γὰρ ὁμοίως ἐπὶ πάντων τὴν ἀλογίαν ταύτην κατασκευαζομένην θεάσασθαι. καὶ γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἀληθινὸν καὶ τὸ δίκαιον ὁμοίως