On the nature of good against the Manichaeans

The essay “On the Nature of Good against the Manichaeans” (48 chapters) was written by Bl. Augustine Aurelius in 405 in Hippo. The beginning of the treatise sets out the Orthodox understanding of good and evil. Next blzh. Augustine rejects any dualism contained in the Manichaean texts (“Treasures of Life,” “Main” Epistle). We are talking, first of all, about the non-substantiality of evil, the source of which lies in the free will of created beings. Evil is not an independent existence. This is a deprivation of the main benefits of nature and inconsistency with purpose. The Bishop of Hippo explains the Christian teaching about God as the Absolute Good, which is not subject to corruption and defilement. It is impossible to harm him. Divine Good provides for created good. Blzh. Augustine writes that created being is fundamentally different from the Divine, since it was created from nothing. It does not exist forever, is changeable, can be subject to decay and destruction. The complete destruction of good in nature means the complete destruction of nature itself. *The title of the work in Latin is De natura boni contra manichaeos. Contents Preface Composition of the treatise 1. God is the highest and unchangeable Good, from Whom all other goods, spiritual and material, are 2. How can the Manichaeans be corrected 3. Measure, form and order are the main goods in things created by God 4. Evil is the corruption of measure, form and order 5. The highest corrupted nature is better than the lower uncorrupted one 7. The corruption of rational immaterial nature is the result of either free arbitrariness, or punishment 8. The beauty of the universe despite the corruption and destruction of lower natures 9. Punishment is established for the sinning nature, so that it is correctly ordered 10. Natures are subject to corruption because they are created from nothing 11. It is impossible to harm God, and harm to nature can only be done with His permission 12. Every good is from God 13. Individual goods, great and small, are from God 14. Lesser goods, when compared with greater ones, are called by opposite names 15. There is some beauty in the body of a monkey 16. Deprivation is ordered by God 17. Nature, insofar as it exists, is good 18. Matter, which some called formless matter, is also not evil 19. God has absolute existence 20. Suffering is possible only in good natures 21. Measure is the cause of size 22. In a sense, the concept of measure is applicable to God 23. In what sense is it possible to talk about evil measure, form and order 24. Evidence from Scripture about the immutability of God 25. The words of the Gospel are misunderstood by some 26. Created being was created from nothing 27. It is necessary to distinguish between “from God” and “from God” 28. Sins are not from God, but from the will of the sinner 29. God is not defiled by our sins 30. Even the slightest and earthly good is from God 31. God punishes and forgives 32. Even the power to harm is given by God 33. Angels are evil not from God, but from sin 34. Sin is not the desire for an evil nature, but the abandonment of the best 36. Evil is not in created nature, but in the misuse of this nature 37. God uses the evil of those who sin for good 38. Eternal fire that torments sinners is not evil 39. Eternal fire is called because it has no end; his eternity is not like the Divine 40. God cannot be harmed; created nature can be harmed only by God's righteous decree 41. How great good the Manichaeans attribute to the nature of evil and how great evil the nature of good 42. The blasphemy of the Manichaeans regarding the nature of God 43. The Manichaeans attribute great evil to the nature of God even before mixing with evil 44. The wicked inventions of the Manichaeans about God 45. Impiety is attributed to themselves Manichaeans 46. Crazy teaching of the “Basic” message 47. Manichaeans induce to commit the most heinous crimes 48. Prayer for the admonition of the Manichaeans List of abbreviations Anti-Manichaean polemics are given a prominent place in the literary work of St. Augustine. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly, Manichaeism played an important role in the spiritual life of young Augustine - for almost 10 years he was fascinated by this religious teaching. Secondly, already as a bishop, Augustine fought against the Manichaeans as a dangerous sect that practically absorbed and digested various Gnostic systems. As a nineteen-year-old boy, Augustine became acquainted with the teachings of Mani, and it attracted him with its claim to universalism and supposedly philosophical content. The central position of Manichaean metaphysics, against which the African bishop would later be primarily opposed, suited young Augustine spiritually and intellectually. The idea of ​​two principles, good and evil, seemed very true to him. He himself admits in “Confession”: “And since even my pathetic piety forced me to believe that not a single evil creature could be created by a good God, I decided that there were two quantities, one opposite to the other, both of them infinite, only the evil one was narrower, and the good one wider” 1. According to Mani 2, two opposite principles, good and evil, coexist from eternity. One of them is good, and the other is evil “by nature,” in its very essence. At the same time, however, in Manichaeism we notice “a weakening of consistent dualism, recognition of the superiority of the good principle over the evil” 3, which was expressed in the refusal to call the evil principle “god.” The good god (“the highest good” of the Manichaeans) rules in the “Kingdom of Light.” Outside the good God himself (“Father”) and at the same time being his “members” there are five so-called “mansions”, or tents (tabernacles): reason, knowledge, thought, caution, determination. St. Augustine also calls them beata saecula - blessed worlds, or aeons. The “Father” inhabited his own abodes, being both identical with them and different. The Kingdom of Darkness is the antipode of the Kingdom of Light. It also has five aeons: deadening breath, sultry wind, darkness, mist and consuming fire. At first, the two Kingdoms do not seem to notice each other and each exist in its own “region,” but then the forces of darkness that were previously at war with each other see the light. From now on, the joint efforts of the dark forces are aimed at mastering the light. Evil is embodied in Satan (Iblis), who leads the battle against Good. The Father of Light, having learned about the attack, decides to resist evil himself, but as if indirectly: he emanates into the “mother” (or, according to the Manichean usage, “calls” her), and she, in turn, into the “first man”. The first person, before the upcoming battle, puts on armor, also his own emanations: clean air, invigorating wind, clear light, life-giving waters and warming fire. However, as a result of the battle, the emanations of the first man were devoured by Satan and the sons of darkness. Thus, at first the forces of evil triumph over good and a mixture of good and evil occurs - one of the key concepts of Manichaeism. However, the merciful Father emanates the next galaxy of light eons that come to the aid of the stricken person. From this moment the creation of the world begins, the purpose of which is the liberation of light. The Mother of Life (an emanation of the Father) creates twelve (or ten) heavens and eight earths. The spirit of life (the emanation of the second galaxy) forces the sons of darkness to give up part of the devoured light, from which the sun and moon (“light ships”) are created. As a result of mixing the elements of light and darkness, the elements of the world are formed. So, for example, the warming fire is mixed with the consuming fire and the fire of our world is obtained. In the end, from the intercourse of two demons come Adam and Eve, in whose body, as in a prison, numerous particles of light are imprisoned. Since “the body is the prison of the soul,” a person must in every possible way humble it and “free” the light. In general, everything in the world exists in the form of a mixture of good and evil substances. The idea of ​​this was given to man by Jesus the Savior, the personification of cosmic light, sent by the Father to heal Adam and awaken him from sleep. Salvation is possible as an ascent (that is, the release of particles of light) to the “highest sky” through heavenly “ladders” and “ships”. Proconsular Africa was an outpost of Manichaeism in the West. During the time of St. Augustine, Faustus of Milevsky, famous among the Manichaeans, preached here. In 392 and 404, Augustine organized disputes against the Manichaeans Fortunatus and Felix, after which the position of the Manichaeans was significantly weakened. However, despite this, we find references to Manichaean proselytism throughout the fifth century. Mani's philosophy is certainly religious and philosophical nonsense. Augustine came to understand this through reading the books of the Neoplatonists. Plotinus and Porphyry (certain treatises were translated by Marius Victorinus into Latin, which allowed Augustine to become familiar with them) convinced Augustine of the impossibility of the existence of two “principles,” and also that the One Beginning Itself is Good, and evil is only a “decrease.” However, it was Christianity, and not Neoplatonism, that radically changed his worldview. It was Christianity that turned out to be for Augustine “practical philosophy” leading to the One Living God. Augustine the Christian puts at the forefront the idea of ​​the Good God, who, by His goodness, creates “out of non-existents” a being different from Himself. Created being, while fundamentally different from Divine Being, is, however, also good. The goodness of created nature is its integral characteristic: diminishing in goodness, nature is diminished in its existence. In a sense, for Augustine the concepts of good and being are synonymous. Evil, therefore, is not the evil principle or evil nature opposite to the Good God, but the deterioration, corruption of the good nature. Blessed Augustine sees the cause of evil in the will of the “rational spirit,” that is, in the will of an angel and a person. As if in a fit of madness, the created will rushes towards something that is not God, preferring the worst to the best, choosing a lesser good. Contrasting the Christian vision of the problems of good and evil with the Manichaean one, Blessed Augustine shows, firstly, the inconsistency of Manichaean theogony and cosmogony and, secondly, consistently examining the logic of Mani, he shows what terrible crimes this false teaching of his followers should lead to. The treatise “On the Nature of Good”, small in volume and related to the early 4 works of St. Augustine, is extremely interesting and important. Here, in a very laconic form, the Orthodox understanding of the problems of good and evil is first outlined, and then the absurdity of Manichaean ontology is revealed. This work can well be regarded as the credo of St. Augustine. The treatise is also interesting because it contains significant quotations from the Manichaean “Treasure” (“Treasure of Life”) 5 and the so-called “Main” message. Augustine contrasts Manichaeism with a Christian view of the problem: 1) The doctrine of God as the Absolute Good: a) God is the Supreme Good: I) God is unchangeable Good; II) The Divine Good cannot be subject to corruption; III) The Divine Good is not subject to desecration; IV) The Divine Good cannot be harmed; b) God the Good is the cause of every other good; c) Divine Good provides for created good. 2) The doctrine of “other” being as a relative good: a) created being is fundamentally different from the Divine, since it is created from nothing: I) created being does not exist forever; II) created being is changeable; III) created being can be subject to decay; IV) created being can be destroyed; b) the existence of a creature is directly related to the good: I) to the extent that nature exists, it is good; II) the complete destruction of good in nature means the complete destruction of nature itself; c) measure, form and order are the main goods in created nature. 3) The doctrine of evil as non-existence: a) evil is not an independent existence; b) evil can only exist in good created natures; c) evil is the deterioration of nature: I) evil is a decrease in the existence of nature; II) evil is the deprivation of the main benefits of nature; III) evil is non-conformity to purpose. 4) The doctrine of the “actualization” of evil in the created will: a) evil of the will is not a striving towards an evil nature; b) evil of will is “abandonment of the best.” In his treatise, Blessed Augustine dwells on criticism of the following provisions of Mani: 1) The idea of “evil-in-itself” or absolute evil: a) the idea of ​​the uniqueness of evil; b) the idea of ​​the activity of evil. 2) The Manicheans’ idea of the Supreme Good: a) the subjection of the highest good of the Manichaeans to decay; b) the subjection of the highest good of the Manichaeans to vices; c) subjection of the highest good of the Manichaeans to suffering. 3) The idea of ​​the “consistency” of the absolute good of the Manichaeans and the good of the created world. 1. God is the highest and unchangeable Good, from Whom all other goods, spiritual and material, are 6 The Supreme Good 7, superior to all other goods 8, is God. Consequently, this Good exists unchangeably and, therefore, is truly eternal and immortal 9. Other goods derive their existence only from Him 10 , but not from His essence 11 . From His essence there is only He Himself, and everything created is from Him, and not from His essence. And if only He exists immutably, then everything created by Him, due to the fact that it was created from nothing, is changeable 12. His omnipotence is so great that He was able to create various benefits from nothing, that is, from complete nothingness 13: great and small, heavenly and earthly, spiritual and physical 14. But since He is truly just, He did not equate what was born from Himself and what was created from nothing. So, the cause of any good, great and small - at all levels of existence - can only be God 15. Every nature, to the extent that it is nature, is also good, 16 and that is why the reason for the existence of any nature can only be the Highest and True God, and everything that is not God is not the Highest Good, but only similar to the Highest Good. On the other hand, any low good, although far removed from the Supreme Good, can only come from Himself. So, every spirit that is subject to the law of change, and all flesh, is from God. This is the origin of all created nature, 17 which is either spirit or flesh. The unchangeable Spirit is God, the changeable spirit is created nature (and the changeable spirit is better than the flesh). Flesh is not spirit, and although sometimes the wind is called spirit because it is invisible to us, we feel its power well, and therefore it can be called spirit only in a different sense. 2. How can the Manichaeans correct themselves? However, some do not understand that all nature (that is, all spirit and all flesh) is good by nature; They are driven by the unrighteousness of the spirit and the mortality of the body, and therefore they try to invent another nature, not created by God, the nature of the evil spirit and the mortal body. We believe that what has been said can be brought to their attention. After all, they also recognize that any good can exist only from the Most High and True God. This idea is, of course, correct and will be sufficient for their correction if they listen to what is said. 3. Measure, form and order are the main goods in things created by God We, Catholic Christians, honor God, from Whom come all blessings, great and small. From Him comes every measure, great and small; from Him comes every form, great and small; from Him comes all order, great and small 18 . Everything that is moderate, beautiful, ordered, 19 the more it is such, the more it is good. The less moderate, beautiful and orderly something is, the less good it turns out to be. Thus, these three goods under consideration, measure, form and order - I will keep silent about other countless goods that can be reduced to these three - are, as it were, generic goods in things created by God, whether spiritual or physical. And God is higher than any measure, type and order, higher not spatially, but by ineffable and exceptional power. And from Him come any measure, form and order. Where these three goods appear to a large extent, there are excellent natures, where to a small extent there are insignificant natures, and where they do not exist at all, there is no nature at all. Therefore, all nature is good. 4. Evil is corruption of measure, form and order Therefore, if we want to explore where evil comes from, we must first consider what it is. And evil is nothing more than the depravity of 21 natural measures or species or order. Thus, the evil nature is called corrupt, and the uncorrupted nature is called good. But even corrupted nature itself, to the extent that it remains nature, is also good, and to the extent that it remains corrupted, it is evil. 5. The highest corrupted nature is better than the lower uncorrupted one. Some damaged nature, built in natural measure and form at a higher level of being, may, however, be better than nature, although undamaged, but in natural measure and form standing at a lower level of being. As in the human concept of the quality of visible things, damaged gold is in any case better than undamaged silver, and damaged silver is better than undamaged lead 22. So in stronger and more spiritual natures, a rational spirit, but damaged by an evil will, is better than an intact spirit, but unreasonable. And any spirit, even in a damaged state, is better than any intact flesh. So, a nature that has a body with itself and imparts life to this body is better than a nature that only receives life. After all, no matter how corrupted the spirit of life 23 is, it can give life to the body, and therefore it is still better than an intact body. 6. Nature, which cannot be corrupted, is the Supreme Good; nature, which can be damaged, is some good If corruption destroys all measure, form and order in the things subject to it, then there will be no nature left. Therefore, nature, which cannot be corrupted, is the Supreme Good 24. This nature is God. And any nature that is subject to corruption is a relative good, and corruption harms it only by taking away or reducing the good in it. 7. The corruption of rational immaterial nature is the result of either free will or punishment For the most excellent creatures, that is, for intelligent spirits 25, God established the following order: if they themselves do not want it (that is, if they remain obedient to the Lord their God and cleave to His incorruptible beauty), they cannot be damaged. If they do not want to maintain obedience, rotting in sins of their own free will, then they will not of their own free will begin to rot in punishment 26 . After all, God is so good that it will not be good for those who leave Him. And among the things created by God, rational nature is such a great good that there is no other good in which it would be blessed except God. Thus, those who sin are ordered in punishment 27 . This ordering, since it does not correspond to their nature, turns out to be torture; but since it corresponds to sin, it is fair. 8. The beauty of the universe despite the corruption and destruction of lower natures Everything else, created from nothing and located below the rational spirit, can be neither blessed nor unhappy 28. Due to the fact that, relative to their measure and type, not so great and even the smallest goods are good according to the will of the Highest Good God, they are ordered in such a way that the less powerful are subordinate to the stronger, the weak are powerful, the weak are powerful, and thus the earthly is to the heavenly, as subordinate to the superior 29 . Things that leave and take their place also have a kind of temporary beauty; after all, those who die or cease to exist must not defile and violate the 30 measure, type and order of the universal creation. This can be compared to how a well-composed speech will certainly be beautiful, even though some syllables or all the sounds in it replace each other, as if being born and dying 31. 9. Punishment is established for the sinning nature, that it may be rightly ordered. As for the quality and degree of punishment for sins, this is a matter of Divine, not human justice. Great, of course, is the goodness of God when those who turn to God avoid this punishment; and when sinners are rewarded according to their deserts, there is no injustice with God 32 , for nature is better ordered if, with justice, it suffers in torment, and does not rejoice with impunity in sin 33 . However, even in this state, nature, at least to a minimal extent possessing measure, form and order, remains a certain good; if they are completely taken away and completely destroyed, this nature will not be good, because it will not remain nature at all. 10. Natures are corrupted because they were created from nothing. Thus, all natures subject to corruption would not be natures at all if they were not created by God, and would not be corruptible if they were born by Him, since then they would be the same as He Himself. Therefore, they exist in every measure, form and order. After all, it was God who created them. However, these natures are changeable, since they were created from nothing. It is sacrilegious to have the audacity to identify God and nothingness if we believe that what is born of God is the same as what He created out of nothing. 11. It is impossible to harm God, but harm to nature can only be done with His permission Thus, the nature of God cannot be harmed at all, 34 and the nature that is in the power of God cannot be harmed unjustly, since even when some cause harm unjustly by sinning, an unrighteous will is imputed to them. And the power that allows them to cause harm is from God. And although the sinner does not know this, God knows how it is necessary for those whom he allowed to harm nature to suffer. 12. Every good thing comes from God Everything that has been said is so obvious, so true that if those who introduce another nature, not created by God, want to pay attention to it, they will stop blaspheming and believing that there is great good in the highest evil, and great evil in God. As I said above, if they pay attention to the fact that every good unconditionally comes from God - not that small blessings come from one god, and great ones from another, but both of them come from the Supreme Good, which is God (and the truth forces even those who do not want to admit this), it will be enough for them to correct themselves. 13. Individual benefits, great and small, are from God Therefore, let us recall all kinds of blessings, about which it is worthy to say that God is their Creator. If these goods are abolished, will there be any nature left? All life, strength, preservation, memory, intelligence, tranquility, quality, number, feeling, light, pleasantness, proportionality, beauty, peace, be they small or great, or any other similar benefits, and especially those that can be found in everything, spiritual or physical, that is, measure, form and order, are from the Lord God 35 . If anyone wants to use these benefits improperly, he will be subject to Divine punishment, and where there are no such benefits at all, there will be no nature. 14. Smaller goods, when compared with larger ones, are called by opposite names. Among all these goods, the lesser goods in comparison with the greater are called by opposite names. So, in comparison with the beauty of a person, the beauty of a monkey is called ugliness. This misleads the foolish, who believe that human appearance is good and monkeys are evil. They do not notice in the monkey’s body the inherent measure, the symmetry of the members, the proportionality of the parts, the preservation of integrity and much more, the description of which would take a lot of time. 15. There is some beauty in the body of a monkey In order that what we have said may become clear and satisfy the slow-witted, or that even those who are stubborn and opposed to the most obvious truth may be persuaded to confess the truth, let us ask them: can decay harm the body of a monkey? And if it can undergo corruption, that is, become more vile, what is diminished in it, if not the goodness of beauty? This means that something remains as long as the nature of the flesh remains. It follows that when goodness perishes, nature also perishes. Therefore, nature is good. Thus, we call slow that which is the opposite of fast, since we cannot call motionless slow. A high voice is contrasted with a low voice, or a good one with a bad one, but if there is no voice at all, there will be silence, because it is the absence of sound and is usually contrasted with it. Light and dark are also called opposites, but dark also has some light, without which there is only complete darkness, that is, the absence of light, just as silence is the absence of sound. 16. Deprivation is ordered by God However, even every such deprivation is ordered in the universality of nature, 36 so that those who consider wisely see their orderly succession. Thus, God, without illuminating certain places and periods, created darkness equal in dignity to day. And we, using the voice in an appropriate way, use silence in speech, and even more so, He - the perfect Creator of all things - appropriately arranged the absence of certain things. Therefore, in the hymn of the three youths, light and darkness praise God, that is, they give rise to the praise of God in the hearts of prudent people 37. 17. Nature, as far as it exists, is good Consequently, any nature, to the extent that it is nature, is not evil, and evil for nature is nothing more than a reduction of good. And if the good of nature were reduced to the point of destruction, then there would be no nature left, as well as no good. This applies to every conceivable nature, and not only to that which the Manichaeans introduce and endow with such great benefits that their extreme blindness is surprising. 18. Matter, which some called formless substance, is also not evil. And even that matter, which the ancients called substance 38, should not be called evil. I do not mean the substance which the Manichaeans, in their maddest fuss, call the creator of bodies. That is why it was rightly pointed out to the Manichaean that he was introducing another god - after all, no one can give shape and create bodies except God. And they are created with measure, form and order, which (I believe even they admit this) are good and are only from God. But by substance I mean some completely formless 39 and qualityless matter, from which, as the ancients said, the qualities we perceive are formed. For this reason, the forest is called Elh in Greek. After all, the forest itself is not suitable for anything, but is a material from which those who work with it can make some things. So, this matter, not perceived in any form 40, but difficult to imagine through any deprivation of the image, should also not be called evil. After all, it also has the ability to take forms, because if it could not take the form given by the Creator 41, it could not be called matter. In turn, if a form is something good, then in which it appears to the greatest extent is called beautiful 42. Just as natures are called beautiful by their appearance, 43 then, without a doubt, even the ability to take a form is something good: after all, if wisdom is a good, then the very possibility of being wise is also a good. And since every good is from God, no one should doubt that even matter, if such exists, receives its existence only from God. 19. God has absolute existence And behold, the word of our God is magnificent and divine, addressed to His servant: “I am who I am” and “say to the children of Israel: He who is has sent me” (Exodus 3:14). And indeed He is the Existing One, since He is unchangeable 44; and every change makes a thing different from what it was. This means that He truly exists who does not change, and every other being created by Him received its existence from Him, each in its own measure. For Him who exists in the highest way, the only opposite is that which does not exist at all. That is why everything that is good and everything that is natural comes from Him, because everything that exists by nature is good. So, all nature is good, and all good is from God. Therefore, all nature is from God. 20. Suffering is possible only in good natures Physical or mental suffering, considered by some to be a special evil, 45 also can only exist in good natures. After all, in itself, resistance to pain is in some way a desire to remain in the same state, since this state was good. If suffering leads to the better, it is useful, 46 and if it leads to the worse, it is not useful. Consequently, the soul is caused by a will that resists a higher power, and the body is caused by a feeling that resists a stronger body. However, evil without suffering is worse, that is, it is worse to rejoice at injustice than to suffer in decay. But even such joy can only come from acquiring, albeit inferior, goods, and injustice lies in neglecting the best. Likewise, a painful wound is better for the body than painless decay, called corruption itself, which the Lord’s dead body did not see, that is, did not endure. As was foretold in prophecy: “You will not allow Your holy one to see corruption” (Ps. 15:10). Will anyone deny that He was wounded by nailing and piercing with a spear? But even putrefaction, rightly called by all the corruption of the flesh, if there is something further to rot, increases as the good decreases. And if something completely rots, there will be no good and no nature left, since even decay will have nothing to decay. Consequently, the rotting itself will not remain, since it will have absolutely nowhere to stay. 21. Measure is the reason for size Thus, everyone speaks of small and insignificant things as moderate, because even in such things there remains a certain measure, without which not only a small size, but absolutely nothing would exist. And that which is called excessive due to its extraordinary magnitude is condemned for its extraordinary magnitude itself. But even what is extremely large, in order to be contained within the framework of some measure, is under God, “who has arranged everything by measure, number and weight” (see Wis. 11:21). 22. In a sense, the concept of measure applies to God It cannot be said of God that He has a measure, otherwise it would be necessary to assume that He also has an end. But the One who gives measure to all things cannot be called immoderate, so that everything can exist in one degree or another. But again, God cannot be called proportionate, as if He received a measure from someone. If we call Him the Supreme Measure, as we once did 47, then we must understand by the Supreme Measure the Supreme Good. After all, every measure, so far as there is a measure, is good, which is why everything proportionate, moderate and consistent is worthy of praise. And in another sense, we use the concept of measure to denote the end, and we say “without measure” when we mean “without end.” Such things are sometimes glorified, as when it is said, “And of His kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:33). After all, you can say this: “there will be no measure,” meaning by measure the end. And the one who does not rule to one degree or another does not rule at all. 23. In what sense is it possible to talk about evil in measure, form and order? Consequently, measure, form and order are called evil either because they are present to a lesser extent than they should, or because they do not correspond to those things that they should correspond to, and therefore are called evil because they are unusual for these things and incongruous with them. As if it were said of someone that he did not act properly because he did less than he should have done, or did something that in this case he should not have done, or more than he should have done, or inappropriately. So what is done poorly is rightly condemned only because it was not done to the proper extent. In the same way, an evil species can be spoken of either in comparison with a more beautiful or beautiful one, because in one nature the species is smaller, and in the other it is larger (not in size, but in appropriateness and beauty 48); or because it is not in harmony with the nature in which it is present, so that it looks alien to it and out of place. This is similar to the sight of a naked man in the central square, which would not embarrass anyone in the bathhouse. Likewise, order is called evil when it itself is present to a lesser extent. Therefore, rather than order, it is disorder that is bad when something is ordered to a lesser extent than it should be, or is not ordered as it should be. Where there is a certain measure, a certain form, and a certain order, there is also a certain goodness and a certain nature; and where there is no measure, no form, no order, there is no good and no nature. 24. Evidence from Scripture of the Immutability of God The rule of our faith, or certain truths discovered by reason, must be supported by the testimony of the Divine Scriptures, so that those who, through lack of thought, cannot understand these things, may believe the Divine authority 49 . Then they will be granted understanding. And those who are reasonable, but poorly taught the Church Scriptures, should not assume that we prefer to judge all this according to our own understanding, without studying those books. Thus, it is written in the psalms that God is unchangeable: “You change them, and they will change; but You are the same, and Your years will not end” (Ps 102:27–28). And in the book of Wisdom it is said about wisdom: “abiding in itself, it renews everything” (Wis 7:27). Why does the Apostle Paul also say: “to the incorruptible, invisible, one... God” (see 1 Timothy 1:17). And the Apostle James said: “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variableness or shadow of turning” (James 1:17). Also, the fact that what is born by Him is the same as He is briefly said by the Son Himself: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). But since the Son was not created, but by Him all things were created, it is written: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... All things were created through Him, and without Him nothing was created, 50 that is, there is nothing that was created without Him. 25. The words of the Gospel are misunderstood by some And there is no need to listen to the nonsense of people who believe that the word “nothing” should be understood as something 51 . Moreover, based on the fact that the word “nothing” is at the end of the sentence, they want to force everyone to such idle talk. According to them, from this sentence it follows that “nothing” was created, and once created, it is something 52. They have lost their minds because of their passion for controversy and do not understand that there is no difference between the sayings “without Him nothing was created” and “without Him nothing was created.” And even if we assume this order: “without Him nothing was created,” they still 53 can say that “nothing” is something, since it was created. Well, is there really a difference in the expressions: “without him the house was created” or “without him the house was created,” if it is meant that something was created without this or that person, and this something is a house? So here it is said: “without Him nothing was created,” because “nothing,” of course, is not something; and unless a false meaning is put into the phrase, there is no difference between the sentences “without Him nothing was created” or “without Him nothing was created” or “nothing was created.” And who wants to argue with people who, when I say “no difference,” will object: “that means there is a difference, since “no” is “some””? Those with common sense see quite clearly that when I said “there is no difference,” I meant the same thing as “no difference.” However, these, if the question “what did you do?” someone answers “nothing,” they will have to find fault: “if nothing, then you did something, since nothing itself is something.” And they know that the Lord Himself put this word at the end of the sentence: “and spoke nothing in secret” (John 18:20). Therefore, let them read and be silent. 26. Created existence is created from nothing God created everything except the One born from Himself with His Word, not from pre-existing material 54, but from something completely non-existent, that is, out of nothing, according to the words of the Apostle: “calling things that do not exist as if they exist” (see Rom 4:17). And it is written even more clearly in the book of Maccabees: “I beseech you, my child, look at heaven and earth, and seeing everything that is in them, know that God created everything out of nothing” (2 Mac 7:28). And what is written in the psalm: “He spoke, and they became” (Ps 149:5). It is obvious that He did not give birth to these things from Himself, but created them by word and command. And that which is not from Itself is, of course, from nothing. For there was nothing that He could create from. Why does the Apostle say quite clearly: “For all things are from Him, by Him, and to Him” (Rom. 11:36) 55. 27. It is necessary to distinguish between “from God” and “from God” However, “from Him” does not mean the same thing as “from Him” 56 . That which is from Him can be said “from Him,” however, not everything that is “from Him” can be said “from Him” in the proper sense. Heaven and earth are from Him, since He created them. But not from Him, since not from His substance. Just as a man, if he gives birth to a son and builds a house, then both the son and the house are from him, but the son is from him, and the house is from earth and wood. And this is so because man, being a man, cannot build anything out of nothing, but God, from whom is all things, in whom are all things, in whom are all things, has no need for any matter not created by Him to help His own omnipotence. 28. Sins are not from God, but from the will of the sinner When we hear “all things are from Him, by Him and to Him,” then by “all” we must understand all natures that exist naturally 57 . After all, sins that harm nature and do not preserve it do not come from Him. These sins are from the will of those who sin 58. This is confirmed in various ways by Holy Scripture, especially in the place where the Apostle says: “Do you really think, O man, that you will escape the judgment of God by condemning those who do such things and doing the same yourself? Or do you neglect the riches of God’s goodness, meekness and long-suffering, not realizing that God’s goodness leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of righteous judgment from God, who will reward everyone according to his deeds” (Rom. 2:3-6). 29. God is not defiled by our sins And although the whole totality of things created by God abides in Him, He is not desecrated by sinners, about whom it is said: Wisdom, in its purity, touches everything and nothing unclean threatens it (cf. Wisdom 7:24,25) 59. We must believe that God is both unchangeable and incorruptible, and indestructible. 30. Even the smallest earthly good is from God And that God really created even the most insignificant goods, that is, earthly and mortal, we see from other words of the Apostle, where he, speaking about the members of our body: “Therefore, if one member suffers, all members suffer with it; If one member is glorified, all members rejoice with it,” he adds: “God arranged the members, each one in the composition of the body, as He pleased.” And again: “But God proportioned the body, instilling greater care for the less perfect, so that there would be no division in the body, but all members would equally care for each other” (1 Cor 12:26,18,24,25). However, what the Apostle thus praises in the measure, form and order of bodily members can be found in the flesh of all living creatures, the largest and smallest, since all flesh is valued as an earthly good, and therefore lesser. 31. God punishes and forgives Also, since the matter of Divine, and not human judgment, is the question of what and how severe punishment the sin of this or that person deserves, it is written: “Oh, the depth of wealth and the wisdom and knowledge of God! How incomprehensible are His destinies and unsearchable His ways!” (Rom 11:33). By the goodness of God, remission of sins is given to those who convert. Therefore, the fact that Christ was sent shows that He, not in His own nature as God, but in our nature, received from His wife, died for us. The Apostle foreshadows this goodness of God for us and love: “But God proves His love for us by the fact that Christ died for us while we were still sinners. Much more therefore now, having been justified by His blood, we will be saved from wrath by Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we will be saved by His life” (Rom 5:8-10). If those who have sinned are given due punishment, there is no injustice with God, which is why the Apostle says: “What shall we say? will not God be unjust when he expresses anger?” (Rom 3:5). And in one place the Apostle briefly reminded that both goodness and severity come from God: “So you see the goodness and severity of God: severity towards those who have fallen, but kindness towards you, if you continue in the goodness of God” (Rom 11:22). 32. Even the power to harm is given by God And about the fact that even power to those who cause harm is given by God 60, Wisdom says: “By me kings reign and rulers legitimize righteousness” (Proverbs 8:15). Likewise, the Apostle says: “There is no authority except from God” (Rom. 13:1). The fact that there is a reason for this is written in the book of Job: “Who, because of the obstinacy of people, makes a hypocrite king” (see Job 34:30) 61. And God said about the people of Israel: “I have given you a king in My wrath” (Hosea 13:11). And God’s sight is righteous when the wicked accept the power to harm to test the patience of the good and to punish the wicked. Thus, by the power given to the devil, Job was tested so that his righteousness would be revealed (Job 1–2); and Peter was tested so that he would not be presumptuous (Matthew 26:31–35); (Matthew 26:69–75), and Paul was buffeted so that he would not “be conceited” (2 Cor 12:7), and Judas was cursed to hang himself (Matthew 27:5). Therefore, if this was done by the power given by God to the devil, then we can say that God Himself did all this righteously. In the end, the wicked who persist in sympathizing with the depravity 62 of the devil will be told: “Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41). Then the devil will be punished not for righteous deeds committed by Divine permission, but for the unrighteous desire to harm, which belonged to himself. 33. Angels are evil not from God, but from sin And since even the evil angels were not created evil by God, but became so through sin, Peter in his Epistle says: “For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but bound them in chains of hellish darkness, He delivered them up to judgment for punishment” (2 Pet 2:4). After this, Peter shows that for them there will still be the punishment of the final judgment, about which the Lord speaks: “Depart from Me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” Yes, they have already received this underworld place as punishment - the lower dark air 63, a kind of prison. Although this air is called sky, it is not the starry sky, but the lower one. Its gloomy vapors thicken into clouds, birds fly there, which is why this air is called the cloudy sky, and the birds are called heavenly. That is why the Apostle Paul calls these evil angels - we fight with these envious people with a righteous life - spirits of wickedness in high places (see Eph 6:12). And so that the highest heavens are not understood by this heaven, in another place he says: “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the children of disobedience” (Eph 2:2). 34. Sin is not the desire for an evil nature, but the abandonment of what is better Likewise, sin or unrighteousness is not the desire for evil natures, but the abandonment of what is better. Therefore, we find in Scripture the following words: “every creation of God is good” (1 Timothy 4:4), which means that every tree planted by God in paradise is also good. Consequently, man did not strive for an evil nature when he touched the forbidden tree, but by neglecting the better he committed an evil act. Since the Creator is better than anything He created, His commandment should not have been abandoned - not to touch the forbidden, although good, fruit. Through the abandonment of the best, the desire for the good of created nature appeared, which man touched contrary to the command of the Creator. God did not plant an evil tree in Paradise. But he who forbade touching the fruit himself was better than this fruit. 35. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was not evil, but man had to obey God By the prohibition, God wanted to show that the nature of the rational soul should not be in its own power, but in subordination to God, and that it must maintain the order of its own salvation by obedience. Therefore, He called the tree, which He forbade to touch, “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (see Gen. 2:9). Because, having touched the fruit contrary to the prohibition, he experienced the punishment of sin and thus learned the difference between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. 36. Evil is not in created nature, but in the misuse of this nature Who is so stupid as to assume that God's creation, especially those planted in paradise, is worthy of blame? Even thorns and thorns, which, by the judicial will of God, were produced by the earth to wear out the sinner, are not subject to blame. After all, these plants also have their own measure, form and order, which upon examination everyone will find praiseworthy. These thorns and thorns are evil to those natures that must be tamed because of sin. So, as I have already said, sin is not the desire for an evil nature, but the neglect of the best. And it is the act itself that is evil, and not the nature which the sinner misuses. So, evil is a bad use of a good. The Apostle condemns those who “served the creature instead of the Creator” (Rom. 1:25) 64 as damned by Divine judgment. He condemns not the creature (this would be unfair to the Creator), but those who, having neglected the best, made bad use of the benefit. 37. God uses the evil of those who sin for good Accordingly, if all natures kept their own measure, form and order, there would be no evil. And if someone uses these benefits poorly, he still will not abolish the will of God - God knows how to righteously order the unrighteous. So, if they themselves, by the depravity of their will, made bad use of goods, He, by the righteousness of His power, makes good use of their evil, duly ordaining 65 for punishment those who perversely determined 66 themselves to sin 67 . 38. Eternal fire that torments sinners is not evil And even the eternal fire, destined to torment the unrighteous, is not of an evil nature, since it has a measure, form and order, not distorted by any vice. And torment is evil for the damned and is due to them for their sins. And the light of the eternal fire, tormenting the sick eyes, is not evil nature. 39. The fire is called eternal because it has no end; his eternity is not like Divine True, fire is not eternal in the same way that God is eternal - it, perhaps, has no end, but has a beginning, and God is beginningless. Then, although it can be used endlessly to punish sinners, it is, however, of a changeable nature. And true eternity is true immortality, that is, the highest immutability, which only the absolutely unchangeable God possesses. After all, it is one thing not to change, having the opportunity to change, and another thing is the complete impossibility of changing. And one can say about a person that he is good, but not like God, about whom it is said: “No one is good except God alone” (Mark 10:18). And the soul is called immortal, but not in the same way as God is immortal, about whom it is said: “He alone has immortality” (1 Timothy 6:16). And a person can be called wise, but not like God, about whom it is said: “to the only wise God” (Rom. 14:26). Likewise, fire is called eternal, but its eternity is not divine. Only the immortality of God is true eternity. 40. God cannot be harmed; created nature can be harmed only by God's righteous decree This is the catholic faith, sound doctrine, and evident truth within the understanding of those who understand. From this teaching it follows that no one can harm the nature of God, and the nature of God does not harm anyone unjustly and does not tolerate anyone harming with impunity 68 . “Whoever does wrong 69,” says the Apostle, “will receive according to his iniquity; He has no partiality” (Col 3:25). 41. How great good do the Manichaeans attribute to the nature of evil, and how great evil does the nature of good If the Manichaeans, having rejected the destructive zeal for defending their own error, had wished to judge the above with the fear of God, they would not have blasphemed in the most villainous manner, believing the existence of two natures: one good, which is called God, the other evil, not created by God. They are so mistaken, delirious, let's say more - insane, that they do not notice how they endow even the so-called nature of the highest evil with great benefits: life, power, safety, memory, reason, moderation, strength, abundance, feeling, light, pleasure, size, correspondence of components, peace, measure, appearance, order. And the so-called Supreme Good is endowed with great evil: death, disease, unconsciousness, stupidity, disorder, impotence, need, recklessness, blindness, pain, depravity, obscenity, war, immoderation, ugliness, vicissitude. After all, they say that the princes of darkness had life in their nature and, living in their kingdom, were healthy, had memory and thought. The Manichaeans also say that a certain prince of darkness spoke to the assembly. But he could not speak and be heard if they did not have memory and understanding. From what the Manichaeans said about the princes of darkness it also follows that they had the correct structure of soul and body, ruled their kingdom with autocratic power, had the necessary limbs and fertility, felt each other, and next to them - light 70, had eyes with which they saw light in the distance (and their eyes could not see light in the complete absence of light, which is why they are called eyes 71). It turns out that they extremely enjoyed their voluptuousness, and were limited by the size of their own members and the place. And if there were not some beauty in the kingdom of darkness, the princes of darkness could not love their wives and the conformity of their members would not be preserved. Without this, everything that the Manichaeans are madly talking about could not have happened. If there had not been some peace there, they would not have obeyed their prince. If there were no moderation, they could only eat insatiably, drink, go on a rampage, and so on. And even in this case, there must have been a measure in them, due to which they were limited to their forms. The Manichaeans insist that everything was so. This means that they cannot deny the proper measure inherent in all the actions of the princes of darkness. And without the view, no natural qualities could exist there. If there were no order there, some could not dominate and others obey; they could not exist harmoniously in their original principles 72; and in general they could not have properly positioned members, and everything imagined in vain by the Manichaeans could not have happened. Manichaeans say that the nature of God does not die. What then, according to their idle talk, does Christ resurrect 73? If she is not sick, what does Christ cure? If it is not the nature of God to forget, who does Christ remind? If unreasonableness is not characteristic of her, whom does Christ teach? If she is not upset, what does Christ restore? If she is neither conquered nor captive, what does Christ liberate? If he doesn’t feel the need, who does he come to help? If you haven't lost your senses, what brings you back to your senses? If she is not blinded, what does He enlighten? If she is not sick, what does He give weakness to? If she is righteous, what does He correct with His instructions? If she is not in dishonor, what does He cleanse? If she does not fight, to whom does she promise peace? If she is abstinent, to whom is the legal measure due? If she is not disfigured, what does He transform? If it is not perverted, what does He correct? Indeed, according to the Manichaeans, everything accomplished by Christ relates not to the creation of God, perverted by the sin of free will, but to the very nature and essence of God, that is, to what God Himself is. 42. Blasphemy of the Manichaeans regarding the nature of God What is this blasphemy comparable to? With nothing! Perhaps only with the delusions of other perverted sects. If it is considered as such (which we have not yet spoken about), it will turn out that it blasphemes the nature of God in the worst and most disgusting way. After all, the Manichaeans say that some souls (supposedly existing from the essence of God and of absolutely the same nature) did not sin arbitrarily, but were conquered and oppressed by a tribe of dark forces. This tribe of Manichaeans is called the nature of evil. The oppressed souls, not of their own free will, but at the command of the Father, descended, were defeated by a tribe of dark forces and were forever imprisoned in the terrible sphere of darkness. According to their sacrilegious nonsense, it turns out that God freed Himself from the greatest evil in one part, and in the other part, which He could not free from the enemy, He cursed Himself. And he triumphed over her from above as over a defeated enemy. Oh, criminal and incredible audacity to believe so, speak so, teach about God so. Defending their teaching and at the same time blindly rushing to the worst, they say that God's nature has suffered great evil as a result of mixing with evil nature - after all, God's nature could not and cannot cause evil to itself. Is the dignity of incorruptible nature 74 only in the fact that it cannot harm itself, and not in the fact that it cannot suffer harm? Finally, if the nature of darkness harmed the nature of God, and the nature of God did the same to the nature of darkness, we can speak of two evil natures harming each other. In this case, the tribe of dark forces will have the best intentions, because they caused harm unwittingly. After all, it, in fact, did not want to cause harm, but only wanted to enjoy the good of God. And God wanted to destroy the tribe of dark forces. Forgetting what was said before - “his most glorious kingdoms were founded on the bright and blessed earth so that they could not be moved or shaken by anyone” - Mani is clearly delusional in his destructive message “Essential”: “But the father of the most blessed light knew that a great fall and destruction would come from darkness and that a tribe of dark forces would threaten his holy worlds if He did not send against him a glorious and powerful deity. With the help of this deity He will be able to simultaneously defeat and destroy the principles of darkness, and when they are destroyed, the inhabitants of light will enjoy eternal peace.” So, the Father was afraid of the threatening fall and destruction of his worlds. Here, it turns out, how they “were founded on a luminous and blissful earth, so that they could not be moved or shaken by anyone”! Out of fear, He wanted to harm the neighboring tribe, tried to destroy and destroy it, so that the inhabitants of the light could enjoy eternal peace. Why didn’t he add “and with eternal fetters”? Were not the souls, forever bound by Him in the sphere of darkness, inhabitants of the light, of whom He clearly says that they had to make a mistake because of their own, originally light, nature? And without wanting to, Mani is forced to admit that they sinned by free will, although he wants to place the sin only in the necessity of the opposite nature. He gets confused all the time and, as if he himself was already imprisoned in a sphere of darkness invented by him, looks for a way out and does not find it. But let him say what he wants to the deceived and pitiful people, by whom he is revered much more than Christ. For such a price he can sell them such verbose and blasphemous fabrications. Let him say what he wants, let him imprison in the sphere, as in some kind of prison, a tribe of dark forces, and outside attach the nature of light, to which he promised eternal peace after the destruction of the enemy. Behold, the punishment for light is greater than for darkness, the punishment for the Divine nature is greater than for the opposite kind. But although the Divine nature is within darkness, it is inherent in its nature to dwell in darkness, and souls, which by nature are the same as God, cannot be accepted, according to him, into peaceful kingdoms. They are rejected from the life and freedom of the holy light and are nailed to the same terrible sphere. For he says: "These souls, clinging to what they loved, are left in the same sphere of darkness. They brought this upon themselves by their own works." Well, of course, this is not a free will decision! You see how, in his madness, the Manichaean does not know what he is saying, and, contradicting himself, wages a war more terrible against himself than against the god himself of the tribe of dark forces. Consequently, if the souls of light are condemned for loving darkness, the tribe of dark forces is condemned unjustly - after all, they loved the light. But it really loved the light, having as its goal not the destruction of the light, but its possession, albeit violent; The nature of light wanted to destroy darkness in war. Consequently, the light, when it was defeated, loved darkness. Choose: the light either loved the darkness out of necessity, or was seduced by free will. If necessary, why was 75 convicted? If free, then why did the nature of God turn out to be so vicious? If the nature of God was forced to love darkness, then it did not conquer, but was overcome. If she loved darkness freely, then why do these unfortunates hesitate to attribute the will to sin to nature, created by God out of nothing? They are probably afraid that in this case the will to sin will have to be attributed to the light generated by Him. 43. Manichaeans assign great evil to the nature of God even before mixing with evil According to the crazy inventions that they trusted, the cause of great evils was mixing with evil 76. We will show that great evil was present in the so-called nature of light before any confusion. What else can be added to these blasphemies? After all, before the war began, there was already a difficult and inevitable need for war - this is truly a great evil that existed before the mixing of good with evil. Let them tell you where it comes from, because there was no mixing back then. But if there was no need, there was free will. Where then does such great evil come from - God Himself wanted to harm His own nature? The enemy could not harm the nature of God, and He Himself mercilessly sent it to confusion, shameful cleansing and unrighteous condemnation. This is the evil of the destructive, sinful and monstrous will that occurred before it was mixed with the evil of the opposite nature. Or perhaps God did not know that His members would love darkness and become hostile to the holy light (as Mani says), that is, not only to their own God, but also to the Father from whom they were born? Where does God have such great evil of ignorance until it is mixed with evil of the opposite nature? Let's say God knew that all this would happen. Then, if He did not grieve for the future defilement and curse of His own nature, there was always a ruthlessness in Him. If he was sad, he was always unhappy. Why did such great evil happen to your “Highest Good” before mixing with your “highest evil”? And, undoubtedly, if even the smallest part of nature, nailed in the eternal prison of darkness, did not know in advance what awaited it, in the nature of God there would be eternal ignorance, and if it knew, eternal misfortune. Where does this evil come from, which appeared before mixing with the evil of the opposite tribe? Or, perhaps, this particle of nature, out of its great love, rejoiced that, thanks to the fact that it was punished, eternal peace was prepared for the other inhabitants of the world? Let everyone pronounce anathema, seeing that what is not permissible is being said about the nature of God. If Mani had admitted that the nature of God is not hostile to the light, then the desire (not of the Divine nature, of course, but of some person) to endure any evil for one’s homeland could be commendable. However, this evil, of course, can only be temporary and not eternal. And they talk about eternal nailing in the sphere of darkness, and not of something created, but of the nature of God. And if the nature of God rejoiced that it loved darkness and became hostile to the holy light, it would be the most vicious, the most vile and inexpressibly blasphemous joy. Where does such monstrous and criminal evil come from before mixing with the evil of the opposite tribe? Who can bear such wicked and perverted madness - to attribute such great goods to the highest evil, and to the Supreme Good, that is, God, such great evil? 44. The wicked inventions of the Manichaeans about God The Manichaeans say that part of the nature of God is mixed everywhere: in the sky, on the earth, in all dry and wet bodies, in all flesh, in all the seeds of trees, herbs, people, animals. We affirm that the nature of God is present in all things by the power of the Divine, without any connection, immaculate and incorruptible for the order and government of the world, while the Manichaeans believe that it is attached to things, suppressed and defiled. The Manichaeans say that it is untied, liberated and purified not only by the rotation of the sun, moon and forces of light, but also by their own elect 77 . It is terrible to say how sacrilegious and incredible abominations the most wicked delusion inclines them, if not forces them. They say that the forces of light turn into beautiful men and are pitted against women from the tribe of dark forces. And vice versa, the same forces of light turn into beautiful women and are opposed to men from the tribe of dark forces. They do this in order to incite vile lust in the princes of darkness with their beauty. This lust from the relaxed members releases the life-giving substance contained in them, that is, the nature of God, which, according to the Manichaeans, is contained in bodies. The nature of God is liberated, rejected, flees and, being received or purified, is delivered. This is what these unfortunate people read, say, listen to, and believe in. About this in the seventh book of their “Treasures” 78 (as they call the book of Mani, in which these blasphemies are set out) it is said: “Then this blessed Father, who has bright ships 79 as refuges and abodes of various sizes, 80, thanks to his innate mercy, gives help to his life-giving substance to remove and liberate it from wicked bonds, oppression and torment. To do this, he, by his invisible command, changes the appearance of his own forces contained in the most beautiful ship, and makes them appear 81 opposite to the forces located in various parts of the sky 82. Since his powers contain both the male and female sexes, he orders them to appear to the opposing forces both in the form of beardless youths 83 - in front of women of a hostile kind, and in the form of beautiful maidens - in front of men of a hostile kind. He knows that these hostile forces, due to the deadly and criminal lust inherent in them, are easily carried away, captured by the beautiful forms that appear to them and thus released. Know, then, that our Father himself and His powers, which He necessarily transforms into the immaculate likeness of young men and virgins, are one. And He uses them as His own weapons and through them fulfills His will. And the ships are full of these Divine forces, which present themselves in the likeness of lovers against the hellish race and who, with persistence and affection, immediately achieve their plans. That is why, when it is necessary for the same holy powers to appear to men, they immediately appear in the guise of the most beautiful virgins. And vice versa, when it is necessary to approach women, putting aside the image of virgins, they show the image of beardless youths. At the sight of this beautiful image, ardor and lust increase in women, and thus the chain of their worst thoughts is weakened, and the living soul imprisoned in their members is freed, flees and mingles with its purest air. Then completely purified souls ascend to the light ships, prepared for movement and transportation to their homeland. And that which still carries the opposite kind of defilement descends piece by piece in a stormy and fiery stream, mixes with trees, with other plants, with all seeds and is painted in different colors 84. Just as from the great and brightest ship the images of young men and maidens appear to the forces living in heaven, which are by nature fiery, and at the sight of whose beauty a part of the life in the members of these forces, freed, is brought down through fiery streams to the earth, so the highest power itself, dwelling in the ship of vital forces in the likeness of young men and holy maidens, through its angels, appears to the forces, by nature cold and wet, arranged 85 in heaven. At the same time, he appears to women as young men, and to men as virgins. Thanks to this change and diversity of the Divine and most beautiful faces, the princes of the cold and damp race, their men and women, are liberated, and the living in them flees, and the rest, being weakened, is brought down to the earth by cold streams and mixed with all earthly races.” Who can bear it? Who will believe not only in the reality of what was said, but also in the very possibility of saying it? Obviously, only those who are afraid to anathematize the teachings of Mani and are not afraid to believe that God does and suffers such things! 45. Impiety is attributed to the Manichaeans themselves The Manichaeans say that their chosen ones, by eating food and drink 86, purify the mixed part and nature of God contained in all food. When supposedly this part or nature is received by the holy elect in food and drink for the maintenance of the body, it is liberated, imprinted, and saved by their holiness. The unfortunate do not pay attention to the fact that it is not for nothing that they are spoken about like that. They will in vain deny what has been said until they anathematize the Manichaean books and cease to be Manichaeans. Because if the Manichaeans say that the part of God contained in all seeds is purified by the eating of the elect, then everyone will correctly consider that among the elect what happened between the heavenly powers and the princes of darkness, as is described in the “Treasury”: after all, in them, according to them, the flesh comes from the tribe of dark forces, and the vital substance contained in them is a part of God. And if this part must be saved and purified by eating, as the destructive delusion makes them think, who, having discovered it, will not shudder at the thought of what outrages and atrocities follow it? 46. ​​The Crazy Teaching of the “Main” Message In fact, they say that Adam was created the first of men by some princes of darkness so that the light would not escape from them. In the message which is called the “Basic,” Mani described what the prince of darkness, whom they represent as the father of the first man, said and did to his friendly princes of darkness: “Unholy deceiving those present, he said: “What does that great rising light seem to you? Look how it moves the firmament, how it shakes many forces. Therefore, it would be better for you to provide me with the light in your power to create for me the image of the great, appeared in glory. Through him we will be able to rule, finally freed from communication with darkness.” After hearing this and consulting among themselves for a long time, they decided that it would be fair to fulfill this demand. After all, they were not sure that they would always be able to retain that light, and therefore they preferred to give it to their prince, hoping that in this way they themselves would rule. We need to consider how they gave their light. Evidence of this is scattered throughout the text of all the Divine Scriptures 87 and in the heavenly mysteries, but for the wise it is not difficult to find out how it was given: truly and truly it is revealed to the inquirer clearly and face to face. Since the men and women who had come together formed a crowded assembly, the prince of darkness pushed them to have intercourse. In this intercourse, some gave seed, while others became pregnant. Their generation was like those who gave birth to it, and the firstborn were endowed with greater strength than their parents. Their prince, accepting this as the best gift, rejoiced. And so, just as we see now that the nature of evil, the creator of bodies, from there receiving power, creates 88, so that prince, having received, devoured the offspring of his comrades, which from their parents inherited the feeling, knowledge and light created at the same time as him at birth. From the many strengths received from this kind of food, which had absolutely no strength 89, but much more cunning and perversity of mind from the ferocious spiritual dispensation of his parents, he summoned himself a wife who came from the same source as himself. And as a result of intercourse with her, he, like the other princes of darkness, sowed many of the evils he had devoured, adding at the same time something of his own thoughts and strength. He did this so that his way of thinking would become the creator and imager of everything he poured out. His wife accepted all this, just as well-cultivated land accepts a seed. After all, in it the images of all heavenly and earthly powers were composed and combined, so that what was created obviously had the likeness of everything that exists.” 47. Manichaean induces to commit the most heinous crimes What a villain! What a disgusting destruction and destruction of deceived souls! I'm not even talking about the contained nature of God. Let these unfortunates, deceived and poisoned by a deadly delusion, at least think that if through the intercourse of men and women a part of God is nailed down, which, according to them, is liberated and purified by eating, then such a vile delusion compels them to liberate and purify the part of God not only from bread, vegetables and fruits (the only food they take in public), but also from what could be nailed by intercourse if conception had occurred. I heard from one believer from Rome that the Manichaeans admitted this 90 in the people's court not only of Paphlagonia, but even of Gaul 91 . And when they were asked, guided by the authority of which scripture they did this, they pointed to the passage I mentioned from the “Treasury”. When you remind them of this, the Manichaeans are in the habit of answering that a certain enemy deserted from his regiment, that is, from among the elect, caused a schism and founded the most disgusting heresy of this kind. From this it is clear that even if these do not do such things, others who do are guided by their own books. If they are afraid of crime, let them reject books that force them to commit it. And if they don’t commit a crime, they try to live cleaner, contrary to the books. We can tell them: either purify the light from all the seeds, so as not to give up what you should do, but, by your own admission, you do not; or anathematize Mani for placing a part of God and all light, concluded by copulation, in all seeds. This means that something from the very part of God becomes the food of the elect and is purified through eating. What can they answer to this? You see to what wickedness Mani is inclining you, and you still hesitate to anathematize him. What do the Manichaeans do when you tell them this? What kind of subterfuges are resorted to when this so wicked teaching must be anathematized or when such an atrocity must be committed. How intolerable is their idea that the nature of God is necessarily oppressed, so that it must wage war; that she was either ignorantly at peace, or always in fear and sadness, restless from the corruption that threatened her in confusion and the imprisonment of eternal damnation; that as a result of the war she must be captured, oppressed, desecrated; that after a false victory she would be nailed forever in the terrible sphere and separated from her original bliss. However, compared to what I just talked about, even this evil seems tolerable. 48. Prayer for admonition of the Manichaeans How great is Your longsuffering, O merciful and compassionate Lord, long-suffering, abounding in mercy and truth 92 . You command the sun to rise on the good and the evil and send “rain on the just and the unjust” 93 . You do not want the death of the sinner, but that he “turn from his way and live” 94. You, little by little denouncing 95, give place to repentance, so that, leaving depravity, they believe in You, Lord. With Your patience You lead them to repentance, although many, through hardness and unrepentant hearts, treasure up wrath for themselves on the day of wrath and the revelation of Your righteous judgment. You reward everyone “according to his deeds” 96. You will forget all the untruths of a person when he turns from his vice to Your mercy and truth 97 . Appear 98 to us and grant that, thanks to our service, with which You wished to expose this vile and vile error, from which many have already been freed, and others are freed through the sacrament of holy baptism or through the sacrifice of a contrite spirit, a “contrite and humble” heart 99, in the pain of repentance, we may be deemed worthy to accept the remission of our sins and blasphemies, which, in Your ignorance insulted. After all, Your ineffable mercy, the power and truth of Your baptism, the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Your holy Church are so powerful that they should not despair as long as they live on this earth by Your long-suffering, even if, knowing what an evil it is to think or say such things about You, they are still held in this evil confession because of the habit of temporary and earthly benefits or for the sake of acquiring them. They, being wounded by Your punishments, can resort to Your ineffable goodness and prefer eternal and heavenly life to all carnal temptations. CSEL – Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. PG – Migne, Patrologia Graeca. PL – Migne, Patrologia Latina. SL – Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina. Confessionum libri tredecim (“Confession”, hereinafter – Aug. Confess.) 5, 10. Russian translation hereinafter quoted from: St. Augustine. Confession / Transl. from lat. and comment. M. E. Sergeenko. M., 1992. P. 134. A more or less detailed exposition of Manichaean metaphysics is contained in Theodore bar Choni, a Nestorian bishop of the late 6th century. in the book “Scholia” (Theodorus bar Koni. Liber Scholiorum II. B. m., 1912). Also among the sources for the study of Manichaeism is the Arabic “Fihrist” (Muhammad Ibn al Nadin. The Fihrist: A 10th Century A.D. Survey of Islamic Culture. Kazi Pubns, 1998), etc. When presenting the Manichaean teachings, I used Geo Widengren’s monograph (Widengren G. Mani and Manichaeism / Translated from German. Ivanova S.V. SPb., 2001), Arendzen J. P. Manichaeism // The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1910), as well as an introductory article by Albert H. Newman. Introductory essay on the manichaean heresy // A select library of the Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. T&T Clark, Edinburgh, s.a. Vol. IV). Widengren G. Decree. op. P. 72. Usually attributed to the period between 399 and 405. A more precise dating of the treatise is obviously impossible. One of Mani’s “canonical” works. The titles are translated from the titles made by the Benedictines and placed in the PL of Abbot Migne. We, of course, meet the concept of “the highest good,” as well as “the highest evil,” long before Augustine. Thus, Cicero says that the ancients called honor the highest good, and dishonor the highest evil; see: De Legibus (“On the Laws”). 1, 55, 8 // De Legibus Ciceron: Traite des Lois / Ed. G. de Plinval. 1968. Others, according to him, considered a moderate life and the enjoyment of virtue to be the highest good (Ibid. 1, 56, 10). Christian authors used this term quite actively. By “the highest good” they, for example, Tertullian and St. Ambrose of Milan, of course, meant God. The problem of good was considered by St. Augustine not only in polemics with the Manichaeans. Marroux notes: “...Augustine’s thought quite naturally took on the forms of precisely those problems that were inherent in his era; starting from the Hellenistic period, all ancient philosophy revolves around the question of the highest good...”. – Marru A.-I. Saint Augustine and Augustinianism. Dolgoprudny, 1999. P. 77. St. Augustine taught about a kind of “gradation” of good. He distinguished between superior good, average good and inferior good (see: De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim (“On the Book of Genesis literally XII books,” hereinafter – Aug. Gen. ad litt.). 8, 14 // CSEL 28.1 / J. Zycha. 1894. P. 3–435; Retractationum libri duo (“Two books of revisions,” hereinafter – Aug. Retract.). 1, 9 // SL 57 / A. Mutzenbecher. 1984), which he also calls the “greatest” and “least” goods (De libero arbitrio (“On free will”, hereinafter – Aug. Liber. arbitr.). 2, 18 // SL 29 / W. M. Green. 1970. P. 211–321). St. Augustine gives these goods the following definition: “The virtues, thanks to which one can live correctly, are great goods; the beauty of certain bodies, without which one can live correctly, is the least good; and the powers of the soul, without which one cannot live correctly, are an average good.” – Aug. Liber. arbitr. 2, 19. Let us also cite (in our own translation) a rather large passage from Augustine’s 21st sermon, which talks about such a “gradation” of good: “Everything that God has created is good. But some goods are great, others are small, although both are good. Some goods are heavenly, others are earthly; some are spiritual, others are material; some are eternal, others are temporary. Still, this is good, since the Good One created the good. The Divine Scriptures say: order love in me (cf. Song 2:4, ts.-glor.). God created you good under Himself and under you, below, He created something. One is above you, the other is below; Leaving the highest good, do not bow to the lower good! Be upright so that you may be praised, for all who are upright in heart will be praised. After all, you sin only because you handle this or that thing disorderly. Having accepted this thing for use, use the lower one correctly (bene) and then correctly (bene) you will enjoy the highest good. Now hear and think about your own ideas. Ask yourself how and with what things you handle. Now, if you were a merchant and in your business you preferred silver to gold, lead to silver, and sand to lead, wouldn’t all your comrades consider you a complete madman...” - Sermones (“Sermons”, hereinafter - Aug. Serm.). 21, 3-4 // PL 38-39. Plato also taught about the hierarchy of goods; see Plato. Philebus (“Phileb”, hereinafter – Plato. Phileb.). Platonis opera. Vol. 2. Oxford, 1967: St. II. Wed. Tertullian: “...The highest good is that which is eternal (as God is; thanks to which He is unique in his kind, while eternal, and therefore good, while God)...”. – Tertullian. Against Hermogenes, 11 // Quintus Septimius Florent Tertullian. Selected works. M., 1994. P. 137. Wed. also: “...both the greatest and the least blessings are from Him from Whom is all good.” – Aug. Liber. arbitr. 2, 18. Compare: quod de deo est, deus est ‘…That which is from God is God’. – Augustinus Hipponensis. Contra Felicem manichaeum (“Against Felix the Manichaean”). 2, 15 // CSEL 25 / J. Zycha. 1891, pp. 801–852. Variability is one of the characteristics of created being: created being is not the highest. Variability, on the one hand, is a consequence of “creatureship,” creation from nothing, and on the other hand, it is the reason for the “decrease” of creation. The creature “declines,” that is, “inclines toward non-existence”; see: De vera religione (“About the true religion”, hereinafter – Aug. Ver. relig.). 18 // SL 32 / K.-D. Daur. 1962. P. 187–260. In his Confessions, Augustine writes that the created world “is not from God’s substance itself, but was created from nothing, since it is not the same as God, and a certain variability is inherent in everything...”. – Aug. Confess. 12, 17. Blessed Augustine contrasts “Perfect Nothingness” with “Higher Being.” Existence, like goodness, can be to a lesser or greater degree; see Augustinus Hipponensis. Contra Secundinum manichaeum (“Against Secundinum Manichaeum”). 10 // CSEL 25 / J. Zycha. 1891, pp. 905–947. Neoplatonists and many Church Fathers spoke about the hierarchy of existence. Compare: “...nature, as if from steps, that is, from the distinctive signs (idioms) of life, makes the path of ascent from the smallest to the perfect.” – Gregorius Nyssenus. De opificio homini (“On the structure of man”). P. 148. The Russian translation hereinafter is quoted from the publication: St. Gregory of Nyssa. About the structure of man. St. Petersburg, 1995. According to Basil of Seleucia, God arranged or “tuned” created existence in the likeness of an ascending ladder; see Basilius Seleucensis. Orationes (“Words”). 1, 1 // PG 85, 28–474. St. Augustine speaks about this word for word in the Enchiridion; see: Enchiridion de fide, spe et caritate (“Enchiridion about faith, hope and love”, hereinafter – Aug. Enchirid.). 4 // SL 46 / E. Evans. 1969. P. 49–114. Facta natura, as opposed to dei natura - in this work, St. Augustine does not reserve the word natura only for “created nature.” According to St. Augustine, modus, species, ordo are “principles” or “categories” of created being. Modus is the regularity, proportionality inherent in being as such (cf. also: modus ergo animi sapientia est ‘the measure of the soul is wisdom’. – De beata uita (“On the Blessed Life”, hereinafter – Aug. Beat. uit.). 4 // SL 29 / W. M. Green. 1970. P. 65–85; quis est, qui non habet patrem? quis alius quam summus modus? ‘Who has no father? Only he who is the Supreme Measure’ – Ibid.) on the other hand, this term can also indicate the limitations of created existence. The term species, in our opinion, is the most difficult to translate. The first meaning of this word is ‘appearance’, ‘appearance’, ‘image’. However, it has important philosophical connotations, correlating with the Platonic concept of idea (by the way, the first meaning of the word ιδέα is ‘view’, ‘image’) - this is how the Greek word was translated into Latin. St. Augustine himself, speaking about Platonic ideas, uses the word species; seeciuitate Dei. 12, 27 (“On the City of God”, hereinafter – Aug. Ciu. Dei.) // SL 47–48 / B. Dombart, A. Kalb. 1955. Elsewhere, Augustine says that in Latin the word “idea” can be translated either as forma or as species (ideas igitur latine possumus uel formas uel species dicere. – De diuersis quaestionibus octoginta tribus (“LXXXIII various questions”, hereinafter – Aug. Quaest. LXXXIII). 46 // SL 33 / J. Fraipont. 1958. P. 1–377). That is why, first of all, it seemed appropriate to us to translate species as idea. However, such a narrowing of the meaning of the word species, its use as a philosophical “technical term” may not be justified by the context: the treatise is apparently addressed to the widest (and philosophically unprepared) audience, and the use of this word once in connection with Plato’s “theory of ideas” rather emphasizes the possibility of non-specialist understanding in other places. Therefore, we settled on the word appearance, suggesting that there is a whole spectrum of shades present here, from aesthetic to logical. The French and English translations here prefer to use forme and form respectively. In general, St. Augustine, like many Latin Fathers, uses species in different meanings depending on the context. For example, Tertullian writes that when speaking of creation, we must point to persona factoris, species facti, forma materiae ‘the face of the creator, the image of the created, the form of matter’. – Tertull. Hermogen. R. 148; in another place Tertullian speaks of two “images” of things - visible and invisible: duas species rerum, uisibilia et inuisibilia. – Tertullianus. Ad versus Marcionen (“Against Marcion”). 1. R. 310 // SL 1 / E. Kroymann. 1954" P. 441–726; Ambrose of Milan: “the image of things is most beautiful” (рulcherrima est rerum species. – Ambrosius Mediolanensis. Exameron (“Six Days”). 1, 8, 28 // CSEL 32.1 / C. Schenkl. 1897. P. 3–261), or: “the essence of the earth is in the fertility and quality of the arable land” (species autem terrae est germinatio et uiriditas agri. – Ibid. 3, 6, 25). Plato, discussing the good in the Philebus dialogue, speaks of three ideas of good: “So, if we are not able to grasp the good with one idea, then we will catch it with three - beauty, proportionality and truth.” – Plato. Phileb. Pag. 65. Russian translation cit. by: Plato. Collected works. T. 3. M., 1994. P. 75. Wed. above: modus, species, ordo. The Manichaeans placed emphasis precisely on the “becoming” of evil. Corruptio means 'deterioration' and 'destruction' of nature. Deterioration can only parasitize the good of nature. Elsewhere, St. Augustine writes: "The more corruption increases, the more nature tends toward non-existence. Is it difficult to say what in nature that is subject to corruption is from God and what is from non-existence, when the appearance is from nature, and corruption is contrary to nature?" – Contra epistulam manichaei quam uocant fundamenti (“Against the message of the Manichaeans, which is called “The Fundamental””, hereinafter – Aug. Contra ep. fund.). 40 // CSEL 25 / J. Zycha. 1891. P. 193–248. The word corruptio is used in Latin translations of the Bible when translating the Greek fqorЈ. Compare: "All nature is good. If nature cannot be subject to corruption, then it is a great good; if it can, it is a small one." – Aug. Enchirid. 4. This refers to the angelic and human natures. Wed: If anyone corrupts God’s church, God will corrupt him (1 Cor 3:17). Augustine quotes these lines of Scripture more than once. In the Latin text he uses, “corrupts” – corrumpit, see, for example, Aug. Liber. arbitr. 3, 14. Augustine repeats this thought almost verbatim in another place: “Those who order themselves unjustly in sins are righteously ordered in punishments.” – Epistulae (“Messages”, hereinafter – Aug. Ep.) 140, 2 // CSEL 34,1; 34.2; 44; 57; 58/A. Goldbacher. 1895–1898. Compare: God “reigns also in those whom He has ordered in the most just torment under the feet of His people.” – Aug. Serm. 363. “Those who are punished by eternal fire do not return to God, from Whom they have fallen, although every falling away is so ordered that it remains in the most appropriate place, because even those who do not turn to God remain in the most appropriate way in punishment.” – Aug. Retract. 1, 7. St. Augustine also speaks of the “ordering” of sin in existence: “the pleasures of sinners become instruments of the punishing Lord.” – Enarrationes in Psalmos (“Commentaries on the Psalms”, hereinafter – Aug. In Ps.). 7, 16 // SL 38–40 / E. Dekkers, J. Fraipont. 1956. See also: Aug. Ep. 18, 2. Aug. Ciu. Dei. 8, 17. For a lengthy discussion of order, see Aug. De ciu. Dei. 19, 13. There Augustine gives a general definition of order: “Order is the distribution of identical and unequal things in their places.” Compare: “But just as a farmer knows what to do with a huge heap of chaff, so for God the whole multitude of sinners is nothing, because He knows how to deal with them so that the order of ministry in His kingdom is not in any way defiled or upset.” – Augustinus Hipponensis. De catechizandis rudibus (“On the teaching of the catechumens”). 19 // SL 46 / J.-B. Bauer. 1969. P. 121–178. Wed. also the Stoic idea of ​​the expediency of “bad” in the universe. Turpent ac turbent is a stylistic device characteristic of St. Augustine using words that sound similar. The verb turpo also means 'to pollute', and the verb turbo means 'to disturb order'. Augustine gives a similar example elsewhere: Augustinus Hipponensis. In Iohannis euangelium tractatus (“Commentary on the Gospel of John”). 99, 2 // SL 36 / R. Willems. 1954. Wed: Is it really untruth (iniquitas) with God? No way (Rom 9:14). Augustine repeats this same thought in “On the City of God” (19, 13): “It is more fitting for the unrighteous to be sick in suffering than to rejoice in wrongdoing.” Elsewhere, Blessed Augustine writes: "They (Manichaeans - St. D. L.) say that the nature of God can be harmed by the sins of others, but we deny this. We affirm that any nature can only be harmed by one’s own sins. But we call God so good, righteous and incorruptible that He does not sin. He does not harm those who wish to sin, and those who wish to sin cannot harm Him." – De genesi contra manichaeos (“About the Book of Genesis, against the Manichaeans”, hereinafter – Aug. Gen. contra manich.). 2 // PL 34, 173–220. In another anti-Manichaean treatise, Augustine notes: "Who gave number, quality, forms, life? These goods were not created by themselves, and therefore they were given to each nature only by the Creator of all good - God." – Aug. Contra ep. fund. 29. R. 229. According to Augustine, God “creates and orders forms and natures, but He does not create deprivations of form and imperfections of nature, but only orders them.” – Augustinus Hipponensis. De Genesi ad litteram imperfectus liber (“On the Book of Genesis literally (unfinished book)”). 5 // CSEL 28.1 / J. Zycha. 1894. P. 459–503. Evil actually is the deprivation of good. – Contra Iulianum opus imperfectum (“Against Julian (unfinished book)”, hereinafter – Aug. Iulian.). 5 // PL 44, 641–874. In Homer, this word means forest. Then it generally means material for making this or that thing. In a philosophical sense, this term was first used by Aristotle, who contrasted matter with entelechy. In the later philosophical tradition (for example, in Proclus), matter was opposed to the noumenal principle - “mind”; see Liddell-Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford. 1996. pp. 1843–1996. Augustine calls Elh rerum materies ‘the matter of things’; see Augustinus Hipponensis. Contra Faustum manichaeum (“Against Faustus Manichaeum”). 20, 14 // CSEL 25 / J. Zycha. 1891. P. 251–797. Mani obviously contrasted God and matter, identifying matter with evil and placing it in the kingdom of darkness. In his Confessions, St. Augustine reflects on the words from the book of Genesis, “In the beginning God created heaven and earth, but the earth was invisible and unstructured...” and calls this earth “completely formless.” – Aug. Confess. 12, 13. Augustine also speaks about “formless matter” in his treatise “On True Religion” - from this matter (in turn, created from nothing) the world was created. – Aug. Ver. relig. 18. Augustine obviously borrows the idea of ​​“formless matter” from the Platonists. Plato in the dialogue “Timaeus” says about this beginning of the world that its purpose “is to clearly perceive in its entirety the imprints of all eternally existing things, which itself should by nature be alien to any forms.” – Plato. Timaeus. 51. Russian translation cit. by: Plato. Collected works. T. 3. P. 454. The word species in the present case acquires a narrowly philosophical meaning as (apparently) a translation of Plato's ιδέα; see Saint Augustin, 224. Forma - this word, like the word species, translated the term “idea” (ιδέα) from Greek. Let us recall that in Augustine the terms species, idea and forma are equivalent; see Aug. Quest. LXXXIII. 46, 1–2. Forma and formosi. Thus, Augustine calls the Son of God “the uncreated and most beautiful form.” – Aug. Ver. relig. 11. Species – speciosi. Above, Augustine used the word species in the sense of Plato's idea. However, this word also has another meaning, in which it is probably used in this context. To the question “Is matter from God?”, Augustine answers: “Every good is from God, everything that is beautiful, as beautiful as it is, is good, and everything that has an image is beautiful.” – Aug. Quest. LXXXIII. 10. Blessed Augustine also speaks about the fact that the name Jehovah indicates Divine immutability in “On the City of God.” In comparison with the existence of the Divine, creation “as if does not exist.” According to Augustine, this view was held by Plato; see Aug. Ciu. Dei. 8, 11. Blessed Augustine attributed this judgment to a certain Cornelius Celsus. Young Augustine probably held the same opinion; see Augustinus Hipponensis. Soliloquiorum libri duo (“Two books of monologues”, hereinafter – Aug. Soliloqui.). 881 // PL 32, 869–904. Epicurus considered suffering the highest evil. Compare: “If, in your opinion, sorrow is evil, then pleasure and pleasure are, of course, good, and if so, then fornication, gluttony, and everything that delights and pleases the one doing it is good...” – Joannes Damascenus. Contra Manichaeos (“Against the Manichaeans”, hereinafter – Joann. Damasc. Contra manich.). 40 // PG 39, 1085–1109. The Russian translation hereinafter is given according to the publication: St. John of Damascus. Against the Manichaeans // Works of St. John of Damascus. M., 1997. Compare: “Not exactly, but according to our custom, that which is painful and painful for our feelings is called evil, that which now brings torment, and then the fruit of salvation and eternal joy.” – Joann Damask. Contra manich. 15. Blessed Augustine himself calls God the “Highest Measure” in the dialogue “On the Blessed Life”; see, for example, Aug. Beat. uit. 4. Decor means both 'beauty' and 'appropriateness'. The issue of authority, not considered separately here, was the second most important (after the issue of the origin and existence of evil) in St. Augustine’s polemics against the Manichaeans. Wed. King James Version: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being that was made (John 1:1-3). Augustine also discusses this in “Against Julian”; see: Contra Iulianum opus imperfectum (“Against Julian (unfinished book)”). 5 // PL 44, 641–874. In a sense, Augustine anticipates the criticism of ultrarealism. The Latin language, unlike Russian, allows only one negation (or rather, it also allows double negation, but in this case the phrase takes on the opposite meaning). Therefore, from the Latin verbatim: ‘Without Him nothing was created’. Nihilominus. Nihil interest. Nihil est factum. Here and below is a play on words. Plato adhered to approximately this idea; see for example Plato. Timaeus (“Timaeus”). 51 // Platonis opera. Vol. 4/J. Burnet. Oxford, 1902; repr. 1968: St III. 17a-92s. Literally: ‘From Him, through Him and in Him are all things’. The Latin prefixes ex and de are very close in use. Blessed Augustine prefers to use the latter when speaking about birth from God, about origin from His essence. So among the Stoics, sin is “unnatural,” that is, contrary to nature; see, for example: Stoicorum veterum fragmenta (“Fragments of the Early Stoics”). III 412 / Hans Friedrich August von Arnim; Maximilianus Adler. Stuttgardia Teubner, 1964. This thought is repeated by St. Augustine in other places; see, for example: Ex uoluntate peccatum est ‘Sin from the will’. – Augustinus Hipponensis. De nuptiis et concupiscentia (“On marriage and lust”). 2, 28, 48 // CSEL 42 / C. F. Vrba, J. Zycha. 1902. P. 211–319. Synod. translation: ... wisdom... in its purity passes through and penetrates everything... nothing defiled will enter it. – Ed. According to Mani, “the power to harm” is an attribute of the Dark Principle and, therefore, does not depend on God. So in the text of LXX, from which the translation was made into the Slavic language: He appoints a hypocrite as king for the obstinacy of the people. The Hebrew (Masoretic) text from which the Synodal translation was made differs from the text of the LXX: ... so that the hypocrite may not reign, to offend the people. St. Augustine also spoke about “persistence” or “steadiness” in virtue; see Augustinus Hipponensis. De dono perseuerantiae (“On the gift of stability”) // PL 45, 993–1034. Aer in classical Latin meant 'air', which surrounded the earth. In patristic literature it is the habitat of evil spirits (see Eph 6:12). See also: Augustinus Hipponensis. Enarrationes in Psalmos (“Commentaries on the Psalms”). 148 // SL 38–40 / E. Dekkers, J. Fraipont. 1956. Augustine contrasts aer with caelum - the container of celestial bodies, and in pagan mythology also the abode of the gods. Own “served the creature more than the Creator” (seruierunt creaturae potius quam creatori). Ordinans, cognate with ordo ‘order’. God wisely “controls” evil and “takes advantage of it.” The created cosmos, finding itself without the support of the Uncreated Superessence, would not be able to exist - the evil it produces, multiplying, would destroy it very quickly. God, in His ineffable goodness, turns the destructive energy of the world to the benefit of the world itself. For St. Augustine, the understanding that God constantly cares for His creation, although fallen, is extremely important. This vision of the role of Divine Providence is an integral part of St. Augustine’s worldview. He, without a doubt, lives in hope of God’s mercy, which turns the sinner to salvation. This is evidenced by the fact that the prayers of Blessed Augustine are filled with precisely this kind of hope: "God, through whom everything strives to be that would not be in itself. God, who you do not allow that which destroys itself to perish... God, who does not create evil, but allows it to be, so that it does not become even more evil (facis esse ne pessimum fiat). God, who is a little, by resorting to what is true, you discover that evil is nothing. God, through whom the universe, even with its bad side, is perfect (cum sinistra parte perfecta est). God, through whom there is absolutely no disagreement, since the worst agrees with the best. God, Whom everything loves that is capable of loving, whether knowing it or not." - Augustinus Hipponensis. Soliloquiorum libri duo (“Two Books of Monologues”). 869 // PL 32, 869–904. In another place, St. Augustine says: Illi dicunt naturae dei nocere aliena peccatä nos negamus, sed dicimus nulli naturae nocere peccata, nisi sua... ‘They say that the nature of God is harmed by the sins of others. We reject this opinion and say that sins harm only our own nature and no other...’. – De genesi contra manichaeos (“On the Book of Genesis, against the Manichaeans”). 2, 220 // PL 34, 173–220. Obviously, this refers to the Light (Good) Beginning, directly adjacent to the Kingdom of Darkness. Compare: “Then the substance rebelled against itself, and its fruits fought with each other, and when some fled and others pursued, they reached the borders of the light, and, seeing the light, desired its beauty and stopped fighting with each other, and, conspiring, attacked the light.” – Joannes Damascenus. Contra Manichaeos (“Against the Manichaeans”, hereinafter – Joann. Damasc. Contra manich.). 2 // PG 39, 1085–1109. The word lumen has several meanings, including ‘light’, ‘lamp’, ‘eye’, ‘sight’. Satan, according to the ideas of the Manichaeans, exists eternally, not actually, but arises from eternal “elements.” The Manichaeans believed that human nature is part of the Divine nature. The good nature, in contrast to the evil, is called incorruptible; see also: Joann. Damask. Contra manich. 27. Compare: "If the Good One voluntarily gave up a part of himself, that is, his soul, then he who gave up the good to the evil is not good. How did he himself give up his soul to the evil one? [How will he] judge those who are enslaved to evil? After all, they will say to him: you yourself gave us away, there is no judgment." – Joann Damask. Contra manich. 29. The confusion occurred as a result of the battle between the “first man” and the “prince of darkness.” Satan defeated man and devoured part of his light. Compare: "And the Good One sent power from himself, and in the fight the leaders of darkness devoured a particle of light. For the Good One allowed the power to be taken away from him, fearing that they would take over his place. He did this in order to overcome evil through the particle he gave. And so a mixture of good and evil took place: for from a particle of good souls arose, and from the essence of evil - bodies." – Joann Damask. Contra manich. 2. The followers of Mani were divided into “chosen” and “listeners”. Mani's work, called “The Treasure of Life,” is quoted by Augustine, Euodius of Uzal and Al-Biruni. – Saint Augustin. Philosophie, catech-se, polemique. uvres. III. Editions Gallimard, 2002. P. 240. Further, when referring to the comments of this publication, the abbreviation Saint Augustin will be used, indicating the page to which the commentary is given. That is, the “sun” and “moon”, which were a kind of “transshipment points” for souls. Compare: “...the sun and the moon arose as ships to transport the particle that matter stole from God...”. – Joann Damask. Contra manich. 39. So, it seems to me, we need to translate the phrase secundum magnitudines. The French translator offers the following option: Alors le bienheureux P-re, qui a des navires lumineux comme abris et comme demeures ou palais... – Saint Augustin, 240. The French translator suggests that parere should be understood in the sense of “to obey” (obeir), and not “to appear,” which does not seem to be justified by the context. Through an angel, according to the Manichaeans, God created ten heavens. It is possible to understand “naked youths” (gar›ons nus - Saint Augustin), but here the tender age of young men, so attractive in the ancient era, is rather emphasized - after all, it is not said about the virgins that they were naked. Here I follow the CSEL text, which suggests coloribus diversis inficitur, but if you prefer the PL, as the French and English translations do, then you need to read caloribus diversis inficitur ‘mixed with different lights’. Wed. Above, Augustine speaks of order as a good. On the “Manichaean Eucharist” see Fortunat, 3. – Saint Augustin, 242. Apparently we are talking about the Bible, which was accepted by the Manichaeans in an “edited” version. This phrase, apparently, can be understood in different ways. Wed: And just as even now we see take place, that the nature of evil taking then strength forms the fashioner of bodies…; Et, comme nous voyons encore maintenant que la nature du mal, creatrice des corps, les fa›onne en prenant l… des forces… The French translation suggests here to understand here by fortitudo ‘bravery’, ‘courage’ (vaillance). “There were various rumors among Roman Christians about the Manichaeans and, in particular, that they practiced a very peculiar communion using animal and even human sperm...” – Serge Lancel. St. Augustine. SCM Press, 2002. P. 122. Similar confessions apparently came from the Priscillianists, who considered themselves followers of Mani, at the trial in Trier in 385 - Ibid. P. 493. Not. 3. The French translation, unlike the English one, suggests that praesto here means ‘to provide’ (accorde-nous)