title: Coll. 8

title_alt:
De dono intellectus
On the gift of understanding

source_text:
<!-- page 493 -->

### COLLATIO VIII.
#### *De dono intellectus.*

### Summarium

*Introductio; utile est omnibus audire verbum Dei,* 1. — *Expositio textus, in quo innuitur dispositio ex parte hoc donum suscipientis, et liberalis diffusio ex parte dantis. Primo per modum prooemii agitur de triplici dispositione ex parte suscipientis,* 2. — *Prima est vitae sanctimonia,* 3. — *Secunda, mansuetudinis tractabilitas,* 4. — *Tertia, intelligentiae captivatio,* 5. — *De liberalitate ex parte dantis. A prima intelligentia est omnis radiositas intelligentiae; notantur specialiter tres, quarum duae priores exponuntur,* 6. — Pars I. De intellectu, qui est regula circumspectionum moralium. *Oportet, quod homo dirigatur secundum divinas regulas, ut hoc donum recipiat,* 7. — *Intellectus tria docet: primo, quid evitandum,* 8. — *Secundo, quid exsequendum,* 9. — *Tertio, quid exspectandum,* 10. — *Haec confirmantur per Scripturam,* 11. — Pars II. De intellectu, qui est ianua considerationum scientialium. *Hic habet triplicem radicem,* 12. — *Primo, partim est a dictamine naturae,* 13. — *Secundo, partim a frequentia experientiae,* 14. — *Tertio, partim ex illustratione lucis aeternae; triplex certitudo; haec illuminatio iuvatur per Angelos; Deus causa essendi in anima ut principium, ordo vivendi ut donum infusum, ratio intelligendi ut sol intelligentiae,* 15. — *Contra haec tria sunt tres errores, scilicet de aeternitate mundi, de necessitate fatali et de unitate intellectus,* 16-19. — *Quomodo differant tres intellectus,* 20.

1. *Benedicam Dominum, qui tribuit mihi intellectum*[^p493-7]. — *Audiens sapiens sapientior erit, et intelligens gubernacula possidebit.* In secundo verbo ostendit Salomon, quod utile est audire verbum Dei;

<!-- page 494 -->
et ratio est, quia in auditu verbi Dei proficit et ille qui intelligit, et similiter ille qui non intelligit: ergo et sapientes et simplices ire debent ad audiendum verbum Dei. Quod sapientes proficiant audiendo verbum Dei, patet, quia dicit, quod *audiens sapiens sapientiam sapientior erit.* Item, quod proficiant simplices audiendo verbum Dei, patet, quia dicitur in Psalmo[^p494-1]: *Declaratio sermonum tuorum illuminat et intellectum dat parvulis. Parvulus* appellatur hic qui propter mediocritatem scientiae suae parvulus dicitur, sicut parvam animam dicitur habere qui pauca novit, et similiter magni intellectus dicitur qui multa novit. *Parvulus* etiam dicitur qui humiliter se habet, etsi multa noverit et sit multum intelligens. Unde in Evangelio[^p494-2] dicitur: *Abscondisti haec a sapientibus et prudentibus, et revelasti ea parvulis,* id est humilibus. — Nihil enim tam obscurat intellectum in his quae Dei sunt, sicut praesumtio. Omnes laudamus humilitatem et vituperamus praesumtionem; pauci tamen immunes sunt a praesumtione. Dicit Richardus de sancto Victore, quod «disputando contra superbiam homo frequenter superbit». Ecce, quod fortis deceptor decipit multos. Nullus potest illuminare corda hominum, nisi ille qui novit conscientias hominum. In principio rogemus Deum etc.

2. *Benedicam Dominum* etc. Istud breve verbum est ipsius David per Spiritum sanctum explicantis nobis ipsum *donum intellectus*[^p494-3] datum nobis a Spiritu sancto, et explicat ipsum nobis quantum ad *suscipientis gratitudinem humilem* et quantum ad *dantis diffusionem liberalem.* Suscipientis gratitudo humilis notatur, cum dicit: *Benedicam Dominum;* dantis liberalis diffusio notatur, cum subdit: *Qui tribuit mihi intellectum.* Donum istud requirit, hominem esse gratum Deo, et facit, quod homo recognoscat se ipsum et donum et doni principium; et intelligendo doni principium recognoscat homo se ipsum, et sic gratias agat. Et tunc benedicit Deum et refundit pulcritudinem doni in ipsum auctorem doni et ipsum laudat et dantem non impugnat. — Disponimus autem nos ad suscipiendum istud donum per tria: primo, per *vitae sanctimoniam;* secundo, per *mansuetudinis tractabilitatem;* et tertio, per *intelligentiae captivationem,* ut benedicamus auctorem istius doni.

3. Primo, dico, disponimus nos ad recipiendum istud donum intellectus per *vitae sanctimoniam;* unde Isaias[^p494-4]: *Quem docebit scientiam, et quem intelligere faciet auditum? Ablactatos a lacte et avulsos ab uberibus.* — *Lac* significat dulcedinem delectationum carnalium, qua dulcedine pascuntur carnales et infantes, id est, qui sequuntur motus infantiles. Et quamdiu homo coniunctus est istis consolationibus carnalibus, dicitur lactans et non est idoneus ad suscipiendum solidum cibum vitae et intellectus. Si volumus benedicere Deum et recipere istud donum, oportet, quod simus avulsi ab istis consolationibus et sequestremus nos a lacte concupiscentiarum. De Daniele[^p494-5] et sociis eius, qui continentes erant, dicitur, quod *dedit eis Deus scientiam et disciplinam in omni libro et sapientia.* Delectatio circa tactum impugnat maxime istud donum, ebrietas ex parte anteriori et luxuria ex parte posteriori.

4. Secundo disponitur homo ad recipiendum istud donum per *mansuetudinis tractabilitatem.* Unde in Ecclesiastico[^p494-6]: *Esto mansuetus ad audiendum verbum, ut intelligas.* Concupiscentia obnubilat intellectum, et furor impedit intelligentiam, quia «impedit ira animum, ne possit cernere verum». — Philosophus dicit, quod, «quiescendo anima fit prudens et sciens». Quando aqua est quieta, tunc homo videt in ea bene faciem suam; sed quando est turbata, tunc nihil potest in ea videre. Ita, quando homo est in ira, tunc non videt veritatem. Contentiosi intelligentiam impediunt in se et in aliis. Iratus etiam pertinaciter defendit falsum. Unde Legislator mitissimus fuit. Dicit Isaias[^p494-7]: *Tantummodo sola vexatio intellectum dabit auditui.* Homo tractabilis addiscit et fit mitis.

5. Tertio disponitur homo ad donum intellectus digne suscipiendum per *intelligentiae captivationem.* Unde Isaias[^p494-8] secundum translationem Septuaginta dicit: *Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis.* Et Augustinus dicit: «Nisi homo captivet intellectum suum et sequatur per fidem ea quae audit, non disponitur ad donum intellectus». Et Apostolus[^p494-9] dicit: *Captivantes intellectum in obsequium Christi.* Qui secundum lucem intelligentiae suae vult sacram Scripturam indagare, cogitat errores falsissimos. In vita ista sumus parvuli, et «oportet addiscentem credere[^p494-10]»;

<!-- page 495 -->
Deo enim oportet credere et maxime in sublimibus, quae transcendunt intelligentiam nostram. Primus Angelus erravit, quia praesumsit de se. — *Concupiscibilis* deordinata impedit istud donum; similiter et *irascibilis,* quando est deordinata; sed quando *rationalis* est deordinata, maxime impedit istud donum. Oportet igitur, quod captivemus intellectum nostrum, si volumus suscipere istud donum. Furibundus est qui omnia despicit; non est dispositus ad suscipiendum istud donum nec praesumtuosus. Oportet igitur, quod captivemus intellectum nostrum, quia qui plus credit scire frequenter minus scit. — Per ista tria disponitur homo ad digne suscipiendum donum intellectus. Patet modo primum, scilicet *suscipientis humilis gratitudo.*

6. Sequitur *liberalitas ex parte dantis,* quae tangitur, cum dicit: *Qui tribuit mihi intellectum.* Deus det mihi aliquid dicere et tribuat mihi intellectum ad dicendum aliquid congruum de isto dono intellectus. — Omnis radiositas intelligentiae ab illo fonte intelligentiae venit. Et licet multiformis sit radiositas intelligentiae, volo tamen ad praesens dicere de tribus, scilicet quod intellectus est *regula circumspectionum moralium, ianua considerationum scientialium* et *clavis contemplationum caelestium;* et iste est donum[^p495-1].

7. Primo incipiam ab illo qui est *regula circumspectionum moralium.* Oportet enim, te esse morigeratum, si vis habere istud donum intellectus. Psalmus[^p495-2]: *Intellectum dabo tibi et instruam te in via hac, qua gradieris; firmabo super te oculos meos. Nolite fieri sicut equus et mulus, quibus non est intellectus.* Dominus promittit nobis istum intellectum et ostendit nobis, qualiter debemus ipsum recipere. — *Firmabo,* inquit, *super te oculos meos.* Divina complacentia acceptat quod facimus approbando in praesenti et remunerando in futuro. Si vis regulari secundum istam regulam, caveas tibi, quod non sis bestialis, sed regularis: non dirigaris secundum impetum sensus, sed secundum iudicium rationis; non secundum phantasmata bestialia, sed secundum iudicia intellectualia. Aliter accidet tibi quod accidit Adae, qui, contempta regula veritatis, secutus est instinctum mulieris, et mulier secuta est instinctum serpentis. Psalmus[^p495-3]: *Homo, cum in honore esset, non intellexit; comparatus est iumentis insipientibus et similis factus est illis.* Factus est homo brutalis et subiectus passionibus.

8. Iste intellectus *prudentialis* est, quo instruitur homo secundum dictamen divinae legis ad cognoscendum, *quid evitandum,* quia omne *malum; quid exsequendum,* quia omne *bonum;* et *quid exspectandum,* quia *summum bonum.* — Primo, dico, intellectus prudentialis docet, *quid evitandum,* quia omne malum. Unde dicit Sapiens[^p495-4]: *Si sapientiam invocaveris et inclinaveris cor tuum prudentiae et quaesieris eam quasi pecuniam, et sicut thesauros effoderis illam; tunc intelliges timorem Domini et scientiam Dei invenies.* Qui intellectum istum vult habere, debet ipsum quaerere cum desiderio cordis et studiositate operis; et quid tunc invenies? Certe, timorem Domini et scientiam Dei. Quod omnis homo, qui vult dirigi in bonum, debet timere Deum, ut vitet omne malum; dicit Psalmus[^p495-5]: *Sanctum,* inquit, *et terribile nomen eius; initium sapientiae timor Domini; intellectus bonus omnibus facientibus eum.* Ecce, *timor Domini sapientia, et recedere a malo prudentia,* dicit sapiens. — Igitur intellectus prudentialis docet primo, quid evitandum, quia omne malum.

9. Secundo docet, *quid exsequendum,* quia omne bonum secundum viam interioris cogitatus et exterioris operationis. Scribitur in Iosue[^p495-6]: *Non declines a lege;* sequitur: *ut intelligas cuncta, quae agis. Sapientia callidi est intelligere viam suam, et imprudentia stultorum errans.* Scribitur: *Si est tibi intellectus, responde proximo tuo; si non, sit manus tua super os tuum.* Et in libro Sapientiae: *Spiritus sanctus disciplinae effugiet fictum et auferet se a cogitationibus, quae sunt sine intellectu.* Deus enim vult, quod omnia agamus rationabiliter. Et beatus Ambrosius[^p495-7] dicit, quod nihil agere nec loqui debemus de eo, de quo non possimus reddere rationem. — Ista est secunda pars intellectus moralis. Dicit Salomon: *Omni negotio tempus est et opportunitas.*

10. Tertio instruit intellectus prudentialis, *quid exspectandum,* quia summum bonum. Unde in Proverbiis[^p495-8]: *Gemma gratissima exspectatio postulantis; quocumque se vertit, prudenter intelligit.* In omnibus, quae dirigunt intelligentiam nostram in agendis et in vitandis, debet homo uti consilio finis. Oportet enim, quod homo aliquid exspectet in eo quod agit. Si intendis temporale commodum, vilem mercedem exspectas. Grata, immo gratissima gemma est bonum aeternum. Unde in Baruch[^p495-9]: *Disce, ubi sit prudentia, ubi sit virtus, ubi sit intellectus, ut scias simul, ubi sit longiturnitas vitae et victus, ubi sit lumen oculorum et pax.* — Dicit: *ut scias, ubi sit longiturnitas vitae et victus, lumen oculorum et pax.* Et ubi est? Certe, *longitudo dierum in dextera eius*[^p495-10]; et Psalmus dicit: *Apud te*

<!-- page 496 -->
*est fons vitae* etc. Si lumen oculorum habetis, prudenter agetis.

11. Hic est intellectus prudentialis triplex, et qui non habet istum intellectum rectificari non potest. Unde scribitur[^p496-1]: *Gens absque consilio est et sine prudentia; utinam saperent et intelligerent ac novissima providerent.* Tangit tres partes intelligentiae, scilicet *memoriam praeteritorum, intelligentiam praesentium* et *circumspectionem futurorum.* — Intellectus iste est regula circumspectionum moralium cum desiderio cordis et prosecutione operis, ut homo consideret, quid sit vitandum, quid agendum, et quid exspectandum. Deus enim dat istum intellectum, et est donum Dei. Unde Psalmus[^p496-2]: *Intellectum tibi dabo et instruam te in via hac, qua gradieris.*

12. Alius est intellectus, qui est *ianua considerationum scientialium,* de quo dicitur in Ecclesiastico[^p496-3]: *In thesauris sapientiae intellectus* etc.; hoc est dicere, quod thesauri absconditi scientiae vel consistunt in cognitione causarum altissimarum, vel conclusionum, vel principiorum. Et oportet fodere per studium veritatis, ut homo ad istum thesaurum perveniat. — Iste intellectus, qui est ianua considerationum scientialium, partim est *a dictamine naturae,* id est a lumine interiori; partim *ex frequentia experientiae,* sicut a lumine exteriori; et partim *ex illustratione lucis aeternae,* sicut a lumine superiori.

13. Quod sit partim ex *dictamine naturae,* patet in Ecclesiastico[^p496-4], ubi dicitur: *Deus de terra creavit hominem,* scilicet quantum ad corpus, *et secundum imaginem suam fecit illum,* scilicet quantum ad animam. Sequitur: *Creavit ex ipso adiutorium simile sibi; consilium et linguam et oculos et aures et cor dedit illis excogitandi, et disciplina intellectus replevit illos.* Dat intelligere, quod anima humana tres habet operationes, secundum quod est eius potentia et operatio. «Omnis anima nobilis tres habet operationes[^p496-5]», quibus se convertit super corpus suum, super se et ad divina. Aliquando convertit se super corpus: habet linguam ad loquendum, aures ad audiendum etc.; aliquando convertit se super se; aliquando ad *intelligendum* et cognoscendum Deum. — Et hoc est secundum triplicem considerationem animae; consideratur enim anima ut *forma et perfectio corporis,* ut *hoc aliquid*[^p496-6] et ut *imago.* — Quod autem iste intellectus sit partim a dictamine naturae, patet in Adam, quia omnibus rebus nomina imposuit[^p496-7]. Sed quod Deus eum replevit *disciplina intellectus,* istud fuit privilegium eius; unde non est in nobis. Anima autem nostra habet supra se quoddam lumen naturae signatum, per quod habilis est ad cognoscenda prima principia, sed illud solum non sufficit, quia, secundum Philosophum[^p496-8], «principia cognoscimus, in quantum terminos cognoscimus». Quando enim scio, quid totum, quid pars; statim scio, quod «omne totum maius est sua parte».

14. Secundo dico, quod partim est a *frequentia experientiae;* in Ecclesiastico[^p496-9]: *Vir in multis expertus cognoscet multa.* Philosophus: «Ex multis *sensibus* fit una *memoria;* ex multis *memoriis* fit una *experientia;* ex multis *experientiis* fit unum universale, quod est principium *artis* et *scientiae*».

15. Et quantumcumque homo habeat *naturale iudicatorium* bonum et cum hoc *frequentiam experientiae,* non sufficiunt, nisi sit *illustratio per divinam influentiam.* Unde dicitur in Daniele[^p496-10]: *Dat sapientiam sapientibus et scientiam intelligentibus disciplinam. Ipse revelat profunda et abscondita et novit in tenebris constituta; et lux cum eo est.* Tangit certitudinem *sapientialem, scientialem* et *intellectualem.* Sed unde est ista certitudo? Certe a Deo. Certitudinem sapientialem tangit, cum dicit: *Ipse revelat profunda.* Apostolus: *Ipse illuxit in cordibus nostris ad illuminationem scientiae claritatis Dei.* Lux ista pura est et *est cum eo;* unde in Ioanne: *Ipse est lux vera, quae illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum.* Nullus certitudinaliter illuminatur nisi per ipsum. Et Augustinus decimo quarto de Trinitate[^p496-11] quaerit, unde hoc, quod impius bene iudicat aliquando; unde quaerit: «Ubi scriptae sunt illae leges iustitiae, secundum quas iudicat bene impius»? Et respondet, quod «scriptae sunt in libro lucis aeternae, et non migrando, sed imprimendo descendunt in animam, sicut imago anuli, quae cerae imprimi-

<!-- page 497 -->
tur, anulum non relinquit» etc. — Haec autem illuminatio iuvatur per Angelos; in Daniele[^p497-1] dicitur: *Factum est autem, cum viderem ego Daniel visionem et quaererem intelligentiam; ecce, stetit in conspectu meo quasi species viri* etc.; *et clamavit et ait: Gabriel, fac intelligere istum visionem.* Visiones istae descenderunt a Patre luminum, et Angelus adiuvat intellectum Danielis, ut capiat lucem Dei et per hanc intelligat. Dicit Glossa, quod intellectus per naturam habet vim intelligendi, secundum quod discernitur homo a pecore; sed solus Deus illuminat perfecte. Verum est, quod homo ministerialiter et adminiculative per Angelum instruitur, sicut patuit in Daniele; sed effective solus Deus habet potestatem super ipsam animam rationalem, quia ipsa immediate a Deo formatur. Ipse enim illuminat omnem hominem. Unde Angelus sic illuminat, sicut ille qui fenestram aperit, dicitur illuminare domum. «Solus enim habet cathedram in caelis qui docet hominem in terris». — Unde non est verum quod dicunt philosophi, quod una Intelligentia aliam creat, quia *creare* est omnipotentis Dei, non alicuius virtutis creatae; unde illius lucis, quae est actus purus, est hoc facere. Dixit Paulus in Actibus Apostolorum,[^p497-2]: *In ipso vivimus et movemur et sumus;* et dicit Augustinus, quod Apostolus non loquitur ibi de vita corporali, sed de vita intellectuali. Unde loquitur ibi de Deo, secundum quod est omnibus «causa essendi, ratio intelligendi et ordo vivendi». *Causa* est *essendi* immediate producens omnia perpetua, mediate vero temporalia, immediate tamen per virtutes elementares. *Ratio* autem *intelligendi* est, quia certificantur per ipsum intelligentiae super transmutabilitatem naturae. Si omnes creaturae impugnarent, Deus tamen est amandus; nec Deus potest facere, quin sit amandus. Corruptis omnibus, remanet certitudo veritatis. Est etiam Deus *ordo vivendi;* nisi donum Spiritus sancti inhabitat in homine, non regetur secundum regulam rectae vitae. — Secundum quod Deus est *causa essendi,* intrat in animam ut principium; secundum vero quod est *ordo vivendi,* intrat in animam ut donum infusum; secundum quod est *ratio intelligendi,* intrat in animam ut sol intelligentiae. Iste est sol, qui omnes illuminat; a quo aliqui aberrant, secundum quod dicunt impii in libro Sapientiae[^p497-3]: *Ergo erravimus a via veritatis et iustitiae; lumen non luxit nobis, et sol intelligentiae non est ortus nobis* etc.

16. Tres sunt errores cavendi in scientiis, qui sacram Scripturam et fidem christianam et omnem sapientiam exterminant; quorum unus est contra *causam essendi,* alius contra *rationem intelligendi,* et tertius contra *ordinem vivendi*[^p497-4]. Error contra causam essendi est de aeternitate mundi, ut ponere mundum aeternum. Error contra rationem intelligendi est de necessitate fatali, sicut ponere, quod omnia eveniunt de necessitate. Tertius est de unitate intellectus humani, sicut ponere, quod unus est intellectus in omnibus. — Isti errores significantur in Apocalypsi in numero nominis bestiae. Dicitur ibi[^p497-5], quod *habuit nomen, cuius numerus sexcenti sexaginta sex,* qui est numerus cyclicus. Primi fundant se super circulum motus et temporis; secundi, supra motum siderum; tertii, supra Intelligentiam unam, dicendo, quod ingreditur et egreditur in corpus. — Totum istud est falsum. Primus error refellitur per id quod scriptum est in veteri testamento: *In principio creavit Deus caelum et terram*[^p497-6]. Secun-

<!-- page 498 -->
dum errorem secundum nihil est de libero arbitrio, nihil valet crux Christi. Secundum tertium non est differentia in merito et praemio, si una est anima Christi et Iudae proditoris. Totum est haereticum.

17. Primus, dico, error destruit *causam essendi*: quia tu sentis, Deum esse causam omnium aut secundum *partem,* aut secundum *totum.* Si secundum *partem:* ergo aufers Deo suam principalitatem causandi. Si secundum *totum:* ergo cuiuscumque alterius Deus est causa: ergo producit illud non de se ipso, non de aliquo alio, quia nihil est: ergo de nihilo[^p498-1]. — Item, sequitur secundum istum errorem, quod res habuit simul *esse* et *non-esse,* et quod *esse* ante *non-esse;* et multa alia inconvenientia. Unde certum est, quod Deus omnia creavit. Et ideo dixit illa bona mulier filio suo in libro Machabaeorum[^p498-2], quod respiceret omnia, *quia de nihilo ea creavit Deus.*

18. Secundus error est de necessitate fatali, sicut de constellationibus: si homo sit natus in tali constellatione, de necessitate erit latro, vel malus, vel bonus. Istud evacuat liberum arbitrium et meritum et praemium: quia, si homo facit ex necessitate quod facit, quid valet libertas arbitrii? Quid merebitur? — Sequitur etiam, quod Deus sit origo omnium malorum. Verum est, quod aliqua dispositio relinquitur ex stellis; sed tamen solus Deus principatur animae rationali. Dicit Ieremias[^p498-3]: *Confundentur vehementer, quia non intellexerunt opprobrium sempiternum.* Opprobrium sempiternum habebunt qui sic errant.

19. Tertius error est pessimus, qui comprehendit utrumque. Aliqui insani male intellexerunt de intellectu. Unde quidam dixerunt, quod esset *ignis;* quidam, quod *aqua;* isti reprobati sunt per philosophos[^p498-4]. — Quod iste intellectus sit unus in omnibus, istud est contra radicem distinctionis et individuationis, quia in diversis intellectus habet *esse* distinctum: ergo habet principia suae essentiae propria et distincta et individuantia. — Quod alii dicunt, quod una Intelligentia irradiat super omnes; istud est impossibile; quia nulla creatura istud potest. Unde hoc est solius Dei.

20. «Omnis substantia intellectualis est sciens et rediens supra se reditione completa[^p498-5]». Unde omnis substantia intellectualis intelligit se et diligit et iudicat. Unde habet rationem speculi et lucem super illud radiantem. Et hoc quidem verum est in Deo, et tam in Angelo quam in homine; sed differenter: quia in Deo idem sunt *speculum* et *lux* ipsa *re,* sed differunt *ratione.* In Angelo autem differunt *ratione* et *natura*[^p498-6], sed non *tempore,* quia non potest intelligere plus quam intelligat, quia «intelligentia plena est formis[^p498-7]». Sed in homine differunt et *ratione* et *natura* et *tempore,* quia homo non statim intelligit, cum potest intelligere. Sic ergo intellectus humanus habet rationem *apprehendentis* et *iudicantis,* intellectum *possibilem* et *agentem;* nec potest iste intellectus sufficienter illuminari sine adminiculo superioris et altioris lucis, quia Sapiens[^p498-8] dicit: *Corpus, quod corrumpitur, aggravat animam* etc.; et Philosophus dicit: «Sicut se habet oculus vespertilionis ad lucem solis, sic se habet intellectus noster ad manifestissima naturae».

De tertio intellectu, scilicet qui est *clavis contemplationum caelestium,* longum esset dicere[^p498-9]. Rogabimus Dominum etc.

---

english:
<!-- page 493 -->

### COLLATION VIII.
#### *On the gift of understanding.*

### Summarium

*Introduction; it is profitable for all to hear the word of God,* 1. — *Exposition of the text, in which is intimated the disposition on the part of him who receives this gift, and the liberal outpouring on the part of the giver. First, by way of preface, the threefold disposition on the part of the receiver is treated,* 2. — *The first is holiness of life,* 3. — *The second, the tractableness of meekness,* 4. — *The third, the taking captive of the intelligence,* 5. — *On the liberality on the part of the giver. From the first intelligence comes all the radiance of intelligence; three are noted in particular, of which the two former are expounded,* 6. — Part I. On the understanding which is the rule of moral circumspections. *A man must be directed according to the divine rules if he is to receive this gift,* 7. — *The understanding teaches three things: first, what is to be avoided,* 8. — *Secondly, what is to be carried through,* 9. — *Thirdly, what is to be looked for,* 10. — *These things are confirmed by Scripture,* 11. — Part II. On the understanding which is the door of scientific considerations. *This has a threefold root,* 12. — *First, it is partly from the dictate of nature,* 13. — *Secondly, partly from frequency of experience,* 14. — *Thirdly, partly from the illumination of the eternal light; the threefold certitude; this illumination is helped by the Angels; God is the cause of being in the soul as its principle, the order of living as an infused gift, the reason of understanding as the sun of intelligence,* 15. — *Against these three there are three errors, namely on the eternity of the world, on fatal necessity and on the unity of the understanding,* 16-19. — *How the three understandings differ,* 20.

1. *I will bless the Lord, who hath given me understanding*[^p493-7]. — *A wise man shall hear and shall be wiser, and he that understandeth shall possess governments.* In the second saying Solomon shows that it is profitable to hear the word of God;

<!-- page 494 -->
and the reason is that in the hearing of the word of God both he who understands and likewise he who does not understand make progress: therefore both the wise and the simple ought to go to hear the word of God. That the wise make progress by hearing the word of God is plain, because he says that *a wise man hearing wisdom shall be wiser.* Likewise, that the simple make progress by hearing the word of God is plain, because it is said in the Psalm[^p494-1]: *The declaration of thy words giveth light, and giveth understanding to little ones.* He is here called a *little one* who is called little on account of the middling measure of his knowledge, just as he is said to have a small soul who knows few things, and likewise he is said to be of great understanding who knows many things. He is also called a *little one* who bears himself humbly, even though he knows many things and is very intelligent. Whence it is said in the Gospel[^p494-2]: *Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones,* that is, to the humble. — For nothing so darkens the understanding in the things that are God's as presumption. We all praise humility and blame presumption; yet few are free from presumption. Richard of Saint Victor says that "in disputing against pride a man frequently grows proud." Behold how the strong deceiver deceives many. No one can enlighten the hearts of men except him who knows the consciences of men. At the outset let us pray to God, etc.

2. *I will bless the Lord,* etc. This brief saying is that of David himself, expounding to us by the Holy Spirit that very *gift of understanding*[^p494-3] given to us by the Holy Spirit; and he expounds it to us in respect of *the humble gratitude of the receiver* and in respect of *the liberal outpouring of the giver.* The receiver's humble gratitude is noted when he says: *I will bless the Lord;* the giver's liberal outpouring is noted when he adds: *Who hath given me understanding.* This gift requires that a man be thankful to God, and it brings it about that a man acknowledges himself and the gift and the source of the gift; and by understanding the source of the gift a man acknowledges himself, and so gives thanks. And then he blesses God and pours back the beauty of the gift upon the author of the gift himself, and praises him and does not fight against the giver. — Now we dispose ourselves to receive this gift by three things: first, by *holiness of life;* secondly, by *the tractableness of meekness;* and thirdly, by *the taking captive of the intelligence,* that we may bless the author of this gift.

3. First, I say, we dispose ourselves to receive this gift of understanding by *holiness of life;* whence Isaiah[^p494-4]: *Whom shall he teach knowledge, and whom shall he make to understand the hearing? Them that are weaned from the milk, that are drawn away from the breasts.* — *Milk* signifies the sweetness of carnal delights, on which sweetness the carnal and infants feed, that is, those who follow infantile motions. And so long as a man is joined to these carnal consolations he is said to be a suckling and is not fit to receive the solid food of life and of understanding. If we wish to bless God and to receive this gift, we must be drawn away from these consolations and set ourselves apart from the milk of concupiscences. Of Daniel[^p494-5] and his companions, who were continent, it is said that *God gave them knowledge and skill in every book and wisdom.* Delight in respect of touch fights hardest against this gift — drunkenness on the side in front, and lust on the side behind.

4. Secondly, a man is disposed to receive this gift by *the tractableness of meekness.* Whence in Ecclesiasticus[^p494-6]: *Be meek to hear the word, that thou mayst understand.* Concupiscence beclouds the understanding, and fury impedes the intelligence, because "anger hinders the mind, that it cannot discern the truth." — The Philosopher says that "by being at rest the soul becomes prudent and knowing." When water is still, a man sees his own face well in it; but when it is troubled, he can see nothing in it. So too, when a man is in anger, he does not see the truth. The contentious impede intelligence both in themselves and in others. The angry man also stubbornly defends what is false. Hence the Lawgiver was most meek. Isaiah says[^p494-7]: *Vexation alone shall make you understand what you hear.* A tractable man learns and becomes gentle.

5. Thirdly, a man is disposed worthily to receive the gift of understanding by *the taking captive of the intelligence.* Whence Isaiah[^p494-8], according to the translation of the Septuagint, says: *Unless you believe, you shall not understand.* And Augustine says: "Unless a man take his understanding captive and follow by faith the things he hears, he is not disposed for the gift of understanding." And the Apostle[^p494-9] says: *Bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ.* He who wishes to search out sacred Scripture according to the light of his own intelligence thinks up the falsest errors. In this life we are little ones, and "the learner must believe[^p494-10]";

<!-- page 495 -->
for God must be believed, and most of all in things sublime, which transcend our intelligence. The first Angel erred because he presumed upon himself. — The *concupiscible* power, when disordered, impedes this gift; likewise the *irascible,* when it is disordered; but when the *rational* is disordered, it impedes this gift most of all. We must therefore take our understanding captive if we wish to receive this gift. He is raging mad who despises everything; he is not disposed to receive this gift, nor is the presumptuous man. We must therefore take our understanding captive, because he who believes he knows more frequently knows less. — By these three a man is disposed worthily to receive the gift of understanding. So now the first is plain, namely *the humble gratitude of the receiver.*

6. There follows *the liberality on the part of the giver,* which is touched on when he says: *Who hath given me understanding.* May God grant me something to say and give me understanding to say something fitting about this gift of understanding. — All the radiance of intelligence comes from that fountain of intelligence. And although the radiance of intelligence is manifold, I wish nevertheless for the present to speak of three, namely that the understanding is the *rule of moral circumspections,* the *door of scientific considerations,* and the *key of heavenly contemplations;* and this last is the gift[^p495-1].

7. First I shall begin from that which is the *rule of moral circumspections.* For you must be well-mannered if you wish to have this gift of understanding. The Psalm[^p495-2]: *I will give thee understanding, and I will instruct thee in this way, in which thou shalt go; I will fix my eyes upon thee. Do not become like the horse and the mule, who have no understanding.* The Lord promises us this understanding and shows us how we ought to receive it. — *I will fix,* he says, *my eyes upon thee.* The divine good pleasure accepts what we do, approving it in the present and rewarding it in the future. If you wish to be ruled according to this rule, take heed that you be not bestial but regular: be not directed according to the impulse of sense, but according to the judgment of reason; not according to bestial phantasms, but according to intellectual judgments. Otherwise there will happen to you what happened to Adam, who, despising the rule of truth, followed the prompting of the woman, and the woman followed the prompting of the serpent. The Psalm[^p495-3]: *Man, when he was in honour, did not understand; he is compared to senseless beasts, and is become like to them.* Man became brutish and subject to the passions.

8. This understanding is *prudential,* by which a man is instructed according to the dictate of the divine law to know *what is to be avoided,* namely every *evil; what is to be carried through,* namely every *good;* and *what is to be looked for,* namely the *highest good.* — First, I say, prudential understanding teaches *what is to be avoided,* namely every evil. Whence the Wise Man says[^p495-4]: *If thou shalt call for wisdom and incline thy heart to prudence, and shalt seek her as money, and shalt dig for her as for a treasure; then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and shalt find the knowledge of God.* He who wishes to have this understanding must seek it with desire of heart and diligence of work; and what will you find then? Assuredly, the fear of the Lord and the knowledge of God. That every man who wishes to be directed toward the good must fear God, so as to shun every evil, the Psalm says[^p495-5]: *Holy,* he says, *and terrible is his name; the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding to all that do it.* Behold: *the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom, and to depart from evil, that is prudence,* says the wise man. — Therefore prudential understanding teaches first what is to be avoided, namely every evil.

9. Secondly it teaches *what is to be carried through,* namely every good, according to the way of interior thought and exterior operation. It is written in Josue[^p495-6]: *Decline not from the law;* there follows: *that thou mayst understand all things which thou doest. The wisdom of a discreet man is to understand his way, and the imprudence of fools erreth.* It is written: *If thou have understanding, answer thy neighbour; but if not, let thy hand be upon thy mouth.* And in the book of Wisdom: *The Holy Spirit of discipline will flee from the deceitful, and will withdraw himself from thoughts that are without understanding.* For God wills that we do all things reasonably. And blessed Ambrose[^p495-7] says that we ought neither to do nor to say anything of which we cannot give a reason. — This is the second part of moral understanding. Solomon says: *For every business there is a time and opportunity.*

10. Thirdly, prudential understanding instructs *what is to be looked for,* namely the highest good. Whence in Proverbs[^p495-8]: *The expectation of him that asketh is a most acceptable jewel; whithersoever he turneth himself, he understandeth prudently.* In all the things that direct our intelligence in what is to be done and in what is to be shunned, a man ought to use the counsel of the end. For a man must look for something in what he does. If you aim at temporal advantage, you look for a cheap wage. A pleasing, indeed a most pleasing jewel, is the eternal good. Whence in Baruch[^p495-9]: *Learn where is prudence, where is strength, where is understanding, that thou mayst know also where is length of days and life, where is the light of the eyes and peace.* — He says: *that thou mayst know where is length of days and life, the light of the eyes and peace.* And where is it? Assuredly, *length of days is in her right hand*[^p495-10]; and the Psalm says: *With thee*

<!-- page 496 -->
*is the fountain of life,* etc. If you have the light of the eyes, you will act prudently.

11. This prudential understanding is threefold, and he who has not this understanding cannot be set right. Whence it is written[^p496-1]: *They are a nation without counsel and without prudence; O that they would be wise and would understand, and would provide for their last end.* He touches the three parts of intelligence, namely *memory of things past, intelligence of things present,* and *circumspection of things to come.* — This understanding is the rule of moral circumspections, with desire of heart and carrying through of work, so that a man may consider what is to be shunned, what is to be done, and what is to be looked for. For God gives this understanding, and it is God's gift. Whence the Psalm[^p496-2]: *I will give thee understanding, and I will instruct thee in this way, in which thou shalt go.*

12. There is another understanding, which is the *door of scientific considerations,* of which it is said in Ecclesiasticus[^p496-3]: *In the treasures of wisdom is understanding,* etc.; which is to say that the hidden treasures of knowledge consist either in the cognition of the highest causes, or of conclusions, or of principles. And one must dig by the study of truth, that a man may come to this treasure. — This understanding, which is the door of scientific considerations, is partly *from the dictate of nature,* that is, from an interior light; partly *from frequency of experience,* as from an exterior light; and partly *from the illumination of the eternal light,* as from a light above.

13. That it is partly from the *dictate of nature* is plain in Ecclesiasticus[^p496-4], where it is said: *God created man of the earth,* that is, as to the body, *and made him after his own image,* that is, as to the soul. There follows: *He created of him a helper like to himself; counsel and a tongue and eyes and ears and a heart he gave them to devise, and he filled them with the discipline of understanding.* He gives us to understand that the human soul has three operations, according as it has its power and its operation. "Every noble soul has three operations[^p496-5]," by which it turns itself upon its own body, upon itself, and to divine things. Sometimes it turns itself upon the body: it has a tongue for speaking, ears for hearing, etc.; sometimes it turns itself upon itself; sometimes to *understanding* and knowing God. — And this is according to the threefold consideration of the soul; for the soul is considered as *the form and perfection of the body,* as *this something*[^p496-6] and as *image.* — But that this understanding is partly from the dictate of nature is plain in Adam, since he imposed names on all things[^p496-7]. But that God filled him with the *discipline of understanding* was his privilege; whence it is not in us. Our soul, however, has stamped upon it a certain light of nature, by which it is fit to know first principles; but that alone does not suffice, because, according to the Philosopher[^p496-8], "we know principles inasmuch as we know terms." For when I know what a whole is and what a part is, at once I know that "every whole is greater than its part."

14. Secondly I say that it is partly from *frequency of experience;* in Ecclesiasticus[^p496-9]: *A man that hath much experience shall know many things.* The Philosopher: "Out of many *sensations* one *memory* is made; out of many *memories* one *experience;* out of many *experiences* one universal, which is the principle of *art* and *science.*"

15. And however good a *natural power of judgment* a man may have, and with it *frequency of experience,* they do not suffice unless there be *illumination by a divine influence.* Whence it is said in Daniel[^p496-10]: *He giveth wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to them that have understanding. He revealeth deep and hidden things, and knoweth what is in darkness; and light is with him.* He touches the *sapiential, scientific* and *intellectual* certitude. But whence is this certitude? Assuredly from God. He touches sapiential certitude when he says: *He revealeth deep things.* The Apostle: *He hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God.* This light is pure and *is with him;* whence in John: *He was the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.* No one is enlightened with certitude save through him. And Augustine, in the fourteenth book *On the Trinity*[^p496-11], asks whence it comes that the impious man sometimes judges well; whence he asks: "Where are written those laws of justice according to which the impious man judges well?" And he answers that "they are written in the book of the eternal light, and they descend into the soul not by migrating but by imprinting, as the image of a ring which is impressed on wax

<!-- page 497 -->
does not leave the ring," etc. — Now this illumination is helped by the Angels; in Daniel[^p497-1] it is said: *Now it came to pass, when I Daniel saw the vision and sought the meaning; behold, there stood before me as it were the appearance of a man,* etc.; *and he cried out and said: Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.* These visions came down from the Father of lights, and the Angel helps Daniel's understanding, so that it may take in the light of God and understand through it. The Gloss says that the understanding has by nature the power of understanding, according to which man is distinguished from the beast; but God alone enlightens perfectly. It is true that a man is instructed ministerially and by way of help through an Angel, as appeared in Daniel; but effectively God alone has power over the rational soul itself, because it is formed immediately by God. For he himself enlightens every man. Whence the Angel enlightens in the way that he who opens a window is said to light up the house. "For he alone has his chair in heaven who teaches man on earth." — Whence what the philosophers say is not true, that one Intelligence creates another, because *to create* belongs to the omnipotent God, not to any created power; whence it belongs to that light which is pure act to do this. Paul said in the Acts of the Apostles,[^p497-2]: *In him we live and move and are;* and Augustine says that the Apostle is not speaking there of corporeal life, but of intellectual life. Whence he speaks there of God according as he is to all "the cause of being, the reason of understanding, and the order of living." He is the *cause of being* by producing immediately all perpetual things, and mediately temporal things, yet immediately through elemental powers. And he is the *reason of understanding* because through him intelligences are made certain above the mutability of nature. If all creatures should fight against it, God is nevertheless to be loved; nor can God bring it about that he should not be lovable. Though all things be corrupted, the certitude of truth remains. God is also the *order of living;* unless the gift of the Holy Spirit dwells in a man, he will not be governed according to the rule of right living. — According as God is the *cause of being,* he enters into the soul as its principle; according as he is the *order of living,* he enters into the soul as an infused gift; according as he is the *reason of understanding,* he enters into the soul as the sun of intelligence. This is the sun that enlightens all; from which some go astray, according to what the impious say in the book of Wisdom[^p497-3]: *Therefore we have erred from the way of truth and of justice; the light hath not shined upon us, and the sun of understanding hath not risen upon us,* etc.

16. There are three errors to be guarded against in the sciences, which exterminate sacred Scripture and the Christian faith and all wisdom; of which one is against the *cause of being,* another against the *reason of understanding,* and the third against the *order of living*[^p497-4]. The error against the cause of being is that concerning the eternity of the world, as to posit the world eternal. The error against the reason of understanding is that concerning fatal necessity, as to posit that all things come about of necessity. The third is that concerning the unity of the human understanding, as to posit that there is one understanding in all. — These errors are signified in the Apocalypse in the number of the name of the beast. It is said there[^p497-5] that *he had a name whose number is six hundred sixty-six,* which is a cyclic number. The first ground themselves upon the circle of motion and time; the second, upon the motion of the stars; the third, upon one Intelligence, saying that it enters into and goes out of the body. — All this is false. The first error is refuted by that which is written in the Old Testament: *In the beginning God created heaven and earth*[^p497-6]. Accord-

<!-- page 498 -->
ing to the second error nothing pertains to free will, and the cross of Christ avails nothing. According to the third there is no difference in merit and reward, if the soul of Christ and of Judas the traitor is one. The whole is heretical.

17. The first error, I say, destroys the *cause of being*: because you hold God to be the cause of all things either according to a *part* or according to the *whole.* If according to a *part:* then you take away from God his primacy in causing. If according to the *whole:* then God is the cause of whatever else there is: therefore he produces it not out of himself, not out of anything else, since there is nothing: therefore out of nothing[^p498-1]. — Again, it follows on this error that a thing had *being* and *non-being* at once, and that *being* came before *non-being;* and many other absurdities. Whence it is certain that God created all things. And therefore that good woman said to her son in the book of Machabees[^p498-2] that he should look upon all things, *because God made them out of nothing.*

18. The second error is that concerning fatal necessity, as about the constellations: that if a man be born under such a constellation, of necessity he will be a thief, or bad, or good. This empties out free will and merit and reward: for if a man does of necessity what he does, what is the worth of the freedom of choice? What will he merit? — It follows also that God is the origin of all evils. It is true that some disposition is left from the stars; but nevertheless God alone rules over the rational soul. Jeremiah says[^p498-3]: *They shall be greatly confounded, because they have not understood the everlasting reproach.* An everlasting reproach will they have who so err.

19. The third error is the worst, and it comprehends both. Certain madmen understood ill about the understanding. Whence some said that it was *fire;* some, that it was *water;* these were refuted by the philosophers[^p498-4]. — That this understanding should be one in all is against the root of distinction and individuation, because in different men the understanding has a distinct *being:* therefore it has the principles of its essence proper and distinct and individuating. — As for what others say, that one Intelligence irradiates upon all: this is impossible, because no creature can do this. Whence this belongs to God alone.

20. "Every intellectual substance is knowing and returns upon itself with a complete return[^p498-5]." Whence every intellectual substance understands itself and loves itself and judges. Whence it has the character of a mirror and of a light shining upon it. And this indeed is true in God, and both in the Angel and in man; but differently: for in God the *mirror* and the *light* are the same in *reality,* but differ in *reason.* In the Angel, however, they differ in *reason* and in *nature*[^p498-6], but not in *time,* because it cannot understand more than it does understand, since "an intelligence is full of forms[^p498-7]." But in man they differ both in *reason* and in *nature* and in *time,* because a man does not understand at once when he is able to understand. So then the human understanding has the character of *apprehending* and of *judging,* the *possible* and the *agent* intellect; nor can this understanding be sufficiently enlightened without the help of a higher and loftier light, because the Wise Man[^p498-8] says: *The corruptible body is a load upon the soul,* etc.; and the Philosopher says: "As the eye of the bat is to the light of the sun, so is our understanding to the things most manifest in nature."

Of the third understanding, namely that which is the *key of heavenly contemplations,* it would be long to speak[^p498-9]. We shall pray the Lord, etc.

---

la: Psalm. 15, 7. — Seq. locus est Prov. 1, 5.

en: Psalm 15:7. — The following passage is Proverbs 1:5.

la: Matth. 11, 25. — Sententia Richardi habetur in eius libro Benjamin minor, c. 46.

en: Matthew 11:25. — Richard's sentence is found in his book *Benjamin minor,* c. 46.

la: De hoc dono cfr. III. Sent. d. 35. q. 3.

en: On this gift cf. Book III of the *Sentences,* d. 35, q. 3.

la: Cap. 28, 9. Cfr. Hieron. in hunc locum. Hebr. 5, 12. seqq.: Et facti estis quibus lacte opus sit, non solido cibo. Omnis enim, qui lactis est particeps, expers est sermonis iustitiae; parvulus enim est. Perfectorum autem est solidus cibus, eorum qui pro consuetudine exercitatos habent sensus ad discretionem boni ac mali.

en: Chapter 28:9. Cf. Jerome on this passage. Hebrews 5:12 and following: *And you are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that is a partaker of milk is unskilful in the word of justice; for he is a little child. But strong meat is for the perfect, for them who by custom have their senses exercised to the discerning of good and evil.*

la: Cap. 1, 17. — De delectatione circa tactum cfr. Aristot., III. Ethic. c. 10; VII. c. 4. et c. 7.

en: Chapter 1:17. — On delight in respect of touch cf. Aristotle, *Ethics* III, c. 10; VII, c. 4 and c. 7.

la: Cap. 5, 13. — Seq. sententia: Impedit ira etc., habetur inter Disticha de moribus vulgo Catoni adscripta (Ed. secunda Arntzenii, Amstelaedami 1754), lib. II. n. 4. (pag. 154); sententia Aristot. in VII. Phys. text. 20. (c. 3.); cfr. supra pag. 449, nota 1.

en: Chapter 5:13. — The following sentence, *Anger hinders the mind,* etc., is found among the *Distichs on Morals* commonly ascribed to Cato (Arntzenius's second edition, Amsterdam 1754), bk. II, n. 4 (p. 154); the sentence of Aristotle is in *Physics* VII, text 20 (c. 3); cf. above, p. 449, note 1.

la: Cap. 28, 19. — Num. 12, 3: Erat enim Moyses vir mitissimus super omnes homines, qui morabantur in terra.

en: Chapter 28:19. — Numbers 12:3: *For Moses was a man exceeding meek above all men that dwelt upon earth.*

la: Cap. 7, 9. Cfr. supra pag. 306, nota 1, ubi etiam locus Augustini indicatur, ex quo seq. sententia August. colligi potest. Vide etiam in Ioan. Evang. tr. 29. n. 6; Serm. 91. (alias 234. de Tempore) c. 6. n. 6. et Serm. 126. (alias 32. ex Homiliis 50) c. 1. n. 1. seqq.; Enarrat. in Ps. 118. serm. 18. n. 3; 83 Qq. q. 48.

en: Chapter 7:9. Cf. above, p. 306, note 1, where the passage of Augustine is also indicated, from which the following sentence of Augustine can be gathered. See also *On the Gospel of John,* tract. 29, n. 6; *Sermon* 91 (elsewhere 234, *On the Seasons*) c. 6, n. 6, and *Sermon* 126 (elsewhere 32, from the *Fifty Homilies*) c. 1, n. 1 and following; *Enarration on Psalm* 118, serm. 18, n. 3; *Eighty-three Questions,* q. 48.

la: Epist. II. Cor. 10, 5: In captivitatem redigentes omnem intellectum etc.

en: Second Epistle to the Corinthians 10:5: *Bringing into captivity every understanding,* etc.

la: Aristot., I. Elench. c. 2.

en: Aristotle, *Sophistical Refutations* I, c. 2.

la: Cfr. supra in Hexaëm. collat. 3. n. 1.

en: Cf. above in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 3, n. 1.

en: Psalm 31:8 and 9.

en: Proverbs 2:3-5.

la: Psalm. 110, 9. et 10. — Seq. locus est Iob 28, 28. Pro *prudentia* Vulgata *intelligentia.*

en: Psalm 110:9 and 10. — The following passage is Job 28:28. For *prudentia* the Vulgate has *intelligentia.*

la: Cap. 1, 7. — Seq. locus est Prov. 14, 8: Sapientia callidi etc.; tertius est Eccli. 5, 14; quartus Sap. 1, 5.

en: Chapter 1:7. — The following passage is Proverbs 14:8: *The wisdom of a discreet man,* etc.; the third is Ecclesiasticus 5:14; the fourth Wisdom 1:5.

en: Cf. *On the Duties of Ministers* I, c. 2, n. 5; c. 3, n. 13 and following; c. 10, n. 35; c. 22, n. 99, and 24, n. 105 and following; *Enarration on Psalm* 36:30, n. 66 and 68; on Psalm 38:2, n. 5, and on Psalm 118:9, serm. 2, n. 5. — The following passage is Ecclesiastes 8:6.

en: Chapter 17:8.

en: Chapter 3:14.

la: Prov. 3, 16. — Seq. locus est Ps. 35, 10.

en: Proverbs 3:16. — The following passage is Psalm 35:10.

la: Deut. 32, 28. et 29. — De seq. propositione cfr. supra pag. 90, nota 1.

en: Deuteronomy 32:28 and 29. — On the following proposition cf. above, p. 90, note 1.

en: Psalm 31:8.

la: Cap. 1, 26. — De seq. propositione cfr. supra pag. 356, nota 2. et Aristot., I. Poster. c. 2. — De triplici lumine cfr. opusculum de Reductione artium ad theolog. n. 1.

en: Chapter 1:26. — On the following proposition cf. above, p. 356, note 2, and Aristotle, *Posterior Analytics* I, c. 2. — On the threefold light cf. the opusculum *On the Reduction of the Arts to Theology,* n. 1.

en: Chapter 17:1 and 5.

la: Secundum auctorem libri de Causis, propos. 3. Vide supra 442, nota 5. — In seqq. codd. ordinem propositionum confundunt, et B aliqua omittit. Adhibita ed. Vaticana, quae hanc collationem interserit collationi 3. in Hexaëm., ordinem restituimus et pauca verba supplevimus.

en: According to the author of the *Book of Causes,* prop. 3. See above, 442, note 5. — In what follows the codices confuse the order of the propositions, and B omits some things. Using the Vatican edition, which inserts this collation into collation 3 of the *Hexaëmeron,* we have restored the order and supplied a few words.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 227, nota 3.

en: Cf. above, p. 227, note 3.

la: Vide Gen. 2, 19. De isto actu cfr. II. Sent. littera Magistri d. XXIII. c. 3. et Comment. ibid. a. 2. q. 1. ac dub. 3. — Subinde respicitur Ps. 4, 7: Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui, Domine.

en: See Genesis 2:19. On this act cf. Book II of the *Sentences,* the Master's text, d. XXIII, c. 3, and the *Commentary* on the same place, a. 2, q. 1, and dub. 3. — Thereafter Psalm 4:7 is looked to: *The light of thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us.*

la: Cfr. supra pag. 49, nota 1. — De dignitate: Omne totum etc., vide supra pag. 303, nota 6. — In hoc numero 13. A est valde confusus et corruptus; secuti sumus meliorem B, adiunctis tamen nonnullis ex A. Idem prorsus docetur supra Quaest. disp. de Scientia Christi q. 4. in fine corp. et infra in Serm.: Unus est magister etc., post medium.

en: Cf. above, p. 49, note 1. — On the axiom *Every whole,* etc., see above, p. 303, note 6. — In this number 13, A is very confused and corrupt; we have followed the better codex B, adding nevertheless some things from A. Precisely the same is taught above in the *Disputed Questions on the Knowledge of Christ,* q. 4, at the end of the body, and below in the *Sermon: One is your master,* etc., after the middle.

la: Cap. 34, 9. — De sententia Philosophi vide supra pag. 21, nota 10.

en: Chapter 34:9. — On the sentence of the Philosopher see above, p. 21, note 10.

la: Cap. 2, 21. seq. — Seq. locus est II. Cor. 4, 6; tertius Ioan. 1, 9. De certitudine sapientiali etc. vide supra in Hexaëm. collat. 7. n. 1.

en: Chapter 2:21 and following. — The following passage is II Corinthians 4:6; the third John 1:9. On sapiential certitude, etc., see above in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 7, n. 1.

la: Cap. 15. n. 21; cfr. supra pag. 17, nota 10. et pag. 23, nota 6. et 7.

en: C. 15, n. 21; cf. above, p. 17, note 10, and p. 23, notes 6 and 7.

la: Cap. 8, 15. et 16. (Aliquae edd. Vulgatae *istam* pro *istum*). — Glossa inferius allegata est in Ps. 118, 73. et est secundum August. (cfr. supra pag. 348, nota 7.), ad cuius mentem est etiam seq. sententia: Solus enim habet etc. Cfr. supra pag. 324, nota 2. et pag. 331, nota 6. De opinione philosophorum respectu Intelligentiae vide supra pag. 338, nota 2. in fine.

en: Chapter 8:15 and 16. (Some editions of the Vulgate have *istam* for *istum*). — The Gloss alleged below is on Psalm 118:73 and is according to Augustine (cf. above, p. 348, note 7), to whose mind the following sentence also answers: *For he alone has,* etc. Cf. above, p. 324, note 2, and p. 331, note 6. On the opinion of the philosophers regarding the Intelligence see above, p. 338, note 2, at the end.

la: Cap. 17, 28. — August., XIV. de Trin. c. 12. n. 16: Et quidem *non longe positus ab unoquoque nostrum,* sicut Apostolus [Act. 17, 27. et 28.] dicit, adiungens: *In illo enim vivimus et movemur et sumus.* Quod si secundum corpus diceret, etiam de isto corporeo mundo posset intelligi. Nam et in illo secundum corpus vivimus, movemur et sumus. Unde secundum mentem, quae facta est ad eius imaginem, debet hoc accipi, excellentiore quodam eodemque non visibili, sed intelligibili modo. Nam quid non est in ipso, de quo divine scriptum est [Rom. 11, 36.]: *Quoniam ex ipso et per ipsum et in ipso sunt omnia?* Cfr. supra pag. 349, nota 8, ubi etiam de seq. sententia: causa essendi etc.

en: Chapter 17:28. — Augustine, *On the Trinity* XIV, c. 12, n. 16: "And indeed *he is not far from every one of us,* as the Apostle [Acts 17:27 and 28] says, adding: *For in him we live and move and are.* But if he were saying this according to the body, it could be understood even of this corporeal world. For in it too we live, move and are according to the body. Hence it ought to be taken according to the mind, which was made to his image, in a certain more excellent and likewise not visible but intelligible manner. For what is not in him, of whom it is divinely written [Rom. 11:36]: *For of him and by him and in him are all things?*" Cf. above, p. 349, note 8, where there is also matter on the following sentence: *the cause of being,* etc.

la: Cap. 5, 6. seq.

en: Chapter 5:6 and following.

la: Vide supra in Hexaëm. collat. 6. n. 2. seqq. et collat. 7. n. 1. seq.

en: See above in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 6, n. 2 and following, and collation 7, n. 1 and following.

la: Cap. 13, 17. et 18: Et ne quis possit emere, aut vendere, nisi qui habet characterem, aut nomen bestiae, aut numerum nominis. Hic sapientia est. Qui habet intellectum, computet numerum bestiae. Numerus enim hominis est; et numerus eius sexcenti sexaginta sex. — Secundum Boeth., II. Arithmet. c. 30, numerus *cyclicus* vel sphaericus est ille qui in multiplicatione apparet tanquam terminus multiplicationis; v. g. «quinquies quinque, qui fit 25, ab 5 progressus, in eosdem 5 desinit. Et si hos rursum quinquies ducas, in eosdem 5 eorum terminus veniet. Quinquies enim 25 fiunt 125» etc. Hoc modo *non accipitur* hic numerus *cyclicus;* Bonelli in sua ed. huius opusculi de Septem Donis Sp. S. pro *qui est numerus cyclicus* habet: *in quo sunt tres circulationes.* Rupert. abbas Tuitiens., in praenotatum locum Apoc.: *Et numerus eius sexcenti sexaginta sex,* ait: «Ecce, senarius numerus tertio repetitus, immo in decuplum atque inde in centuplum multiplicatus est». Subinde ostendit, quod in hac triplicatione senarii, qui est numerus creaturarum et specialiter *hominis* (sexto die creati), significetur malitia multiplicata satanae; nam ipse primo peccavit, hominem seduxit et in antichristo malitiam suam complebit. Richard. a S. Vict., IV. super Apoc. c. 5. ait: Sex perfectionem significant. Possumus autem per *senarium* minimam perfectionem accipere, et per *sexagenarium* mediocrem, et per *sexcentenarium* maximam et consummatam perfectionem intelligere. Merito itaque tali numero describitur, qui et in omni gradu malorum perfecte malignus, et in omni gradu bonorum bonitati perfecte contrarius invenitur etc. Cfr. Bonelli, tom. II. Supplement. oper. S. Bonav. col. 608 n. 985, ubi eadem explicatio datur in Comment. in Apoc. S. Bonaventurae erronee tributo. — In cod. B ea quae hic sequuntur desiderantur.

en: Chapter 13:17 and 18: *And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man; and the number of him is six hundred sixty-six.* — According to Boethius, *Arithmetic* II, c. 30, a *cyclic* or spherical number is one that appears in multiplication as the term of the multiplication; e.g. "five times five, which makes 25, having set out from 5, ends in the same 5. And if you multiply these again by five, their term will come to the same 5. For five times 25 makes 125," etc. It is *not in this way* that the number *cyclic* is taken here; Bonelli, in his edition of this opusculum *On the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit,* has, in place of *which is a cyclic number: in which there are three circlings.* Rupert, abbot of Deutz, on the aforesaid passage of the Apocalypse, *And the number of him is six hundred sixty-six,* says: "Behold, the number six repeated a third time, indeed multiplied tenfold and thence a hundredfold." He then shows that in this tripling of the six — which is the number of creatures and especially of *man* (created on the sixth day) — is signified the multiplied malice of Satan; for he sinned first, seduced man, and will complete his malice in Antichrist. Richard of Saint Victor, *On the Apocalypse* IV, c. 5, says: Six signifies perfection. Now we can take by the *six* the least perfection, and by the *sixty* the middling, and by the *six hundred* understand the greatest and consummate perfection. Rightly therefore is he described by such a number, who is found both perfectly malignant in every degree of evils and perfectly contrary to goodness in every degree of goods, etc. Cf. Bonelli, tom. II of the *Supplement to the works of St Bonaventure,* col. 608, n. 985, where the same explanation is given in the *Commentary on the Apocalypse* erroneously attributed to St Bonaventure. — In codex B what follows here is wanting.

la: Gen. 1, 1. seqq.

en: Genesis 1:1 and following.

la: Cfr. supra Breviloq. p. II. c. 1.

en: Cf. above, the *Breviloquium,* part II, c. 1.

la: Libr. II. 7, 28: Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad caelum et terram et ad omnia, quae in eis sunt, et intelligas, quia ex nihilo fecit illa Deus.

en: Book II, 7:28: *I beseech thee, my son, look upon heaven and earth, and all that is in them, and understand that God made them out of nothing.*

en: Chapter 20:11. Cf. Book II of the *Sentences,* d. 14, part II, a. 2, q. 3.

la: Cfr. Aristot., I. de Anima, text. 19. seqq. (c. 2. seqq.). Ibid. text. 20. insinuatur, quod «Democritus quidem ignem quendam et calorem dicit esse ipsam [animam; cfr. text. 30.], et text. 32, quod «magis autem onerosorum quidam [ipsam animam] et aquam existimaverunt, ut Hippo». — Seq. opinio (Averrois) refellitur II. Sent. d. 18. a. 2. q. 1. — In codd. corrupte legitur: *hoc est contra radicem distinctum* (!). Adiecimus textui verba *distinctionis et individuationis, quia in diversis intellectus habet esse* (cfr. loc. cit. in corp. et ad 1.).

en: Cf. Aristotle, *On the Soul* I, text 19 and following (c. 2 and following). In the same place, text 20, it is intimated that "Democritus indeed says that it [the soul; cf. text 30] is a certain fire and heat," and text 32, that "certain of the more cumbrous thinkers held it [the soul] to be water, as Hippo did." — The following opinion (that of Averroes) is refuted in Book II of the *Sentences,* d. 18, a. 2, q. 1. — In the codices it is corruptly read: *this is against the root distinct* (!). We have added to the text the words *of distinction and individuation, because in different men the understanding has a distinct being* (cf. the passage cited, in the body and at 1).

la: Secundum auctorem libri de Causis, propos. 15, supra pag. 215, nota 4. allegatum. Cfr. supra in Hexaëm. collat. 2. n. 10.

en: According to the author of the *Book of Causes,* prop. 15, alleged above, p. 215, note 4. Cf. above in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 2, n. 10.

la: Praecedentia septem verba supplevimus ex Bonelli (in hac collat.). Verba *non tempore* referuntur ad *species innatas,* quin excludatur nova *actualis cognitio,* ut explicatur II. Sent. d. 3. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. in corp. et ad 1.

en: The seven preceding words we have supplied from Bonelli (in this collation). The words *not in time* refer to *innate species,* without excluding a new *actual cognition,* as is explained in Book II of the *Sentences,* d. 3, part II, a. 2, q. 1, in the body and at 1.

la: Ut ait auctor libri de Causis, propos. 10; cfr. supra pag. 299, nota 5. — De speculo et luce cfr. supra in Hexaëm. collat. 5. n. 23. seqq. et collat. 12. n. 2. seqq.

en: As the author of the *Book of Causes* says, prop. 10; cf. above, p. 299, note 5. — On the mirror and the light cf. above in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 5, n. 23 and following, and collation 12, n. 2 and following.

la: Sap. 9, 15. — De sententia Philosophi vide supra pag. 309, nota 2. De intellectu possibili et agente cfr. II. Sent. d. 24. p. I. a. 2. q. 4.

en: Wisdom 9:15. — On the sentence of the Philosopher see above, p. 309, note 2. On the possible and agent intellect cf. Book II of the *Sentences,* d. 24, part I, a. 2, q. 4.

la: De ipso sive de tertio membro divisionis (vide supra n. 6.) agit S. Doctor in Hexaëm. collat. 3. n. 1. seqq., ubi auctor se refert ad ea quae in hac collatione dixerat.

en: Of it, that is, of the third member of the division (see above, n. 6), the holy Doctor treats in the *Hexaëmeron,* collation 3, n. 1 and following, where the author refers back to what he had said in this collation. ---

translators_notes:
**★ Page span — closed positively at BOTH ends, and BOTH ends are shared leaves; that is now three
spans in a row.** Collatio VIII runs **pp. 493–498**, twenty numbered paragraphs over six leaves. It
**opens mid-leaf on p. 493**, where the `COLLATIO VIII.` display heading, its subtitle *De dono
intellectus.* and a full-measure Summarium fill the lower half of the leaf below Collatio VII's ¶ 19,
leaving room for exactly **two lines of ¶ 1 in each column** before the footer register; and it
**closes mid-leaf on p. 498**, its ¶ 20 ending *Rogabimus Dominum etc.* about two-thirds down the right
column, above the `COLLATIO IX.` display heading, its subtitle *De dono sapientiae.* and Collatio IX's
own Summarium. The end was fixed positively from `COLLATIO IX.` (raw L82381) on the band and **never**
by subtracting one from the index's page for Collatio IX — which is 498, so the subtraction would have
produced 497 and lost a whole leaf. p. 498 is the **sixth** consecutive index page (473, 479, 483, 489,
493, 498) proved on the plate to be a heading page rather than a first-owned page. The in-place
subtitle on p. 493 was read against the index's title and **agrees.**
⚠ p. 498's running head already reads `DE DONIS SPIRITUS S. COLLATIO IX.` although Collatio VIII's
last four paragraphs occupy the top two-thirds of the leaf. That is the **fourth** attestation in a row
of this work's normal behaviour on a shared leaf: **the running head names the collatio that BEGINS on
the leaf, not the one that opens it.** The span was fixed from the display heading, never from the head.

**A runover WAS received; NO forward hand-off is made — the first time in this work.** `bon-don-c7`
forwarded p. 493 **n. 7** and named it by content (`Psalm. 15, 7. — Seq. locus est Prov. 1, 5.`); it is
transcribed here and nn. 1–6 of that leaf are Collatio VII's and are not. Per the standing rule the
hand-off was treated as telling only *which* note is ours: its anchor was re-derived off the band and
falls at ¶ 1's *qui tribuit mihi intellectum* ⁷, in the left column, two lines below the Summarium. The
hand-off's warning about the second numeral was checked again at 3× and stands: it is `Prov. 1, 5.`,
not `4, 5.`
**⚠ Nothing is forwarded to `bon-don-c9`.** p. 498's register is nine notes and **all nine are this
chunk's** — n. 9 anchors at ¶ 20's *longum esset dicere* ⁹, the last words of the collatio. Collatio IX
begins on the same leaf but claims no note there, because on this leaf it consists only of a display
heading, a subtitle and a Summarium, and **the Summarium is unanchored** (the frozen convention,
verified again here on the plate). So a shared leaf does **not** imply a runover: it implies one only
when the incoming unit's own body reaches the leaf. c9 must open p. 498 expecting **nothing**, and must
not read the leaf's nine notes as partly its own.

**⛔ The heading-anchor question was not reopened, per the frozen rule.** `COLLATIO I.` was settled at
10× on p. 457 as carrying **no** apparatus anchor. Nothing on p. 493 was searched for one; incidentally,
nothing stands after `COLLATIO VIII.`'s period either, and the first anchor in this chunk's part of the
leaf is body-anchored.

**Summarium.** Rendered, not trimmed, per the standing rule. It crosses the gutter and was read from a
single full-width crop (rows 0.435–0.80), never from a column band; the header garbles to `SuMMARiuM`
in the raw and was found by content. **The Summarium and the body agree:** the synopsis ends at **20.**
and the body's numbered paragraphs run 1–20 with no gap (p. 493 = 1 · p. 494 = 1–5 · p. 495 = 5–10 ·
p. 496 = 10–15 · p. 497 = 15–16 · p. 498 = 16–20). Eight of eight collationes have now agreed; the
c6/c14 short-Summarium mechanism has still not fired in this work, and the body is counted every time.
⭐ The Summarium is also the **only** place in the chunk where the collatio's three-part division is
stated as `16-19` for a single synopsis entry — four body paragraphs answering to one line — which is
worth knowing before counting entries against paragraphs mechanically.

**Apparatus — 47 entries, all read off 450 dpi footer bands, both blocks on every leaf, none from a
whole-page read.** Per printed page: **p. 493 = 1** (of the leaf's seven) **· p. 494 = 10 · p. 495 = 10 ·
p. 496 = 11 · p. 497 = 6 · p. 498 = 9.** This is the heaviest register in the work so far — 47 against
c4's 53 only because p. 497 carries just six, one of which (n. 5, the Boethius / Rupert / Richard note
on the cyclic number) fills nearly the whole leaf's foot by itself and is the longest single entry in
the *Septem Donis.*

**Block splits vs. anchor splits, stated separately per page.** Four of the six leaves carry a footer
entry that spans the two blocks, and on those the block split is not a count of whole notes:

- **p. 493** — the shared opening leaf. This chunk holds **one** note, n. 7, which prints in the right
  block and anchors in the **left** column: block and anchor do **not** coincide, in the smallest
  possible sample. The leaf's full block split is 3 / 4.
- **p. 494** — block **5½ / 4½**, anchors **3 / 7**. n. 6, the Cato/Aristotle note, begins in the left
  block and finishes in the right; it is rendered joined. Only nn. 1–3 anchor in the left column,
  because the left column holds only the tail of ¶ 1 and ¶ 2 while the right holds ¶¶ 3, 4 and 5, each
  of which cites twice or more.
- **p. 495** — block **6 / 4**, anchors **3 / 7**. No note crosses the gutter, but nn. 3 and 4 share one
  line (see below). nn. 1–3 anchor in the left column, nn. 4–10 on the right.
- **p. 496** — block **6½ / 4½**, anchors **5 / 6**. n. 7, the Genesis/*Sentences* note, begins in the
  left block and finishes in the right; rendered joined. The anchor split falls one note later than the
  block split.
- **p. 497** — block **4½ / 1½**, anchors **2 / 4**. n. 5 begins in the left block and runs over most of
  the right; the signature line `S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` and the sheet number `63` print inside this
  register, the left block below n. 5's break and the right below n. 6.
- **p. 498** — the shared closing leaf. Block **4½ / 4½**, anchors **3 / 6**. n. 5 spans both blocks;
  rendered joined. All nine are this chunk's.

**⚠ Two footer notes set on one line — FIFTH attestation.** On p. 495 the left block's **n. 3
(`Psalm. 48, 13.`) ends flush left and n. 4 (`Prov. 2, 3-5.`) is set flush right on that same line**,
with nothing but white space between them. Read by line, the left block appears to hold five notes
rather than six. The mechanism now has five attestations (c3 p. 472 n. 3, c4 p. 477 nn. 6/7, c5 p. 481
nn. 3/4, c7 p. 490 nn. 2/3, c8 p. 495 nn. 3/4). **Read a footer block by numeral, never by line.**

**Gutters — six leaves, six measurements, and the two shared leaves had to be measured by REGION.**
`493 (lower region) = 1180` · **494 = 1352** · **495 = 1160** · **496 = 1387** · **497 = 1223** ·
`498 (upper region) = 1306`.
- **p. 493** is the stacked-region case in its purest form and the resume note's warning held exactly:
  the default returns **1532 on a 1 px run** with `colcrop`'s own `⚠ WEAK RUN`, and rows 0.55–0.92
  return *no low-ink column at all*, because that band lands on the display heading, the subtitle and
  the full-measure Summarium. c7 measured this leaf's **upper** region at 1183 and warned that the
  value must not be carried down the leaf; profiling **the region actually transcribed here** (rows
  0.80–0.97 — ¶ 1's four lines and the register below them) returns a clean 64 px band 1149–1212,
  **midpoint 1180**, with a 3 px centre-rule island. The two regions differ by only 3 px, which is a
  coincidence and not a licence: the upper number was never adopted, it was re-measured.
- **p. 494** measured **1352 on a 54 px run** — under the 58–64 px floor, so step (3) fired. The ink
  profile returned the band 1326–1379 with a **14 px** ink island at its centre, peak 121: this is the
  heavily-inked centre rule of the frozen rule 5, and the narrow run is positively diagnostic of it
  rather than of a narrow gutter. Eight row windows agreed at 1349–1355. **Default adopted.**
- **p. 495** measured 1154 on a **74 px** run — *above* the band, which the frozen rule says is as much
  a failure signal as below it. Step (3) returned band 1129–1191 (63 px), **midpoint 1160**, island
  1158–1164 at peak 264. The 6 px correction is small but it is the profile's answer, not the
  default's, and 1160 is what was used to crop.
- **p. 496** (62 px) and **p. 497** (58 px) both sat inside the sound band and both were confirmed by
  the ink profile (496: band 1357–1418, island 8 px at peak 524; 497: band 1194–1253, island 6 px at
  peak 1052 — the most heavily inked rule of the span).
- **p. 498** is the second stacked leaf: the default returns **1294 on a 13 px run**, and the skew
  screen reports 210 px of apparent drift with slices 0.51 and 0.68 outlying — the signature of a
  stacked region, not of skew, exactly as the tool's own warning says. Profiling the **upper** region
  (rows 0.06–0.52), which is all that this chunk transcribes, returns band 1275–1337 (63 px),
  **midpoint 1306**, with twenty windows agreeing at 1306–1307. c9 must measure p. 498's **lower**
  region separately and must not carry 1306 down the leaf.

**⚠ Four Quaracchi digits corrected against the raw, all of the 3/5 class; the 1/4 class did not fire
in a single note on six leaves.** That is the third consecutive collatio in which every correction has
been 3/5, and the frozen rule's warning not to calibrate on the previous page still stands.
- **p. 494 n. 6** reads `lib. II. n. 4. (pag. 154)`; the raw gives `134`. The `5` matches the `5` of
  `1754` on the same line, three words earlier.
- **p. 494 n. 9** reads `Epist. II. Cor. 10, 5`; the raw gives `10, 3`. **Settled independently by
  sense:** II Cor. 10:5 is *In captivitatem redigentes omnem intellectum,* which is the very clause the
  note quotes and ¶ 5 alleges; 10:3 is *In carne enim ambulantes.*
- **p. 495 n. 10** reads `Seq. locus est Ps. 35, 10`; the raw gives `33`. Ps. 35:10 is *Apud te est fons
  vitae,* the half-verse ¶ 10 breaks off on; Ps. 33:10 has nothing to do with it.
- **p. 498 n. 8** reads `Sap. 9, 15`; the raw gives `9, 13`. Wisdom 9:15 is *Corpus quod corrumpitur
  aggravat animam,* quoted verbatim in ¶ 20.
The raw also mangled `Cap. 20, 11. Cfr. II. Sent. d. 14.` to `Cap. 20, U. Cfr. II. Scnt. d. U.`
(p. 498 n. 3), `VII. c. 4.` to `VII. c. i.` (p. 494 n. 5), `nota 4.` to `nota i.` (p. 498 n. 5) and
`nota 5.` to `nota S.` (p. 498 n. 7); those are glyph noise rather than digit substitution, but they are
logged because only the plate distinguishes the two. ⚠ The raw additionally **closes a parenthesis in
the wrong place** in p. 494 n. 8, printing `(alias 234. de Tempore; c. 6. n. 6.` where the plate closes
after *Tempore*. **Never adopt a digit — or a bracket — from the raw.**

**⭐ The `Libr. <roman>. <ch>, <v>` genre trait fired a TENTH time.** **p. 498 n. 2 is `Libr. II. 7, 28.`**
for II Machabees 7:28, with the book named only in the body (*in libro Machabaeorum*) and not in the
note — the mother of the Maccabean martyrs telling her son to look at heaven and earth. This is the
same shape as the nine before it, and `build-citations.py`'s explicit unresolvable barrier is engaged
as designed, so the long Vulgate quotation that follows inside the note cannot bind to the previous
note's book. Attestations now stand at ten: c2 p. 467 n. 5; c3 p. 472 n. 4 and p. 473 n. 5; c4 p. 474
n. 5 and p. 478 n. 6; c5 p. 480 n. 2, p. 482 n. 5 and p. 482 n. 10; c7 p. 493 n. 4; **c8 p. 498 n. 2.**
⚠ Six citations on this span look like the shape and are not — `III. Sent. d. 35. q. 3.` (p. 494 n. 3),
`I. Elench. c. 2.` (p. 494 n. 10), `I. Poster. c. 2.` (p. 496 n. 3), `II. Sent. littera Magistri
d. XXIII.` (p. 496 n. 7), `I. de Anima, text. 19.` (p. 498 n. 4) and `II. Arithmet. c. 30` (p. 497
n. 5): every one names its work, so the barrier is not engaged and nothing is at risk. **The cousin
shape `Epist. <roman>. <ch>, <v>` did NOT fire here:** p. 494 n. 9 is `Epist. II. Cor. 10, 5.`, which
names its book and resolves normally. Three attestations of the cousin still stand, not four.

**⚠ One plate-level typographical defect, corrected and logged — the same class as c7's `hubeo`.**
p. 495's left column prints *ad digne **snscipiendum** donum intellectus*, with `sn` where
*suscipiendum* requires `su` — a turned or wrong sort, not an OCR artifact, and one the raw faithfully
reproduces (`snscipiendum`), so **nothing but the plate could catch it and no mechanical check can find
it.** The intent is unambiguous: the identical phrase is set correctly as *ad donum intellectus digne
suscipiendum* eleven lines above, in ¶ 5's opening. **suscipiendum** is transcribed.
⚠ A second, smaller case is logged rather than corrected: p. 495's first marginal gloss reads
`.pedimenta 3.`, its opening `Im` lost at the scan's inner edge, not on the printed page. It is rendered
**Impedimenta 3.** — the paragraph beside it is precisely the three disordered powers that impede the
gift — and the clipping is noted here because the completion is inference, however secure.

**Cross-references — nineteen distinct page references, one verified semantically and the rest checked
on the plate at 3–4×.** `pag. 449, nota 1` (p. 494 n. 6) was **verified in the corpus**: `bon-hex-c23`'s
p. 449 n. 1 is the Aristotle *Physics* VII, text 20 (c. 3) note carrying *quia quieta est residetque
anima, sciens fit et prudens* — which is exactly the sentence this note documents (*quiescendo anima
fit prudens et sciens*). The remaining references are `pag. 17 · 21 · 23 · 49 · 90 · 215 · 227 · 299 ·
303 · 306 · 309 · 324 · 331 · 338 · 348 · 349 · 356 · 442`. ⚠ **Five of these (17, 21, 23, 49, 90) lie outside Vol V's transcribed range**, whose chunks begin at p. 201, so
they point into untranscribed matter; that is a coverage fact, not a defect, and `check-xref-pages.py`
should not be read as flagging them.

**Register.** *Intellectus* → **understanding** throughout — the gift, the faculty, and the
Aristotelian *intellectus possibilis / agens* alike — and *intelligentia* → **intelligence**, so that
Bonaventure's two words stay two words in English. The pair is worked hard here: ¶ 5's *captivet
intellectum suum* and ¶ 6's *radiositas intelligentiae* stand a dozen lines apart, and ¶ 11 divides
*intelligentia* itself into *memoria praeteritorum, intelligentia praesentium, circumspectio futurorum*
("memory of things past, intelligence of things present, circumspection of things to come"), which
collapses if the two words share one English root. The capitalised *Intelligentia* of the philosophers
(¶¶ 15, 16, 19) is rendered **Intelligence**, capital retained, since it names a separated substance
and not a faculty.
⚠ **The Douay pulls the other way and it is left visible, not smoothed.** Inside quotations the Douay
wording is kept even where it renders *intelligentia* by "understanding" — Wisdom 5:6's *sol
intelligentiae* as "the sun of understanding" in ¶ 15, Job 28:28's *prudentia* where the Vulgate has
*intelligentia* in p. 495 n. 5, and Daniel 8:15's *quaererem intelligentiam* as "sought the meaning" in
¶ 15. **This is the same shape as the open *pietas* question and should be settled with it at the c9
close, not chunk by chunk:** either the body follows the Douay and the distinction is lost, or the
Douay stands inside quotation marks and a note records why the same Latin word is Englished two ways
three lines apart. As it stands this chunk holds the distinction in the body and yields to the Douay
inside the quotation.
Elsewhere: *prudentialis* → **prudential**, *prudentia* → **prudence**; *quid evitandum, quid
exsequendum, quid exspectandum* → **what is to be avoided, what is to be carried through, what is to be
looked for**, fixed once and repeated verbatim at each of its five occurrences (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11, and the
Summarium), since Bonaventure repeats it verbatim; *circumspectiones morales* → **moral
circumspections**, *considerationes scientiales* → **scientific considerations**, *contemplationes
caelestes* → **heavenly contemplations**, holding the triad *regula · ianua · clavis* (**rule · door ·
key**) identical at each of its four recurrences.

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi's editorial outline, trimmed from the body, body order): Utile est verbum Dei
audire. · Contra praesumtionem. · In textu duo notantur. · Dispositio per tria. · Dispositio prima. ·
Secunda. · Tertia. · Notandum. · Impedimenta 3. · Argumentum collationis. · Divisio eiusdem. ·
Pars I. De intellectu ut regula circumspectionum moralium. · Regula generalis. · Docet tria. · Primo,
quid evitandum. · Notandum. · Secundo, quid exsequendum. · Tertio, quid exspectandum. · Haec
confirmantur. · Epilogus. · Pars II. De intellectu ut ianua considerationum scientialium. · Triplex
ipsius origo. · Primo partim est a dictamine naturae. · Secundo, partim ab experientia. · Tertio,
partim ex illustratione divinae influentiae. · Triplex certitudo. · Notandum. · Notandum. · Error
philosophorum. · Deus triplex causa. · Notandum. · Errores 3 cavendi. · Significantur in Scriptura. ·
Refelluntur. · Contra errorem primum. · Contra secundum. · Contra tertium. · De differentia trium
intellectuum.

**Zero `[?]` flags.** Every ambiguous reading on this span was settled on the plate, and the four that
the plate alone could not settle — the three digits corrected by sense against the verses they quote,
and the `snscipiendum` sort — were settled against text quoted elsewhere in the same collatio or in the
Vulgate.