363

to have. Eunomius achieves these things through his wisdom, by which he insults the Lord with servitude, attributing the same dishonor to the unblemished glory of the Father. 3.8.59 But let us return again to the sequence of what is written. What does Eunomius say about the Only-begotten? That 20he does not appropriate this dignity.20 For he calls the appellation of "being" a 20dignity.20 O irrational philosophy! Who of all men that have ever lived, whether among the Greeks or in barbaric philosophy, who of our own people, who in all of time has given the name 20dignity20 to "being"? For everything observed in a hypostasis, the common custom of those who use reason says "1to be"2; and from "to be" the name "being" is derived. But now the term 20dignity20 is being innovated against the meaning of "being". 3.8.60 For he says that the Son, who is and lives because of the Father, does not appropriate the dignity of "being," neither having <the> scripture to support his statement nor advancing his argument with any logical sequence to this folly, but as if having placed some flatulent food in his entrails, he belches forth the blasphemy, unprepared and illogical, like some foul wind. 3.8.61 20He does not appropriate,20 he says, 20this dignity.20 Let it be granted that "being" is called 20dignity.20 Why then does he who is, not appropriate "to be"? Because, he says, he is through the Father. So then, are you saying that the one who does not appropriate "to be" does not exist? For 20not to appropriate20 means the same as to be alienated, and the contrast of what is signified is obvious. For what is one's own is not alien, and what is alien is not one's own. Therefore, he who 20does not appropriate20 "to be" is completely alienated from being. And he who is alien to being 3.8.62 does not exist in being. But he induced the necessity of this absurdity by saying, 20the substance which has lordship even over this one drawing to itself the concept of being.20 Let the incoherent syntax of this be passed over in silence, but let the point of his statement be examined. By what argument proved is it that the Father's substance has lordship over the Only-begotten, which he belches forth to us again from his surfeit? Which evangelist proposed this statement? What dialectical approach, what premises, what constructions have proved through any sequence that the only-begotten God is ruled over? 3.8.63 But, he says, the substance which has lordship draws to itself the concept of the Son's being. What does he mean by this drawing of being, and how was the word 20to draw20 thrown into what he has said? The one who has examined the power of words will certainly judge. But we shall pass over this too in silence, and take up again that other statement, that he does not grant being according to substance to him for whom he does not leave the name of being. And why does he shadow-box in vain about the non-existent, fighting as if it were such and such a being? For that which is not is neither like anything at all, nor unlike. But while granting being, he forbids its being said. O empty precision, to concede the greater point and then to quibble 3.8.64 over the sound of the word! But how does the one 20who has lordship20 over the Son, as he says, 20draw to himself the concept of being20? For if he says that the Father draws his own substance, this drawing is superfluous; for being is present to him even without being drawn. But if he says that the Son's being is drawn from the Father, I cannot see how "to be" will be detached from being and move over to the one who draws it. Does he perhaps imagine the error of Sabellius, that the Son does not exist in himself, but is smeared onto the Father's hypostasis, and does he mean by this that 20the concept of being is drawn20 from the substance that has lordship over the Son? Or, not denying that the Son exists in his own hypostasis, does he say that he is deprived of the meaning of "being"? And how is it possible for being to be separated from the concept of "to be"? For as long as anything is whatever it is, it is not its nature not to be what it is. 3.9.1 But let us proceed also to what follows in his argument. 20the Only-begotten himself,20 he says, 20assigning to the Father the appellation due to him alone according to his dignity. For he who taught that the address "good" belongs only to him who is the cause both of his own and of all goodness, and all

363

ἔχειν. ταῦτα κατορθοῖ διὰ τῆς σοφίας Εὐνό μιος, δι' ὧν καθυβρίζει τῇ δουλείᾳ τὸν κύριον, τὴν αὐτὴν ἀτιμίαν τῇ ἀκηράτῳ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς προστριβόμενος. 3.8.59 Ἀλλ' ἐπαναδράμωμεν πάλιν ἐπὶ τὴν τῶν γεγραμμένων ἀκολουθίαν. τί λέγει περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς ὁ Εὐνόμιος; ὅτι 20οὐκ οἰκειοῦται ταύτην τὴν ἀξίαν. ἀξίαν20 γὰρ ὀνομάζει τὴν τοῦ ὄντος προσηγορίαν. ὢ παραλόγου φιλο σοφίας. τίς τῶν πώποτε γεγονότων ἀνθρώπων εἴτε παρ' Ἕλλησιν εἴτε παρὰ τῇ βαρβαρικῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ, τίς τῶν καθ' ἡμᾶς, τίς τῶν ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ 20ἀξίαν20 ὄνομα τῷ ὄντι ἔθετο; πᾶν γὰρ τὸ ἐν ὑποστάσει θεωρούμενον ἡ κοινὴ τῶν λόγῳ κεχρημένων συνήθεια "1εἶναι"2 λέγει· παρὰ δὲ τὸ εἶναι ἡ τοῦ ὄντος ἐπωνυμία παρεσχημάτισται. ἀλλὰ νῦν καινοτομεῖται κατὰ τῆς τοῦ ὄντος σημασίας ἡ τῆς 20ἀξίας20 3.8.60 φωνή. λέγει γὰρ τὸν υἱὸν μὴ οἰκειοῦσθαι τὴν τοῦ ὄντος ἀξίαν τὸν διὰ τὸν πατέρα ὄντα καὶ ζῶντα, οὔτε <τὴν> γραφὴν ἔχων τοῦ λόγου προστήσασθαι οὔτε διά τινος ἀκο λουθίας πρὸς τὴν ἄνοιαν ταύτην προαγαγὼν τὸν λόγον, ἀλλ' ὥς τινα φυσώδη τροφὴν τοῖς σπλάγχνοις ἐνθέμενος ἀκατάσκευόν τε καὶ ἀσυλλόγιστον οἷόν τι πνεῦμα δυσῶδες 3.8.61 τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐρεύγεται. 20οὐκ οἰκειοῦται20, φησί, 20ταύ την τὴν ἀξίαν20. δεδόσθω τὸ ὂν 20ἀξίαν20 κατονομάζεσθαι· τί οὖν ὁ ὢν οὐκ οἰκειοῦται τὸ εἶναι; ὅτι, φησί, διὰ τὸν πατέρα ἐστίν. οὐκοῦν μὴ εἶναι λέγεις τὸν τὸ εἶναι μὴ οἰκειούμενον; τὸ γὰρ 20μὴ οἰκειοῦσθαι20 τῷ ἀλλοτριοῦσθαι ταὐτὸν σημαίνει, καὶ πρόδηλος ἡ τῶν σημαινομένων ἀντι διαίρεσις. τό τε γὰρ οἰκεῖον οὐκ ἀλλότριον καὶ τὸ ἀλλό τριον οὐκ οἰκεῖον. ὁ οὖν 20μὴ οἰκειούμενος20 τὸ εἶναι ἠλλοτρίωται πάντως τοῦ εἶναι. ὁ δὲ τοῦ εἶναι ἀλλότριος 3.8.62 ἐν τῷ εἶναι οὐκ ἔστιν. ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀνάγκην τῆς ἀτοπίας ταύτης ἐπήγαγεν εἰπὼν 20τῆς καὶ τούτου κυριευούσης οὐσίας πρὸς ἑαυτὴν ἑλκούσης τὴν τοῦ ὄντος ἔννοιαν20. τούτου δὲ τὸ μὲν κατὰ τὴν σύμφρασιν ἀσυν άρτητον σιωπάσθω, τὸ δὲ σπουδαζόμενον ἐν τοῖς λεγο μένοις ἐξεταζέσθω. τίνος ἀποδείξαντος λόγου τὸ κυριεύειν τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς οὐσίαν πάλιν ἐκ τῆς πλη θώρας ἡμῖν προσερεύγεται; τίς εὐαγγελιστὴς τούτου προ έστη τοῦ λόγου; τίς ἔφοδος διαλεκτική, ποῖαι προτάσεις, τίνες κατασκευαὶ τὸ κυριεύεσθαι τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν διὰ 3.8.63 τίνος ἀκολουθίας ἀπέδειξαν; ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἑαυτὴν ἕλκει, φησίν, ἡ τοῦ κυριεύουσα οὐσία τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ ὄντος ἔννοιαν. τί βούλεται αὐτῷ ὁ ἑλκηθμὸς τοῦ ὄντος καὶ πῶς προσερρίφη τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἡ τοῦ 20ἕλκειν20 λέξις; κρινεῖ πάντως ὁ ἐπεσκεμμένος δύναμιν λόγων. ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦτο σιγήσομεν, ἐκεῖνον δὲ πάλιν τὸν λόγον ἀναληψόμεθα, ὅτι οὐ δίδωσιν εἶναι κατ' οὐσίαν ᾧ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ ὄντος οὐ καταλείπει. καὶ τί μάτην σκιαμαχεῖ περὶ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος μαχόμενος ὡς τοιοῦδε ὄντος; τὸ γὰρ μὴ ὂν οὔτε ὅμοιόν τινι πάντως ἐστὶν οὔτε ἀνόμοιον. ἀλλὰ διδοὺς τὸ εἶναι ἀπαγορεύει τὸ λέγε σθαι. ὢ κενῆς ἀκριβείας, ἐν τῷ μείζονι συγχωροῦντα μι 3.8.64 κρολογεῖσθαι περὶ τὸν ψόφον τοῦ ῥήματος. πῶς δὲ ὁ 20κυριεύων20, ὥς φησι, τοῦ υἱοῦ 20πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκει τοῦ ὄντος τὴν ἔννοιαν20; εἰ μὲν γὰρ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐσίαν ἕλκειν φησὶ τὸν πατέρα, περιττὸς οὗτος ὁ ἑλκηθμός· πάρ εστι γὰρ αὐτῷ τὸ εἶναι καὶ μὴ ἑλκόμενον· εἰ δὲ τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ εἶναι παρὰ τοῦ πατρός φησιν ἕλκεσθαι, πῶς ἀποσπασθή σεται τοῦ ὄντος τὸ εἶναι καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἕλκοντα μεταχωρήσει, κατιδεῖν οὐκ ἔχω. ἆρα μὴ τὴν Σαβελλίου πλάνην φαντά ζεται, ὡς οὐκ ὄντος τοῦ υἱοῦ καθ' ἑαυτόν, τῇ δὲ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑποστάσει προσαλιφέντος, καὶ τοῦτο βούλεται αὐτῷ τὸ 20ἕλκεσθαι τὴν τοῦ ὄντος ἔννοιαν20 παρὰ τῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ κυριευούσης οὐσίας; ἢ εἶναι καθ' ὑπόστασιν τὸν υἱὸν οὐκ ἀρνούμενος τῆς τοῦ ὄντος αὐτόν φησι σημασίας ἀπο μερίζεσθαι; καὶ πῶς ἔστι διαζευχθῆναι τῆς τοῦ εἶναι δια νοίας τὸ ὄν; ἕως γὰρ ἂν ᾖ πᾶν ὅπερ ἂν ᾖ, μὴ εἶναι ὃ ἔστι φύσιν οὐκ ἔχει. 3.9.1 Ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὸ ἐφεξῆς τοῦ λόγου προέλθωμεν. 20αὐτοῦ20, φησί, 20τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἀποδιδόντος τῷ πατρὶ τὴν μόνῳ κατ' ἀξίαν ὀφειλομένην ἐπω νυμίαν. ὁ γὰρ τὴν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ πρόσρησιν μόνῳ προσήκειν διδάξας ἐκείνῳ τῷ καὶ τῆς σφετέ ρας καὶ πάσης ἀγαθότητος αἰτίῳ καὶ πᾶν