serve that the definition of analysis given by Clement's source
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY P PISTIS, GNOSIS, C also trustworthy principles: it is worth looking at An. Pr. 64?32-6, f Clement, Strom. viii. 8. 1 (i An. Post. 71>20-3, 72°7-8, 7220-1, 84°30-3, Top. 100°18—21,! off.): E€xaorov jLev yap rev d EN 1140°31 3.2
Kvvpevoy Sid twwv arrodetxv This doctrine of the absolute dpy7, which is regarded by Plato { Grrodetky oe erpOGaT ACEO Sy $
Ay + ca OVUM ETEPWYV, A LS AV as the end of the dialectic process and which is identified by KaKEev UP CTPA ee XP.
: strated principl e& abrv moTa avaopapwpE Aristotle with the trustworthy and undemonstrated principle Be tad uee Guoudleras .
TE PONY! i. of demonstration, has, however, become part of the schoolonep tradition.s No work dealing with logical and epistemological
The Aristotelian terms dv doctrines could have omitted it. Small wonder, therefore, if it zparov used by Albinus c also occurs in Middle Platonism. Albinus, in chapter V of the , Seixrovs (or dvard8euxrov) Didaskalikos, describes the process of analysis in these terms: h viii. 7. 1-2 and viii. 8. 1; ' r Ate) git te oe ge yy Ais in Did. 157. 21-2, has pra Did. 157. gf. dvoddoets: 82 ay wie Te eae ae es Pah
7a e& abra@v mord or Ta 7 av ab Ov emt ra DTA vont ) y Seu ' rey eee Toyom ee ee ely i Agia lag Pa papel Strom. viii. 7. 1-2, viii. 7. yuevay avodos vam S . pelea ceilbe et vibe dnoboa.énl ras dvwobérous epyds ' from these close correspon e& U70 ws
: i a aa Aye ' " or ae ee Pho ee, Albinus, that the logical CE, Did, 157.21-2 devs Ge dhbapen:der:70 mp irov kat ofonoyoulenats tained in the so-called ei . es : asc -he ok analogo In these two passages of Albinus it is easy to notice the presence a pal Coreen " O both ofPlatonic and ofAristotelian terms. Whereas the dvud8ero a ae '.. x ic ets ?
! liz xical doctrines wh dpyat of the first passage remind us of Rep. vi. 511 b 6-7, the agua maa betrines wh A , re:
Pde anil a6 f tk directly to Plato, without terms dvazodeikrous Kal aécovs mpoTdces and mpWrov O' the ; S : d 'hy 'j li first and second passages are the same terms which occur in { fe xe a ae enn J the passages of Aristotle quoted above.' It is interesting to oba the.
2. en un ea serve that the definition of analysis given by Clement's source aaron. cares nas lt am corresponds exactly to the second of the three kinds of analysis f SFOUSIN ChaFactersuc:Or SO :
"ale Clement's source is incl described by Albinus:
| stration not only the uni 1 To An. Post. 8430-3 and Top. 100%18-21 attention has been drawn also by Aristotle, but also what a Ernst, 20.
2 Primm, 27 n. 18, has been able to mention only this passage of Aristotle.
Vilker, 235 n. 2, does not produce more evidence, but simply refers to Priimm's Strom. viii. 7. 3-4 (iii. 83. footnote; both Primm and Vélker, speaking about the doctrine of the apxat in dpyat pera thy dx mlore Clement, have taken into account only the passage of Strom. ii. 13. 4 without awias sus mentioning the longer section of Strom. viii. 6. 7-7. 2.
PYOS aaah S 3 It occurs also in Alexander of Aphrodisias, the well-known commentator of yervapeva atvOera pév, Aristotle and a contemporary of Clement: see, for instance, Jn Top., vol. ii, Pars ii, m™mpudrev, p. 18. 16 Wallies, and Jn Top., vol. ii, Pars ii, p. 16. 4-8 Wallies. The reference to si the first passage is given also by Ernst, 20. é inn Rat dinlepetione ar 4 See, for instance, Galen, De Meth. med., c. 4, vol. x, p. 3315-18 Kithn, Inst. a) —aement, Strom, viii. 5.
(iii log. i. 5 'p. 4. 16-18 Kalbfleisch), xvi. 6 (p. 39. 17-19), Xvi. 7 (p. 40. 3-4) : these "HOMO VOU vcay éxzopilovra ti mi references are produced by Ernst, 20. To them it is possible to add Inst. log.
Toa yap drddekis nal aaa mlor xvii. 1 (p. 42. 7-8) and xvii. 2 (p. 42. 14-16).
! ik Moyounévay 7d dudioPyrodpevo 5 Cf. also the passages of Alexander of Aphrodisias and of Galen to which the Be in the definition of demonst two preceding footnotes refer.
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY { PISTIS, GNOSIS, see ee S Bh IES Peery one ye ia _ ~ Strom. vill. 14. 3 (iii. 88. 20-1): dex) 8 rovrwy amdvrwy €otl 7d
| expressions 7a mpos al mpos aicBnaly te Kal vonow evapyes. i (Strom. viii, 7. 3) and The same idea underlies also a passage of the second book of the (Strom. viii. 14. 3). res At this point the doub tromateis ;
Z in the four passages quot ii . 2-4): Ocd Ar rs Strom. i, 9 5 a ree 3 4) ' ebdpaares : mati sek Néyvou dl ii. g. 5, and ii. 13. 2) d iS ol aro Yap TAUTNS At a, L J , at :
AISA ll a Oia ema ita i tradition or on some i ev nw Kat Ty Sidvovav €KTEWOVTAL.
{ of these four passages o Clement can say here that sensation is the source of faith because first solution: from the sense-perceptions are évapyefs and what possesses evdpyea is g. 5 it could be easily i morév (cf. Strom. viii. 7. 3-4).
Ai by Theophrastus or a Closely connected with this doctrine which considers as prinpassages of Strom. ii. 13. ciples of demonstration (i.e. of scientific knowledge) what ap- | their close parallelism pears evident both to sensation and to mind is the view according also to suggest a direct to which scientific knowledge is based both on sensations and patetic philosopher. Ye on mind, The passage of Strom. ii. 13. 2 in which this view is shown by R. Hirzel th expounded shows some very close correspondences with a section
Adversus Mathematicos, c of the seventh book of Sextus Empiricus' Adversus Mathematicos © logy of several philoso (§§ 216 ff.) containing an exposition of the epistemological docexponents of the Acade trines of the Peripatetic school: q and of the Stoics), go Strom. ii. 13. 2 (ii. 119. 22-3):
Adv. Math. vii. 226: datverar ov ~ which can perhaps be « -~ ~ ~ e "
I ek 8¢ aicOfcews Kal 700 vod 7) THis ek TOV elpnucvuw mpGra Kpurfpia | at § 201. Hirzel came émorhpns cvvicrarat obaia. ris TOY mpayydrow yrdoews } TE | striking correspondenc aicOnats Kal 6 voids, 1) pev dpydvov ~ epistemology (§§ 141-4 tpdrov éxovoa, 7) S€ Texvirov. « « » (§§ 216-26) as well as odrws odd 6 voids xwpis alcbjoews © epistemological doctrin d doxtpdoar méfuxe 7a mpdypara, | which underlies the de Strom. ii. 13. 2
Adv. Math. vii. 218: kowdy be epistemology is that sc kowdv 88 vob Kal alcbjcews td aydorépwv [sc. aloBijcews Kal | the product of sense-pe j evapyés. vorjaews] ds Eheyev 6 Oedppacros This idea, according to | 70 evapyés.? h The expression xowér 82 vod Kat aicBrjcews 76 évapyés which occurs 7 gg, Seetieeels TOY het y4 :
| extus Empiricus with the Ka in Clement's passage reminds us at once of the very similar | 493-4, thinks it possible that oe . es che pe ah), survey of the epistemological | * Galen also holds this view.in De Meth. med. be 310k x, p. 29. 79bee
| * See Hirzel, 496-7: 'Der z (cf. Ernst, 21) and in Inst. log. i. 5 (p. 413-15 Kalbfleisch).
From the first of thes i Darstellung sprechende Grun two passages it can be inferred that Galen had expounded this doctrine at some tI theorie auch in diesem histo length in his logical work Tlepi drodeigews tropvijpara. On this huge work bis
! chos nun ist characteristisch, Galen see Walzer, op. cit.20 and the literature quoted in footnote 2 on the der Sinne méglich, die Wahr same page. Galen refers to it also in Inst. log. xvii. 1 (p. 42. 10 Kalbfleisch). geben ist, sondern nur vermitt 2 Tothis last passage of Sextus Empiricus attention has been drawn by Stihliny agi gewonnen werden kann, und app. crit., vol. ii, 119, and by Witt, Albinus .. ., 34 0. 4, and 53. a ihm fiir die platonisch-aristot \ } | ; \
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY i PISTIS, GNOSIS, C | sense-perceptions, does not agree entirely with the actual episte- | Accordingly, e i ai mology of Plato and Aristotle, but simply reproduces the point the epistemologica sn of view of Antiochus.! Since, therefore, the passages of Adv. Math.
13. 2, VI. 7. 3-45 Pa | vii. 226 and 218 quoted above can be traced back to Antiochus orina et ¥ « i and since they show a close correspondence with Strom. ii. 13. 2, of the epistemology of th | viii. 7. 3-4, and viii. 14. 3, it is very likely that these three passages some exponent of his sch of Clement as well are dependent on Antiochus. show the substantial ag In this way, even the passage of Strom. ii. g. 5, in spite of its their schools and to ae . rn . te O > referring to Theophrastus, can be related to Antiochus. What i.e. of the exponents fe) Clement says here is not only closely related to Strom. ii. 13. 2,
In order to achieve thi Strom. viii. 7. 3-4, and Strom. viii. 14. 3 so as to form together with epistemological aon o these passages a coherent epistemological system, but is also in made no distinction be perfect agreement with Antiochus' epistemological views, acattributed both to Plato cording to which the self-evidence ofsense-perceptions represents views (which were also the first, fundamental stage for the growth of knowledge and has
Stoics). The best evidenc a direct influence on reason. The passage ofStrom. ii. 9. 5 should 261 of the seventh book be compared with Ac. Pr. ii. 19: ordiamur igitur a sensibus, quorum
R. ~~ has pointed ita clara iudicia et certa sunt, Ac. Pr. ii, 30: mens enim ipsa, quae his ene Acts dia D sensuum fons est atque ipse sensus est, naturalem vim habet, quam ini orig y relate — :1 tendit ad ea, quibus movetur [sc. sense-perceptions], and Ac. Post. i.
Ny hic A appear: Evie ent b 30: guamquam oriretur a sensibus [sc. iudicium veritatis] . . . finition of cli as ovyxa :
; ' assages of Clement:
! See Hirzel, 498: 'Aus ihnen [sc. from the sentences of §§ 141~4] namentlich Passas erhellt, daB wir hier nicht die echte platonische Theorie vor uns haben. Denn
Scare, ss ... widerspricht ihr... die in den angefiihrten Worten erhaltene, daB unser Strom. il. 8. 4 (ii. e's Geist auch die Fahigkeit die Sinneseindriicke zu beurtheilen nur den Sinnen verGeoceBeias ovyxardbeat danken oder daB das Denken aus der sinnlichen Wahrnehmung stammen solle
Strom. ii. 54. 5-551 (ii.
...Dagegen kénnen wir eine solche Entstellung von Antiochos erwarten, da dd IT\drwvos aa w q durch die selbe die platonische Lehre seiner eigenen gleich wurde. Denn nach
Sv 8d y Antiochos ist ein Denken ohne Begriffe nicht méglich, diese selber aber sind oe ee bdfa SERR simmtlich aus den sinnlichen Wahrnehmungen geschdpft'; and p. 510: 'Dem
€oru i obdev ado 7) entsprechend wird zum Schlu8 das Verhiltnis der beiden Kriterien, der Sinne ; und des Geistes, durch eine Vergleichung erlautert, die die Sinne als Werkzeug, t ee ist cbenso auffallend das Fehlen einer fiir die aristotelische Erkenntnistheorie
FF te alan With bint ns wichtigen Bestimmung, wonach der vods einer unmittelbaren Erkenntnis fahig, Frochesl sa8)) or S190 a ein intuitives Vermégen ist, als die Ubercinstimmung mit der platonischen Lehre,
Fee eee wie sie bei Sextos aufgefaBt wird. DaB beides fir die Ableitung von Antiochos Bassnrcceie Goanwillt acranie spricht, versteht sich von selber.' It may also be worth while to look at Hirzel's
SEGoe ee C further remarks on pp. 499-520. I shall only draw attention to some passages Fir ne Pts PPANPST ORS Sayee in which the emphasis laid on the importance ofsense perceptions is particularly jh Mi G3: damt aggumantt pabsone strong: ovprepilaBay atré [sc. 7 Abyq] Kat THv :° alobijaews evépyeay (§ 141 on joe to Hie closes eprrespondence Plato) ; ovvepyod detrar 5 Abyos ris alabijaews (§ 1. 4 on Plato) ; oftws ove 6 vos
Ovvayw weduxviay dravres Exope en eey mes Uy tA ease, . lem vim habet, see chapterI, foo xupls alodifcews Soxydoa répuxe ra mpdypara (§ 226 on the Peripatetics); ris
4 Gis ihie rinteaseoli gener dvocws ... mpds eniyvwow ris adpBelas Ty aloOytuciy Suvapw dvadovens ($259 | A See ae on the Stoics); and viv... davractav ris alobijocws ...8 fs rav mpayydrwv | We Ere aEene durihayBdvera, (8 260, on the Stoica).
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY PISTIS, GNOSIS, G Sine Sieh 'contd z Strom. v. 86. 1 (ii. 383. 1) : 78x 82 4 alovis ed Kai éxovous Tis puxijs above. The identificatio ovykardbeats .
« / sensio) is therefore charact | The term ovyxardbecis had been employed especially by the | that, in this case as well, Stoics: it indicated the positive reaction or 'assent' of mind to the Clement. That Clemen sense-perceptions. A passage ofthe Academica Posteriora ofCicero,
Academy had adopted | belonging to the exposition made by Varro of Zeno's teaching, | shown by the passage of provides a clear illustration of this doctrine: sed ad haec, quae visa ovyxarabéces od pdvov sunt et quasi accepta sensibus, adsensionem adiungit [sc. Keno| animorum,
Srods ef? tyutv elvar Aéyo quam esse volt in nobis positam et voluntariam.
Visis non omnibus } most probably to Antio adiungebat fidem, sed eis solum, quae propriam quandam haberent deemphasis laid on the agr clarationem earum rerum, quae viderentur (Ac. Post. i. 40-1).! In this
| Porch reminds us of the passage adsensio (ovyxardects) and fides (miorts) are practically we have seen, did his best one and the same thing. It would therefore be natural to suppose,
F | between the different ph as Pohlenz did,? a direct influence of Stoicism in the adoption : doubt may arise about t of the Stoic term ovyxardOecis. It must, however, not be forgotten
'He [sc. Clement] is the that here Varro is speaking from the standpoint of Antiochus ;3 f faith with the Stoic ter that Antiochus himself adopted the Stoic doctrine ofovyxardBeors
| An analogous conclusi and connected it with pistis can also be seen from the following i | pistis as a preconception eadenee statement according to w qi yi i Wy i ls Ac. Pr. ii. 37: simul illud aperiebatur, comprehendi multa etpercipi sensibus,
; Srohaypéveelene quod fert sine adsensione non potest., ; : emt TH evapyh Tob mpdypa Ac. Pr. ii. 38: . . . sic non potest [sc. animal] obiectam rem perspicuam non
; Bernie fe bee Weenee approbare. hi IE T, Ac. Pr. ii. 38: qui enim quid percipit, adsentitur statim.
) ajane a mpdhnyss : sabi) Ac. Pr. ii. 39: omninoque ante videri aliquid quam agamus necesse est, edyvapovos mpo karadrjibe eique, quod visum sit, adsentiatur.
{ curus knowledge is base '
De Finibus iv. 9: denuntiant, ut neque sensuum fidem sine ratione nec i ing to him, are always tr rationes sine sensibus exquiramus atque ut eorum alterum ab altero ne i | dua avros adnOA dnow ta separemus.§ j ; fr. 247 Usener, p. 179
The sense of the sentence of the last passage, neque sensuumfidem | mike « EPa : aie sine ratione .. . exquiramus, is that it is reason that mustultimately
(see the nn anne decide whether to believe or not in sense-perceptions. That such B siti ee aa a decisionis expressed by an assent of mind (adsensio, ovyrardBeors) i vee = BBY preconcep is clearly shown by the passages of the Academica Priora quoted i s It : aoe —£.
+ | ' nay at a first glanc 1 On the Stoic doctrine of avyxardbeas sce alsoJ. S. Reid's footnote 20, p. 223 q Clement, the acceptance in his commentary of the Academica of Cicero (London, 1885). i 2 NGA, phil.-hist. Kl. (1943), 150.
3 See Witt, 29 n. 1, and also 34.
A, * The Philosophy of the Church j + On the change of construction in this passage see Reid, footnote 15; P. 225. i _, See also Vita Epic., c. 33, 5 On the dependence ofthis passage of De Finibus on Antiochus see Witt, 29 and a "wer davévros, and C. Bailey'
(Apicurus. The extant Remains, O '
PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY PISTIS, GNOSIS, whom he does not hesitate to attack elsewhere.t Such a surprise While mentioning an } is, however, bound to vanish as soon as we remember that the as 7poAnyus, Clement h ] Epicurean doctrine of mpérAnyus is in perfect agreement with { still floating in his min | the views of the Stoics, who considered sense-perceptions as the | I cannot prove it directl basis of every knowledge and as the first cause of what they too reference to Theophrast | called zpodjpers.2 This was also the view of Antiochus, as can be doctrine of péAnyus no seen from Ac, Pr. ii. 30: mens enim ipsa, quae sensuum fons est, atque from a school handbook ) ipse sensus est, naturalem vim habet quam intendit ad ea, quibus movetur;
; ing of Antiochus. It shou itaque alia visa sic adripit, ut eis statim utatur, alia quasi recondit, to have devoted part of | e quibus memoria oritur. Cetera similitudinibus construit, ex quibus the Epicurean doctrine o efficiuntur notitiae rerum, quas Graeci tum évvoias tum mpodrjpers f section of Adv, Math. vi vocant, There can be therefore only one reason why Clement seventh book of the Adv f accepts the Epicurean doctrine of pdAnyus:he found it in agreeHirzel, can be traced b ment with his own epistemological views which, as we have seen,
To sum up. Accordi he had inherited from the school-teaching deriving from Antio- \ indicates in Clement (a chus. It is important to observe that, after mentioning Epicurus' strated principles of dem doctrine, Clement maintains that a preconception is transformed
) principles of demonstrat into knowledge by instruction, 6 pabdy de 789 Karddnyw moved Ty reason and to mind, an aporninv, Strom. ii, 17. 1
(ii. 121. 14-15), and that it is prior to mediate knowledge base knowledge, zpdAnyus ..
. mpd karadifews, Strom. ii, 28. 1 (ii, 128. such terms as 'assent' o 1-2). This is not in agreement with Epicurus' views, according ee acceptance of the first a which zpdAqyus is itself knowledge, rijv 5é mpoAnipw Aeyovow oiovel formulated by Plato and karddniw 7) ddav dpOjv 7) Evvovay évarroxeperny, Vita Epic. 33. come down to Clement On the other hand, Clement's statements showa perfect agreeschool-tradition which al ment with the teaching of Antiochus, who thought that it was
The doctrine of the acce the rational activity of mind that had the task oftransforming the tion and, in more genera product of sense-perceptions (arpdAnyis) into knowledge (xardimmediate knowledge i Anis) : €0 [sc. to sense-perceptions] cum accessit ratto argumentique
: most probably, however conclusio rerumque innumerabilium multitudo tum et perceptio eorum omnium Peripatetic school, but apparet et eadem ratio perfecta his gradibus ad sapientiam pervenit. Ad
Antiochus. The definiti rerum igitur scientiam vitaeque constantiam aptissima cum sit mens hominis, which both refer to imm amplectitur maxime cognitionem et istam kar dAnibey quam, ut dixt,
; perceptions can also be verbum e verbo exprimentes comprehensionem dicemus (Ac. Pr. ii. 30-1). tl ' The scholars (for instance t Volker, 236 n. 4, cannot refrain from expressing his wonder: "Clemens beruft
) sophy ...i.121) who have men sich ausdriicklich auf Epikur, und ich finde es bezeichnend, daB er sich nicht \ Le. Strom. ii. 16. 3, have not t scheut auf die Autoritat dieses auch von ihm abgelehnten Philosophers u. U. zu on Epicurus is based on an in stiitzen.' On Clement's polemic against Epicurus see chapter I, p. 45 above.
} * Philo does not possess such Even in this passage Clement does not miss the opportunity of criticizing Epicurus? analogies in the use of the terms before mentioning his definition ofpistis as apdAnyus he says 6 pddtora rijs dAnBetas given by Vélker, 248, especiall mporipioas riy Hdoviy, Strom. ii. 16. 3 (ii. 121. 9).
. ever, the same as those of Anti 2 See Reid's footnote 5 on Ac. Pr. ii. 30, p. 213, with all the material concerning , ledge is the product of the com thie Stoics:
'29 (i. 68, 15-21) and ii. go (i |