詩篇註釋 第 1 章 第 33/34 段

And what is the end but to be made divine, that God may be all in all? Some understand it concerning the resurrection from the dead, saying that those who are raised have, instead of a corruptible body, an incorruptible one, and instead of a natural body a spiritual one, and instead of a weak and inglorious one a strong and glorious one.

But Paul, in speaking, did not say:

'we shall all be changed [altered],' but 'we shall be transformed, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible' — since it is according to its substance that the body is raised.

For it does not become bodiless out of a body, but out of such a body comes such a body, having the transformation according to quality.

If we understand it thus, according to quality only, it is an alteration.

But if — since the corruptible is not the same as the incorruptible — the corruptible becomes incorruptible, then it has been transformed, transformed by way of a substantial change.

I do not say that a bodiless thing has come out of a body, but that out of a corruptible body has come an incorruptible body.

Does the body remain? — The body remains; and just as the sinful soul, if it becomes righteous, the soul remains,

so the transformation has come about by way of alteration.

If, then, the resurrection comes about by way of alteration, the flesh is again flesh, the corruptible is again corruptible;

for I do not call the corruptible, or the flesh, a mere quality.

It comes about, then, by way of transformation.

If, for example, we alter the colours of a vessel made of earthenware, whether by painting or in some other way, this is an alteration;

but if, having made a vessel out of clay, we bring it to the fire and it becomes earthenware, this is not an alteration but a transformation — not because the clay was cast out and the earthenware brought in,

but because that very thing has become earthen.

Again, sand and natron, when wrought by the glassmakers, become glass in form; and I do not say that the sand has vanished so as to be gone entirely, nor the natron, but that those very things have become glass.

And that it is a transformation, hear:

natron, when it was natron, would dissolve when moisture came upon it; but the glass which has come from it does not dissolve.

Again, the sand, when moisture fell upon it, was a heap of scattered grains.

But when it becomes glass, it is no longer scattered grains.

This, then, I call a transformation — not from one underlying substance into another underlying substance, but the coming to be of something new out of something that has perished.

The natron and the sand perish, and the glass comes to be.

But the perishing of these does not reduce them to non-being.

And in the case of the earthenware, as I said, the earthenware that has come to be from fire does not cast the clay down into non-being, nor does the earthenware come to be from some other source.

In like manner the bird comes to be from an egg;

for the egg is not cast out in order that the bird may be brought in;

that very thing changes into this, yet it is no longer an egg;

for henceforth this thing flies, it has sense-perception.

But of these things the egg possessed none.

And Paul has used the term of sowing:

'It is sown in corruption, it is sown in weakness.'

The seed of the living creature, when it is seed, is not a living creature.

But it changes into the living creature;

it develops further; yet the seed itself first turns into a formed nature, then from that nature into an embryo, and after the embryo, having become a living creature, undergoes birth.

These, then, are transformations, not alterations;

for the change does not come about in respect of quality alone.

And indeed many such examples may be found.

And Paul himself, using the example of seeds:

The grain of wheat, before sowing, is a grain.

But when, being sown, it meets with cultivation, it becomes an ear of corn;

'But,' others say, 'it is again wheat.'

But they do not know that what was said is an illustration.

And it has often been said that illustrations are not to be pressed at every point, since otherwise they would no longer be illustrations.

Again, an infant and a boy are not the same thing.

Yet the infant changes into the boy, and I do not say that, the infant having been reduced to non-being, the boy came in from somewhere else, but that the infant itself changed both in growth and in the rest of its quality, and became a boy — it was not replaced by another age-being.

And according to age the infant is one thing and the boy another, but with respect to the man who is passing through the ages there is no difference;

for one and the same subject underlies that infant and that age;

having passed away [as infant], it is again a man who underlies the boy.

And if from the boy he changes into the young man, again the age has changed.

But this is a quality, and a substantial quality.

And again, ever passing through the ages, until he reaches old age.

He alters, therefore, both his qualities and his ages;

for I said that the ages are substantial qualities.

But the same man remains.

Even if, then, the body receives ten thousand transformations in the resurrection, it is a body — not, however, this particular body, not the one it was before the transformation.

And so Paul was constrained to speak of it as one thing and then another.

'It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.'

Not first the spiritual but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.

But where there is a 'first' and an 'afterward,' identity is not what is signified.

Nevertheless, we take the 'first' and the 'afterward' not in the sense of a change of substances, but of a change of the very same body, since from corruptible it has become incorruptible, and from natural it has become spiritual.

Change (allagē), then, is one thing, and alteration (alloiōsis) is another.

The transformation of the soul produces the alteration—I mean either the praiseworthy one or the blameworthy one.

For it is possible also to be altered for the worse, as it has been said:

'How is the gold dimmed, how is the good silver altered?' And he says:

'The precious sons of Zion, esteemed as gold and silver—how are they reckoned as vessels of clay, the works of their own hands?' Again, the allegory will show other things.

For gold is said to have been changed into earthen vessels not according to the literal history, but according to the anagogical sense.

'Unto the end, then, concerning those who shall be altered.'

'For the sons of Korah, unto understanding.'

And since the very title and the whole psalm have mysteries hidden within them, for this reason there is need of understanding for the one who utters this ode.

And I was saying, also concerning the thirty-first psalm, since it was spoken with a riddle.

'An ode, then, for the beloved.'

This triumphal ode has come to be for the beloved.

For he himself has become the author of the alteration as well.

For I said that, being rich, he became poor, that he might make us rich—not rich in appearance, not in a sensible manner, but possessing all reason and all knowledge.

I said that, having become a curse, he confirmed the blessing.

The beloved one, then, has become the author of this most excellent alteration.

For this reason the ode is dedicated to him.

Just as the triumphal ode is sent up to a general or a king—even though others too have labored alongside, the bodyguards and soldiers—yet the sum of the victory is ascribed to the king or the general.

The phrase 'for the beloved'?—it stands for 'concerning.'

For 'for someone' is not always said in that sense.

So that the adversary may be put to shame, having nothing base to say concerning us.

For here 'concerning us' is not said in the sense of 'pleading on our behalf.'

'My heart has poured forth a good word.'

It is said from the person of the Father and from the person of the perfect man, the wise one.

And you know that the belch brings forth the sweet savor of the food previously taken in.

For a belch is nothing other than a coming-forth of breath from the stomach, disclosing the quality of the things previously taken in.

If, then, someone is nourished on an apple, he has a belch bearing the quality and fragrance of an apple.

When, therefore, a holy person is nourished on the bread of life and on the flesh of Jesus, which is true food, and on the fruits of the tree of life, and drinks the wine gathered from the true vine, he has a belch corresponding to the foods previously taken in.

The one thus nourished and belching is signified:

'The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth that which is good.'

And since it concerns intelligible things, he did not hesitate to call the heart a treasure in place of a stomach.

The one, then, who has been nourished on the blessed food and has partaken of the flesh of Jesus and of the bread of life, the heavenly bread, brings forth words corresponding to those things by which he was nourished, and will say:

'My heart has poured forth a good word.'

For the present, then, we are speaking concerning the man.

The sons of Korah, offering up their hymns with this very same mind and the same spirit, offer them up as one.

'As the hart pants after the springs of the waters, so pants my soul'—thus here too they speak as one and in the singular.

And this is referred to each one of the wise.

For if the wise man brings forth, in teaching, those things which he has in his heart and on which he has been nourished, he has poured forth the good word.

From which, again, the argument gathers that if someone who has not been nourished wishes to bring forth a word, it is not a good belch.

And again, the one nourished on the vilest foods has a wretched and evil word of instruction. Then he says: 'I speak my works to the king.'

To such an extent are my works made open with boldness, bearing no condemnation of me nor any accusation.

I speak to the king himself, to the judge.

'My tongue is the pen of a swift-writing scribe.'

My word, signified by means of the tongue.

In many places you will find the tongue standing for the word.

'The Lord will utterly destroy all deceitful lips and the boastful tongue'—by the boastful tongue he means the boastful word.

'Fair in beauty beyond the sons of men.'

And the sons of men—that is, the wise of the world and those who in whatever manner profess teaching—seem to have beauty in their own words.

But the beauty of our word is beyond the sons of men; it is sent from God, it is given by God, it is true wisdom.

It has, then, something more than the sons of men, who utter from their own heart words and lessons gathered together out of their own diligence and learning.

The psalm is taken as spoken from the person of the Father.

And nearly all who speak in a general sense understand it thus.

The things that are supernatural and great and higher than our conceptions are with difficulty made manifest, and only through many examples.

Often, then, when we wish to say that God is one, we say ten thousand things.

We say that nothing is coupled with him, that there is in him no matter and form, that he is a monad, that he is a unity—and only through the multitude of words do we make these things manifest.

But when I wish to speak about wine, it is enough to say 'wine.'

For it is said to those who know what it is.

And by a single word we signify the concept.

We have no need of many words.

But when we say that God is earth, since he himself says:

'Have I become a wilderness to Israel, or a barren land?'—we say ten thousand things in order to make clear how God is called earth.

Again, if we call him a spring, we say not a few things, as when we speak concerning a perceptible spring.

But concerning God we say many things, namely that:

Since the things belonging to God and the fullness of his good things are not flowing in from outside and being supplied, but he himself is full of the good things.

Being, then, the fullness of good things, being the fullness of the virtues, he is called a spring.

The Savior's begetting, being neither ready to hand nor to be grasped by those who wish, but only by those to whom the revelation of the Father and of the Son has come—for just as the Father reveals the Son, so also the Son reveals the Father—there is need of many examples, that the intimacy of the Son with the Father and his begetting may be made manifest.

He calls him, then, the effulgence of light.

The effulgence is not outside of the light.

And the light does not exist prior to the radiance; for light and radiance are simultaneous.

For light and radiance exist together.

If, then, we wish to show that the generation of the Son is eternal, we call Him eternal radiance of light from eternal light.

But those of heterodox opinion do not understand in what sense each of these things is said, and they do not take them as illustrations, but they say:

The light is substance, the radiance is activity.

Is the Son, then, the activity of a substance and not a substance? But they do not perceive why this was said:

namely, that one might learn that the Father does not exist prior to the Son.

For surely the Father is not a perceptible light, nor is the Son a perceptible radiance.

In human affairs teaching comes about so that from the things we know we may learn the things we do not know.

But we know that the light does not exist prior to the radiance.

Again the Father is called a fountain of wisdom:

'For you have forsaken the fountain of wisdom.'

He wishes to show that, just as the water is not foreign to the fountain, so neither is Wisdom foreign to the only wise One.

For he calls the Father alone wise, since he would not have called any of the created beings alone wise.

For many are those who are named after the wisdom which they possess.

But the Father is not called wise as one named after wisdom, since then He would no longer be alone, there being many who partake of wisdom and are called wise from it; rather He is called alone wise as the One who wells up wisdom, who begets Wisdom, so that the sole wise One and Wisdom differ in nothing, and one may call Wisdom itself alone wise, so that He is wise from the Wise.

Here too, then, the Scripture, wishing to show the intimacy of the Son with the Father and His offspring from Him, says that the Father is a fountain of wisdom and a fountain of life:

for He is also called a fountain of life:

'They have forsaken me, the fountain of living water.'

Here again, therefore, the Scripture, wishing to show that the Saviour is not other than the substance of the Father, says that He was uttered as a word from the heart:

'For my heart has uttered forth a good word.'

But God has a heart that is not other than Himself;

for the heart signifies the mind.

And just as He is said to have an immortality not other than Himself and to have life in Himself which is not other than His own, so too He has a heart which is not other than Himself:

for the Son is mind, the offspring of mind.

And the Word is the offspring of mind.

'My heart, then, has uttered forth a good word.'

And in order to show that not only the begetting heart but also the offspring is good, He named the offspring:

for it is beyond doubt that, the offspring being good, that which begot it is also good.

Yet perhaps the converse does not hold.

For it can happen that what is begotten from a good thing is not good, whenever it undergoes change.

But since the Word is unchangeable and does not admit of change as other things do, in this way too He received His begetting as good from the heart of the good Father.

Again, since among human beings the true offspring are those brought forth from the womb, He says again:

'From the womb before the morning star I begot you.'

It is proper to the womb to beget, just as it is proper to hands to make.

So whenever He wishes to present God as the genuine maker and truly the craftsman of creation, He calls the creation the works of His hands:

'For I will look upon the heavens, the works of your fingers.'

'The heavens are the works of my hands.'

And since some suppose that begetting and being created are the same, if this were so, it would have followed for Him to say:

'The heavens are the offspring of my hands,' or to say:

not that [they are the same in reality], but that these differ in respect of conception (in thought).

The intimacy that comes from the Father, however, is disclosed through all these things.

In a perceptible manner, He named it by the name of 'Lord.'

I say all these things concerning God so that through all of them I may set Him apart from everything that can be said of God according to false opinion.

And so here too the heart of the Father begets.

And—for the moment I speak in terms of human affairs—men at one time become generators of thoughts, and at another receive them from outside through teaching.

They are not called fathers of the thoughts which, having been shaped in accordance with them by others, they merely bring forth.

Indeed, we call the discoverers of the sciences the fathers of the sciences, but those who have learned from others we do not call fathers of the sciences.

They say, at any rate, that Moses became the first father of lawgiving, because he did not receive the laws from another, but was himself led to this by God.

'My heart, then, has uttered forth a good word.'

As an offspring from the womb, so also is the good word in the heart.

But in the case of God, heart and womb are not one thing and another.

'I tell my works to the King.'

Here there has come about a sudden change of the speaking person.

The good Word Himself who has been begotten, being in accord with the Father, says:

'I tell my works to the King.'

For just as when we hear that:

'God said, Let there be,' and:

'He himself spoke, and they came to be; he commanded, and they were created,' we do not hear these things in a human way:

for it was not to the Son as though ignorant of what must come to be and how it must come to be that He commanded and spoke, but for our sake, that the concord of the Father and the Son might be shown, namely that by one single will all things came to be and all things are provided for:

'And God said, Let there be'—do you suppose that He used an uttered word? We used to say that the work outstrips the word, and the word is not prior in time to the work, but only in conception.

If, then, these things are so, how must one understand the 'saying'? We do not hear it as a voice that moves from place to place, a voice passing from a mouth into an ear.

In order that the concord may be shown, these things are said also concerning the Spirit, of whom the Saviour said:

'He cannot speak of himself.'

This 'he cannot' means that apart from Himself and the Father no word or teaching of His is conveyed.

But in the case of the other, created beings, it often signifies that someone speaks apart from God whenever he does this erroneously.

The Holy Spirit, however, is by nature incapable of being separated from the Father's declaration—so to speak, He Himself is the declaration.

'I tell, then, my works to the King.'

'My tongue is the pen of a swift-writing scribe.'

My tongue writes upon the hearts of men inviolable laws.

For, giving laws upon their understanding, 'I will inscribe them also upon their heart.'

And it is upon hearts of flesh, and not of stone, that God writes by means of His living Spirit.

And observe that the pen of the swift-writing scribe can be the Holy Spirit.

'Once has God spoken; these two things have I heard.'

And with respect to the wording of the passage set before us ......

'Once has God spoken; these two things have I heard.'

If a demonstration is being made concerning circumcision, the wise man hears two things: both concerning the perceptible circumcision according to the commandment, and concerning the spiritual circumcision.

If, God having spoken once concerning sacrifice, we again hear these two things: both the perceptible sacrifice according to the Law, and the one offered in spirit which is called the sacrifice of praise.

And it is the same in the case of each commandment.

Concerning the Sabbath, then, when he says it, he heard these two things.

But they spoke of another meaning, loftier and hard for the many to detect, namely that:

God, wishing to enjoin the many commandments, such as the Decalogue, does not speak them commandment by commandment, but ......

Having come into the understanding of the hearer, they were all heard together.

'These two things have I heard' — so that you might grasp even more than these.

And indeed it is plain to the many.

The concept and the thing expressed are not the same.

A concept is the activity of the mind, of which the utterance is a symbol.

The things in the voice are symbols of the affections in the soul.

That which co-subsists with the imagination of what one is about to say:

For does not the concept, being immaterial and pure, ......

...... something is lacking concerning it.

It does not couple to itself any of the things conjoined by utterance, in order that it might be made manifest.

But it co-subsists with the imagination of the one thinking.

And there co-subsists in me an image of how it must be interpreted.

The images, then, that co-subsist arise from a single concept, from the Word of God, and on account of this 'I heard two things.'

And the concept that is able to interpret to others what has been thought is among the difficult things.

Just as, then, when God has spoken once one hears two things according to the two contemplations that have been rendered, so too the Scripture of God is understood not according to a single concept or word.

This pen writes spiritually.

On account of this it is a swift-writing pen.

And in the case of swift-writing men there arises a certain interval, in order that they may join together what comes first and what comes after.

But here it is not so; rather, the swiftness is such that there is in it no interval.

How were you speaking of the sudden change? — It was the person of the Father that was speaking:

'My heart has poured forth a good word.'

And it is no longer the Father who is the one speaking:

'I speak my works to the King' — but rather the Son:

for I do not take it as the followers of Eunomius say:

He Himself who poured forth the word speaks His works to the King, beside whom He has set Him — that is, to the begotten Word — that He might know how to declare them, that He might know them.

Of what sort might the works be? — These are the things which He has accomplished through the economy.

Let one of the works be this: to have a word like the pen of one writing swiftly and writing quickly.

The man who ministers can also be a pen, while the writer is God the Word who has made use of it:

for through this He wrote to the whole inhabited world ............

...... or did they bring it to one conclusion? — His works are brought to fulfilment ......

another might tell them to him beside ......

On account of this he fled from the face of God.

...... a throng was to him; it announced to him through the throng that he does not partake of the tree of ......

God wishes to guard, for just as ......

He made him to guard and to till the Paradise for him.

Likewise we do not divide off that which says 'this' as being outside the word, as if ......

...... I converse, I declare, I think — we do not assign all these things to the soul, nor all to the body, but the one composed of both speaks what he thinks.

And this activity is of the soul; the one speaking is the composite being.

But if I say that I walk swiftly, or that I grow warm, or that I shiver, it is now the composite being speaking concerning his own body.

'My tongue is like the pen of a swift-writing scribe.'

'Fair in beauty beyond the sons of men.'

The evangelical word is beyond all human words.

Of the man who was assumed and of the pre-existing Word of God ......

He is a good word and a king.

'Grace has been poured out upon your lips.'

This is interpreted in the Gospel according to Luke:

For when He entered into the synagogue in Capernaum, and the book of the prophet Isaiah was given to Him that it might be read, He said:

'And all marvelled at the words of grace that proceeded out of His mouth.'

Thus His words are so full of grace as to hold fast those who hear.

But by 'those who hear' he means according to understanding, not those who ......

For all hear the Gospel, both Greeks and Jews ......

But they are not within the grace of the words ......

Is there a different person here? — 'Grace has been poured out upon your lips': either the Holy Spirit or the writer says this.

And sometimes the Father also, bearing witness, says:

for we have often said that 'lips' signify the word:

'For unrighteous lips put far away from me.'

'On account of this God, your God, has blessed you unto the age.'

And this too is said concerning the man.

For to be blessed by reason of some cause does not belong to God the Word.

He Himself is the blessing, the fountain of blessing.

But here 'cause' stands for 'on this account,' just as also in the verse:

'Therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee.'

And to have been anointed by reason of a cause shows that the one anointed is diligent and upright;

for having wrought righteousness and hated iniquity, He obtained the anointing.

Therefore He has been blessed for ever, since He had a tongue like the pen of a swift writer, or rather of one who writes.

These things he says concerning the man.

And since He has a priesthood and a teaching that pass to no successor—for even though heaven and earth pass away, His words remain—He was blessed for ever.

'Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O mighty One.'

Often the 'thigh' is used in reference to the impulses proper to manhood.

We were saying, then, that the Word, in rebuking those who have the moist wantonness of licentiousness, says in Ezekiel:

'And every thigh shall be moistened with moisture'—that is to say:

the loins, the matters of generation, are defiled with moisture.

Yet concerning the diligent and upright man these things could not be said.

You have, at any rate, in the Song of Songs, spoken by the Bridegroom to the Bride:

'like a necklace'—since you have devoted yourself, O soul or Church, to complete purity, having prepared yourself for no other than the true Bridegroom, God the Word—'are the graceful movements of thy thighs.'

It is likened to a necklace, an adornment worn about the neck.

And often subjection signifies an adornment worn about the neck.

It signifies also that the Church has been made subject.

'Wives, so submit yourselves unto your own husbands as the Church unto Christ.'

The rhythm, then, of thy thighs—that is, of thy desires and appetitive powers—has been ordered in harmony after the manner of the many-hued necklace.

And the one sense must be taken by way of the higher (anagogical) interpretation, while the other—that concerning the licentious—also according to the literal (historical) sense:

'every thigh shall be moistened with moisture.'

Both the thigh of the soul and that of the body minister to licentiousness.

For this reason Abraham, when sending forth the elder of his household, that divine and wise servant, for the betrothal of Rebecca—I speak according to the literal text—made him place his hand under Abraham's thigh, that so he might blamelessly and chastely bring the maiden;

for he was put under oath by placing his action beneath the thigh, that is, beneath the sexual impulse, so to speak;

for thus indeed he brought the maiden unharmed.

Since, therefore, through human generation the Saviour took up the temple (of the body), He says to Him who is mighty—for He is God the Word—:

'Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O mighty One.'

And the faithful man, the self-controlled, the imitator of God, girds about his thigh the unbreakable Word of God, sharpened above every two-edged sword, that he may cut away the superfluous desires;

for he who has partaken of honourable marriage, so as to keep the bed undefiled, has the Word of God as a sword that cuts away.

If, then, one takes 'mighty' here to mean God the Word, or the soul that is joined to Him, he calls the 'thigh' the Incarnation, the birth from a woman.

'Gird, therefore, this sword,' while thy comeliness and thy beauty remain.

Now beauty and comeliness are sinlessness, when it is spoken concerning the soul;

but if it be concerning God the Word, this is what it means:

the beauty of God and His comeliness abide with Thee, who hast become man;

for Thou didst not change from being Word and God the Word.

And henceforth it is said also to each one of the chaste:

put on beauty and comeliness from the other virtues, take also self-control (chastity), the Word that cuts.

That we may take up which sword?—the word concerning chastity, the universal Word, the one that cuts away.

'Behold a wise man subject to reproofs.'

This man is one who is making progress and is still at the beginning.

But the perfect man is untroubled;

he is not subject to reproofs, he does not turn aside from the mouth—that is, from the Word—of God.

'Make it known to a righteous man, and he will increase in receiving it;'

'a righteous man is his own accuser in the first speaking (in his first plea).'

In general he has something for which he will accuse himself.

But the one who is truly perfectly righteous does not sin;

he has been begotten of God unto righteousness, and everyone who has been begotten of God does not commit sin.

He who does not commit sin is perfectly righteous—concerning whom also the Saviour has spoken in the Gospel:

'Many prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them.'

But the gnashing of the teeth belongs to one who has condemned himself;

for having watched closely he did not seize him, did not strike, did not wound, and so, at his failure, he gnashes his teeth.

But often the gnashing of the teeth signifies repentance (regret), as also in the Gospel concerning him who was bound hand and foot and cast into the outer darkness that has been prepared for the devil and his angels:

'There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

And the 'there,' again in this passage, signifies such a condition (state).

'But the Lord shall laugh at him, for He foreseeth that his day is coming.'