← Back to Distinction 17

Dist. 17, Art. 2, Q. 2

Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 17

Textus Latinus
p. 420

Quaestio II. Utrum corpus Adae constitutum fuerit ex natura pure elementari.

Secundo quaeritur, utrum corpus primi hominis constitutum fuerit de natura pure elementari, an simul cum natura elementari concurrerit natura caelestis ad eius constitutionem. Et quod simul cum elementari concurrat natura caelestis ad corporis humani constitutionem, videtur:

p. 421

Ad oppositum.

1. Primo per Augustinum super Genesim ad litteram1, qui dicit, quod anima mediante luce corpus vivificat et administrat; et eadem est sententia Avicennae. Si ergo corpus humanum sic conditum est, ut natum esset ab anima vivificari, videtur, quod ad eius constitutionem concurrerit natura lucis; et haec est natura caelestis: ergo etc.

2. Item, Philosophus in decimo sexto2 de Animalibus dicit, quod in nobis est «calor igneus et calor caelestis, qui quidem est calor vitalis»; sed non est accidens sine substantia: ergo de constitutione corporis nostri est caelestis natura.

3. Item, impossibile est, contraria venire ad conformitatem et unitatem nisi per unum, quod sit elevatum a contrarietate; quia si illud haberet contrarietatem, potius discordiam faceret, quam conciliaret. Si igitur natura corporalis a contrarietate elevata non est nisi natura caelestis, et in corpore vivificabili necesse est contraria elementa conciliari maxime: videtur ergo, quod de constitutione primi hominis fuerit natura caelestis3.

4. Item, omne corpus mediante anima rationali quodam modo habet beatificari4; sed non pertingunt ad beatitudinem mediante anima, nisi quae ei uniuntur; nulla tamen corpora ei coniunguntur, nisi quae sunt de constitutione sui corporis: videtur ergo, quod corpus primi hominis non tantum constitutum sit de natura elementari, verum etiam de natura caelesti.

5. Item, in quolibet organo cuiuslibet sensus dominatur aliquod corpus simplicium, sicut ostendit Augustinus super Genesim ad litteram5: cum igitur quinque sensus sint in homine, videtur, quod quinque corpora sint de eius constitutione: ergo non solum natura elementaris, sed etiam caelestis.

6. Item, ordo est in ascendendo et in descendendo, ita quod ab infimo pervenitur ad supremum per media, et e converso; sed substantia spiritualis maxima distantia distat a natura corporea et opaca, et minus a natura perspicua, et adhuc minus a natura luminosa, quae est natura caelestis: ergo videtur, quod nec corpus animae, nec anima corpori uniri debeat, nisi natura lucis interveniente; videtur ergo, quod corpus primi hominis non tantum de elementari, sed etiam de caelesti natura constitutum fuerit.

Contra:

Fundamenta.

1. Ex nullis corporibus constituitur corpus mixtum, nisi quae possunt ad invicem agere et pati; haec autem sola sunt habentia contrarietatem6: cum igitur natura quinti corporis talis sit, ut non habeat contrarietatem, non videtur, quod veniat ad constitutionem corporis mixti: ergo nec ad constitutionem corporis primi hominis.

2. Item, nihil venit ad constitutionem mixti nisi corpus, quod est miscibile; miscibile autem non est nisi corpus rarefactibile et condensabile, et omne tale est corruptibile, natura autem quinti corporis est incorruptibilis: ergo non potuit venire ad constitutionem humani corporis.

3. Item, corpus humanum secundum se totum est propagabile, ergo secundum se totum est generabile et corruptibile per naturam; sed natura quinti corporis non recipit generationem nec corruptionem: ergo non videtur esse de constitutione humani corporis.

p. 422

4. Item, si est de constitutione, quaero, unde sumta sit illa natura; aut enim de caelo aut de terra. Si de caelo: ergo videtur, quod ab ipso caelo fiat aliquarum partium sequestratio, cum generatur homo. Si de terra; sed contra: nihil est de terra, quod non sit natum ex ipsa produci; sed natura quinti corporis non est nata produci de natura alicuius elementi: ergo nec de caelo nec de terra potest sumi illa natura: ergo non est de constitutione corporis humani. Si tu dicas, quod de caelo venit per radiorum immissionem; hoc non videtur conveniens, quia impossibile est, per radium separari a sua origine; impossibile est etiam venire ad alterius constitutionem, cum lumen in medio sit per modum speciei et idoli, quae nullo modo veniunt ad constitutionem alicuius rei naturalis7.

5. Item, si natura quinti corporis venit ad constitutionem corporis hominis, quaero, quid fiat de ea8, quando corpus humanum resolvitur. Aut enim tendit sursum, aut in propria natura manet deorsum, aut corrumpitur in aliquod elementum. Sed in aliquod elementum non potest cedere, cum sit per naturam incorruptibilis. Deorsum in propria natura non convenit sibi manere, cum eius locus proprius sit esse in circumferentia, non in centro. Si sursum tendit: ergo videtur, spatium orbium caelestium aliquando ampliari aut condensari. Quod si tu dicas, quod cedit in constitutionem alterius corporis nec habet corrumpi; cum ergo ex corpore hominis generentur vermes et bufones et serpentes, poneretur natura quinti corporis esse de constitutione vermium, sicut de constitutione hominum.

6. Item, quaero, propter quid natura quinti corporis veniat ad constitutionem humani corporis; aut enim propter mixtionem, aut propter animationem, aut propter sensum, aut propter intellectum. Si propter mixtionem: ergo tunc esset de compositione cuiuslibet mixti. Si propter animationem: tunc esset de natura cuiuslibet plantae. Si propter sensificationem: tunc esset de natura cuiuslibet animalis bruti. Si ergo venit, hoc est propter intellectum solum. Sed contra: «intellectus nullius partis corporis est actus»9: ergo quantum est de se, non magis exigit corpus suum componi de natura caelesti quam de elementari.

Conclusio. Natura quinti corporis non venit ad constitutionem corporis humani secundum substantiam, sed secundum virtutem et per quandam conformitatem.

Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod circa hoc est triplex modus dicendi.

Opinio 1. Quidam enim dicere voluerunt, quod natura caelestis venit ad constitutionem humani corporis sicut elementum, pro eo quod natura caelestis non est alia quam natura ignis; et ideo, cum constet, ignem ad constitutionem humani corporis venire, dicunt, corpus humanum ex natura caelesti constitutum esse. Haec autem natura ignis, etsi, prout aliis permiscetur, habeat agere et pati, et corrumpi et generari, et hoc, prout est hic inferius; prout tamen est in sphaera sua, tranquillitatem et quietem habet nec suscipit corruptiones nec peregrinas impressiones. Et istam suam positionem per verba Augustini10 muniunt, qui negat, esse quintum corpus praeter quatuor corpora mundi. — Improbatur. Sed haec positio viae philosophicae et communi aperte repugnat, quae praeter quatuor corpora mundi ponit essentiam quintam, supra omnem contrarietatem elevatam; quod valde rationabile est, sicut ostensum fuit supra, distinctione decima quarta11. Nec huic repugnat sententia Augustini, si recte intelligatur, sicut ibidem expositum est.

Opinio 2. Ideo aliter alii voluerunt dicere, quod natura caelestis venit ad constitutionem humani corporis, non sicut unum ex elementis, sed sicut medium ligans omnia elementa et illa concilians. Et hoc dicunt exigere dignitatem complexionis humanae, per quam corpus humanum in sua prima constitutione habuit elementa in optima conciliatione; habuit etiam idoneitatem ad hoc, ut post meriti consummationem inhabitaret in caelesti mansione. Et sic debuit habere naturam caelestem et elementarem de sui constitutione: elementarem propter statum viae, in quo competebat ipsum habere corpus passibile12; caelestem propter statum patriae, in quo competebat ipsum habere corpus clarum et impassibile. Et quemadmodum in statu viae natura elementaris praedominatur, sic in statu patriae erit e contrario. — Non probatur. Hoc autem etsi videatur satis probabile esse dictum, tamen non modicam habet calumniam, qualiter illa natura quinti corporis, cum sit incorruptibilis et carens contrarietate, veniat ad commixtionem cum aliis elementis. Et iterum, si venit, unde venit et in quid cedit, difficile est assignare.

Opinio 3. cum distinctione. Et ideo est tertius modus dicendi, quod dupliciter est loqui de natura caelesti: aut per proprietatem, aut per conformitatem. — Per proprietatem, Membrum 1 distinctionis. natura caelestis dicitur esse natura quinti corporis, quae sic perfecta est sua forma, ut nullo modo habeat appetitum ad aliam formationem13, sic est activa, quod nullo modo potest pati et corrumpi; et sic est natura orbium et stellarum et firmamenti. Conclusio 1. Haec autem non venit ad constitutionem humani corporis secundum substantiam et veritatem, sed solum venit

p. 423

secundum virtutem, quia virtus stellarum et orbium influendo facit elementorum conciliationem, quae veniunt ad humani corporis constitutionem secundum rem, dum actio elementorum regimen et directionem habet ab influentia corporum superiorum. — Membrum 2. Alio modo dicitur natura caelestis per conformitatem; et sic large accipitur et vocatur natura caelestis illud quod est conforme caelo in subtilitate et in claritate et in quadam sublevatione14 a contrarietate. Et per hunc modum spiritus, qui sunt de constitutione corporis viventis, et maxime hominis, dicuntur esse naturae caelestis propter subtilitatem et luminositatem, et propter hoc etiam, quod sublevationem habent a natura contrarietatis, dum consurgunt ex commixtione elementorum in quadam harmonia et consonantia. Et quoniam in corpore humano, sicut infra15 patebit, maior est harmonia quam in aliquo corpore mixto; hinc est, quod eius calor et spiritus et complexio magis conformantur naturae caelesti. Conclusio 2. Et hoc modo, accipiendo naturam lucis sive naturam caelestem large sive per conformitatem, intrat constitutionem humani corporis secundum virtutem16 magis quam constitutionem alicuius alterius mixti propter humanae complexionis aequalitatem et dignitatem. Secundum veritatem tamen tam spiritus quam calor, qui dicuntur naturae caelestis, sunt de natura elementari, quia deperduntur et restaurantur, secundum quod expresse physici dicunt.

Iuxta hanc tertiam viam, quae probabilior est et planior, patet responsio ad quaestionem propositam17, patet etiam responsio ad obiecta. Nam rationes ostendentes, quod natura quinti corporis non venit ad constitutionem corporis humani, loquuntur de natura caelesti proprie dicta, quae est incorruptibilis et inalterabilis et immiscibilis; et ideo non est miscibilis ad constitutionem tertii. Rationes vero ad oppositum inductae procedunt vel de natura caelesti dicta per conformitatem, sicut duae primae auctoritates; vel, si concludunt de natura quinti corporis proprie dicta, non ostendunt, quod veniat ad constitutionem corporis humani secundum substantiam, sed secundum virtutem. Aliter non concludunt, sicut patet discurrendo per singulas.

Ad argumenta ad oppositum:

Solutio oppositorum.

Ad 1. Nam ad illud quod primo obiicitur de luce, dicendum, quod est lux quinti corporis, et lux ignea, et lux ex aequalitate complexionis generata sive consurgens; et haec est illa lux, quae facit corpus Triplex lux. esse susceptibile vitae; aliae vero minime.

Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de calore, dicendum, quod calor caelestis non dicitur, quia sit in natura caelesti, sicut in subiecto, quia illa neque calida est neque frigida; sed quia est a natura caelesti secundum debitam proportionem, ita quod facit ad conservationem; et talis calor in corpore humano est. Sed ex hoc non sequitur, quod natura caelestis veniat ad constitutionem corporis humani secundum substantiam, sed solum, quod influat.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de conciliatione, iam patet responsio, quia non conciliat veniens intra, sed sufficit ad conciliandum, influens extra.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de beatificatione, dicendum, quod corpora beatificari dicuntur in homine Notandum. non per veritatem, sed per conformitatem; et ideo ex hoc non sequitur, quod de constitutione humani corporis sit natura caelestis secundum veritatem, sed sufficit, quod sit secundum conformitatem, ita quod aliquid ei conforme respondeat in humano corpore.

Ad 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur de quinque sensibus, dicendum, quod sicut idem Augustinus dicit, unum elementum dominatur in duobus, sicut aqua sub ratione vaporis dominatur in olfactu, sub ratione humoris dominatur in gustu, sicut ipse dicit tertio super Genesim16-bis.

Ad 6. Ad illud quod obiicitur de ordine, dicendum, Notandum. quod, etsi natura caelestis sit excelsior inter corpora simplicia secundum se considerata, non tamen excellit in gradu in comparatione ad ulteriorem formam suscipiendam; sed is est ordo, quod forma elementaris unitur animae mediante forma mixtionis, et forma mixtionis disponit ad formam complexionis. Et quia haec17b, cum est in aequalitate et harmonia, conformatur naturae caelesti; ideo habilis est ad susceptionem nobilissimae influentiae, scilicet vitae. Et sic in unione animae ad corpus rectus servatur ordo. Magna etiam est dignitas humani corporis propter magnam harmoniam et proportionalem coniunctionem suarum partium, ob quam in statu viatoris conformis fit naturae caelesti; in statu autem comprehensoris perficietur a Deo, non tantum, ut sit conformis, sed etiam, ut supra naturam caelestem sit exaltata et sublimata, ut ei congruat potissime habitatio caeli empyrei17.

---

English Translation

Question II. Whether the body of Adam was constituted from a purely elemental nature.

Secondly, it is asked whether the body of the first man was constituted of a purely elemental nature, or whether together with the elemental nature there concurred a celestial nature in his constitution. And that together with the elemental there concurs a celestial nature in the constitution of the human body, it seems:

To the contrary [side affirming celestial nature].

1. First, by Augustine on Genesis according to the letter1, who says that the soul, by the mediation of light, vivifies and administers the body; and the same is the opinion of Avicenna. If therefore the human body has been so fashioned that it is born to be vivified by the soul, it seems that there concurred in its constitution the nature of light; and this is the celestial nature: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, the Philosopher in book sixteen2 On Animals says that in us there is "an igneous heat and a celestial heat, which indeed is the vital heat"; but an accident does not exist without a substance: therefore the celestial nature pertains to the constitution of our body.

3. Likewise, it is impossible that contraries come to conformity and unity except through some one thing which is elevated above contrariety; for if that thing had contrariety, it would rather cause discord than reconcile. If therefore the corporeal nature elevated from contrariety is none other than the celestial nature, and in a body able to be vivified it is necessary that contrary elements be reconciled to the highest degree: therefore it seems that the celestial nature was in the constitution of the first man3.

4. Likewise, every body, by mediation of the rational soul, is in some manner able to be beatified4; but they do not attain to beatitude through the soul, except those which are united to it; yet no bodies are joined to it, except those which are of the constitution of its body: therefore it seems that the body of the first man was constituted not only of an elemental nature, but also of a celestial nature.

5. Likewise, in every organ of every sense some one of the simple bodies dominates, as Augustine shows on Genesis according to the letter5: since therefore there are five senses in man, it seems that five bodies are of his constitution: therefore not only the elemental but also the celestial nature.

6. Likewise, there is order in ascending and in descending, so that from the lowest one arrives at the highest through means, and conversely; but spiritual substance is at a maximum distance from corporeal and opaque nature, and at less from perspicuous nature, and at still less from luminous nature, which is the celestial nature: therefore it seems that neither could the body be united to the soul, nor the soul to the body, except by the mediation of the nature of light; it seems therefore that the body of the first man was constituted not only of the elemental but also of the celestial nature.

On the contrary:

Foundations.

1. From no bodies is a mixed body constituted, except such as can act and be acted upon by one another; and these alone are such as have contrariety6: since therefore the nature of the fifth body is such that it does not have contrariety, it does not seem that it comes to the constitution of a mixed body: therefore neither to the constitution of the body of the first man.

2. Likewise, nothing comes to the constitution of a mixture except a body which is miscible; but the miscible is nothing but a body that is rarefiable and condensable, and every such body is corruptible, whereas the nature of the fifth body is incorruptible: therefore it could not come to the constitution of the human body.

3. Likewise, the human body according to its whole self is propagable, and therefore according to its whole self it is generable and corruptible by nature; but the nature of the fifth body does not admit generation nor corruption: therefore it does not seem to be of the constitution of the human body.

4. Likewise, if it is of the constitution, I ask, whence is that nature taken; for either from heaven or from earth. If from heaven: then it seems that from heaven itself there happens a setting-apart of certain parts when a man is generated. If from earth; but on the contrary: nothing is of the earth which is not born to be produced from it; but the nature of the fifth body is not born to be produced from the nature of any element: therefore that nature cannot be taken either from heaven or from earth: therefore it is not of the constitution of the human body. If you say that it comes from heaven by the emission of rays, this does not seem fitting, because it is impossible for a ray to be separated from its origin; it is also impossible for it to come to the constitution of another, since light in a medium is by way of species and image, which in no way come to the constitution of any natural thing7.

5. Likewise, if the nature of the fifth body comes to the constitution of the body of man, I ask, what becomes of it8 when the human body is dissolved. For either it tends upward, or remains in its proper nature downward, or is corrupted into some element. But into any element it cannot yield, since by nature it is incorruptible. To remain downward in its proper nature does not suit it, since its proper place is to be in the circumference, not in the center. If it tends upward: then it seems that the space of the celestial orbs is at times enlarged or condensed. But if you say that it yields to the constitution of another body and is not corrupted; since therefore from the body of man worms and toads and serpents are generated, the nature of the fifth body would be placed as belonging to the constitution of worms, as to the constitution of men.

6. Likewise, I ask on account of what the nature of the fifth body comes to the constitution of the human body; for either because of mixture, or because of animation, or because of sense, or because of intellect. If because of mixture: then it would be of the composition of any mixture whatsoever. If because of animation: then it would be of the nature of any plant whatsoever. If because of sensification: then it would be of the nature of any brute animal whatsoever. If therefore it comes, this is on account of the intellect alone. But on the contrary: "the intellect is the act of no part of the body"9: therefore so far as itself is concerned, it does not demand its body to be composed of a celestial nature any more than of an elemental.

Conclusion. The nature of the fifth body does not come to the constitution of the human body according to substance, but according to virtue and through a certain conformity.

I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing, it must be noted that concerning this there is a threefold manner of speaking.

Opinion 1. For some have wished to say that the celestial nature comes to the constitution of the human body as an element, on the ground that the celestial nature is no other than the nature of fire; and therefore, since it is established that fire comes to the constitution of the human body, they say that the human body is constituted from a celestial nature. This nature of fire, however, although, insofar as it is mingled with others, has acting and being acted upon, and being corrupted and generated — and this insofar as it is here below; yet insofar as it is in its own sphere, it has tranquillity and quiet, and admits neither corruptions nor foreign impressions. And they fortify this position of theirs by the words of Augustine10, who denies that there is a fifth body beyond the four bodies of the world. — It is disproven. But this position openly contradicts the philosophical and common way, which beyond the four bodies of the world posits a fifth essence, elevated above all contrariety; which is highly reasonable, as was shown above, in distinction fourteen11. Nor does the opinion of Augustine contradict this, if it be rightly understood, as has been there expounded.

Opinion 2. Therefore others have otherwise wished to say that the celestial nature comes to the constitution of the human body, not as one of the elements, but as a mean binding all the elements together and reconciling them. And they say that this is required by the dignity of the human complexion, through which the human body in its first constitution had the elements in optimal reconciliation; it also had a fitness for this, that after the consummation of merit it might dwell in the celestial mansion. And thus it had to have a celestial and an elemental nature in its constitution: elemental on account of the state of the way, in which it was fitting for it to have a passible body12; celestial on account of the state of the homeland, in which it was fitting for it to have a clear and impassible body. And just as in the state of the way the elemental nature predominates, so in the state of the homeland it will be the reverse. — It is not proved. But this, although it seems to be sufficiently probable a saying, has nonetheless no small difficulty, as to how that nature of the fifth body, since it is incorruptible and lacking contrariety, can come into commixture with the other elements. And again, if it comes, whence it comes and into what it yields, is difficult to assign.

Opinion 3, with distinction. And therefore there is a third manner of speaking, namely, that of the celestial nature one may speak in two ways: either according to property, or according to conformity. — According to property, First member of the distinction. the celestial nature is said to be the nature of the fifth body, which is so perfect in its form that it in no way has an appetite for another formation13, so active that it can in no way suffer or be corrupted; and such is the nature of the orbs and stars and firmament. Conclusion 1. And this does not come to the constitution of the human body according to substance and truth, but only comes according to virtue, since the virtue of the stars and orbs by its influence brings about the reconciliation of the elements, which come to the constitution of the human body according to the thing, while the action of the elements has its rule and direction from the influence of the higher bodies. — Second member. In another way the celestial nature is spoken of according to conformity; and thus it is taken broadly, and there is called a celestial nature whatever is conformed to heaven in subtlety and in clarity and in a certain elevation14 from contrariety. And in this manner the spirits, which are of the constitution of the living body, and most of all of man, are said to be of a celestial nature on account of their subtlety and luminosity, and on this account also, that they have an elevation from the nature of contrariety, while they arise from the commixture of the elements in a certain harmony and consonance. And since in the human body, as will appear below15, there is greater harmony than in any other mixed body; hence it is that its heat and spirits and complexion are more conformed to the celestial nature. Conclusion 2. And in this manner, taking the nature of light or the celestial nature broadly or according to conformity, it enters the constitution of the human body according to virtue16 more than the constitution of any other mixture, on account of the equality and dignity of the human complexion. According to truth, however, both the spirits and the heat which are said to be of a celestial nature, are of an elemental nature, because they are lost and restored, as the natural philosophers expressly say.

According to this third way, which is more probable and more straightforward, the response to the question proposed is plain17, and the response to the objections is also plain. For the reasons showing that the nature of the fifth body does not come to the constitution of the human body speak of the celestial nature properly so called, which is incorruptible and unalterable and immiscible; and therefore it is not miscible into the constitution of a third [thing]. But the reasons brought to the contrary side proceed either of the celestial nature said according to conformity, as do the first two authorities; or, if they conclude concerning the nature of the fifth body properly so called, they do not show that it comes to the constitution of the human body according to substance, but according to virtue. Otherwise they do not conclude, as is plain by going through them one by one.

Solution of the opposing arguments:

Solution of the opposing arguments.

To 1. For to that which is first objected concerning light, it must be said that there is the light of the fifth body, the igneous light, and the light generated from the equality of the complexion, or arising therefrom; and this is that light which makes the body Threefold light. able to receive life; the others, by no means.

To 2. To that which is objected concerning heat, it must be said that the heat is not called celestial because it is in a celestial nature as in a subject — for that nature is neither hot nor cold — but because it is from a celestial nature according to due proportion, so that it tends to preservation; and such heat is in the human body. But from this it does not follow that the celestial nature comes to the constitution of the human body according to substance, but only that it influences.

To 3. To that which is objected concerning the reconciliation [of contraries], the response is already plain, because what comes within does not reconcile, but it suffices for reconciling to influence from without.

To 4. To that which is objected concerning beatification, it must be said that bodies are said to be beatified in man Note. not by truth, but by conformity; and therefore from this it does not follow that the celestial nature is of the constitution of the human body according to truth, but it suffices that it be according to conformity, so that something conformed to it should answer in the human body.

To 5. To that which is objected concerning the five senses, it must be said that, as the same Augustine says, one element dominates in two, as water under the notion of vapor dominates in smell, and under the notion of moisture dominates in taste, as he himself says in the third book On Genesis16-bis.

To 6. To that which is objected concerning order, it must be said, Note. that, although the celestial nature is more excellent among the simple bodies considered in themselves, nevertheless it does not excel in degree in comparison to the further form to be received; but this is the order, that the elemental form is united to the soul by mediation of the form of mixture, and the form of mixture disposes to the form of complexion. And since this latter17b, when it is in equality and harmony, is conformed to the celestial nature, therefore it is fitted for the reception of the most noble influence, namely of life. And thus in the union of the soul to the body the right order is preserved. Great also is the dignity of the human body on account of the great harmony and proportional conjunction of its parts, by reason of which in the state of the wayfarer it is made conformed to the celestial nature; and in the state of the comprehensor it will be perfected by God, not only that it be conformed, but also that beyond the celestial nature it be exalted and sublimated, so that to it most especially befits the habitation of the empyrean heaven17.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Libr. VII. c. 13. n. 21; c. 19. n. 25. Cfr. supra pag. 319, nota 8. — Avicenna, de Anima sive Sexto Naturalium, p. IV. c. 6, ubi agit de complexione sive temperamento elementorum corporis, requisito ad recipiendam vitam, sic ait: Cum vero temperatissimum fuerit, ita ut contraria aequalia sint in eo et operentur aequaliter, coaptabitur perfectioni vitae rationalis, similis vitae caelestis; haec autem aptitudo est in spiritu humano. Spiritus vero humanus omnino est quoddam, quod generatur ex elementis et effigiat vultus ad similitudinem caelestium corporum; unde iudicant de eo dicentes, quod sit substantia lucida; et ideo spiritus visibilis vocatur radius et lux; unde et anima gratulatur, cum videt lucem, et molestatur in tenebris. Ipsa enim lux est comparata eius vehiculo et confortatur propter eam vehiculum eius, quod est spiritus, cui tenebra est contraria. — Vat. Et eadem est ratio Avicennae: Si enim corpus etc.
    Book VII, c. 13, n. 21; c. 19, n. 25. Cf. above p. 319, note 8. — Avicenna, On the Soul, or Sixth of the Naturals, pt. IV, c. 6, where he treats of the complexion or tempering of the elements of the body required for the reception of life, speaks thus: When it is most fully tempered, so that contraries are equal in it and act equally, it will be adapted to the perfection of rational life, like to celestial life; and this aptitude is in the human spirit. The human spirit moreover is entirely a certain thing which is generated from the elements and forms countenances after the likeness of celestial bodies; whence men judge of it, saying that it is a luminous substance; and therefore the visible spirit is called ray and light; whence also the soul is gladdened when it sees light, and is grieved in darkness. For light itself is compared to its vehicle, and on its account its vehicle, which is the spirit, is strengthened, to which darkness is contrary. — Vat.: And the same is the reason of Avicenna: For if the body etc.
  2. Haec sententia secundum antiquam divisionem operum de Animalibus reperitur in libro 12. et 16, secundum recentiorem in 11. de Partib. animal. c. 7. et 11. de Generat. animal. c. 3. In primo loco Aristoteles contra eos qui dicunt, «animam esse ignem aut aliquam eiusmodi vim», docet: «Melius fortasse dixeris, animam in quodam eiusmodi corpore constare; cuius rei causa est, quod ad exsequenda animae officia calor omnium maxime administrandi vim obtinet». In secundo loco ait: «Inest... videlicet quod calor vocatur, idque non ignis... sed spiritus... proportione respondens elemento stellarum. Quamobrem ignis nullum animal generat... at vero solis calor et animalium... principium habet vitale. Ceterum calorem in animalibus contentum nec ignem esse neque ab igne originem ducere, apertum ex his est». Virgilius etiam, Aeneid. 6. v. 730. ait: Igneus est ollis vigor et caelestis origo. — Vat. calor igneus, et calor animalis et calor caelestis. — De minori cfr. Aristot., VII. Metaph. text. 3. (VI. c. 1.), ubi de accidentibus dicit, quod per se existere non possunt: «Quoniam subiectum eis determinatum est; hoc autem substantia et singulare est». Et Porphyr., de Praedicab. penult. c. ait: Oportet enim esse subiectum, ut illi aliquid accidat.
    This sentence, according to the ancient division of the works On Animals, is found in book 12 and 16; according to the more recent, in book 11 of On the Parts of Animals, c. 7, and book 11 of On the Generation of Animals, c. 3. In the first place Aristotle, against those who say that "the soul is fire or some such force," teaches: "You will perhaps speak better if you say the soul to consist in some such body; the cause of which is that for carrying out the offices of the soul, heat of all things has the greatest power of administration." In the second place he says: "There is in [animals]... namely what is called heat, and this not fire... but a spirit... corresponding proportionately to the element of the stars. For which reason fire generates no animal... but in truth the heat of the sun and of animals... has a vital principle. As to the heat contained in animals, that it is not fire nor draws its origin from fire is plain from these things." Virgil too, Aeneid 6, v. 730, says: Fiery is their vigor and celestial their origin. — Vat.: igneous heat, and animal heat and celestial heat. — On the minor [premise], cf. Aristotle, VII Metaphysics, text 3 (VI, c. 1), where on accidents he says that they cannot exist per se: "Since their subject is determined for them; and this is substance and the singular." And Porphyry, de Praedicab., penultimate chapter, says: For there must be a subject, for something to be an accident in it.
  3. De principiis huius arg. vide supra d. 14. p. I. a. I. q. 2. et p. II. a. 2. q. 2.
    On the principles of this argument see above d. 14, p. I, a. 1, q. 2, and p. II, a. 2, q. 2.
  4. Cfr. Alanus ab Insulis, II. de Articul. cath. fidei, prop. 13, in qua dicitur, quod propter caritatem Dei «oportuit, quod omni rei aut alicui habenti cum omni re communem naturam etiam gloriam suam communicaret. Sed omni non debuit hoc facere. Gloria enim Dei inutilis esset in insensatis et brutis. Ergo aliquid oportuit esse, quod haberet cum omni re aliquid commune ratione necessitatis ad illam gloriam capessendam... Ergo de terra formatus est homo, rationalis ut Angelus, cum inanimatis vivens, et constat ex quatuor elementis, supremam gloriam suscepturus.»
    Cf. Alan of Lille, II On the Articles of the Catholic Faith, prop. 13, in which it is said that on account of God's charity "it was fitting that to every thing, or to some thing having a common nature with every thing, He should communicate also His glory. But He ought not to do this for every thing. For God's glory would be useless in senseless and brute things. Therefore something had to be which would have something in common with every thing by reason of necessity for grasping that glory... Therefore man was formed from the earth, rational as an Angel, living with the inanimate, and is constituted from the four elements, about to receive supreme glory."
  5. Libr. III. c. 4. n. 6. seq. Cfr. supra pag. 319, nota 8.
    Book III, c. 4, n. 6 and following. Cf. above p. 319, note 8.
  6. Hae propositiones sunt Aristot., I. de Generat. et corrupt. text. 87. seqq. (c. 10.). — De proprietatibus corporis quinti sive caeli, quae in hoc et in seqq. argg. proferuntur, vide Aristot., I. de Caelo et mundo, ex quo iam supra d. 8. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. plura allegata sunt.
    These propositions are from Aristotle, I On Generation and Corruption, text 87 and following (c. 10). — On the properties of the fifth body or heaven, which are brought forward in this and the following arguments, see Aristotle, I On the Heaven and the World, from which above at d. 8, p. I, a. 2, q. 2, many things have already been cited.
  7. Cfr. de hoc supra d. 13. a. 3. q. 1. seq. — Paulo superius plures codd. cum edd. 2, 3 et Vat. radium pro per radium.
    Cf. on this above d. 13, a. 3, q. 1 and following. — A little above, several codices with edd. 2, 3 and Vat. read the ray instead of through the ray.
  8. Cod. cc et ed. 1 eo.
    Codex cc and ed. 1: eo.
  9. Aristot., II. de Anima, text. 11. et 21. (c. 1. seq.). Cfr. III. text. 4. seqq. (c. 4.). — Paulo superius codd. V W sensum pro sensificationem.
    Aristotle, II On the Soul, text 11 and 21 (c. 1 and following). Cf. III, text 4 ff. (c. 4). — A little above, codices V W read sense instead of sensification.
  10. Libr. VII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 21. n. 27. Cfr. supra d. 14. p. I. a. 1. q. 2. arg. 2. ad opp.
    Book VII On Genesis according to the letter, c. 21, n. 27. Cf. above d. 14, p. I, a. 1, q. 2, argument 2 of the opposing side.
  11. Part. I. a. 1. q. 2. in corp.
    Part I, a. 1, q. 2, in the body.
  12. Nonnulli codd. animale.
    Some codices: animal.
  13. Vat. cum uno alteroque cod. formam.
    Vat. with one or another codex: formam [form].
  14. Multi codd. cum edd. 1, 2, 3 sibi non constantes, hic tantum sublimatione.
    Many codices with edd. 1, 2, 3, not consistent with themselves, here only sublimatione [sublimation].
  15. Quaest. seq.
    Following question.
  16. Ita codd. D O Y cc et ed. 1; alii secundum veritatem, sed contra contextum. Vat. omittit secundum virtutem. Dein non pauci codd. post magis quam perperam subnectunt secundum.
    Thus codices D O Y cc and ed. 1; others read according to truth, but against the context. Vat. omits according to virtue. Then not a few codices after more than wrongly add according to.
  17. Cap. 5. n. 7. Vide supra pag. 319, nota 8.
    Chapter 5, n. 7. See above p. 319, note 8.
  18. Vat., interpunctione variata, Et quia cum haec in aequalitate et harmonia conformatur.
    Vat., with varied punctuation: And since this, when [it is] in equality and harmony, is conformed.
  19. Fide codd. et ed. 1 supplevimus verba responsio ad quaestionem propositam, patet etiam. — Vat. mediante anima rationali pro in homine. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    On the faith of the codices and ed. 1 we have supplied the words responsio ad quaestionem propositam, patet etiam ("response to the question proposed, [the response] is also plain"). — Vat.: by the mediation of the rational soul for in man. — See the scholion to the preceding question. ---
← Dist. 17, Art. 2, Q. 1Dist. 17, Art. 2, Q. 3→