Chapter 4.—How the Mind Knows Itself, Not in Part, But as a Whole.

6. What then shall we say? Does that which knows itself in part, not know itself in part? But it is absurd to say, that it does not as a whole know what it knows. I do not say, it knows wholly; but what it knows, it as a whole knows. When therefore it knows anything about itself, which it can only know as a whole, it knows itself as a whole. But it does know that itself knows something, while yet except as a whole it cannot know anything. Therefore it knows itself as a whole. Further, what in it is so known to itself, as that it lives? And it cannot at once be a mind, and not live, while it has also something over and above, viz., that it understands: for the souls of beasts also live, but do not understand. As therefore a mind is a whole mind, so it lives as a whole. But it knows that it lives. Therefore it knows itself as a whole. Lastly, when the mind seeks to know itself, it already knows that it is a mind: otherwise it knows not whether it seeks itself, and perhaps seeks one thing while intending to seek another. For it might happen that itself was not a mind, and so, in seeking to know a mind, that it did not seek to know itself. Wherefore since the mind, when it seeks to know what mind is, knows that it seeks itself, certainly it knows that itself is a mind. Furthermore, if it knows this in itself, that it is a mind, and a whole mind, then it knows itself as a whole. But suppose it did not know itself to be a mind, but in seeking itself only knew that it did seek itself. For so, too, it may possibly seek one thing for another, if it does not know this: but that it may not seek one thing for another, without doubt it knows what it seeks. But if it knows what it seeks, and seeks itself, then certainly it knows itself. What therefore more does it seek? But if it knows itself in part, but still seeks itself in part, then it seeks not itself, but part of itself. For when we speak of the mind itself, we speak of it as a whole. Further, because it knows that it is not yet found by itself as a whole, it knows how much the whole is. And so it seeks that which is wanting, as we are wont to seek to recall to the mind something that has slipped from the mind, but has not altogether gone away from it; since we can recognize it, when it has come back, to be the same thing that we were seeking. But how can mind come into mind, as though it were possible for the mind not to be in the mind? Add to this, that if, having found a part, it does not seek itself as a whole, yet it as a whole seeks itself. Therefore as a whole it is present to itself, and there is nothing left to be sought: for that is wanting which is sought, not the mind which seeks. Since therefore it as a whole seeks itself, nothing of it is wanting. Or if it does not as a whole seek itself, but the part which has been found seeks the part which has not yet been found then the mind does not seek itself, of which no part seeks itself. For the part which has been found, does not seek itself; nor yet does the part itself which has not yet been found, seek itself; since it is sought by that part which has been already found. Wherefore, since neither the mind as a whole seeks itself, nor does any part of it seek itself, the mind does not seek itself at all.

CAPUT IV.

6. Quomodo mens non ex parte, sed totam se cognoscat. Quid ergo dicemus? an quod ex parte se novit, ex parte non novit? Sed absurdum est dicere, non eam totam scire quod scit. Non dico, Totum scit; sed quod scit, tota scit. Cum itaque aliquid de se scit, quod nisi tota non potest, totam se scit . Scit autem se aliquid scientem, nec potest quidquam scire nisi tota. Scit se igitur totam. Deinde quid ejus ei tam notum est, quam se vivere? Non potest autem et mens esse, et non vivere, quando habet etiam amplius ut intelligat: nam et animae bestiarum vivunt, sed non intelligunt. Sicut ergo mens tota mens est, sic tota vivit. Novit autem vivere se. Totam se igitur novit. Postremo cum se nosse mens quaerit, mentem se esse jam novit: alioquin utrum se quaerat ignorat, et aliud pro alio forsitan quaerat . Fieri enim potest ut ipsa non sit mens, atque ita dum mentem nosse quaerit, non se ipsam quaerat. Quapropter, quoniam cum quaerit mens quid sit mens, novit quod se quaerat, profecto novit quod ipsa sit mens. Porro si hoc in se novit quod mens est, et tota mens est, totam se novit. Sed ecce non se noverit esse mentem, cum autem se quaerit, hoc tantummodo noverit quod se quaerat. Potest enim etiam sic aliud pro alio quaerere, si hoc nescit: ut autem non quaerat aliud pro alio, procul dubio novit quid quaerat. At si novit quid quaerat, et se ipsam quaerit, se ipsam utique novit. Quid ergo adhuc quaerit? Quod si ex parte se novit, ex parte autem adhuc quaerit, non se ipsam, sed partem suam quaerit. Cum enim ea ipsa dicitur, tota dicitur. Deinde quia novit nondum se a se inventam totam, novit quanta sit tota. Atque ita quaerit quod deest, quemadmodum solemus quaerere, ut veniat in mentem quod excidit, nec tamen penitus excedit; quia potest recognosci, cum venerit, hoc esse quod quaerebatur. 0977 Sed quomodo mens veniat in mentem, quasi possit mens in mente non esse? Huc accedit, quia si parte inventa, non se totam quaerit, tamen tota se quaerit. Tota ergo sibi praesto est, et quid adhuc quaeratur non est: hoc enim deest quod quaeritur, non illa quae quaerit. Cum itaque tota se quaerit, nihil ejus deest. Aut si non tota se quaerit, sed pars quae inventa est quaerit partem quae nondum inventa est; non se ergo mens quaerit, cujus se nulla pars quaerit. Pars enim quae inventa est, non se quaerit: pars autem quae nondum inventa est, nec ipsa se quaerit, quoniam ab ea quae jam inventa est parte quaeritur. Quocirca, quia nec tota se mens quaerit, nec pars ejus ulla se quaerit, se mens omnino non quaerit.