MEDIEVAL ACADEMY BOOKS, NO. 96

CORPUS PHILOSOPHORUM MEDII AEVI

AVERROIS HEBRAICUS

CORPUS PHILOSOPHORUM MEDII AEVI

ACADEMIARUM CONSOCIATARUM

AUSPICIIS ET CONSILIO EDITUM

OPERA AVERROIS

Ediderunt

HENRICUS AUSTRYN WOLFSON V't

SHLOMO PINES

THE MEDIEVAL ACADEMY OF AMERICA

AND

THE ISRAEL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

AVERROES' DE SUBSTANTIA ORBIS

Critical Edition of the Hebrew Textwith English Translation and Commentary

byARTHUR HYMAN

Cambridge, Massachusetts and Jerusalem1986

ISBN 965-208-071-3Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 85-61823

Copyright ©1986 by theMedieval Academy of America

Printed in Israel

In 1931, the Medieval Academy of America undertook the publicationof Averroes' Commentaries on Aristotle in accordance with H.A.Wolfson's "Plan for the publication of a Corpus CommentariorumAverrois in Aristotelem"', published in Speculum, VI (1931), pp.412-427.

In 1977, the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities undertook topublish the Hebrew translations of the works of Averroes.The present volume is a joint publication of both academies. It is the lastto be published in the framework of the Medieval Academy series ofCorpus Commentariorum Averrois in Aristoielem.

S. Pines

CONTENTS

Preface 7Introduction 13

CONCERNING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE

CELESTIAL SPHERE BY AVERROES

Chapter One 39Chapter Two 74Chapter Three 99Chapter Four 112Chapter Five 120Chapter Six 123

Bibliography 139Index of References 144Index of Names and Subjects 148Hebrew Section see p. 7

PREFACE

Averroes is primarily known for his many commentaries on Aristotle'sworks and for his Tahdfut al-Tahafut, "The Incoherence of theIncoherence." He was also the author of a number of independenttreatises dealing with a variety of philosophical and theological topics.These treatises contain answers to questions addressed to Averroes orsolutions to problems posed by him. In them Averroes usuallydevelops his own views on the topic under discussion and, whennecessary, refutes opinions he holds to be erroneous.The Ma'amar be-'Esem ha-Galgal (De Substantia Orbis) is a collectionof such treatises which have as their common subject-matter thenature and properties of the heavens. No longer extant in Arabic, thework has been preserved in Hebrew and Latin translations madeindependently of one another from the Arabic original. The Hebrewtranslation is composed of six treatises, five of which appear in theLatin version.The Hebrew translation from the Arabic is the work of an anonymoustranslator. It has reached us in a number of complete and partialmanuscripts in a recension made by Moses ben Joshua of Narbonne(called Narboni, d. 1362). In addition to the anonymous Hebrewtranslation of the complete work, there has come down to us anindependent translation of the third chapter made from the Arabic bySolomon ibn Ayyub (fl. middle of thirteenth century).The Latin translation from the Arabic seems to have been made byMichael Scotus in the first half of the thirteenth century. It has beenpreserved in over eighty complete and partial manuscripts and in anumber of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century printed editions. Itappeared in Manuel Alonso's edition of Alvaro de Toledo'sCommentario al "de substantia orbis," published in 1941, and inAntonio Poppi's edition of Pietro Pomponazzi's Super libello desubstantia orbis expositio, published in 1966. The manuscripts andmost of the printed editions of the Latin version contain the fivechapters of Scotus' translation, but in some of the sixteenth-centuryeditions there appear two additional chapters translated from theHebrew into Latin by Abraham of Balmes. The first of theseadditional chapters was translated from the sixth chapter of theanonymous Hebrew translation; the second from a text that has onlyrecently been discovered. The five chapters of Scotus' version were

De Substantia Orbis

translated from Latin into Hebrew by Judah Romano (earlyfourteenth century).The present volume contains a critical edition of the anonymousHebrew translation of the De Substantia Orbis and an Englishtranslation of the work, with an introduction, explanatory notes and aHebrew-Latin glossary. For the preparation of this edition I had at mydisposal complete and partial manuscripts of the anonymous Hebrewtranslation, the chapter translated by Ibn Ayyub, and, for purposes ofcomparison, a sample of the early printed Latin editions and of thetext appearing in Alonso's volume. The linguistic similarity betweenHebrew and Arabic justifies the use of the Hebrew version, inpreference to the Latin, as the basic text for the English translation.Since, however, the Latin is an independent translation from theArabic original, I did not hesitate to use it when it proved to be ofhelp. Thus I made use of the Latin translation in those instances inwhich the Hebrew text was corrupt or defective while the Latin versionhad preserved the correct reading, as well as in those instances inwhich, while the Hebrew text was intelligible, the Latin seemed to havepreserved a reading more in harmony with the drift of Averroes'argument. In the first case I felt free to correct or supplement the textof the Hebrew manuscripts in accordance with the reading of theLatin; in the second, I retained the text of the Hebrew manuscripts inmy critical edition, but based my translation on the Latin. However,whenever it became necessary to deviate from the text of the Hebrewmanuscripts in any way, my reasons for doing so are recorded in afootnote. Corrections of the text of the Hebrew manuscripts andsupplements to it based on the Latin are indicated in my edition byasterisks, and the few instances in which I had to change the text onthe basis of conjecture are included in square brackets. My edition isaccompanied by two critical apparatuses: one listing the variants ofthe Hebrew manuscripts, the other the variants between the Hebrewand the Latin editions used. In the latter case, I translated the Latinvariants into Hebrew.In preparing the English translation I considered it my primary task toprovide the modern reader with an accurate and readable version ofAverroes' text. At the same time I attempted to preserve the linguisticniceties and the stylistic peculiarities of the original, insofar as this waspossible within the confines of proper English usage. Thus, I retainedAverroes' rather involved sentence structure in most instances, but I

Preface

did not hesitate to divide sentences when the need for claritydemanded it. I also permitted myself to supplement the translationwhen necessary to elucidate the meaning of a passage or to disclose thestructure of an argument. Such additions are enclosed in squarebrackets.The explanatory notes are provided to aid the reader in understandingAverroes' text. In them, I have analyzed discussions, outlinedarguments, and examined philosophic issues, besides explaining termsand linguistic usages. Reference is made to the writings of Averroesand the works of other authors. Insofar as I was aware of them, I havereferred to passages in Aristotle's writings in which the discussions ofAverroes had their origin or on which he drew in his exposition. Inpreparing these notes I made use of Narboni's Hebrew commentary onthe De Substantia Orbis and of the Latin commentaries of Alvaro deToledo and John of Jandun. AH these commentaries contain muchrelating to the discussion of the topics of the De Substantia Orbis byphilosophers subsequent to Averroes, but in my notes I have limitedmyself to those passages that were of immediate help for theclarification of Averroes' text.The present volume was completed many years ago, but its publicationhas unfortunately been delayed by lack of adequate funding. It is,therefore, with a special sense of gratitude that I record the learnedsocieties and foundations that made the publication of this workpossible. I wish to thank the Mediaeval Academy of America and theIsrael Academy of Sciences and Humanities for jointly sponsoring thepublication of this volume. The American Academy for JewishResearch through its Epstein Fund, the J. A. Melnick Foundation, theNational Foundation for Jewish Culture, and the Gustav WurzweilerFoundation generously provided publication grants, and my thanksare extended to them as well. Finally, I am indebted to the AmericanPhilosophical Society which, at an earlier stage of my work, provideda research grant that permitted me to examine manuscripts inEuropean libraries.It is my pleasant duty to acknowledge the gracious help I receivedfrom the following libraries and their librarians: BibliothequeNationale, Paris; Bodleian Library, Oxford; British Museum, London;Columbia University Library, New York; Harvard University Library,Cambridge, Mass.; Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary ofAmerica, New York; Jewish National and University Library,

De Substantia Orbis

Jerusalem; New York Public Library, New York; PreussischeStaatsbibliothek, Berlin; Staatsbibliothek, Munich; Vatican Library;and Yeshiva University Library, New York.Important as were subventions and library resources, it was the adviceand support of teachers, colleagues and friends that wereindispensable for this project. First and foremost, I wish toacknowledge a debt of many years to my teacher and mentor, the lateProfessor Harry A. Wolfson, who first initiated me into the field ofMedieval Philosophy and who gave generously of his unparalleledlearning and his keen insight into the intricacies of medievalphilosophic texts at every stage of this work. Professor Wolfson stillsaw the final version of this volume and his sage and judicious advicecontributed much to solving many difficult problems. I am also gratefulto "Oil TIO Professor Saul Lieberman V"T for all I learned fromhim and for his interest and support as my work progressed. Mythanks are extended to the following colleagues who helped me in avariety of ways: to Professor Salo W. Baron, professor emeritus atColumbia University and past president of the American Academy forJewish Research, for his interest over the years; to Professor Paul O.Kristeller, professor emeritus at Columbia University and a pastpresident of the Mediaeval Academy of America, for discussing withme the Renaissance commentators on the De Substantia Orbis and fordirecting my attention to uncatalogued Latin manuscripts of the work;to Professor Shlomo Pines, professor emeritus at the HebrewUniversity, Jerusalem, for discussing with me aspects of the workduring the year in which I served as visiting professor at thatuniversity; and to the late Professor Gershom Scholem for arrangingthe cosponsorship of this volume during his tenure as president of theIsrael Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Dr Paul Meyvaert,executive secretary of the Mediaeval Academy of America, gavegenerously of his time and knowledge at all phases of this work. Mr S.Reem, editor, and Mrs Y. Glikson, both of the Israel Academy,expertly performed the required editorial tasks and faithfully saw thevolume through press. Finally, it is, my special pleasure to express mygratitude to Mr Harry Starr, president of the Lucius N. LittauerFoundation, for many years of friendship and generous help. All ofthese teachers, friends and colleagues have done much to improve thequality of this tvolume. Any shortcomings that it still possesses are, ofcourse, my own. ; , .

10

Preface

I dedicate this volume to the members of my immediate family: myparents of blessed memory, my wife Ruth, a scholar in her own right,and our children, Jeremy Saul, Michael Samuel, and Joseph Isaiah.Their love, devotion, and patience informs every page of this volume.

Yeshiva UniversityNew York

11

INTRODUCTION

I. MANUSCRIPTS, PRINTED EDITIONS AND COMMENTARIES

This critical edition was prepared from five of the seven completemanuscripts of the anonymous Hebrew translation of Averroes' DeSubstantia Orbis listed by Steinschneider, two partial manuscripts ofthe same translation,1 and three manuscripts of the chapter translatedby Solomon ibn Ayyub.2 In addition I had at my disposal three of thefifteenth- and sixteenth-century printed editions of the Latintranslation and the Latin text appearing in Manuel Alonso's edition ofAlvaro de Toledo's Commentario al "de substantia orbis."

1. The Hebrew ManuscriptsThe Hebrew manuscripts are:X Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 918, foil. 166v-179v.3

3 Rome, Vatican, Urb. 41, foil. 115r-136r.<1 Munich, No. 31, foil. 287v-315r.5

1 Cf.SteinschneideTtDieHebraischenUbersetzungendesMittelaltersunddieJudenals Dolmetscher (Berlin, 1893; reprint: Graz, 1956), pp. 179 (Steinschneider 6)and 183. Steinschneider's listing is somewhat unclear, for one gains theimpression that only the manuscripts listed on p. 183 contain the DeSubstantia Orbis. However, the catalogues reveal that some of the manuscriptslisted on p. 179 also contain all or part of the work. If we examineSteinschneider's list on p. 179, omitting those manuscripts that also appear onp. 183, the following picture emerges: Berlin 112, cf. below, MS T; Munich 36,cf. below, MS 0; Steinschneider 6 (now Jewish Theological Seminary ofAmerica, No. 2311), cf. below, MS '; other manuscripts, of which thecatalogues do not record whether they contain any part of the work.

2 Ibn Ayyub's translation appears as an appendix to his Hebrew translation ofAverroes' Middle Commentary on De Caelo in some of the manuscripts of thatwork. Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen, pp. 128-129, Unaware thatthis appendix is identical with chapter 3 of the De Substantia Orbis,Steinschneider was led, in my opinion, to a wrong theory concerning thecomposition of the work. Cf. below, pp. 14-15, and the article cited below, n. 20.H. A. Wolfson was the first to note that the appendix to the Middle Commentaryon De Caelo is identical with chapter 3 of the De Substantia Orbis and he kindlybrought this fact to my attention.

3 Cf. H. Zotenberg, Catalogues des Manuscrits Htbreux et Samaritains de laBibliotheque Imperiale (Paris, 1866), No. 918.

4 Cf. St Ev. Assemanus et Jos. Sim. Assemanus, Bibliothecae Vaticanae Codd.MSS. Catalogus (Rome, 1756), No. 41.

5 Cf. M. Steinschneider, Die HebrBischen Handschriften der K. Ho/- und Staats-biblbthek in MUnchen2 (Munich, 1895), No. 31.

13

De Substantia Orbis

T Harvard, MS Heb. 42, foil. 258r-260v. Ibn Ayyub's translationof chapter 3.6

n Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 957, foil. 24v-42v.7

T Berlin, No. 112, fol. 7v. A manuscript of chapter 5.8

t3 Munich, No. 36, foil. 220v-221v. A manuscript of chapters 4 and5.'

' New York, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, No. 2311,foil. 38r-70v.'°

V Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 945, foil. 114v-117r. IbnAyyub's translation of chapter 3."

0 Munich, No. 31, foil. 102v-105r. Ibn Ayyub's translation ofchapter 3.12

Of the other two complete manuscripts mentioned by Steinschneider,the Turin manuscript13 is no longer extant and the Petersburgmanuscript was unavailable to me because of world conditions.14

2. The Printed Latin TextsThe printed Latin texts used appear in the following works:2? Commentario al "de substantia orbis" de Averroes, por Alvaro de

Toledo, ed. P. Manuel Alonso, S.J. (Madrid, 1941).j? Aristoteles, Opera Latine cum commentariis Averrois, recensuit

Nicolatus Vernia (Venetiis, 1483).T Aristotelis, Omnia quae extant opera, et Averrois Cordubensis in

ea opera, omnes, qui ad haec usque tempora pervenerecommentarii (Venetiis, apud Iuntas, 1562-1574), IX.

6 Cf. M. Glatzer and Ch. Berlin, Hebrew Manuscripts in the Houghton Library ofHarvard College (Cambridge, Mass., 1975), Heb. 42.

7 Cf. Zotenberg, Catalogues, No. 957. ,,8 Cf. M. Steinschneider, Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Jconiglichen

Bibliothek zu Berlin, II: Verzeichnisse der Hebraischen Handschriften (Berlin,1878), No. 112.

9 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Handschriften... Munchen, No. 36.10 Cf. S. Feldman, Philosophy Manuscripts from the Library of the Jewish

Theological Seminary of America (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1974), No. 2311.11 Cf. Zotenberg, Catalogues, No. 945. Cf. also M. Beit-Arid & C. Sirat,

Manuscrits medievaux en caractires hibraiques, II (Jerusalem-Paris, 1979), No.39.

12 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Handschriften...Munchen, No. 31.13 Cf. Codices Manuscripti, Biblioth. R. Taurinensis etc., recensuerunt Jos.

Pasinus: Vol. I,(Turin, 1749), No. 147.14 Cf. Firkowitsch, Handschr. Catalog der mss, I. Sammlung, welche jetzt in Pet.,

No. 433.

14

Introduction

ID Ioannes de Ianduno, In libris Aristotelis De Caelo et Mundo...,quibus adiecimus Averrois sermonem de Substantia Orbis, cumeiusdem Ioanni commentario ac questionibus (Venetiis, apud H.Scotus, 1552).

3. The Hebrew Translation and Its ArrangementThe Hebrew text of the De Substantia Orbis appears as an independentpart of a collection known as D^Jnun D'BJmn "physical questions,"or nvnbxai nwaoa D'IPVn "questions concerning physical andmetaphysical subjects."15 This collection contains a number ofindependent works, by Averroes and other authors, dealing withquestions occasioned by Aristotle's physical and metaphysicalwritings.16 The unity of the collection is provided by the commonsubject-matter of its independent parts. Neither the order of thecomponent treatises of the total collection nor their number is thesame in the various manuscripts.The complete Hebrew manuscripts of the De Substantia Orbis onwhich this edition and translation is based contain an anonymoustranslation of the lost Arabic original." A part of this original wascomposed in Morocco in the year A.H. 574, that is, in 1178/79.18

The complete Hebrew text has reached us in the recension of Mosesben Joshua of Narbonne. In this recension the work is arranged intothree treatises, the third of which, in turn, is subdivided into threechapters."Narboni's text represents the final medieval redaction of theanonymous Hebrew translation.20 At first the name DXJD 1DK0

15 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen, pp. 178 fF.16 Ibid For a similar collection of logical writings, cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische

Obersetzungen. pp. 96 fF.17 The style of the translation, typical usages, such as H33 translating the Arabic

_>«*, and the appearance of the term fhiaVN, leave no doubt that thetranslation was made from the Arabic. This is also apparent from a number ofmistranslations appearing in the Hebrew text. Cf. below, p. 24, and chap. 1, n.59. Texts a ,V ,T contain an independent translation from the Arabic. Cf.below, pp. 21-22 and 23-24.

18 Cf. p. 137. This date and place of composition apply with certainty only tochapter 6.

19 For reasons which will appear below, I have divided my edition into sixindependent chapters.

20 I have discussed the history and transmission of this text in my article "TheComposition and Transmission of Averroes' Ma'amar be-'Esem ha-Gatgal,"Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman (Philadelphia, 1963), pp.

15

De Substantia Orbis

7J7JH was applied only to the treatise which appears as chapter 1 of thepresent edition. In time, five independent treatises dealing with thenature of the celestial element were added. Four of these additionaltreatises were combined into a larger treatise which, in turn, wassubdivided into three chapters. This text, composed of three majortreatises, was the one which reached Narboni. Narboni rearranged thethird treatise, producing the final medieval redaction. Narboni alsoseems to have been the redactor who applied the name 7J7JH QXMIDXOto the Hebrew collection as a whole.Since the De Substantia Orbis appears to be composed of six originallyindependent treatises, I preferred a division into six chapters toNarboni's arrangement. A comparison of the arrangement of thepresent edition with that of Narboni is made in the following table:

TABLE 1

Present Edition Narboni's Edition

Chapter 1 First TreatiseChapter 2 Third Treatise, Chapter 1Chapter 3 Third Treatise, Chapter 2 (First

Part)Chapter 4 Third Treatise, Chapter 3Chapter 5 Second TreatiseChapter 6 Third Treatise, Chapter 2 (Second

Part)

In the complete Hebrew manuscripts the text is accompanied byNarboni's commentary. The text is subdivided into small paragraphs,each of which is followed by the relevant portion of the commentary.Each paragraph is introduced by the phrase TUH px 1OX which Iomitted in the text of this edition but recorded in the Hebrew criticalapparatus. Narboni's commentary, completed in 1349,21 contains twointroductory paragraphs. One of these precedes the third treatise, theother the second chapter of the third treatise:22

299-307. The remarks which follow are discussed and documented in thisarticle.

21 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen. p. 187.22 A section of the first of these introductory paragraphs is cited below, p. 17,

n. 27.

16

Introduction

In Narboni's edition the various treatises and chapters carry their ownsuperscription- or number. Narboni's first treatise is entitled "ATreatise by the Philosopher Averroes Concerning the Substance of theSphere."23 The second treatise24 has as its superscription "ThePhilosopher [Averroes] also Wrote a Letter Concerning This Subjectand It is the Following."25 The third treatise carries no specialheading, but each of its subdivisions is called First, Second and ThirdChapter26 respectively. In addition, Narboni describes the contents ofeach of the chapters of the third treatise in the first of the above-mentioned introductory paragraphs. The first chapter of the thirdtreatise, he writes, deals with Aristotle's view that the celestial body isnot composite;27 the second explains in what sense it is simple;28 andthe third establishes that it is neither light nor heavy.21*

4. The Latin Translation and Its ArrangementThe Latin translation from the Arabic, which seems to have beenmade between 1227 and 1231,'" appears to be the work of MichaelScotus." This translation, usually called the Old Latin, contains thefirst five chapters of the DeSubstantia Orbis. It was later supplementedby two chapters translated from the Hebrew by Abraham of Balmes."The first of these supplementary chapters was translated from our

23 "7jVjn Dxra iioiV'sn TOTI px1? naxa.24 Chapter 5 in the present edition.25 nxT N'm HTV nnx mix nsnn ana TO.26 'i3i |wm naxa.27 sawa Vyisa pooiK mira -vox Nim nnxn unmn naoa ia iiprr \wvrtn naxan

ims'sna 'ion nrs n^ia: mixnip b"~\ aaiia vhi "a^aipn niin&D V'i 'saun.28 irx "a'aip.i otinw ' j i n .OUPD WHIP sim •'wn » m n nao ia jrr w n naxam

nVnaa misa naina sin DNI ia E>D:I naina aaiia.29 naa s^i Vp.sV xinu/a naon ia jn' w^ivrt nanam.30 Cf. R. de Vaux, "La Premiere Entree d'Averroes chez Ies Latins," Revue ties

Sciences Philosophiques el Theologiques, XXII (1933), 193-245, passim.31 Ibid.. 222-223. Cf. E. Renan, Averroes el I'averroisme, in: Oeuvres Completes

de Ernest Renan, ed. H. Psichari, III (Paris, 1949), pp. 167 ff., andSteinschneider, Hebraische Cbersetzungen, p. 182, and p. 182, n. 554. De Vauxagrees with Renan (Steinschneider) that Michael Scotus is the probabletranslator. However, he rejects Renan's'arguments and substitutes others ofhis own.

32 Of the Latin texts used, only T contains these two additional chapters. Theyarc introduced by the following superscription: "Haec duo scquentia capita,ab Abramo dc Balmcs latinate donata, quanquam ab hoc tractatu separatacssc videantur, cum iam ci finis sit impositus: quia tamen in cadem vcrsanturre, in qua ct priora: idco ipsa sextum ct scptimum tractatus huius capitaconstituimus."

17

De Substantia Orbis

chapter 6, the second from a text recently discovered by ProfessorHelen Tunik Goldstein."The title of the Latin version, which appears with slight variation in allthe texts, is De Substantia Orbis. In the introduction to text X the workis referred to as "librum Averrois de substancia orbis"34 and at the endof chapter 1 of the same text the work is called "sermo de substanciaorbis."is In text p> the name of the work appears at the top of eachpage. It is known as "liber Averrois de substantia orbis." At the end ofchapter 1 of this text it is called "sermo de substantia orbis" and at theend of chapter 5 "libellus de substantia orbis." In text T the title of thework, as well as the title mentioned at the end of chapter 1, is "sermode substantia orbis," and at the end of chapter 5 it is called "libellus desubstantia orbis." Text U; refers to the book in the same way as text 1.The majority of the Latin texts are divided in accordance with the fivechapters they contain.16 Text X, which is accompanied by thecommentary of Alvaro de Toledo, deviates from this scheme in that itis divided into three chapters. In this text each chapter is subdividedinto paragraphs of varying length, and each paragraph is accompaniedby the relevant portion of the commentary. Text p is subdivided intofive unnumbered chapters. Text 1, which is divided into sevenchapters, contains the five original chapters together with the above-mentioned two supplementary chapters. In this text each of thechapters is headed by a brief description of its contents.37 Text tP,

33 Cf. Helen Tunik Goldstein, "New Hebrew Manuscript Sources for AverroeanTexts," Journal of Near Eastern Studies. XXXVIII (1979), 29-31. I plan topublish the Hebrew text of this chapter together with the study it requires at afuture time.

34 Cf. Alonso, ed., Commentario. p. 33.35 Ibid., p. 128.36 That the Latin version was already composed of five chapters early in its

history is attested by a manuscript dated 1243. Cf. de Vaux, Revue desSciences. XXII, 223-224.

37 The superscriptions of the whole work and the component chapters are asfollows:

Averrois Cordubensis Sermo Dc Substantia Orbis nupcr cast igatus.ctduobuscapitulis nuctiis.Cap. I. De Substantia Cacli, eiusquc forma, ac materia.Cap. 2. De natura corporis caelestis, quo pacto sit simplex non compositum,

non grave, ncquc leve: ac pluribus ipsis accidentibus.Cap. 3. Formam cacli virtutcm esse non in corporc: ipsumque simplex cssc,

non compositum: ciusque virtutcm, in actione finitam,infinitoaeternoquctempore mov'ere.

Cap. 4. Quo pacto necessaria sit motus cacli continuatio cum his inferioribus.

18

Introduction

which is accompanied by the commentary of John of Jandun, isdivided into five chapters, and each chapter is subdivided intoparagraphs. Each paragraph is followed by the relevant portion ofJandun's commentary. Each of the five chapters carries the samesuperscription as the corresponding chapter in text 1.A comparison of the arrangement of the present edition with that ofthe Latin texts is made in the following table:

HEBREW

Present Edition

Chapter 12

34

5

6—

TABLE

1234

Part I (pp. 243-254)

4Part II (pp. 255-268)

—

—

2

?

1234

5

—

—

LATIN

T

12

34

5

67

12

34

5

—

—

5. The Hebrew TextsProceeding to a more detailed description of the Hebrewmanuscripts,38 we note that, excepting a ,"? , V all seem to go back tothe same manuscript source. Our base manuscript K, written onparchment, dates from the fifteenth century.40 It is written in SpanishRabbinic characters by the same hand. It is divided into regularcolumns of forty-two lines, two columns to a page. Marginal

Cup. 5. Dc caeli simplicitatc. ac spiritualilate.Cap. 6. Corpora caelestia non componi ex materia et forma.Cap. 7. Quacsitum, quo ostendit.quomodo corpora caelestia, cum suntfinita,

ct possibilia ex se, acquirant ab alio actcrnitatem.38 For help in identifying the scripts of the Hebrew manuscripts and their

dates, I am indebted to the late Professor Alexander Marx and the lateMr Morris Lutsky.

39 For manuscripts 0, V, 1, cf. below, pp. 21-22 and 23-24.40 Cf. Zotcnbcrg, Catalogues, No. 918.

19

De Substantia Orbis

comments, which supply missing words and phrases or correct thetext, appear in thirteen places of the text and there are some interlinearcorrections.41 With one exception they are written by a second hand. Inhis orthography, the scribe prefers in most instances the defective formof spelling to the plene form.42 To indicate that a word is to be omitted,he places two (sometimes three) dots or a line over the affected word.Marginal notes to be added to the text are marked by supralinearloops.Manuscript 3, written on parchment, dates from the fifteenthcentury.43 It is written in Spanish Rabbinic characters by the samehand. Each page has one column of twenty-nine lines. Marginal notes,written by the original scribe, appear in two places in the manuscript.One of the notes indicates a lacuna in the" text, the other provides anexplanation. The scribe of this manuscript prefers the plene spelling tothe defective.44 To signify that a word is to be omitted,-he places a lineover the affected word.Comparing manuscripts X and a, we find that, on the whole, they bothrepresent the same text. The contents of the two manuscripts are soalike that it is safe to say that one was copied from the other or thatboth go back to the same manuscript source. There exist two majororthographic differences between the two manuscripts: a reads VsiDwhere X reads Vs?D and a reads '31ST where X reads WManuscript 5, written on parchment, dates from the sixteenthcentury.45 It is written in German cursive characters by the same hand.Each page contains one column of thirty lines. Marginal letters,written by the original scribe, appear in thirteen places. The onlyfunction of these letters is to supply lacking grammatical endings tothe last word of a given line. Because of this special function theyappear only in the left margin.46 The scribe of this manuscript prefersthe plene spelling.

4! In describing the manuscripts I have limited myself to those portions whichcontain the text of the De Substantia Orbis only.

42 E.g., "WDK ,:mnn ,inn ,-ixn ,mn .nna.43 Cf. St Ev. Assemanus and Jos. Sim. Assemanus, Bibliothecae Vaticanae...

Catalogus, No. 41.44 E.g., "HPD'N ,a"ina ,nmn .nxw ,nnn .nrro.45 Cf. Steinschneider, Die Hebraischen Handschriften...in MUnchen. No. 31.

From a date appearing in the first section of the work (fol. 102),Steinschneider dates this manuscript 1550. He describes the manuscript as"sehr unkorrekt." f

46 E.g., the text has'^Ksaan and the margin supplies the missing D. I did notrecord such additions in my critical apparatus.

20

Introduction

This manuscript differs from the first two in three major ways. Firstly,it omits a number of passages found in the first two texts. Secondly, itcontains a number of flagrant mistakes in the spelling and grouping ofwords.47 Thirdly, it includes corrections of what the scribe consideredgrammatical mistakes.4" In addition, variations in tenses, in theconjugation of verbs, and in conjunctions account for a number ofdifferences between this manuscript and the first two.49 There areorthographic peculiarities, for example, letters rather than words areused for numbers; DiVoiBOIX appears instead of IDO'IN or puonx;YH3DX instead of TUSCAN; and NJD px instead of '3D px. Likemanuscript 3, it prefers bins to bSD and 'J12H to V"l. Among the othermanuscripts it is closest akin to \ and it has some affinity with 3.However, the evidence indicates that this manuscript represents a lineof transmission different from that of the other manuscripts.Manuscript 1, which appears as an appendix to the Hebrew translationof Averroes' Middle Commentary on De Caelo, is identical with thethird chapter of the De Substantia Orbis.™ Written on parchment, itdates from c. 1400. It is written in Spanish Rabbinic characters (ofsome Italian influence) by the same hand. Each page contains onecolumn of twenty-four lines. No marginal notes or additions appear inthis text.This manuscript contains an independent translation from the Arabic.Whenever the anonymous Hebrew translation differs from the Latinversion, manuscript T has the tendency to agree with the Latin ratherthan with the Hebrew. This suggests the possibility that "7, as perhapsthe Latin, represents a version of the Arabic original different fromthat on which the anonymous Hebrew translation was based. Thoughgenerally agreeing in subject-matter and general sentence structurewith all the other Hebrew manuscripts, 1 differs from them in havingits own technical terminology.51 However, this terminology is in

47 E.g., nmsa pom in place of ixsipatpi and nxnpna in place of nnnpna. Theseinstances seem to indicate carelessness on the part of the scribe or lack offamiliarity with the subject-matter.

48 E.g., where the first two manuscripts have the participle 33110 with the subject0"»'aipn O'»"un, MS 1 has the grammatically more correct D'33iin. Howeverthis grammatical zeal carries the scribe too far at times. Thus, we find•"B'awn rather than the correct "O'aiPn as adjective modifying onjn.

49 E.g., •\x?mmw instead of lViava;, naxtp instead of nax'tp, and max tax insteadof o:»xi.

50, Cf. above, n. 2.51 This terminology is recorded below, in the Hebrew-Latin Glossary.

21

De Substantia Orbis

agreement with that of the Hebrew of the Middle Commentary on DeCaelo to which this treatise is appended. It is thus virtually certain thatthis appendix was translated by Samuel ibn Ayyub, the translator ofthe Commentary. The appendix carries its own superscription."Manuscript n, written on paper, dates from the end of the fifteenth orthe beginning of the sixteenth century." It is written in ProvencalRabbinic characters by the same hand. Each page contains onecolumn of thirty lines. The text of this manuscript has no marginaladditions. The scribe has no preference in spelling, sometimes usingplene and sometimes defective. Omissions are indicated by the use oftwo dots over the affected word.Generally speaking, this manuscript belongs to the line oftransmission represented by manuscripts K and 3. When these differ, nagrees with X rather than with 3. With X it prefers V'T to mxi, and VVDto Vi?1D. It has more omissions than the first two manuscripts. It hasbeen damaged by water, but this does not affect its legibility.Manuscript T contains chapter 5 accompanied by Narboni'scommentary.54 Copied on parchment, it dates from the fifteenthcentury. It is written by one hand in small square Rabbinic characters.The headings are written in larger square characters. Each pagecontains one column of fifty-three lines each. The manuscript of thistext has no marginal additions. The scribe has no preference inspelling, sometimes using plene and sometimes defective. Since thismanuscript is short, it is difficult to determine an affinity with othermanuscripts.Manuscript U contains chapters 4 and 5 unaccompanied by Narboni'scommentary." Copied on parchment, it dates from c. 1500." It iswritten by one hand in Spanish Rabbinic characters with orientalinfluence and a tendency to cursiveness. The headings are written insquare characters. Each page contains one column of forty-two lines.Marginal notations by the original scribe appear in three places. Two

52 ...Tm'an run 'Nn inxan 7103 max "I»N nVx©n bs Y'2 Dann inx "Thephilosopher Averroes states concerning the question which he mentioned atthe end of the first treatise of this commentary [Middle Commentary on DeCaelo]...".

53 Cf. Zotenberg, Catalogues, No. 957.54 Steinschneider, Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse...zu Berlin. No. 112.55 Cf. Steinschneider, Die Hebraischen Handschriften...in Munchen, No. 36.56 Steinschneider (ibid.) mentions that a part of the manuscript preceding the

chapters of the De Substantia Orbis was written in Constantinople in 1480.

22

Introduction

of these supply a letter that is illegible in the text and the third containsa variant. In addition, a second hand wrote JV Dn >V3 above nViDO intwo places of this text and n"33 above nb>130 ViVa in one place. Thescribe of this manuscript prefers the plene spelling.Generally speaking, this manuscript belongs to the line oftransmission represented by manuscripts n ,3 ,x. In a few places,however, it has some affinity to 1 and \ It prefers VyD to bv\5 and V'Tto ^ISI. It is characterized by a large number of omissions.Manuscript \ written on paper, dates from the fifteenth century." It iswritten in Spanish Rabbinic characters by the same hand. Each pagecontains one column of twenty-eight lines. Marginal additions by fourhands, differing from the writing of the original scribe, appear innumerous places. The last of these additions, in Hebrew and Latin,were made by Steinschneider.58 In his orthography the scribe prefersthe plene spelling. Additions to the text are usually marked bysupralinear loops.This manuscript belongs to the line of transmission represented by ,Xn ,3. Of these three manuscripts it is closest to 3. In a number of minorpoints it also has an affinity with X With 3 and J it prefers VJHD to VVD

and '31ST to V'l. Beginning with folio 53, the paper of this manuscripthas deteriorated, and in some places as much as one-eighth of the pageis missing. As a result of water damage the ink of this manuscript hasfaded in a number of places.Manuscript b is written on parchment, and the section of themanuscript book in which it appears is dated 1398.59 It is written inSpanish Rabbinic characters by one hand. 10X appearing at thebeginning is written in large square characters. Each page contains onecolumn of twenty-seven lines. Marginal notes, written by the originalscribe, appear in three places. Two of these supply words which thescribe had omitted; the third gives a textual variant. In several places,omitted letters or words appear above the line, and two dots indicatethat words which have been run together should be separated. The

57 Cf. Feldman, Philosophy Manuscripts...Library of the Jewish TheologicalSeminary...,No. 2311. This manuscript was used by Steinschneider in thepreparation of his Hebraische Obersetzungen as his additions on the margins ofthe manuscript attest.

58 Steinschneider's additions are not recorded in the critical apparatus.59 Zotenberg, Catalogue. No. 945, and Beit-Arid & Sirat, Manuscrits midiivaux,

II, No. 39.

23

De Substantia Orbis

scribe has no preference in spelling, sometimes using plene andsometimes defective.This manuscript belongs to the line of transmission represented bymanuscript T, showing a somewhat greater affinity to T than to a. Thescribe is given to abbreviations such as 0"3 (for X3'0 p), ,n"3 ,n"23ri"2, and he uses letters to represent numbers.Manuscript 0, written on parchment, dates from lSSO.^It is written inGerman Rabbinic characters by one hand. Headings, which appear intwo places, are written in large square characters. Each page containsone column of thirty lines. One marginal addition, written by theoriginal scribe, appears at the end of the manuscript to supply apassage that he has omitted. The scribe has no preference in spelling,sometimes using plene and sometimes defective.This manuscript belongs to the line of transmission represented by "7,showing a somewhat greater affinity to 1 than to b. The scribegenerally spells out words, though he uses the abbreviation n"3.In summary, it appears that the complete Hebrew manuscripts andpartial manuscripts U ,T represent two lines of transmission of the sametranslation. One line is represented by ' ,D ,T ,n ,3 ,X; the other by X Ofthe first line, n ,3 ,N form a coherent subgroup while 0 and ' showsome affinity to a. The partial texts a ,b ,1 mark an independenttranslation from the Arabic.Before turning to the Latin texts, we should note that the anonymousHebrew version of the manuscripts contains a number of mis-translations. It is characteristic of these mistranslations that thetranslator, at times, read an Arabic form as active when it should betaken as passive and vice versa." Since in Arabic the same form,depending on the vowels, may be active or passive, it can be seen howthis kind of mistake arose. It must, however, be left open whether suchmistakes are the result of carelessness or of insufficient knowledge ofArabic.

6. The Latin TextsThe Latin texts, as is evident from the Hebrew-Latin criticalapparatus, differ in many places from the Hebrew manuscripts and itis possible that the Latin translation is based on a different version ofthe Arabic original. Many of these differences are accounted for by

60 Steinschneider, Hebrdische Handschriften...Munchen, No. A.61 Cf. below, chap. 1, n. 59.

24

Introduction

changes from singular to plural, changes in tenses and the addition oromission of words such as nxT and nb>N. The Latin texts lack the fullerconclusions and explanatory phrases of the Hebrew text.62 Among theLatin texts themselves there exist many orthographic differences,especially in respect to moods and tenses of verbs, prepositions and theinterchangeable uses of similar words." Misprints present specialproblems in the orthography of the Latin texts.64

A more detailed analysis of the Latin texts yields the followingobservations. Texts W ,T ,j? agree among themselves generally in theirdeviations from the Hebrew translation. Text X, though on the wholefollowing the other Latin texts in their deviations from the Hebrew, ina number of instances agrees with the Hebrew rather than with theother Latin texts.65 Orthographic peculiarities of X are: the use of ci inplace of//66 and the use of e or ee in place of the feminine ending ae."Alonso, the editor of X, refers to the text contained in Jandunus'edition in several places, but no attempt seems to have been made toestablish a critical edition of text X. Certain obvious mistakes appear inthis edition of the text.68

Texts j? and IV require no special comment. Text "I, as has beenmentioned, contains two chapters not found in the other Latin texts,6''as well as additions taken from the Hebrew, as Steinschneider hasalready pointed out.In addition to the Hebrew translation from the Arabic, there exists asecond Hebrew translation, made by Judah Romano (early fourteenthcentury) from the Old Latin translation.70 In his translation Romano

62 Cf. ends of chapters.63 It is outside the scope of this Introduction to provide a discussion of the

linguistic differences found among the Latin texts, but a few representativeexamples will illustrate them: per divisioncm / ad divisionem; quod / ut; fuit/ est; dcclaratum est / declarabitur; scd / tamen: ergo / igitur: illae / istae:in quibus / quibus; quum / cum; nee / neque; apud / ab; in potentia /potentia.

64 Since these misprints had no bearing on the Hebrew edition, they wereomitted from the Hebrew-Latin critical apparatus.

65 Cf. Hebrew-Latin critical apparatus.66 E.g., substancia in place of substantia and disposicio in place of disposilio.67 E.g., hee due nature in place of hae duae naturae.68 E.g., on p. 60, line 7, of tfiis text impossibile should be impassibile; on p. 102,

line 1, corruptorum should be corporum, and on p. 128, line 2,fieri eius shouldbe forma eius.

69 Cf. above, p. 7 and n. 32.70 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen. p. 183.

25

De Substantia Orbis

entitles the work D"OWn DXJ? nso." Romano is also the author of acommentary accompanying his translation and distinguished by itsquotations taken almost exclusively from Augustine, AlbertusMagnus, Thomas Aquinas and Egidius Romanus.

7. Commentaries and QuaestionesThe popularity of the De Substantia Orbis among Jewish and Christianscholars of the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance is attested bythe numerous manuscripts72 and commentaries on the work. Amongthe Latin commentators and authors of quaestiones whose works havebeen printed are found the already-mentioned Alvaro de Toledo (endof thirteenth century)73 and John of Jandun (c. 1286-c. 1328),74as wellas Tiberius Bacilerius Bononiensis (d. 1511),75 Maynettus MaynetiusBononiensis (sixteenth century),76 Augustinus Niphus(c. 1470-1538),77

Pietro Pomponazzi (1462-1525),78 Nicolas Vitigozzi (1549-16I0),79andMarcus Antonius Zimara (1470-1532).80 Commentators and authors ofquaestiones whose works still exist only in manuscript are: Walter

71 The heading of this translation reads: mirt' 'npnsn turn pxV crown DXV nsor r a v ]wb bx nnxii pirta Vs'n Y'3 »"] nira r o a .

72 Lacombe lists eighty-two extant manuscripts. Cf. G. Lacombe, AristoielesLatinus. 2 vols., Rome, 1939, and Cambridge, 1955; Supplement, Bruges-Paris, 1961, Indices. These manuscripts are indexed in II, p. 1292, andSupplement, p. 193. Professor Kristeller has discovered a number of others.

73 Cf. above, pp. 7, 9, 14 and 25.74 Cf. above, pp. 9,15 and 18-19. For manuscripts and editions, cf. S. MacClinock,

Perversity and Error: Studies on the 'Averroist' John of Jandun (Bloomington,Ind., 1956), pp. 124-125.

75 Tiberius Bacilerius,...Lectura...in tractatum Averrois de substantia orbis...(Papie, 1508). Cf. B. Nardi, Sigieri di Brabante nelpensiero del Rinascimentoitaliano (Rome, 1945), p. 136.

76 Maynettus Maynetius Bononiensis, Commentarii...in librum Averrois desubstantia orbis (Bonon., 1580).

77 A. Niphus,... Commentationes in librum Averrois de substantia orbis (Veneliis,1508), and other sixteenth-century editions.

78 Pietro Pomponazzi, Super libello de substanlia orbis expositio et quaestionesquattuor (Corsi inediti dell'insegnamento padovano), ed. A. Poppi (Padua,1966). The text appearing in this edition is identical with text 1, so that therewas no need to record it in the critical apparatus.

79 Nicolo Vito di Gozzi, ...Commentaria in sermonetn Averrois de substantiaorbis (Venetiis, 1580).

80 This commentary is found in the Juntine editions of 1550-1552, 1573-1576 andother sixteenth-century editions. Its title, Solutiones contradictionum in dictisAverrois. describes its purpose.

26

Introduction

Burley (d. after 1343),81 Ferrandus de Hispania (fourteenth century),82

Henricus Totting de Oyta (d. 1397),83 Antonius Faventius (AntonioCittadini, fifteenth century),84 Oliverius Arduinus (Oliverius Senensis,sixteenth century),85 Augustinus Bonucius de Aretios (AgostinoBonucci, sixteenth century),86 and Antonius Brasavola (sixteenthcentury).87 There may also exist a commentary by Dietrich vonFreiberg (Theodoricus Teutonicus de Vriberg, d. after 1310),88and thecommentary in Cod. I, iii, 6 (Conventi Soppressi, S. Marco) at theBiblioteca Nazionale in Florence may be by Radulphus Brito.8'Aldosireports that Alexander Achillini (1463-1512) composed a commentaryon the De Substantia Orbis, but his commentary does not seem to beextant.901 could not identify Nicolas Rissus Gallus, Franciscus Longusand Scipion Florillus, who are mentioned by Renan.91

Among the Jewish commentators, in addition to Narboni (d. 1362)92

and Judah Romano (early fourteenth century),93 there is Elijah delMedigo (c. 1460-1497). The latter composed a Hebrew commentaryentitled VaVjn DSV3 IDXnn TWa and a Latin expositio which he wrotefor Pico de la Mirandola.94 The commentary by Levi ben Gershomwhich is mentioned by Renan,95 and, following Renan, by Alonso,96

does not exist, as Steinschneider has already pointed out.97

81 Cf. C.J. Ermatinger, "Notes on Some Early Fourteenth-Century ScholasticPhilosophers," Manuscripta. Ill (1959), 158, n. 14.

82 Cf. C.J. Ermatinger, "Notes on Some Early Fourteenth-Century ScholasticPhilosophers," Manuscripta. IV (I960), 31-34.

83 Cf. Ermatinger, Manuscripta, III, 159, n. 15.84 Cf. P.O. Kristeller, her halicum. I (London-Leiden, 1965), p. 110.85 Kristeller, her. I, p. 206.86 Kristeller, her, I, p. 160.87 Cf. Renan, Averroes. pp. 305-306.88 Cf. Ermatinger. Manuscripta. Ill, 158, n. 11.89 Cf. Kristeller, her, I, p. 162; Ermatinger, Manuscripta. Ill, 167.90 Cf. L. Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science. V (New York,

1941), p. 49; also B. Nardi, Saggisull'aristotelismopadovano dalsecoloXIValXVI (Florence, 1958), p. 268.

91 Cf. Renan, Averroes. p. 305.92 Cf. above, pp. 7, 9 and 15-17; also Steinschneider, Hebrdische Obersetzungen.

pp. 184 ff.; Renan, Averroes, p. 159.93 Cf. above, pp. 7-8 and 25-26.94 Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen. pp. 183-184; Kristeller, her, II

(1967), 328; Renan, Averroes, p. 161.95 Renan, Averrois, p. 159.96 Alonso, ed., Commentario, p. 5.97 Steinschneider,Hebraische Obersetzungen, p. XXVI, correction top. 183;alsop.

66, n. 148. When I first started the present work I examined all the catalogues,

27

De Substantia Orbis

The extensive references to the De Substantia Orbis in the Hebrew andLatin philosophic literature of the Late Middle Ages and theRenaissance, and the many commentaries and quaestiones on thework, still require monographic exploration.

II. SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

Averroes wrote the treatises known collectively as De Substantia Orbisto present the Aristotelian theory of the heavens.'8 For his expositionhe drew primarily upon the Physics and De Caelo, but he also cited theDe Anima, the De Animalibus, the Metaphysics and, for points of logic,the Prior Analytics.™ In addition, he had recourse to the opinions ofsome of the interpreters and commentators on Aristotle's views. l0° Yet,examining Aristotle's writings, Averroes gained the impression thatthe Philosopher's description of the heavens was incomplete in thoseworks still extant and that his statements contradicted one another attimes. Moreover, turning to the interpreters and commentators, hefound that some of them had introduced erroneous opinions into theiraccounts of Aristotle's views and that these required corrections.These observations imposed upon Averroes a three-fold task: tocomplete Aristotle's theory of the heavens, to demonstrate theconsistency of his views, and to refute the false opinions of earlierinterpreters and commentators, particularly those of Avicenna.In speaking of the heavens in the De Substantia Orbis, Averroesgenerally disregarded the particular properties and motions of eachcelestial sphere, considering instead the element common to all.

but could not find any reference to a commentary by Gersonides. I then cameto the conclusion that the work does not exist, an opinion which I foundconfirmed in the just-cited reference.

98 A summary of the contents of the work is given by Pierre Duhem, Le Systemedu Monde. IV (Paris, 1916), pp. 532-559. For the passages in the De SubstantiaOrbis on which the succeeding summary is based the reader is referred to theIndex of Subjects and Names.

99 For references to the passages of these works on which Averroes drew, cf.Index of References.

100 Averroes discusses opinions of Themistius, John Philoponus, Avicenna andAvempace, and he incidentally mentions Alexander of Aphrodisias. At timeshe mentions opinions anonymously, introducing them with such phrases as:"and an opponent should not say," "the commentators observed," "andsomeone might argue," and "among those who philosophize there are some."

28

Introduction

Eternal in its existence, this common element moves with a uniformcircular locomotion of infinite duration. Concerning the celestialelement Averroes first inquired whether, like the terrestrial substances,it is composed of matter and form. For in the case of terrestrialsubstances, Aristotle had found that matter and form belong to themin virtue of their being subject to generation and corruption. Since theheavens, by contrast, were eternal, could they be composed of matterand form?In answer to this question Averroes noted that, while the heavens werenot subject to generation and corruption, they had circularlocomotion in virtue of themselves. Now, everything moved in virtueof itself must be composed of something producing motion andsomething undergoing it. Hence it followed that the celestial elementneeded an agent for the production of its circular locomotion as wellas a body which underwent it. The agent of celestial locomotion is theform of the celestial element, while the body is its matter.Matter and form apply to celestial and terrestrial substances indifferent senses of these terms, since they are predicated of terrestrialsubstances in virtue of their generation and corruption, while they arepredicated of celestial substances in virtue of their eternal locomotion.Since the principles of transient and eternal beings differ in respect togenus, matter and form are predicated of them according toequivocation.

Since Averroes established his account of celestial matter and form bycomparing them to the analogous terrestrial principles, and since thedescription of these was derived, in turn, from an analysis of terrestrialchange, Averroes proceeded by summarizing Aristotle's teachingsconcerning terrestrial change.All sublunar, that is, terrestrial, change is divisible, according toAristotle, into two kinds: substantial and accidental. In substantialchange, one substance (water, for example) ceases to exist and a newsubstance (for example, air) comes to be in its place. In accidentalchange, however, one accidental property succeeds another in asubstance (the unmusical man becomes musical) but the substanceunderlying this change remains the same (the man who is changedretains his human nature).Substantial and accidental change agree in five respects and differ intwo. Both kinds of change agree in that: they require an underlyingsubject in which the change takes place; the form that comes to be, beit substantial or accidental, must be preceded in the subject by a

29

De Substantia Orbis

privation of this form; the underlying subject must have a potentialityfor the form that comes to be; they both must take place betweencontraries, or between a contrary and a property intermediate betweentwo contraries; and these contraries and their intermediates mustbelong to the same genus. Substantial and accidental change differ,however, in that the subject of substantial change cannot exist inactuality; nor can it, as a subject, possess a form that makes it to be asubstance.From the two differences between substantial and accidental changeAverroes concluded that the matter underlying the reciprocaltransformation of the four elements, called prime matter, cannot be asubstance existing in actuality. It is the nature of prime matter to havea potentiality for the forms of the four elements, called substantialforms. Yet it is insufficient to describe prime matter through itspotentiality alone. For, since potentiality is always predicated withrespect to a form, it must be in the category of relation, while primematter, being something in itself, must be a kind of substance. Inaddition, when a given potentiality is actualized, it ceases to exist,while prime matter continues to exist at all times. For these reasons,Averroes affirmed that prime matter must possess a kind of "form,"other than potentiality, its nature. This "form" was known as thecorporeal form, and it differed from the substantial forms that impartto prime matter its existence in actuality.Averroes derived the definition of the corporeal form from theobservation that the four elements, as all corporeal substances, havethe attribute of divisibility as their ultimate common property.Divisibility, in turn, presupposes the possession of quantity. The formof each of the four elements imposes upon the part of prime matter inwhich it inheres certain quantitative limits and boundaries. This kindof quantity is called the determinate quantity of a substantial form.Determinate quantity is subsequent to a substantial form and cannotexist without it. If, however, one were to suppose that the substantialform of a given element were removed, and with it the determinatedimensions proper to that form, the prime matter that remains wouldstill possess extension or three-dimensionality. However, thisdimensionality would be indeterminate and would belong to primematter at all times. For Averroes, this indeterminate three-dimensionality is identical with the corporeal form.In identifying the indeterminate three dimensions with the corporealform, Averroes disagreed with Avicenna's definition of that form.

30

Introduction

Avicenna, like Averroes, had admitted that prime matter requires acorporeal form and that this form has some relation to the threedimensions, but he had denied that the corporeal form is identical withindeterminate three-dimensionality. According to Avicenna's view, noform can be described by a property that ordinarily belongs to anaccident, in this case the accident of quantity. For this reasonAvicenna had defined the corporeal form as a substance, that is, as aform that has a disposition for receiving the three dimensions but thatdiffers from the three dimensions themselves. Thus, the corporealform, for Avicenna, is different from the perceptible property ofdimensionality; it is a "form" posited in order that the corporeal formshould not be described by a property of an accident.Though Avicenna's definition preserved the corporeal form frombeing described by the accidental property of dimensionality, itbrought other difficulties in its wake. For example, were it assumedthat prime matter did not possess dimensionality as its corporeal form,then prime matter could not be divided by the different substantialforms that come to inhere in it, nor could these forms be divisiblethrough the division of prime matter. Moreover, the substantial formscould not expand and contract nor could they be described by theattributes of part and whole. Further, the substantial forms would notbe contraries succeeding one another in prime matter. On Avicenna'sassumption, prime matter could only possess one form at all times. Inview of these difficulties, Averroes rejected Avicenna's definition ofthe corporeal form.Having discussed prime matter and corporeal form, Averroesinvestigated the remaining principles of the reciprocal transformationof the four elements. Since the forms of these elements succeed oneanother in prime matter as a result of change, they must be contraries.And since no sublunar form is the cause of its own generation, theremust exist an agent which, as efficient cause, produces the successionof the four substantial forms in prime matter.From his account of the principles of which the four sublunar elementsare composed, Averroes formulated the following propositions: primematter, being one subject that has a potentiality for several substantialforms, is one in number, many in potentiality; prime matter, in virtueof possessing indeterminate three-dimensionality as its corporealform, is divisible by the substantial forms of the four elements, andthese forms, in turn, are divisible through the division of prime matter,prime matter in virtue of its corporeal form may possess the attributes

31

De Substantia Orbis

of great and small, part and whole; and finally, the substantial forms,being posterior by nature to the corporeal form, may be said to inherein prime matter by means of the indeterminate three dimensions. Allthese descriptions are applicable to the four elements and theirconstitutive principles in virtue of their being subject to generation andcorruption.Having set down these properties of the terrestrial matter and form,Averroes returned to his discussion of the celestial bodies. Theproperties of celestial matter and form can be discovered by denyingto celestial matter and form what had been affirmed of terrestrialmatter and form. For the case of the latter it has been shown that theform inheres in matter by means of the indeterminate threedimensions; by contrast, in the case of the former, the form inheres inmatter without the three dimensions. The celestial form is, therefore,immaterial.The same conclusion is established by a proof derived from the infinitemotion of the heavens. Aristotle had shown that a motive forceproducing a motion of infinite duration cannot inhere in a body offinite dimensions. Since the body of the celestial element is finite in itsdimensions, the infinite celestial motive force cannot inhere in it. Thecelestial motive force, which is the same as the celestial form, istherefore immaterial.Having demonstrated the immateriality of the celestial form, Averroesproceeds to the description of its nature. Since, in the case of theterrestrial elements, their substantial forms are the causes of theirrectilinear upward and downward motion, and since the heavens donot have rectilinear motion at all, the celestial form cannot belong tothe genus of the four terrestrial forms. Soul being the only remainingprinciple of motion, it follows that the celestial form must be a souland that this soul imparts to the celestial element its eternal circularlocomotion. But since the celestial soul is not generated andcorruptible, while the terrestrial is, the term "soul" is predicated of thetwo according to equivocation.How the celestial soul produces the motion of its body engagedAverroes' attention next. In terrestrial living beings, the soul producesmotion by desiring an object that brings the soul to its perfection. Thesoul that is the efficient cause of terrestrial locomotion inheres in thebody that it moves, whereas the object of its desire that is its finalcause exists in separation from it. Since tlie heavens undergolocomotion, they also require an efficient and a final cause. But since

32

Introduction

the celestial form exists in separation from its body, the same celestialform is both the efficient and the final cause of celestial locomotion.Considered as an agent, the celestial form is the efficient cause ofcelestial locomotion; considered as an object of desire, it is the finalcause of celestial locomotion.In affirming that the same celestial form is both the efficient and thefinal cause of celestial locomotion Averroes once again differed withAvicenna's description of these causes. For Avicenna, insisting on thesimilarity between celestial and terrestrial substances, maintained thatthe celestial form that is the efficient cause of celestial locomotionmust inhere in the celestial body, while the object of its desire mustexist in separation from the celestial body. Thus, according toAvicenna, the heavens possess two principles of motion: a soulinhering in the celestial body, and an object of desire existing inseparation from it.To refute this account of the causes of celestial locomotion, Averroesused an argument similar to that which he had used to refuteAvicenna's definition of the corporeal form. If, as Avicenna hadassumed, the heavens possessed souls that inhered in their bodies,they, like the terrestrial living beings, would be subject to generationand corruption. But the heavens are known to be eternal. Hence,it is false to maintain that the celestial soul inheres in the celestialbody.How the celestial form produces celestial locomotion requires furtherexplanation. In human beings two faculties of the soul combine toproduce locomotion. The appetitive faculty, by desiring some object,is the primary cause of human locomotion; but, in addition, thehuman intellect often reflects on the object of the appetitive faculty'sdesire. Human locomotion is thus the result of the combined activitiesof the appetitive and rational souls. Since, according to theAristotelian philosophers, the heavens, like human beings, possess anintelligence, it follows that celestial locomotion requires the combinedactivities of appetitive and rational faculties. But once again Averroesaffirmed that the appetitive and rational faculties of the celestialelement are only different aspects of the same celestial form:considered as an appetitive principle, this form is said to be a soul;considered as a rational principle, it is said to be an intelligence.Having examined the nature and properties of the celestial form,Averroes turned to the matter of the heavens, the celestial body. Sincethe celestial matter, as also its form, is eternal, its nature and

33

De Substantia Orbis

properties can be established by contrasting them with those of primematter, the principle underlying generation and corruption. Thus,prime matter, being able to receive the forms of the four elements insuccession, is one in number, many in potentiality; celestial matter,possessing the same form always, is one in number and one inactuality. Prime matter, possessing indeterminate three-dimensionalityas its corporeal form, is divisible by the substantial forms; celestialmatter, lacking indeterminate three-dimensionality, is indivisible.Prime matter, through its corporeal form, may possess the attributesof great and small, part and whole; celestial matter, always possessingthe same dimensions and not being divisible, cannot be described bythese attributes. Prime matter receives the substantial forms by meansof the indeterminate three dimensions; celestial matter and its formexist in separation from each other. Prime matter requires asubstantial form in order to exist in actuality; celestial matter exists inactuality through itself. All these differences brought Averroes to theconclusion that the celestial matter serves only as a substratum for thecelestial form, not as its matter in the strict sense of the term. For thatreason he held that the term "subject" applies to the celestial bodymore properly than "matter."

So far the celestial form has been considered as an infinite forceproducing locomotion of eternal duration. But Aristotle had alsoshown that it must be finite in some respect. For any force belongingto a finite body must be finite, and the celestial bodies are finite in theirdimensions. How can the celestial motive forces be infinite as well asfinite? To resolve this difficulty Averroes distinguished between twokinds of motive forces that may be said to be infinite: those infinite induration and those infinite in velocity and intensity. A motive force ofthe latter kind cannot belong to any body, be it celestial or terrestrial,for it would move its body in no time. Hence, the celestial motiveforces can only be infinite in duration. It follows then that the heavensrequire a motive force of infinite duration and, being finite in theirdimensions, also a motive force that is finite in velocity and intensity.But, once again, according to Averroes, these two celestial forcesappear to be different aspects of the same celestial form.In speaking of the celestial soul, and of the intelligence that is theobject of this soul's desire, Averroes considered these two principles asdifferent aspects of the same celestial form in passages discussed so far.However, there are passages in which he seems to differentiatebetween the celestial soul and its intelligence. One such passage occurs

34

Introduction

in the De Substantia Orbis. 'Ol In it Averroes affirms that the celestialsoul belongs to the celestial body, while the celestial intelligence isincorporeal. Commentators on this passage differed about whatAverroes had in mind. Some commentators interpreted Averroes tomean that there exists only one completely incorporeal mover, namely,the prime mover, which is the sole object of desire of all the celestialsouls. Other commentators affirmed that each sphere has its owncompletely incorporeal intelligence, which is the object of its soul'sdesire.Averroes' complete view emerges from a passage in the LongCommentary on the Metaphysics in which he distinguished betweentwo objects of the celestial soul's desire: each celestial soul possessesits own intelligence, which as final cause imparts to its body its propermotion; each celestial soul has the prime mover as a second object ofdesire, and this, as final cause, imparts to all celestial bodies theircircular diurnal motion. It seems then that, even in those passages inwhich Averroes differentiates between the soul and the intelligence ofeach celestial sphere, he has in mind that they are two aspects of thesame celestial form.From celestial form and matter Averroes turned to celestial accidents,noting similarities and differences between them and the analogousterrestrial accidents. In the De Substantia Orbis he examined those ofluminosity and opaqueness, the property of calefaction, and the fourqualities of hot, cold, moist, and dry. All accidents, Averroes noted,may be divided into active and passive. Passive accidents are thosewhich require that, when they are changed, their underlying substancemust be changed as well, while active accidents are those which, whenchanged, do not require a change in their underlying substance. Sincethe celestial bodies are not subject to substantial change, they cannotpossess passive accidents. But even active accidents must be predicatedof celestial and terrestrial bodies according to some form of non-univocal predication. Depending on their differences, commonaccidents are predicated of celestial and terrestrial substancesaccording to priority or posteriority, or according to equivocation.Locomotion, transparency and opaqueness, rarity and density, areaccidents of the former kind; calefaction, and the qualities of hot,cold, moist, and dry, are accidents of the latter kind.

5

101 For the succeeding discussion, cf. below, chap. 4, n. 18.

35

CONCERNING THE SUBSTANCE OFTHE CELESTIAL SPHERE

BY AVERROES

A TREATISE BY THE PHILOSOPHER AVERROES

CONCERNING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE [CELESTIAL]

SPHERE1

CHAPTER ONE

In this treatise we intend to investigate concerning the nature of the line i»

things of which the celestial body2 is composed. That the celestial body

* The line numbers in the outer margins refer to the Hebrew text.

DXS2 IBNO,sermo de subsianlia orbis. This title recurs, modified in theHebrew to VlVin oxya main, at the end of the first chapter of the work (Hebrewtext, line 198). The underlying Arabic was probably ilUill j»>fl j *Jtu ortilUII jApfl J f |»V^ a title which does not precisely correspond to any of thethree titles mentioned in the Escurial list of Averroes' works. Cf. my article,"The Composition and Transmission of Averroes' Ma'amar be-'Esem ha-Galgal." Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman (Philadelphia,1962), p. 303, n. 2.

The term b&l, orbs, is used here to refer to the celestial region in its totality, notto any of the celestial spheres taken singly. This use of the term bibl is based onthe Greek o0pav6<; ("heavens") taken in the first two of three meanings whichthis term, according to Aristotle, may have. The term Oi3pav6;, explainsAristotle, may refer to: (I) ...tr}v oOaiav xr\v zi\q tax&*i]<; TOO navroc;jrepiipopai;, fj a<5ua (puaiKov TO tv xfj tezdtrj ncpicpop^ TOO navxdq..., "... thesubstance of the outermost circumference of the world, or to the natural bodywhich is at the outermost circumference of the world.. ."; (2) . . . i d ouvcx^c,ocoua xfj ioxdtr) nepupopqi TOO Jiavx6i;, tv $ aEXrjvri Kai fjA.105, Kai £via TtovaaTpcov..., "...that body which occupies the place next to the outermostcircumference of the world, in which are the moon, the sun and certain of thestars [planets]..."; (3) "...the body that is enclosed by the outermostcircumference, for it is customary to give the name ouranos to the world as awhole." Cf. De Caelo I, 9, 278b, 9-21.The subject of this treatise is, thus, the nature and properties of the celestialelement, taken as an element different from the four sublunar elements."a'BKJn Diin. corpus caelesie. This term does not occur in Aristotle's writings.Cf. Bonitz, Index. Aristotle uses terms taken from some property of the celestialelement. Among the more important of these are: (I) (a) td Ttpwtov x&votoudxwv, "the primary body" (De Caelo I, 3, 270b, 2-3); (b) fj npu>xt\ ovaiaTUV acoudxeov, "the primary bodily substance" (De Caelo 1,3, 270b, 11). (2) tdGEIOV otoua, "the divine body" (De Caelo II, 3, 286a, 11-12). (3) (a) xd KVKXUcpepduevov ouua, "the body whose motion is circular" (De Caelo 1,3,269b, 29-30); TO KUKXU affiuct (De Caelo I, 3, 270a, 33); (b) xd KUKX.IK6V afflua, "therevolving body" (De Caelo II, 7,289a, 30). (4) (a) xd arSiov T6 fivco auua, "theeternal body which constitutes the uppermost part [of the universe J' (DeAnima

39

De Substantia Orbis

line 3 is composed of two natures in the same manner as are the transientbodies has already been demonstrated3 except that in the case of thelatter bodies it is clear that these two natures exist on account of theexistence of generation and corruption in them, while in the case of thecelestial bodies it is evident that they exist on account of the existence oflocomotion in them. The proof thereof is as follows:4 it has been shownconcerning the celestial bodies that they have locomotion in virtue ofthemselves. Now, it is obvious in the case of something moved5 in virtueof itself that it is composed of two natures, one undergoing motion andthe other producing it, for clearly everything moved has a mover, andsomething cannot be mover and moved in the same respect. Thus it isclear that the celestial bodies are composed of two natures.Therefore we want to investigate in this treatise concerning these twonatures of which the celestial body is composed whether they are like thetwo natures of which the transient bodies are composed, one of which iscalled "form," the other "matter," that is to say, we want to investigatewhether matter and form here below are the same in species with matterand form up above, or whether they differ in species, or whether they

II, 6, 418b, 9); (b) id afSia x&v aioGtixSv, "the eternal sensible [substance]"(Metaphysics XII, 1, 1069a, 30-31); (c) "[the body...] called by the ancientsaether (aiBdp) because it 'always runs' (del Beiv)" (De Caelo 1,3,270b, 22-24).

3 The proof'is produced further on in this paragraph.4 The premises of this proof, and their sources in the works of Aristotle, are as

follows:First Premise: The celestial bodies have locomotion in virtue of themselves.Aristotle shows that the celestial element has circular locomotion naturally(Kaiti (puoiv) in De Caelo I, 2. He shows that things having natural motion havethat motion in virtue of themselves (ticp* auxoO) in Physics VIII, 4, 254b, 12-15.Second Premise: Something moved through itself is composed of two natures.This premise is based on the following two subordinate propositions: (a)everything moved has a mover (Physics VII, I, 24Ib, 24-242a, 15); (b)something cannot be mover and moved in the same respect. The latterproposition is self-evident for the case of something moved by another. It alsoapplies to something that is moved in virtue of itself, as is shown in Physics VIII,5, 257a, 31-258a, 2.

5 yyunoa, id quod movetur. The text of the Hebrew manuscripts has the activeVIS, "in the case of something producing motion". This appears to be one ofthe several instances in which the Hebrew translator took an Arabic passive inah active sense or in which he misread a word. Cf. below, n. 59. He seems tohave read A^- instead of Ay>cj>

40

Chapter One

differ according to more and less?6 Now, if the celestial and terrestrial line unatures differ in species, then the term "corporeity"7 is predicated of

Having established that the celestial body is composed of matter and form,Avcrroes now inquires how these two terms are predicated of the celestial andterrestrial bodies. He suggests three possibilities, i.e., that the celestial andterrestrial matter and form are: (1) the same in species (paa DHnN; eaedem), or(2) different in species ft'aa D'D^nna: diversaespecie),or (3)different accordingto more and less (inl'l mnsa D'DVnna; diversae secundum magis el minus).This threefold distinction reflects the medieval theory of predication accordingto which terms may be predicated "univocally", "equivocally" or"amphibolously"—predication "according to more and less" being one of thetypes of "amphibolous" predication. Cf. H.A. Wolfson, "The AmphibolousTerms in Aristotle, ArabicPhilosophy,andMaimonides,"//arvar</r/ieo/ogi'cfl/Review, XXXI (1938), 157-173, especially p. 157, line 3-p. 158, line 17, and p.166, line 32-p. 167, line 20; reprinted in Harry A. Wolfson, Studies in theHistory of Philosophy and Religion, ed. I. Twersky and G. H. Williams, I(Cambridge, Mass., 1973), pp. 455-477.

Though Averroes in the present passage deviates somewhat from the customaryterminology, he seems to inquire whether the terms "matter" and "form" arepredicated of celestial and terrestrial bodies "univocally" ("the same inspecies"), "equivocally" ("different in species") or "amphibolously"("according to more and less").Averroes' answer to this question does not emerge clearly from the presentdiscussion, but he seems to hold that "matter" and "form" are predicated ofcelestial and terrestrial bodies according to equivocation. Cf. below, n. 12, andHebrew text, chap. 5, lines 3-5; also chap. 2, lines 47-51; chap. 3, lines 100-104;and chap. 6, lines 12-15. However, in chap. 2, lines 106-116, he seems to implythat the two terms are predicated according to priority and posteriority. Cf. n.60 to that chapter.maipj, corporeitas. The term niaiw, "corporeity," or rraun mix, "corporealform," applies to the first form belonging to prime matter. In medieval Arabicand Jewish philosophy three views were held concerning the nature of thiscorporeal form. Avicenna was of the opinion that the corporeal form isidentical with the predisposition for receiving corporeal dimensions, but notwith the dimensions themselves. Algazali agreed with Avicenna that thecorporeal form is not identical with the dimensions, but he identified it withcohesion. Averroes, disagreeing with both, maintained that the corporeal formis identical with the indeterminate three dimensions. Cf. H.A. Wolfson,Crescas' Critique of Aristotle (Cambridge, Mass., 1929), p. 578, n. 16,b,andpp.579-590, n. 18, and my essay "Aristotle's 'First Matter' and Avicenna's andAverroes' 'Corporeal Form,'" Harry A. Wolfson Jubilee Volume (Jerusalem,1965), English Section, I, pp. 385-406. In the De Substantia Orbis Averroesdiscusses only his own view and that of Avicenna, defending the former andcriticizing the latter.

41

De Substantia Orbis

line 15 them either according to equivocation or according to a sort of priorityand posteriority.8

That, however, these two natures existing in these respective bodies donot agree in species becomes self-evident once it has been laid down thatthe celestial body is neither generated nor corruptible,9 whereas thebodies with us here below are generated and corruptible,10 for it isimpossible that the causes " of the transient and of the eternal should bethe same in species.12 This being the case, it only remains for us to

8 Since the celestial and terrestrial substances are bodies, they must both possessthe form "corporeity." But if matter and form in the celestial and terrestrialbodies differ in species, then the term "corporeity" must be predicated either"according to equivocation" (DEVI *]inB>2; equivoce) or "according to a kind ofpriority and posteriority" ("lin'Kfn nnnpna ]'S3; secundum prius etposterius).For a discussion of this latter term, which denotes a type of amphibolouspredication, cf. Wolfson, Harvard Theological Review, XXXI, p. 153, lines 18-20.Averroes does not answer this question in the present chapter, but his answerseems to be that the term "corporeity" is predicated of celestial and terrestrialbodies according to equivocation. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3, lines 100-104.However, in chap. 2, lines 129-133 (cf. also below, chap. 2, n. 66) he holds thatthe term "corporeity" is predicated of the two kinds of bodies according topriority and posteriority.

9 Cf. De Caelo I, 3, 270a, 12-22.10 Cf. De Caelo III, 1, 298a, 24-298b, 11. For a discussion of generation and

corruption in general, cf. De Generatione II, 4-5, and De Caelo III, 6.11 mao, causae. Matter and form, which above (lines 2-21) were spoken of as

"natures" (D'1?3D, naturae) are called "causes" (mao, causae) in the presentpassage.Aristotle already uses the terms "nature" and "cause" interchangeably. Herefers to matter and form as "nature" (<puoi?) in such passages as Physics'U, 1,I93a, 28-31; 2,194a, 12-13; 8, 199a, 30-32, while he calls them "causes" (aftta)in such passages as Physics II, 3, 194b, 23-29; Metaphysics V, 2, 1013a, 24-29.

12 The proposition that transient and eternal substances are not the same in genus(our text only reads "the same in species") is based on Aristotle's statement thatthe perishable and the imperishable must be different in kind. Cf. MetaphysicsX, 10, 1058b, 26-1059a, 10; cf. also, De Caelo III, 7, 306a, 9-11, andMetaphysics III, 4, 1000a, 5-IOOla, 3. In Metaphysics X Aristotle writes:'EnEiSrJ 8£ T& ivavria £iepa T<ji efSei, id 51 98apTdv Kai T6 fi<p9aptovSvavrfa(ax£pr\ai<; yap d5uvau(a 5icopiou£vr|), dvdyicTi £xepov eYvai iqi y£vei TO(p8apidv Kai TO ficpOaptov, "Since contraries are other in form and the

1 perishable and the imperishable are contraries (for privation is a definiteincapacity), the perishable and the imperishable must be different in kind."This passage from the Metaphysics presents difficulties of interpretation since,according to the trend of the argument, the phrase ftepov T(j> y£vei cannot be

42-

Chapter One

investigate in what respect those two natures that are in the celestial line 20body differ from the two natures that are in the transient body.

taken in the technical sense of "other in genus." Aristotle's discussion in thispassage shows that there exists a difference between perishable andimperishable things, but it does not reveal the exact nature of this difference. Cf.W. D. Ross, Aristotle's Metaphysics, II, p. 305, n. 28.Averroes in his commentary on this passage from the Metaphysics tries to makeexplicit the difference between perishable and imperishable things. He comes tothe conclusion that they differ not only in species but also in genus. The text ofour passage on which Averroes commented reads :j>l ilX«£*Sll CJLT l i l j . . .iXi3r dj& N ill ijjjj) Ail *i\ijt-\ >\XJ>\ JLJJ V (jjl\j .UUJI O\Sj ij^aJ\jiy VJ J*O* fJui jt X-i "i tfji\j JUUII, "...et cum contraria sint alia informa: et corruptibile et incorruptible sunt contraria: alia magis estnecessarium ut sint genere corruptibile et incorruptibile ex privatione perdifferentiam sine potentia," "... and inasmuch as contraries are other in formand the perishable and that which is imperishable are contraries, it is even morenecessary that the perishable and that which is imperishable do not belong toone genus inasmuch [as the imperishable possesses] a privation which isdistinguished by having no potentiality at all" (Long Commentary onMetaphysicsX.t. 26; Arabic: p. 1383,line 14-p. 1384,line3; Latin: Vol. VIII,275v, M-276r, A). It appears that the Latin translator from the Arabic haddifficulties with this passage.

In the section of his Commentary dealing with this passage Averroesdistinguishes between two kinds of contraries: those belonging to the samegenus and those differing in genus. Contraries of the first kind are described astwo different potentialities such that each contrary has a potentiality for theother. Contraries of the second kind are such that one of them possesses acertain potentiality while the other completely lacks this potentiality.Perishable and imperishable things are contraries of the second kind, for thatwhich is perishable possesses a potentiality for being destroyed while theimperishable lacks any such potentiality. Cf.Long Commentary on MetaphysicsX, com. 26; Arabic: p. 1386, line 9-p. 1387, line 8; Latin: Vol. VIII, 276r, F-276v, E. Note that the Arabic version has a fuller text.The second Latin translation of Aristotle's text reads: "... cum vero contrariaspecie diversa sint, corruptibile autem et incorruptibile contraria sunt (privationamque determinata impotentia) necesse est diversum genere esse corruptibileet incorruptibile..." (Vol. VIII, 275v, H-I).

The phrase at£pr\mq yap dSuvauia Sicapioulvn, is used in the Greek text toshow that perishable and imperishable things may be considered as contraries,while its Arabic equivalent, »j* "*>. J-«* f •»* J*, as interpreted by Averroes,shows what kind of contrariety exists between perishable and imperishablethings.The editor of text V, perhaps basing himself on the discussion in the LongCommentary on Metaphysics, adds a paragraph to the text stating that thecelestial and terrestrial natures differ not only in species but also in genus. This

43

De Substantia Orbis

ime 22 The starting point of the investigation is " what we have gathered fromAristotle concerning these matters. For concerning things existent [innature] no opinion has reached us from the ancients that is truer thanhis, or less subject to doubts, or presented in better order. "Therefore wetake his opinion to be that human opinion which man may attain bynature, that is, it is the most advanced of those opinions which man,insofar as .he is man, may by his own knowledge and intellect attain.Thus, as Alexander put it, "Aristotle is the one on whom we are to relyin the sciences." " We shall begin by recalling Aristotle's opinion

addition reads: "Excitatum est ergo has duas natures, ex quibus componiturcorpus caeleste, non esse eiusdem speciei, neque eiusdem generis cum duabusnaturis, ex quibus componitur generabilia."

13 For the suggestion that the following passage (Hebrew text, lines 22-29), whichamong the Latin texts is only found in 1, was added to this text from the Hebrewversion, cf. Steinschneider, Die Hebraischen Ubersetzungen (Berlin 1893;reprint, Graz, 1956), p. 183, lines 1-2.

14 1110 31 ini1 xVl. TexM has: "et maioris certitudinis," "or (containing)greatercertainty."

15 The preceding passage seems to parallel one quoted by Maimonides—also inthe name of Alexander (of Aphrodisias)—in Guide of the Perplexed, II, 3.Maimonides writes: "Know that though the opinions held by Aristotleregarding the causes of the motion of the spheres—from which opinions hededuced the existence of separate intellects—are simply assertions for which nodemonstration has been made (nsiD Dn'b>» i » y vhv m]»K), yet they are, of allthe opinions put forward on this subject, those that are exposed to the smallestnumber of doubts (pso niUira inv on) and those that are the most suitable forbeing put in coherent order (OVDB mo bs msVin "invi), just as Alexander says in'The Principles of the AH.'" For a discussion of this Maimonidean passage andits background in Alexander's work, cf. S. Pines, "Translator's Introduction,"Guide of the Perplexed (Chicago, 1963), pp. Ixvii-lxxii. A translation of therelevant passage from Alexander's work is found on p. lxix. One of the twoextant Arabic versions of "The Principles of the AH" ("FI Mabadi' al-Kull")has been published by A. Badawi, in: Aristu 'indal-'Arab (Cairo, 1947), pp. 253-277.

Narboni comments on our passage as follows (167r, 1-2):'3 .mnsna vbv ]svn -UPK Ninura jiutnx nxneo ' omsn TIJSOVX X'VDH tun nmnrpn J>K IH?X om .nuwmn rvftnnnn bx nVo mvr D'nDianip lasrc ma n n'crro W .nvn^Km .nvyaum .rwivjnn Vn .o^Vaa niasnn l a i c nsa .on'Vy

.vbs rorinnb ]'KI rtuoix nan nt naiui .|IUOIK.rvuwtnn mVawiaa pnuaa ia moa maanV ^Vis iK'san \iVnn »aun» mv p nnxn»3 "[K .nwman p mKsia rrmwKin mVsttrinna' ins .TIBKO nan nas puoiK DSIp ,jna INS'DKI nwman bs ]svrf? p o s i x1? mbsu'ia vn n»K3 mVsE'iantt''3 .nax xin ON nipnV p a s : xV ,|WDIK nax naxa »x l rmaiai unrpna uvanwa

44

Chapter One

concerning the nature of the bodies that are with us here below, what he line 26lays down about their being composed of matter and form, and what heasserts about the nature of the matter and form existing in them. Fromthese things we shall proceed to an inquiry into the nature of the celestialbodies, analogous to those inquiries we have made in regard to thenature of the transient bodies,16 that is to say, we want to find out inwhat respect they agree and in what respect they differ.

irrra npp >a naxn rrnrc na^i .nrrcn vbv np»n p .nmua nax imtpnrrtwna inva urx K'xana imjRn paa n w a n 'n> .Ti^n miKippa D'aann wuno'Vrcan Kim Vnnnn Kinrc naK© T a pis naK3 .D'PJKn Vab nvxa .nKTa n'rnjn.Since the text of this passage in MS K appears to be defective, I accepted thebetter reading in MS a."And how very wonderfully did Alexander of Aphrodisias speak when he saidof Aristotle that 'it is he on whom we are to rely in- the sciences.' By this hemeant that, just as all proofs go back to first principles that do not have to beinvestigated, so the sciences in their entirety, that is, the logical, physical andmetaphysical sciences, go back to the fundamental principles of Aristotle. Thusit is said: 'Aristotle has said this and there can be no dispute about it.'"Afterwards Averroes shows that the divine nature has provided him[Aristotle] with a summa of the sciences in which one can trust with the sameconfidence one has in first principles. And if Aristotle has already verified one'sstatements, then one can rest assured that they are like the intelligible firstprinciples that are derived from sense perception. And indeed, just as it isunnecessary to make the intelligibles, insofar as they are intelligibles, rely uponsense perceptions, even though they come from them, so, when we, in ourinvestigations and disputations, come to a statement that Aristotle has made, itis not necessary to inquire if it is true, for Aristotle's understanding containedsuch reliable truth that it could not even conceive anything false. Since truthwithout falsehood is peculiar to the separate intelligences, the philosophers didwell when they called Aristotle 'the divine.* Blessed be He Who has shownprovidence for the human species by bringing forth a man, singled out by suchgreat excellence that enlightens all men. Verily, Averroes has spoken the truthwhen he said that Aristotle is the one who began and the one who completed."For similar passages in praise of Aristotle, cf. Averroes, Long Commentary onPhysics, Introduction, end (Vol. IV, 4v, H-5r, B) and Long Commentary on DeAnima (ed. Crawford), p. 433. Cf. also E. Gilson, History of ChristianPhilosophy in the Middle Ages (New York, 1955), p. 642, n. 17. For theapplication of the term "divine" to human beings, cf. H.A. Wolfson, Philo, I(Cambridge, Mass., 1947), p. 101, n. 68.

16 D"B'aipn o'aiin ]B I^K nan saoa nrayn bx ona pn»j iiy. The text of thisphrase is difficult. I took it in the sense of O'Bijn saoa nrasn VK ana pns: Tiy•onoDjn n'nnn D'aun yaoa nvayb nan o"B'B©n.The current paragraph (Hebrew text, lines 22-29), of which the present phraseforms a part, appears in the Latin versions only in text 1. In this text, the passage

45

De Substantia Orbis

line 30 And we say that when Aristotle observed that each one of theindividuals existing in virtue of themselves here below, calledsubstances, passes from one descriptive predicate to another, he foundthat this change takes place according to two kinds." One kind is achange in descriptive predicates existing apart from the essences of thesubstances existing in virtue of themselves. This kind does not require a

reads: "postea revertar de eis ad composilionem naturae similis istis, incorporibus caelestibus." Its meaning seems to be: "then I shall turn from thesematters [that is, the form and matter of terrestrial bodies] to the composition ofa nature [form and matter] existing in the celestial bodies which is similar tothese [the terrestrial form and matter]." The paragraph was probablytranslated into Latin from the Hebrew version.

17 Aristotle differentiates between two kinds of "coming-to-be," namely,substantial and accidental. This distinction is developed by him as follows: (1)(a) There are sai TWV UEV ou Ytyveatku dXXd T68E TI yiyveoBai, "things whichare said to become such and such"; and (b) there are djtXcS? 6e yiyveaGai,"things which are said to become in an absolute sense." (2) (a) The latter kind ofchange occurs TUV oiSatwv u<5vov, "only in respect to substances"; (b) theformer kind of change occurs in respect to quantity, quality, relation, time andplace (Aristotle mentions only five accidents, but it is clear that he has all ofthem in mind). Cf. Physics I, 7, 190a, 31-190b, 1 (cf. Averroes, LongCommentary on Physics I, t. 62, Vol. IV, 37r, B-E, and com. 62, Vol. IV, 37r, E).Aristotle does not distinguish between substantial and accidental change interms of a change in "name and definition," but Averroes writes: "...Et haeduae transmutationes, s. quae est in accidentibus rei et quae est in substantia,conveniunt in hoc, quod sunt alteratio eiusdem rei de una qualitate in aliam, etde una dispositione in aliam. Sed quia viderunt quod quoniam res transmutaturin quibusdam istis dispositionibus, statim nomen et definitio eiustransmutabuntur, et in quibusdam non, vocaverunt primum modumtransmutationem in substantiam et alterationem substantialem, et vocaveruntistas dispositiones dispositiones substantiales. Secundam vero transmutatio-nem, in qua neque nomen rei nee eius definitio transmutatur, vocaveruntalterationem accidentalem," "...And these two kinds of change, that is that inthe accidents of something and that in the substance of something, agree in this,namely, that they are the transformation of that thing from one quality intoanother and from one disposition into another. But inasmuch as they [theAristotelian philosophers] saw that something may undergo a change in someof these dispositions such that its name and definition are changed and in someof these dispositions such that its name and definition are not changed, theycalled the first kind of change, change in substance and substantial change, andthey called these dispositions, substantial dispositions. But the second kind ofchange, and that is the one in which neither the name nor the definition of thethings is changed, they called accidental change" {Long Commentary on PhysicsI, com. 63, Vol. IV, 37v, M-38r, A).

46

Chapter One

change in the individuals underlying, as subjects, these descriptive line 32predicates, neither in the term by which they are called nor in theirdefinition. Examples of such descriptive predicates are those calledqualities, quantities and the other categories called accidents. The otherkind is a change in descriptive predicates such that it demands a changein the individuals underlying, as subjects, these predicates, both withrespect to the terms by which they are called and with respect to thedefinition by which their essence is indicated.18 This latter kind ofchange is called generation and corruption.When Aristotle reflected on these two kinds of change he found in eachone of them things that are common to both and things that are peculiarto each. Concerning the common things " that he found in both kinds ofchange, he noticed that they both have a subject that is the recipient ofthe change, inasmuch as change and motion would be impossible forthem without a subject.20 He also discovered that in both kinds ofchange the precedence of non-existence is a requisite for the existence ofthat which comes to be, for only that which does not exist can come to

18 Dax» bl> minn D i m This phrase, absent from all the Latin texts, is an almostliteral translation of Aristotle's saying that fail 8'6pos uiv X6yo<; 6 td x( rjvelvai arnaaivuv, "a definition is a statement signifying [literally: pointing to] athing's essence" (Topics I, 5, 101b, 39). Cf. Averroes' Short Commentary onTopics (ed. Butterworth), Arabic: p. 161, lines 1-2; English: p. 52, lines 31-33.Aristotle gives a similar account of "definition" in his discussion of the term"substance." He writes: £ti id xi i v elvat oi> 6 \6yot; 6pw\ioq KaitoijTO oOoiaXiyEiai £icdoTou, "The essence, the formula of which is a definition, is alsocalled the substance of each thing" (Metaphysics V, 8,1017b, 21-22). Averroes'text of this passage reads: iUSj tLi^l £ > j ^tll U J» JlaJlj*j? J l i Uu\j*L£*llt j» Ar-\j JS* jty? IJAJ elo- iUi , "Et etiam dicitur substantia illud,quod significat quid in omnibus rebus, et definitionem earum, et hoc estsubstantia cuiuslibet rei" (Long Commentary on Metaphysics V, t. 15, Arabic:p. 564, lines 3-4; Latin: Vol. VIII, 118r, B, and (ed. Ponzalli) p. 134, lines 12-13). '

19 D^Von onmn. The Latin texts -state explicitly that there are five factorscommon to substantial and accidental change ("communia quidem suntquinque quae insunt transmutationi substantial! et accidentali"). According tothe discussion that follows, these common factors are: (1) the subject whichunderlies the change; (2) the privation of that which comes to be; (3) thepotentiality for that which comes to be; (4) that which passes away and thatwhich comes to be are contraries; and (5) these contraries must belong to thesame genus.

20 Cf. Physics I, 7, 190a, 13- 190b, 10.

47

De Substantia Orbis

line 4i be.21 Furthermore, the prior existence of a possibility in the subject is arequisite for the existence of each of the two kinds of change, inasmuchas that which is impossible cannot come to be." He also found amongthe requisites of these two kinds of change that that from which thechange proceeds and that toward which it goes are either contraries orthat which is between contraries.23 And these contraries belong to the

21 The term -ran (non-being), which may apply to absolute or accidental non-being, must refer to accidental non-being in this passage. Cf. Physics 1,8,191b,13-17.Averroes writes in his Long Commentary on Physics I, com. 70, Vol. IV, 41r, D(cf. com. 67, Vol. IV, 40r, A): "...forma est principium per se, privatio estprincipium per accidens "For a full discussion of the function of UJ} 6V, "non-being," or, what is the same,atdpriaiq, "privation," in the process of change, cf. Physics I, 8-9.

22 rvniPDN, posse. The underlying Greek term is 5uvaui<;. Two medieval Hebrewterms reflect this Greek term: riD, poientia, and tmvs«,posse. One meaning ofthe Greek term is: a certain predisposition toward actuality, tvipycm. Theactuality may come to be in the thing, or it may not come to be. This is called m,"potentiality." The other meaning of 8uvaui<; is: a certain Tightness ofconditioa which allows the potentiality to become actual. This is called miDDX,"possibility," and its opposite is "impossibility."'Cf. Wolfson, Crescas, pp.690-693, n. 2.Since our passage concludes "for that which is impossible cannot come to be,"it seems that Averroes had in mind the second kind of Suvctuii;, i.e."possibility." However, Toledanus and Jandunus in their commentariesunderstandpoxse in the sense of poientia, ri3. Since "potentiality" as a factor ofchange is nowhere discussed in the present section it seems justifiable tointerpret posse as "potentiality" as well as "possibility."Jandunus comments on the relation of potentiality to actuality as follows (34a,D): "...nihil per se vadit ad actum, sed per aliquid existens in actu, et sicsimpliciter actus praecedit potentiam, verumtamen in eodem prius est aliquid inpotentia antequam sit in actu, et sic potentia praecedit actum: et sicnecessarium est, quod posse praecedat esse in subiecto," "...nothing isactualized through itself, but it is actualized only through something elseexisting in actuality. In this way actuality precedes potentiality in an absolutesense. However, in respect to the one, underlying subject, something exists inpotentiality before ,it exists in actuality. In this way it is necessary thatpossibility precedes actuality in the subject." Cf. also Aristotle, MetaphysicsIX, 8, 1049b, 17-29.

23 Change may take place in two .ways: (1) between two contraries (Physics I, 5and 7), or (2) between a contrary and a property lying between two contraries(Physics 1,5,188b, 21-23; V, 5,229b, 14-21). A change from black to white is anexample of the first kind of change, a change from black to gray an example ofthe second kind.

48

Chapter One

same genus u and they are reducible to the primary contraries, namely, line 43privation and form.25

But concerning those things in which the two kinds of change differ, hefound that the change that individuals undergo with respect to theirsubstances requires that the subject should not be something existing in

Narboni, giving two examples—one of accidental and one of substantialchange—comments (167v, 1): iivim .smnns IN nine; 3IBHP pVnt? ins ,nxvox : i r a rruwn mixn, "Averroes means to say: for example, when whitechanges to black or to an intermediate color, or when the privation of the formof fire changes to fire."Jandunus writes (34b, A): ".. .and it is necessary, therefore, that change takesplace from one contrary to another contrary. But these contraries can be eitherperfect (perfecta) contraries or imperfect ones (non perfecia). Perfect contrariesare those which are farthest apart (maxime distant) such as white and black,sweet and bitter and such extremes among which change occurs. Imperfectcontraries are those which have some kind of contrariety (aliquidcontrarietatis), such as an intermediate with an extreme."

24 That contraries belong to the same genus is shown by Aristotle in MetaphysicsX, 4, 1055a, 3-10; X, 8,1058a, 9-13. That intermediates are in the same genus astheir contraries (cf. previous note) is shown by him in Metaphysics X, 7, 1057a,18-30.

25 That the first contraries are axtpr\ai(;, "privation," and EI5O<;, "form," isshown by Aristotle in Metaphysics XII, 2, 1069b, 32-34; XII, 4, 1070b, 18-21.All particular contraries, as white and black for example, are subsumed underthis general classification. Other pairs of terms applied to the first contrariesare: 6V, "being," and ur} Sv, "non-being" (Metaphysics IV, 2, 1004b, 27-28),and oxipr\aii;, "privation," and ifyq, "positive state" (Metaphysics X, 4,1055a,33-38).Jandunus, using a mixture of the Aristotelian terminology, comments (34b, A):"...and ...this contrariety can be reduced to a primary contrariety which isnon-being (non esse), i.e., privation (privatio), and positive state (habitus)."The argument of the present passage, according to Jandunus, proceeds asfollows (34b, C-D): if we assume that the subject possesses a substantial form invirtue of which it is a subject and if we imagine that it also possesses a secondsubstantial form in virtue of which it is a particular substance—other than asubject—for example, the form of the element earth, air, etc., then twopossible alternatives follow: (1) the substantial form in virtue of which it is asubject must be destroyed and give way to the new substantial form, earth forexample, or (2) two substantial forms are present in actuality in the subject. Theformer alternative is absurd because it implies that something can come to befrom nothing, the latter because a substantial form determines a thing uniquely.Thus, it follows that something cannot have more than one substantial form inactuality.

49

De Substantia Orbis

line 46 actuality " and that it should not have a form in virtue of which it wouldbecome a substance.- For if it had a form through which it became asubstance, it could not receive the other forms except by destruction ofthis first form, for one form can only have one subject.27 And if thesubject were also a simple substance existing in actuality, it could not bepassive and not receptive, for that which is actual cannot, insofar as it isactual, be the recipient of something else actual.28 Therefore, the natureof that subject that receives the substantial forms, that is to say, thesubject called prime matter,29 is the nature of the potential, that is to say,being potential is the essential differentia30 of prime matter [as a

26 Narboni comments (167v, I): uira wxira DVU? bso2 XXD: ,nxv, "In completeactuality in virtue of its own essence simply."

27 inx w n x^x nnx mixV J'X '3, unam enimformam habere nisiunum subiectumimpossible est. This somewhat awkward phrase is found in all the Hebrewmanuscripts and in the Latin texts U> ,p ,X. However, text T and the marginalsummary in C have the smoother reading: "unum subiectum habere plusquamunam formam impossibile est."Jandunus, who had before him the first version of this passage, sensed itsawkwardness and commented (34b, C): ".. .si subiectum transmutationissubstantialis haberet formam de se in actu, nullam reciperet cuius declaratioest, quia impossibile est quod unum subiectum habeat nisi unam formamsubstamialem. et e converso una forma substantialis non est nisi unius subiecti."Having stated (1) that the subject of substantial change cannot be somethingexisting in actuality, and (2) that this subject cannot have a form in virtue ofwhich, it would become a substance, Averroes proceeds to prove the latterproposition in the present passage and the former proposition in the succeedingpassage.Narboni explains the phrase inx xm K^K nnx mixV px '3, "for one form canonly have one subject," by saying (167v, 1), that the form can only inhere in asubject, i.e., not in something composed of matter and form (DV 'Vvn xV .nxvmix). For if that subject, i.e., prime matter, were composed of matterand formit would be subject to generation and corruption in virtue of itself and thus, inturn, prime matter would require another subject. The same argument wouldapply to this new subject and the chain of subjects would go on to infinity. Thisis false: 'nVa "?x iVi .xcru iV r rm .IBXM TODJ mm ppxnn imnn ,p nx .n'rni?v nn .rrtsn.

28 This argument shows that the subject does not exist in actuality.29 riipxin 'Vaai pamna nana. Literally: "prime matter and first hyle."30 'axya iVran, differentia substantialis. This term is not used in its technical sense

in this passage, i.e., matter is not defined as "being in potentiality" where"being" is the genus and "potentiality" the differentia. For, as Aristotle pointsout, "being" is not a genus. Cf. Metaphysics VIII, 6, 1045a, 36-1045b. 7.

50

Chapter One

subject]. Therefore, prime matter has no proper form nor does it have a line 52nature existing in actuality, but its essence is to be only potential. It is forthis reason that it can receive all forms.ButJ1 the difference that there is between the potentiality through whichthis subject becomes a substance and between the nature of the subjectthat becomes a substance through this potentiality consists in this,namely, that the term potentiality is predicated only in relation to form

Averroes states this as follows: " . . . et accidit substantiae eius, ut sit in potentiaomnes formae: non quod potentia eius est in substantia, ita quod sit parsdefinitionis...," ".. .and it belongs to the substance of matter, that it ispotentially all forms. However, potentiality is not 'in' the substance in such amanner that it would be a part ofa definition...." (Long Commentary on PhysicsI, com. 70, Vol. IV, 41r, E).Jandunus, aware of this point, comments that "potentiality is as (quasi) thesubstantial difference of the subject."A verroes has the following in mind: being is divided into "potentiality" and"actuality." Cf. Metaphysics V, 7, 1017a, 35- 1017b, 9; IX, I. It has been shownin the preceding passage that prime matter is not something existing inactuality. Therefore, it must be something existing in potentiality.

31 The text of the present passage, which is corrupt in the Hebrew manuscripts,was reconstructed from the Latin texts and from a parallel passage in the LongCommentary on Physics (I, com. 70, Vol. IV, 41r, E-F). In these two passagesAverroes shows that a distinction must be made between the nature of primematter, potentiality, and prime matter considered as a subject in the category ofsubstance.In the Long Commentary on Physics Averroes presents two arguments insupport of the latter proposition: if prime matter were identical withpotentiality, its nature, then (1) prime matter would be destroyed when a givenpotentiality is actualized; and (2) prime matter would only be in the category ofrelation, while, in truth, it must also be in the category of substance. Theargument of the present passage is identical with the second of these arguments.Averroes' text in the Long Commentary on Physics reads: "D. d. et quid estsubjectum, i. et modus essentiae eius est, quod non est demonstratum in actu,sed est quasi medium inter non esse simpliciter et esse in actu. Et acciditsubstantiae eius ut sit in potentia omnes formae: non quod potentia eius est insubstantia, ita quod sit pars definitionis, quoniam, si potentia esset insubstantia eius, tune esse eius destrueretur ablatione potentiae et praesentiaformae in actu, s. formae, ad quam habebat potentiam ut reciperet: etuniversaliter, si potentia esset in substantia eius, tune substantia eiuscorumperetur apud generationem, et esset in praedicamento ad aliquid non inpraedicamento substantiae. Ex his igitur patet quod istud subiectum estsubstantia non potentia, neque privatio: pars enim substantiae est

' substantia "

51

De Substantia Orbis

line 55 [and hence this subject should belong to the category of relation], whilethe subject is one of those beings that exist in virtue of themselves," thesubstances whereof exist in potentiality [and hence this subject shouldbelong to the category of substance]. Therefore," [since the nature ofprime matter is to be only potential,] it is difficult to conceive of it34

except in relation to something else, as Aristotle has already pointedout."

32 Text p has the additional phrase: "hoc autem subiectum est elementum unumaeternum existentium per se," "but this subject is an eternal element of thosethings which exist by themselves". In texts E\1, this addition reads: "etelementum unum aeternum existentium per se." In text X, as in the Hebrewversions, the additional phrase is lacking.

33 ]3Vl. Literally: "And therefore." Averroes now returns to his earlier discussionthat to be potential is the nature of prime matter.

34 n r x . This Hebrew term can refer to either conception by the intellect orconception by the imagination. The Latin intellegere vel imaginari takes theterm in both of these senses. However, the interpretation huellegere seems to bepreferable, since "matter" is an object of conception by the intellect rather thanconception by the imagination. Cf. the following note, and Wolfson, Crescas, p.519, n. 21.

35 Aristotle writes (Physics I, 7, 191a, 7-12): i\ 8'ujtoKEiu£vr| <puai£ f>7uatr|Tr)Kax'dvaXoyiav, "The underlying nature is an object of scientific knowledge byan analogy." "For as the bronze is to the statue, the wood to the bed, or thematter and the formless before receiving form to anything that has form, so isthe underlying nature to substance, that is, the 'this' or existent." For acomment on the text of this passage, cf. W.D. Ross, Aristotle's Physics (Oxford,1936), text and p. 494, on 191a, 10.Averroes comments on this passage: "Et ista natura quae est subiectasubstantiae non potest intelligi per se, cum non sit aliquid in actu habensquiditatem, sed intelligitur secundum comparationem propter latcntiam suaesubstantiae. Et ideo, cum voluerimus dare substantiam eius, dicimus ipsam esseillud cuius proportio ad substantiam est sicut proportio cupri ad idolum autligni ad scamnum," "And this nature that is the underlying subject of substance[that is, prime matter] cannot be conceived by the intellect [as it is] in itself, for itis not something in actuality having an essence. But it is to be understood bymeans of a comparison in accordance with the latency [potentiality] of itssubstance. Thus if we want to give the essence of prime matter we say that primematter is that, the relation of which to substance is as the relation of copper tothe statue and wood to the bench" (Long Commentary on Physics I, com. 69,Vol. IV, 40v, I-K).

Narboni comments that it is difficult to conceive prime matter since it lacks anature proper to it (insva ivao pion), i.e., a form existing in actuality (168r, 1).Since knowledge can only be of something actual, prime matter can be known

52

Chapter One

When Aristotle observed" that the substantial forms" are divisible in line 58virtue of the divisibility of this subject — and divisibility belongs to thissubject only insofar as it possesses quantity — he understood that thethree dimensions,38 called "body," are the first thing existing in thissubject. And when he found that all forms have these three dimensionsin common, while each form is distinguished by having a determinate

only through an analogy: as a particular matter (wood) is to a particular form(box), so is prime matter to all forms. The difference between the parts of theanalogy is that when the particular matter (wood) loses its form (box), thematter still has a form of its own, while, when prime matter loses its form, noother substantial form remains (mis : 133 iu>K .mnvnn nmsn bv. imnn on' '3nainn on' xin jnxn Vx p n on' ,y?33i .nmsn !?3 b>x jwxin nainn on' xin ,n:oanms ,iV nain nmnn '3 pn Vi3n yv. .msnVi Dsyb xaru xin '3 ,nmsn bo bv. jwxinimnm .inssn ivssn misn V»3 xin ,mnxn nmsn misa ox ,ysn '3 .lasysinsss UTOD QS» m a s B 103 prcxin).Jandunus (34c, H-34d, E) produces the same argument.

36 The analysis of the composition of natural bodies, that is, the four elements,shows that "divisibility" is the ultimate common property of these bodies.Now, bodies are divisible in virtue of possessing "indeterminate three-dimensionality" (Q^sna vton nrcVon Q'pman). This "indeterminate three-dimensionality" is the "form" of prime matter."Determinate quantity" ( 3110 niO3), like any other accident, belongs to a bodyonly after the body has acquired a substantial form. Analytically speaking,then, prime matter, according to Averroes, receives quantity and form in thefollowing order: first, the "indeterminate three dimensions," then thesubstantial form, and, finally, the determinate dimensions that accompany thesubstantial form. This order contains an implicit disagreement with Avicennawho maintains that no quantity of any kind can belong to matter until matterpossesses a substantial form. Thus, Avicenna's order is: corporeal form (whichis different from indeterminate three-dimensionality), substantial form,dimensionality. Cf. above, n. 7.

37 Averroes distinguishes between two forms of an element: (1) the substantialform (n'DSSn misn) or specific form (n'ran misn); and (2) the corporeal form(iramn nmsn).According to Narboni (168v, 2), these two forms are distinguished as follows:nms3i .bwa y n rrnnxm n"»'xn miss .nvran mmsn nvasvn nrnxa ns r iDssn: n3 '3 ,na am m 'as i DB;J n\T rrasttii, "the term 'substantial forms' refersto the 'specific forms' as, for example, the form 'fire' and the form 'air.' Now, invirtue of the 'corporeal form* something is a body, while in virtue of the 'specificform* it is a definite body, for in virtue of the specific form it becomes asubstance."

38 I.e., the indeterminate three dimensions.

53

De Substantia Orbis

line 6i quantity of them,39 he knew that the indeterminate dimensions becomedeterminate and the ultimate dimensions in actuality only after thesubstantial forms become inherent in the subject, the case being thesame as that of the other accidents which exist in actuality. For Aristotlealso observed that the respective subjects of all accidents are individualsubstances existing in actuality, namely, they are those actual individualsubstances concerning whose nature it is clear that they are composed offorms and of a subject existing in potentiality.From the fact that the subject receives transitory accidents Aristotlealso adduced proof that the subject is not a simple thing, for if it were

39 The form of each of the four elements, earth, water, air and fire, is accompaniedby a definite quantity of dimensions. However, for any given element, thisquantity of dimension has a range delimited by a maximum and a minimum. Cf.below, n. 43.Jandunus comments (35a, A): "Notandum,..., quod sicut unaqueque formahabet qualitates determinatas, ita habet quantitatem determinatam adminimum et ad maximum...," "It is to be noted,..., that just as every form hasdeterminate qualities, so does it have a quantity determined toward a minimumand toward a maximum."In stating that the dimensions of each substantial form are determined toward amaximum and minimum, Averroes has the following in mind: let it be assumedthat a given substantial form (air, for example) inheres in a certain part of primematter. Now when this element (air) composed of the substantial form andprime matter is heated, its dimensions begin to expand. But the element retainsthe same substantial form. Therefore, the elements and their underlying mattercan undergo an increase and a decrease in their dimensions without there beingadded to them something from the outside or without there being somethingtaken away from them, that is, the elements and their matter are elastic.The source of this discussion appears to be Physics IV, 9, 217a, 26-33, whereAristotle writes: "The same matter also serves for both a large and a smallbody. This is evident: for when air is produced from water, the same matter hasbecome something different, not by acquiring an addition to it, but it hasbecome actually what it was potentially, and, again, water is produced from airin the same way, the change being sometimes from smallness to greatness, andsometimes from greatness to smallness. Similarly, therefore, if air that is large inextent comes to have a smaller volume, or becomes greater from being smaller,it is the matter that is potentially both that comes to be each of the two." For aparallel discussion, cf. De Generatione et Corruptione. 1, 5, 321a, 9-13, andAverroes, Middle Commentary on De Generatione et Corruptione I, Part V,chap. 2, Hebrew (ed. S. Kurland): p. 25, line 76-p. 26, line 79; English (trans.Kurland):p. 31, lines 16-24, and p. 162, n. 18; Latin (ed. F.H. Fobes): p. 44,lines 1-7. •

54

Chapter One

actually simple, it would be impossible for it to receive accidents. For line 67passivity toward the reception of something is contrary to the actualpossession of it.40 And as regards the existence of the indeterminatedimensions,41 which all forms have in common, he understood thatprime matter is never denuded of these indeterminate dimensions, for ifprime matter were ever denuded of them, then body would come fromnon-body and dimension from non-dimension and the corporeal formwould change from one contrary state to another and it would comeupon the subject in successive and changing stages, as is the case withthe substantial forms.42

All this is in agreement with what appears through sense perception.Thus, by way of an example, when the calefactory form operates inwater, water undergoes an increase in its dimensions43 and thesedimensions approach the dimensions of air. Now, when water hasreached the greatest quantity of dimensions which may exist in water,the subject divests itself of the form of water and of the maximumquantity of dimensions proper to water and it receives the form of airand the quantity of dimensions proper to the reception of the form ofair. The reverse takes place when the frigorificform operates in air, thatis, the dimensions of air do not cease shrinking until the subject has

40 Cf. Hebrew text, lines 48-50. The argument of this passage shows that primematter cannot be simple in actuality, but that it must always possess asubstantial form. Jandunus (35a, C) takes it to be a continuation of thepreceding discussion that the determinate dimensions are subsequent to thesubstantial form. For, since the subject receives changing accidents, it cannot besimple, but must be composed of matter and a substantial form. Thus, thesubstantial form is prior to any accident.

41 According to Jandunus (35b, C-D) the following passage contains two proofsthat prime matter never exists without the indeterminate dimensions. For if itdid, he argues, then during a process of change (1) one body would cease to existand a new body would come to be from nothing, or (2) there would exist manycorporeal forms which would change into one another. The first supposition isabsurd since "ex nihilo nihil fit"; the second, because the assumed corporealforms would be contraries. Corporeity, however, cannot be a contrary sincecontraries are active, while corporeity is passive. Cf. Toledanus, p. 77, lines 17-21.

42 The substantial forms, unlike the corporeal form, can change into one anotherand thus they are contraries.

43 Each of the four elements has a range of dimensions bounded by a maximumand a minimum dimension. Cf. above, n. 39.

55

De Subslantia Orbis

line 77 divested itself of the form of air, and the form of water has come to be.But as for the absolute dimensions, and those are the dimensions towhich we apply the term "body" in its absolute sense, prime matternever divests itself of them, as it never divests itself of the rest of theaccidents common to all of those bodies that change into their contrary,or to two or more of them, an example of the latter case being theproperty of transparency, which fire and air have in common.Inasmuch ** as the form of the indeterminate three dimensions is the first

44 13 nann . . . nrrniP n»Vi. The argument of this passage is meant to show that thesubstantial forms, that is, the forms of the four elements, are contraries.However, the text is difficult and there is a considerable difference between theHebrew and the Latin versions.According to Narboni's interpretation of the Hebrew text (169r, 1-2) thesubstantial forms are contraries because they succeed one another in primematter, and they succeed one another because: (1) two substantial formscannot inhere simultaneously in the same quantitatively determined part ofprime matter; (2) prime matter cannot simultaneously be free of the form that isdestroyed and that which produces destruction; and (3) the form that comes tobe must come to be through an agent that brings it from potentiality toactuality. For the details of Narboni's argument, cf. below, nn. 45-49.The Latin of this passage reads: "Et quia ilia forma, scilicet forma dimensionisnon terminatae existit in prima materia primitus, et succedit sibi in ea [forcorrection of this text, cf. below, n. 46], cum sit impossibile hoc subiectumrecipiens duas earum in existentia terminatae quantitatis, ideo impossibile est asubiecto denudare formam, vel subiectum denudari a forma, nisi per formaedestructionem. Nee est etiam possibile ipsam fieri in subiecto, nisi per agensextrahens illam de potentia in actu. Unde necesse est has formas esse contrariasadeo, quod altera corrumpat suam contrariam, et subiectum reciperet formamsimilem."

Commenting on this Latin text, Jandunus writes (35d, E-F): "...dicit, quodista forma interminatae dimensionis, i. dimensiones interminatae, quaeappellantur ab aliquibus formae corporeitatis, existunt primo in materia prima,dimensiones autem terminatae succedunt sibi invicem in materia, cumimpossibile sit formas substantiales, quae habent proprios terminos etdistinctos suarum quantitatum simul existens in eadem portione materiae, ideoimpossibile est unam formam substantialem denudare a subiecto, velsubiectum denudari a forma substantial! nisi per corruptionem formae illius...,nee etiam possibile est fieri in hoc subiecto nisi per agens extrahens illam depotentia in actum. Et ideo necesse est formas substantiales esse contrarias, itaquod altera corrumpit alteram cui succedit vel agens generans unam formamcorrumpit alium prius existentem, et tune subiectum recipit formam similem, s.ipsi agenti," " . . .he [Averroes] states that this form of indeterminatedimension, that is the indeterminate dimensions, which are called by some the

56

Chapter One

form residing in prime matter,45 [one substantial form]4<s comes upon it line 82in succession to another [only] as a result of change — seeing that it isnot possible for this quantitatively indeterminate matter to receive twoof the four substantial forms [simultaneously] in one and the sameabode of determinate quantity,47 nor is it possible that both, thesubstantial form that is being destroyed and its contrary, the successivesubstantial form that is destroying, should be without prime matter astheir subject,48 nor is it possible that the form that comes to be as a

form of corporeity, exist first in prime matter, while the determinate dimensionssucceed one another in prime matter, inasmuch as it is impossible that thesubstantial forms that have proper and distinct limits belonging to theirquantities should simultaneously exist in the same portion of prime matter. Forthis reason it is impossible to strip a substantial form from the primary subjector to remove that subject from a substantial form, except by destruction of thatsubstantial form Nor again is it possible that the substantial form thatsucceeds the one that is destroyed should come to be in this subject exceptthrough an agent that brings it from potentiality to actuality. And, therefore,the substantial forms must by necessity be contraries such that one substantialform destroys that other that it succeeds or that the agent that brings one forminto being destroys another form that existed before, as a result of which thesubject receives a similar form, that is a form that is similar to that agent."

45 Narboni explains (169r, 1): mixn Vioaa uan xVi \wmrt nainn oo'tPD1 xV '3 VnminnnaV nn"p nxiwi Vax iraxsn, "i.e prime matter does not divest itself ofthe indeterminate three dimensions nor does it cease to exist when any onesubstantial form ceases to exist, but it remains fixed for the form that isgenerated."

46 n'nssn mixn./or/na substantialis. This term, which is lacking in all the versions,has been supplied from Narboni's commentary, the text of which reads (169r,1): rvaxyn mixn nxr .mann isn apra vbs xiam'nax Kim.

47 I.e., if one substantial form, earth for example, subsists in a given part of primematter and thus imposes upon that part of prime matter the dimensions properto it (earth), then another substantial form, water for example, cannot subsistsimultaneously in the same quantitatively determined part of prime matter.Narboni comments (169r, 1): 'Vi'nn |» Vanan pVnn nxv.Vasia inx pw»a naxitrr» nmsn 'no? iVa vVi? iVirr>tt> IIPDX 'K izr>xn nain masm |i©xin. For the term]3B>», J*, cf. Wolfson, Crescas, p. 577, n. 15.

48 "\m X'n r o s a m ona noonn bn naVinn mixn xuruna DII» nvrw "WDX 'x.Narboni interprets this passage as if it were mixna XBDJn on» n'H'B? n©DX 'K•pnn xin Tosam ona noonn ^x roVinn. He writes (169r, 2): 'x p iaai .nxr. . .'a .naipaa nVnn x'm .rroDnn mooam rmyjn mixna mis xemn jrrre? ivsnmisn BraV nassa la np^noan misn pwxin nainn B T W ia nrcx nny imxannx ^3i .mn» 'nw pain' nx mix 'nbaa pwxn[n] 'Vrnn n'n' ,xV DXI .nV nVapan"\pv Dna, ". . .By this he means that it is impossible that the subject be free

57

De Substantia Orbis

line 84 successor to the one that is destroyed should be generated in the subjectexcept through an agent which brings it from potentiality toactuality49—it follows from these considerations that the substantialforms must be contraries so that each one of them at some time destroysits contrary,50 the result being that the subject receives a form similar tothe one bringing about the destruction.51 Thus, the forms of the elementsare contraries and they reside in a single subject. Therefore we say thatthings undergoing change are in some respect contrary and in some

simultaneously from the form that ceases to exist and from the one that bringsabout [its] destruction, which is a contrary, this latter form being the one thattakes the place of the former. For in the same instant in which prime matterstrips off the form that ceases to be, in the very same instant [actually he means'in the very next instant'] it puts on the form that it receives. If this were not thecase, either prime matter would be without form or two instants would overlap,and each of these assumptions is false."

49 Narboni comments (169r, 2): nVJnV pin invn KK bipob j'Xtt? nn .nxr...,inx naib !?aj>a nainw urp nrcxa iimx .nan p inxK? ma ,pVi .natn mix nwxavb Vax ,pBO 'Va iV van ^aipnn ms'saw owob njpvn nxi UUJDIBB Mb nw xb njnmamv laV Ksai oV»n lVyiDC u s r UMO OVIX ,ra> xV .imx'sa rvrwDK mswbxxai iViVw, "...he means to say, the reason [that an agent is needed] is thatnothing belongs to the recipient [that is, prime matter] except to be prepared forthe attainment of the existence of that thing [that is, the substantial form that isgenerated]. Therefore, as Averroes states, when we know that something maybe the recipient of something else, we have no right to infer on the basis of thisknowledge that that which is received will undoubtedly come upon therecipient, but we only may decide upon the possibility of its existence, no more.But when we know that there exists the perfect agent for the production of thatwhich is received, we have the right to decide that that which is produced by thisagent must also exist."

50 Cf. Aristotle, De Generatione et Corruptione II, 4, 331a, 12-23.51 Literally: "...and that the subject receives in itself a form similar to it."

Toledanus (p. 86, lines 15-16): "... et quod subiectum recipiat formam similemforme corrumpentis quod est agens," ".. .and that the subject receives a formthat is similar to the form that brings about destruction, and this [form] is theagent."Jandunus (35d, F): "...et tune subiectum recipit formam similem, scilicet, ipsiagenti," "... and the subject receives a similar form, i.e., [a form] similar to theagent."In accordance with the Latin version of this phrase ("et subiectum recipiatformam similem"), Ichanged the Hebrew text to ia nann mixn xemn Vapi.

" The Hebrew manuscripts in the best version have the reading: Xttnjna TDDmna nnnn, "the result being that there is destroyed in the subject a form similar to

58

Chapter One

respect similar.52 It follows as a corollary that if there exist simple line 88bodies53 whose forms have no contraries, it will necessarily be true inregard to these forms that they are not generated or corruptible and thatthey do not possess a common subject.All this being as we have described, it should be clear to you that thecause of the destruction and the generation of existing things is thecontrariety belonging to their forms. As for the common subject, it hasno proper form,54 but it is potentially receptive of enumeration that isapplicable to forms differing in species and also of enumeration that isapplicable to forms differing in number or that is according to thedistinction between great and small.55

52 According to Narboni (169r, 2), things undergoing change are similar in thatthey have the same underlying subject and they differ in that the formproducing the change is different from the form changed. Narboni adds that thetwo respective forms must be the same in genus, but different in species: ,HSTD'D'rnna .noa D'aina D'VyDnam Q'Vsisn© 'DV .mixn nDna ,mrna nxa nann ixa...pea.Jandunus interprets (35d, H): "...nam passiva sunt in principio contrariaagenti, in fine vero similia...,""... for the things undergoing change are in thebeginning of the change contrary to the agent, but in the end similar to it "

53 Narboni (169r, 2): D"a'BK;n D'Biwn ,nxi\ "i.e., the heavenly bodies";Jandunus (36a, A): "...ut sunt formae caelestes," "i.e., the heavenly forms."

54 Narboni (169r, 2): imassa , n n \ "he means to say [it has no proper form] invirtue of itself."

55 Prime matter, which has the indeterminate dimensions as its immediate form,can receive quantitative determination, that is, the determinate dimensions, intwo ways: (1) if there inhere two ormoreofthe forms of the four elements, thatis to say, forms differing in species, in a given part of prime matter, then thedimensions of that part of prime matter are determined by the sum of therespective dimensions proper to each of these forms; (2) if there inheres onlyone of the forms of the four elements in a given part of prime matter, then thedimensions of that part of prime matter are determined by the dimensionsproper to this one form. These latter dimensions, in turn, are determined in twoways: (a) according to discrete quantity, that is, according to the number of"units" of that single form that are present in a given part of prime matter; and(b) according to continuous quantity, that is, according to the position that thisform has within the range of dimensions possible for. it.

The phrase ppm Vma nvr new presents difficulties of interpretation,especially since in the subsequent passage (Hebrew text, lines 96-97) Averroesomits it from his enumeration of the ways in which prime matter may becomequantitatively determined. As my interpretation shows, I took this phrase asreferring to an earlier passage of the text iri'which Averroes states that the

59

De Substantia Orbis

line95 The reason for all this5* is "that this subject first receives theindeterminate three dimensions that are susceptible of division, andthat it is potentially many." For if the subject did not possess theindeterminate dimensions, it could not receive simultaneously, that is,in different parts of itself, either those forms that differ in number orthose forms that differ in species, but there would exist in it" only oneform at a given time. On the other hand, if matter, despite being one innumber, were not potentially many, then it would never have beendenuded of that form of which it happened to be the recipient and thatform would have been in the very essence of that underlying matter, sothat it would be impossible that that underlying matter should be

dimensions proper to a given form of the four elements may fall within a rangeof dimensions limited by maximum and minimum dimensions, depending onthe physical conditions under which this element exists (Hebrew text, lines 72-77; cf. above, n. 39).The Latin versions have et quae sit secundum maius et minus. Jandunus takingthe phrase as if it were et quae sint... refers it to the preceding/or/nor diversas.Thus he comments (36a, C): " . . . i . materia prima, quae est in potentia adomnes formas nullam habet de se, sed est recipiens numerum secundumdiversas formas numero et specie: et secundum diversas formas secundummagis et minus, i. quod ipsa materia prima est recipiens numerum per formasdiversas secundum magis pcrfectum et minus perfectum: cuiusmodi suntformae simplicium et mixtorum," "...i.e., prime matter that exists inpotentiality toward all forms, without having any form of its own, but itreceives numerable quantity in accordance with forms differing in number andspecies, and in accordance with forms differing according to more and less, i.e.,that this prime matter receives numerable quantity through forms that differ inthat they are more and less perfect. Forms of this kind are those of simple andmixed things."

56 Narboni (169r, 2): " m n i " ran V>n ,m:ann m Vs roa iVi3j> ,nxi\ "i.e., that thesubject receives potentially all this enumeration, i.e., the specific and theparticular."Toledanus (p. 90, lines 13-14): "quia contraria transmutant et corrumpantse. . . ," "i.e., that the contraries transform and destroy one another "Jandunus (36a, D): "scilicet, quod hoc subjectum est in potentia recipiensformas diversas in numero et specie," "i.e., that this subject receives potentiallythe forms differing in number and species."According to the argument that follows, Jandunus' formulation is the best.

57 I.e., that it potentially receives many substantial forms.58 Narboni (169v, 1): Jl©mn 'Vvn b2 J'3 ,nsr, "i.e., in the whole prime matter"

(the same interpretation is found in Toledanus and Jandunus, ad be).

60

Chapter One

completely denuded of its form or that it should lose this form and line 100obtain another.59

Inasmuch60 as this subject receives many forms simultaneously only invirtue of having received the three dimensions first, it is clear that if thissubject were to possess only one form continuously, it would benumerically one in an absolute manner" and no multiplicity could be in

59 I accepted the text of the Latin versions: "aut corrumperetur ilia forma, et aliaformageneraretur." The Hebrew text of the manuscripts, which has the twoverbs of this phrase in the active instead of the passive, reads: rnixn TOD'TS' KVIWVIT D"p'i K'nn. In the case of the first verb of the phrase, the Hebrew translatortook the underlying Arabic JLJS—which, read as a first form/has a passivesense, and, read as a fourth form, an active sense—as active. Similarly, in thecase of the second verb, he may have misread an underlying OJSo (passive) as£)JSS (active). The Hebrew text of the De Substantia Orbis contains a number ofother passages in which the Hebrew translator took an Arabic active as passiveand vice versa, or in which he appears to have misread an Arabic word. Forexamples, see above, chap. 1, n. 5; below, chap. 2, nn. 27, 37; chap. 4, n. 21;chap. 5, n. IS. For a discussion of the problem of mistranslations, cf. myIntroduction, above, p. 24.

60 This passage introduces Averroes' polemic against Avicenna's argument, that"form" must precede "dimension" in prime matter. Averroes shows here that,on the contrary, "indeterminate three-dimensionality" must precede "form."

61 B^maa nooaa nnK Kinrc nnanna nriK mix K>K ^ap' KV OK K«mnw nxann. Thisreading, based on the Latin texts, is preferable to the reading of the Hebrewmanuscripts, which is: i«anm .nnanna nnK mix nbn >ap' KV KWW nxann...nsoaa nnK DK KOmntP. It is possible that the text of the Hebrew manuscriptsis due to a scribal error, for if the phrases KinK? nRann and DK Kminv iKanm ofthe Hebrew manuscripts are exchanged, almost the exact reading of the Latinwill result.

Narboni explains the just-cited text of the Hebrew manuscripts as follows(169v, 1-2): mixn Rvn.nxv.manna nnK mis KVK Vs?'KV Kinunsann naK m»

—i ,mixa pVnn' Kim .o'Vana vfon Vn ,trnVnr>an O'prnan K'n IVH rcavinia nowr\ mixn p^nnni ,mnK mix nnK pirn nnK mix Vap' uaa pbnv

mixn Vap' KVI .n^nn maan Vap'w nnK naiiyai naanoai ia noipona K'ntp nnKKV mixn Vin nnK ia D'pnnan 'a . ^ j n oxsa n,onai . am pVnm |upm ^man K'nn•pxvn uVmaa nsoaa inK [BK xunjnp V'x] DKUHJU; nKanm ,ni nnx m»K inn .omp'131 'nan ia, '"it is clear that the subject receives only one form always', i.e., thecorporeal form that is indeterminate three-dimensionality. And this subject isdivisible in virtue of the substantial form since part of the subject receives onesubstantial form, while another part of it receives some other substantial form,and the corporeal form that resides in the subject is divided by the division ofthe subject, for the corporeal form is spread throughout the subject, andentangled and intermixed with it, inasmuch as the subject receives quantityfirst. And this corporeal form does not receive the attributes of more and less,

61

Re Substantia Orbis

line 104 it at all, either potentially or actually. Furthermore, this subject wouldnot be divisible by a form, nor would that one form which has beenassumed to reside in it be divisible by the division of the subject. Thereason for all these conclusions would be that the subject does notreceive the indeterminate quantity prior to receiving the form. For if thesubject were to receive this indeterminate quantity first, it would bedivisible by the substantial form, and the substantial form, in turn,would be divisible by its division, that is to say, by the division of thesubject, and the activities of this form would be finite in accordance withthe finiteness of the quantity proper to it,62 and the form would becapable of receiving the distinction of great and small and part andwhole.

Now," if there existed here below a form that does not receive thedistinction of great and small and is not divisible by division of itssubject and of which the subject is not divisible by division of thatform — wherein by the expression "division of form" I mean thediversification of it64—it is evident that the primary dimensions wouldnot settle upon the subject belonging to this form nor would thoseprimary dimensions exist in it until after the form has settled upon it,and when I use the term "after" I have in mind posteriority in respect toexistence, not posteriority in respect to time." The case of the primary

and those of part and whole. The opposite is the case in respect to the substanceof the celestial sphere, for in it the dimensions are subsequent upon the formand they are not prior to it. Therefore Averroes continues: 'And it is clear that ifthe subject were numerically one in an absolute manner and it would contain nomultiplicity' etc."

62 Since, according to the argument, the substantial form inheres in the body invirtue of the indeterminate three dimensions, the substantial form will be finitein accordance with the finiteness of the body. A finite form can produce only afinite activity. Cf. Jandunus, adloc,

63 The following argument is the converse of that of the preceding paragraph.64 ns^nnns. That is, if it is assumed that the subject is not divided by possessing a

number of units of that one form which has been assumed to exist in it. Cf.Hebrew text, lines 91 ff., and above, n. 55.The underlying Arabic term was probably Ifi te-I j .

65 jnin 'DV irm vh mx'Xnn 'oV nnx V~i, Et intelligo post secundum esse, non postsecundum tempus. This reading is found in MSS n ,x, and in all the Latin texts. Inits place, or in addition to it, the remaining Hebrew manuscripts have the ratherawkward phrase "jatn •"prnarr nwxna "nm nvpmnn W According toNarboni's interpretation this Hebrew phrase and the passage in which it occurs

62

Chapter One

dimensions would then be like the case of all the accidents existing in line 112prime matter, that is, the primary dimensions would exist in primematter only insofar as prime matter possesses a form existing inactuality.For this reason Avicenna thought that the case of the three dimensionswhich exist in matter absolutely, that is to say, the [three] indeterminatedimensions, is the same as the case of the determinate dimensions in it.And he asserts that it is impossible but that a primary form settle uponthe primary matter prior to the settlement upon it of the primarydimensions.66 And many absurdities follow from this view. Among

would have to be translated " . . . it is evident that the primary dimensions wouldnot settle upon the subject belonging to this form nor would dimensions (I havein mind those dimensions whose dimensionality is temporally dimensional in itsexistence) exist in it until after the form has settled on it." The phrase inparentheses is equivalent to "the determinate three dimensions." Narbonicomments (169r, 2): 'jixn n'axsn nnxn Vm irm xVx D'pman la lxxa' xVan"raw nvpman 'Jixi n a x Kim o'Vanan trpman nnxn ^in inx cxxaan D'pmaa"jam "pman rvm'xaa.Toledanus comments (p. 93, lines 3-4): "...according to the nature andcausality of the thing and not according to some duration."Jandunus, citing a different example for "priority according to nature," writes(36c, G-H): "As Averroes points out in 4 De Caelo, an agent that produceschange in respect to the accidents proper to this form, i.e., in respect to thequantity and quality proper to the form. These two changes are simultaneousaccording to time but not according to nature, for the cause is by nature simplyprior to the effect, though it is not prior according to time."For the distinction between "prior according to nature" and "prior accordingto time," cf. Aristotle, Categories 12; Metaphysics V, 11,1018b, 14-19; 1019a, 1-14.

66 Medieval philosophers agreed that the first form of matter is the "corporealform," but they differed concerning the nature of this form. As has been seen,Averroes* opinion was that the indeterminate three-dimensions are identicalwith the corporeal form. Avicenna, whose opinion is recorded here, held thatthe corporeal form could not be identical with indeterminate three-dimensionality, which is an accident, but must be a form in the category ofsubstance, which is prior to any dimensionality. Cf. above, n. 7.Narboni describes the difference between Averroes and Avicenna as follows(169v, 2-170r, 1):

13 imj'ip I©DK IU?K maxima nx'Va ounw awrr 'j'o jax© nt.mriN mix wna 'nVa mwtn 'Vvna sxajn maiwn p » i n n ....

iiKm mVuva laiiw nwViwan mvora , ioni "pon iav naana rnpa m^wn,o«?i 8in© nna irm bdi IBK' nai n'BBun mixa D'snwa 0^0 traiim

IKBTI n s ' laa Kin 'a mpain irxi ,na am w oai nvran nmxa

63

De Substantia Orbis

line 118 them: that the substantial forms would not be divisible by the divisionof the primary matter, that the forms would not receive the attributes of

103 mpain nrxi D'prnan nVit s'n n'aipjn rmxmp m a T O ]2KIP mo nxiaa run,m rinvo na Van .imaxsV l1? 3"rr mpamw saw sVi "rr p i o n namax lawns?

.norm .wow ,nav trpmansn pvKin 'Vvnn ino'PDn xV IIPX xim'Vvnn DCWD* x1? TOR Dm D'pman on n'awjn niwnv nax'i VVV p^rr ium p inorm IO'OV o'pman '3 D'Vanon n'pman om .orrtam onVain trips' Van pwRin

.ninian nsoV iiwirsa pyn nt niK'aa i^anxn nasi .navw KV Vax"The explanation of this is that Avicenna thinks that 'body' is a term applyingto the substantiality that has the possibility that the three indeterminatedimensions... rest in it. This is what is meant by 'corporeity,* which is the firstform existing in matter as yet undistinguished by any other form. Thiscorporeity is not of the nature of dimension, which is an accident in the categoryof quantity and may change, increase and decrease, as for example in the case ofthree-dimensional wax, which changes in respect to roundness, and in the caseof air, which decreases [in quantity]. All bodies have the corporeal form incommon and in virtue of it each one is said to be a body. And they differ invirtue of the specific forms through which they are called a particular body.And the corporeal form is not identical with cohesion, for a body can be dividedand still remain a body.

"From this it is clear that Avicenna assumes that the corporeal form is otherthan the dimensions and it is not cohesion as Algazali and Joseph ben Yohai[i.e., Joseph ben Judah ibn 'Aqnin, 1160-1226] thought, and cohesion is notessentially necessary to its nature. But the corporeal form is other than this, forthe corporeal form is something that prime matter does not strip off, while thedimensions change, increase and decrease."But Averroes argues against this, maintaining that the 'dimensions' are indeedthe corporeal form and that prime matter does not strip them off, but it onlyputs off their boundary and their limit, and these are the determinatedimensions. For while dimensions increase and decrease they do not change[completely]. And we have already explained these things at length in ourcommentary on [Algazali's] Makdsid al-Faldsifah."Joseph ibn 'Aqnin, as mentioned in the just-quoted passage, holds an opiniondifferent from that of Narboni. Yet, comparing Narboni's commentary with thepassage in which Ibn 'Aqnin discusses the same problem, we find that, thoughthe doctrines differ, the wording in the two passages mutatis mutandis is almostidentical. Cf. Ibn 'Aqnin, in: Ma'amar...,ed. MoritzLOwy (Berlin, 1879)pp.11-12.Narboni thus based his version on Ibn 'Aqnin's text, or perhaps both texts goback to an underlying third text.Jandunus reproduces the opinion of Avicenna as follows (36d, E-F): "Theopinion of Avicenna, according to chapter 2 of the first tractate of his AlShafa,is as follows: the form 'corporeity' exists in prime matter and the threedimensions are changeable according to the true nature of the substantialforms, just as wax, when it is divided into parts and squeezed and folded

64

Chapter One

great and small,67 that they would be eternal, not divisible by division of line 118the subject,68 and that they would not have a contrary diverse from themin subject.69 Finally, if what has been assumed were true, then matterwould not receive any other form apart from that one form which wouldbe proper to it.70

Aristotle gave an account of those properties that belong to generatedbeings in virtue of their subject and in virtue of their forms, theseproperties being the ones through which generation and corruptioncomes to these beings, that is, to the individuals which exist in virtue ofthemselves. He showed, in addition, that the celestial bodies are neithergenerated nor corruptible.71 As a result of this he denied72 that the

together with the fingers, receives many shapes while it itself always remains abody through the form 'corporeity', which all these shapes have in common.Thus Avicenna states that the form of body is in prime matter, and that theindeterminate dimensions are subsequent upon this common form. But in itselfthis corporeity is free from any particular form existing in actuality. And thus ithas the power to receive the specific form that can belong to it, and its power toreceive the specific forms occurs in two ways, universal and particular. It has theuniversal power insofar as this corporeity is considered absolutely, i.e.,common to all, but it has the power in a particular sense insofar as thatcorporeity is determined through some attributes toward certain forms and nottoward others. And thus body, insofar as it is body, has this power and the form'corporeity' primarily and generally. This is Avicenna's opinion." Cf.Avicenna, Al-Shifa', Metaphysics, II, 1, Arabic: (ed. Anawati and Zayed), p.63, line 3-p. 64, line 4; Latin: (ed. 1508), 75r, 2-75v, 1.For a discussion of Avicenna's doctrine of "corporeal form," cf. A.M.Goichon, La Distinction de I'Essence et de {'Existence d'apres Ibn Sina (Paris,1937), pp. 425-439, especially p. 431, line 21-p. 432, line 6, and n. 6, pp. 435-436. This discussion is especially valuable for its numerous references to thesources and because it shows, in the just-mentioned note, that the textualevidence supports Averroes' interpretation of Avicenna.

67 Cf. Hebrew text, lines 109-114.68 Cf. Hebrew text, lines 95-101.69 Nttrna urh >|Vnn&. The underlying Arabic was probably fyJ>jll j pi i-it*

The Latin reads: "et ipsam non habere contrarium sibi succedens in eodemsubiecto." The meaning of the Latin is that the assumed form would have nocontrary that succeeds it in the subject as a result of change. Cf. Hebrew text,lines 87-90.

70 Cf. Hebrew text, lines 95-101.71 Cf. De Caelo 1, 3, 270a, 12-22.72 pbn, negavit. In accordance with the reading of the Latin version, I changed the

phrase V? obvn of the Hebrew manuscripts to the present reading. This reading

65

De Substantia Orbis

line 125 celestial bodies possess a subject that is receptive to enumeration anddivision in virtue of the fact that the absolute dimensions settle upon itbefore the form is settled upon it, thereby also denying that the celestialbodies are many in potentiality though one in number. Furthermore,Aristotle denied regarding the forms of the celestial bodies that they aredivisible by division of their subject and that their activities are finite invirtue of their own finitude, for in the case of forms divisible by thedivision of their subject, the potentiality of the whole is greater than thepotentiality of a part."Inasmuch as Aristotle found that the activities of the celestial forms areinfinite, he concluded that those forms do not settle upon their subjectby means of the indeterminate three dimensions, that is to say, since theforms do not exist by means of the indeterminate dimensions, they arenot forces in bodies. And from the difference between the force of thewhole and that of a part in the case of the forms divisible in virtue of thedivision of their subject, he demonstrated apodictically that it isimpossible that a power producing an infinite activity should exist ina finite body or that an infinite power should exist in a finitebody.74

After these premises were set down by Aristotle" and after he foundthat the celestial forces act with an infinite activity he drew the following

is also justified by the parallelism of the discussion. In the succeeding passage(Hebrew text, lines 126-127) Averroes denies that certain properties belong tothe form of the celestial bodies, while in the present passage he denies certainproperties of their subject, that is, their matter.Narboni, accepting the original reading of the Hebrew manuscripts, applies thepresent passage to the sublunar bodies. Narboni comments (170v, 2): 11QKDnoDia omnV nvn:n nsr .nuDnn ^sp KUDJ onV n w » ona "ft DVUN, "WhenAverroes says that 'it is concluded by him [Aristotle] concerning them that theyhave a subject receptive of enumeration,' in using the term 'subject' he has inmind the subject of those things that are generated and corruptible."

73 Cf. Hebrew text, lines 132-134.74 Cf. Physics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 24.75 I.e., that no infinite force can be in a finite body nor a finite force in an infinite

body.For the present proof only the first part of this premise is required. However,Averroes assumes an additional proposition that he does not mentionexplicitly, namely, that the body of the heavenly bodies is finite in extension.This is proved by Aristotle in De Caelo I, 5-7.

66

Chapter One

conclusions: the celestial forces do not inhere in a subject at all, they do line 136not have a matter which receives them by means of the indeterminatedimensions, they do not have a matter in virtue of which they arepotentially many, they are not recipients of the attributes of great andsmall, and they donot have a contrary. All these conclusions followfrom the fact that these forms act with an infinite activity. And all this isdiscussed in the Physics.16

When Aristotle also investigated concerning the nature of the celestialbodies in the first book of the De Caelo, he demonstrated that they aresimple, since their motion is simple,77 and that their nature is a naturewhich is neither heavy nor light, that is, they are not ordinarilydescribed by the terms of heaviness or lightness.78 Since it became clearto him that heavy and light bodies are contraries because their motionsare contrary to each other and since it also became clear to him that themotions of the celestial bodies do not possess contraries or contrariety,he concluded from this that the celestial bodies are neither generatednor corruptible,79 and that they do not have a subject which receives thedimensions first [and then the forms], and hence that their forms aredivisible by the division of their subject. This is the meaning of hisstatement in the first book of the De Caelo that "these celestial bodieshave no contrary in their forms nor have they a subject." In like mannerhe deduced the very same thing from the fact that their motions, whichproceed from principles existing in them, are infinite motions.Inasmuch as it is apparent80 in regard to the celestial bodies that they

76 Only the statement "that an infinite power cannot reside in a finite body'' seemsto come from the Physics (cf. above, n. 74). It means that the forms of theheavenly bodies do not reside in their subject by means of the indeterminatethree dimensions. The rest of the present passage follows by converse from whathas been shown to be true of bodies subject to generation and corruption, thatis, bodies whose forms reside in them by means of the indeterminate threedimensions.

77 Cf. De Caelo I, 2.78 Cf. De Caelo I, 3, 269b, 18-270a, 12.79 Cf. De Caelo I, 3, 270a, 13-22.80 The succeeding text of the Hebrew manuscripts differs from that of the Latin

versions. Both agree in denying that in the celestial body the indeterminatedimensions are prior to the celestial form. They disagree, however, concerningthe manner in which the determinate dimensions come upon the matter of thecelestial body. The Hebrew manuscripts maintain that the determinate three

67

De Substantia Orbis

line 148 receive dimensions, and that it is impossible for them to receive thedeterminate dimensions' except in virtue of their forms, and also thatthey do not receive their forms by means of the indeterminatedimensions, as is the case with the transient forms, it follows that thecelestial bodies receive the dimensions in a manner that does not requirethat their forms are transient, that is, their matter receives thedimensions by means of its forms. And the matter does not receive itsforms by means of the dimensions, that is, the indeterminatedimensions, which exist in it potentially, the latter being the case withthose dimensions that exist in prime matter together with the form81 ofthat matter. But the dimensions that exist in the celestial element are oneof its properties.82

Since it became clear to Aristotle concerning the celestial bodies thattheir forms settle upon their subjects in such a manner that they are notdivisible by the division of their subjects, and the reason for that is thatthey do not settle upon the subjects insofar as they are divisible, itfollowed that these forms do not subsist in the subject, but they are

dimensions are a property of the celestial matter independent of the celestialform, while the Latin versions state that the determinate dimensions are aproperty accompanying the celestial form. Since below, in chap. 2 (Hebrewtext, lines 65 ff.), Averroes holds the view contained in the Latin text, I changedthe reading of the Hebrew manuscripts.The Hebrew manuscripts have: onu? D"a'»K;n O'mjn pva nxi: rrnc; no^i•fof NVI .onvnx 'jsa D'fcuian D'pman •ftap'w D3 -WON 'K frcn .o'pman o'VapaKin .mioDjn minn nmxa p:yn ina .o'^ana 'n"?an D'prnan msxana onmxxim ,nnoD3 nun onmx vn'w uaa avirr> NV IIPX isinn bs onix i"73p'» a"in»myxBKa vnmx ^ap' xVi .vnvnx maxsa vb imaxya cprnan Vapa oVrn n\TWmix Dy ]WKirt nana I©K o'pmaa p»n laa .o^ajia 'nVa "?"n ,naa la cpmavm^uoa n^ijo "a'awn nica n»K D'pman vn' ^ax .mn nann.The Latin X (p. 108) presents some difficulties as it stands. If we emend: "...etest impossible ea recipere dimensiones terminatas [nisi] secundum suasformas" the sense will be clear. Also, the phrase "quia illae substantiales suntsine dimensione" which occurs next in text X is obscure, and should perhaps beomitted.

81 mix, forma. This term must refer to the "corporeal form" the nature of which,according to Averroes, is three-dimensionality.

82 Jandunus (37d, F) comments: "... sed est dicendum, quod dimensiones caelisimpliciter sunt sicut accidentia propria, quae consequuntur formas inmateria," "... but it is to be said that the dimensions of the heavens simply arelike proper accidents which follow the forms in matter."

68

Chapter One

separated from the subject in respect to existence.81 For, since these line issforms settle upon the whole subject yet are not divisible in virtue of itsdivision, they have no subsistence in the subject, for they do not settleupon the subject, not in the whole, nor in part of it and generally not insomething divisible nor in something indivisible.This being so,84 it also follows that the form by which the celestial bodyis moved is the same as that toward which it is moved, for in the case ofthe forms that subsist in their subject, the form by which the body ismoved is not the same as that toward which it is moved.85 Andsimilarly86 the form subsisting in a subject that moves that subject toanother form by virtue of its existing in the subject, is itself moved inorder to attain perfection through another form. The motion of thatsubsisting form is therefore finite87 inasmuch as it produces motion inthe subject only while it itself is moved. And this is also one of thearguments that moved Aristotle to believe that the forms of the celestialbodies do not subsist in their subjects, for if they did, their motionswould be finite.88

83 Toledanus (p. 109, lines 10-11): ". . .non quia sint sine ilia materia, sed quiasuum esse non est ab ilia materia," " . . .not that they exist without that matter,but that their existence is not derived from that matter."

84 Jandunus (38b, A) comments: "i.e., inasmuch as the celestial forms do notreceive existence from their subject."

85 Jandunus (38b, A) comments: "forma [i.e., causa] efficiens et finis differunt."That in sublunar substances the efficient and final causes are different, cf.Physics II, 3, especially 194b,29-195a,3; 7; MetaphysicsV,2,especially 1013a,29-1013b, 3.

86 Literally the following passage reads: "And similarly a form of the abovedescription, I mean to say, it will be moved to attain perfection through anotherform, its motion therefore is finite, inasmuch as it produces motion [in thesubject] only while it itself is moved."

87 According to Jandunus (38b, A) the proof proceeds as follows: "The motion ofevery form that is moved by another form in order to perfect itself is necessarilyfinite. The reason for this is: every form of the kind just described moves onlywhen it is moved by an object of desire, which is its end. Thus when it passes[reaches] the end toward which it moves, its motion comes to a stop and thatwhich was moved comes to rest."

88 According to Jandunus (38b, B) the syllogism is: "No form that inheres in itssubject moves in an infinite time. The celestial bodies, however, move throughan infinite time. Therefore, the celestial forms do not inhere in their subject."Cf. Metaphysics III, 7, 1073a, 3-13.

69

De Substantia Orbis

line 168 And an opponent •' should not say that the forms by which the celestialbodies are moved are different from those toward which they are movedand that those forms that must be absolutely without matter andwithout position are those forms toward which the spheres are movedand not those by which they are moved, inasmuch as those by whichthey are moved are forms in matters even though they are not divisibleby the division of their matters. For if this what the opponents wouldsay were true, the forms by which the celestial bodies are moved wouldbe subsisting in their subjects and, hence, moved by the motion of theirsubjects. But if this were so, they would be divisible by the division oftheir subjects,90 for with regard to that which is moved, if it is movedessentially, that is, in the case of a body, it is divisible essentially and if itis moved accidentally it is divided accidentally." Therefore, there isnothing in the celestial body whereby the form by which the motiontakes place differs from that toward which the motion tends, but theyare one and the same form differing only in disposition. Furthermore,were the opponent correct in his contention that the form toward whichthe celestial body is moved is different from that by which it is moved,then the latter in causing motion would itself be moved andconsequently the motion would be finite, for that which is moved whileproducing motion cannot be a principle for eternal motion. This is inaccordance with what Aristotle has already stated.92 Furthermore, in

89 Avicenna is the opponent whom Averroes has in mind.90 The complete argument, which is only implied here, is: if this form [i.e., the

efficient cause] were divisible, it would be finite and thus the action it produces,i.e., the action of the celestial bodies, would be finite [in all respects]. But it hasbeen shown that the action of the celestial bodies is infinite [in duration].Therefore, the original assumption, that the final and the efficient causes aredifferent, is false.

91 The Hebrew manuscripts have an additional phrase at this point. In MSS ,3 ,K' ,n, it reads: nws»3 pVnnaa lnvn ,V"i, "that is to say [the celestial form isdivisible], in virtue of its being in something which is divisible essentially." In 1the phrase reads: maxsn pVnna invn ,'3in, "I have in mind, in virtue of itsbeing divisible essentially". Since this phrase does not appear to contributeanything to the argument, and since it is lacking in the Latin versions, I omittedit.

92 The argument in the preceding passage is condensed and in its expanded form itproceeds as follows: if the two forms differ, then the'form producing motioninheres in the body of the celestial element. If this were the case it would bemoved by the motion of the celestial body. But Aristotle has shown that the

70

Chapter One

opposition to the opponent's view it can be shown by the analogous fact linethat the intellect and the intelligible in the celestial body are one and thesame thing, that the form toward which the sphere is moved and theform by which it is moved are one and the same." All this concerningthe intellect and the intelligible has already been explained in otherplaces.94

And the heavens are said to possess a soul only in virtue of a desireexisting in them and in virtue of possessing locomotion.95 Now, thedesire which belongs to the celestial body exists only insofar as this bodyhas life in virtue of itself and desire in virtue of itself,96 and not in virtueof a force existing in it which is divisible by the division of this body, for,if the latter were the case, the celestial body would be generated andcorruptible.97 And the celestial body is said to undergo motion on

mover of the celestial body must be unmoved. Cf. Physics VIII, 5-6;MetaphysicsXII, 8, 1073a, 23-1073b, 1.

93 In this passage the intellect of the celestial body is considered as the efficientcause of its motion and the intelligible as its final cause. Since it has been shownby Aristotle (see succeeding note) that in the case of the celestial body theintellect and its intelligible are one and the same, it follows that the efficient andthe final causes of celestial motion are identical. The opponent, that is,Avicenna, holds that the efficient and the final causes of celestial motion are notidentical.

94 Cf. Metaphysics XII, 9, especially 1075a, 3-5, where Aristotle writes: " . . . Since,then, thought and the object of thought are not different in the case of thingsthat have no matter, the divine thought and its object will be the same, i.e. thethinking will be one with the object of thought."

95 The heavens are moved circularly by having the prime mover as an object ofappetite. Cf. Metaphysics XII, 7, 1072a, 19-I072b, 4. For a more detaileddiscussion of the cause of celestial motion, cf. below, chap. 4, n. 18.

96 Narboni (171r, 1): imu'CD D» DXS1? D ro 13 ]'K chwn snD3 Kin '3 ,nsT,"i.e.,it is completely actual and it does not have with its extension any potentialitytoward a substance." Cf. Metaphysics XII, 7, 1072b, 27-30. Even though theanalysis in this passage refers to the prime mover only, it is also applicable to themovers of the individual spheres. Cf. Metaphysics XII, 8. 'For the meaning of the term iniOSS, "in virtue of itself," especially as used inreference to divine attributes, cf. H.A. Wolfson, "Avicenna, Algazali andAverroes on Divine Attributes," Homenaje a Millas-Vallicrosa, II (Barcelona,1956), pp. 545-571, especially p. 550, lines 3 ff.; reprinted in H.A. Wolfson,Studies in the History of Philosophy and Religion, I, pp. 143-169.

97 The argument once again shows that, if the soul were a power inhering in thebody, it would be finite and thus the activity it produces would also be finite andthus the body would come to be and pass away.

71

De Substantia Orbis

line 183 account of a principle that exists in it as something separate from it, andnot on account of a principle that exists in it as something that is a partof it, and in the same manner it is said to be living and thinking. Now if itwere thinking by means of a part of itself, it would not be thinking invirtue of itself and the celestial body would be thinking like a man, forman is thinking by means of a part of himself and in like manner it isthrough part of himself that he is living, desiring and moving in place.And generally, since it is clear that the activity of this body is eternal, it isalso clear concerning the nature of its form that it does not subsist in asubject, and that its subject is simple, not composed of matter and form,for if the latter were the case, the celestial body would be generated andcorruptible.Some of those who philosophize'8 have said that the souls of thecelestial bodies are forms in their respective matters which cannotsubsist apart from a subject and that they acquire eternal existencefrom forms that do exist apart from matter. This statement is devoid ofany meaning. For if it were true, it would follow that something thataccording to its nature cannot be eternal acquires eternal existence fromsomething else. All this is absurd, since a nature that is generated andcorruptible cannot receive eternal existence from something else." AH

98 D'DO snnn nxp, incipientesphilosophare. Narboni comments (171r, 1): nia tmonana nmx Dn D"a'»B?n IVJU o'mjn nwsw r\mv 'Vuton 'ro pm TI»OVK bsup DJOK .DnioDii o'aiana D'asiia .D'BBTI b"-\ .DHOTI XWU vibaa nnyt? NVIVXV ma i»B3 TWO u'aii .nmna D'axVa D'rnp: on Dnan 'n^aa nmx 'jaa irmsnnnrnxa ninxan ruf» "a'acn aurw inx ,HXT ,WVITB ninwrrnapmaio D'sioiVonm pm .craaiia arm inx icsnn bs na avsn Dai Da orx, "in using thisexpression Averroes alludes to Alexander, Avicenna, and Algazali, whomaintained that the souls of the celestial bodies are material forms that do notexist apart from a subject. And they said that the heavens, which are composedof bodies and their souls, acquire eternity in virtue of immaterial forms that inthe religious traditions are called angels. And Rabbi Moses [Maimonides]followed these philosophers in respect to this doctrine by maintaining that theheavens acquire eternity from something other than themselves. By this hemeant that the celestial bodies acquire eternity from forms that do not inhere inthem, inasmuch as the celestial bodies, being composite, have a potentiality fordestruction in virtue of themselves. Understand this."

For a discussion of this problem and the difference between Maimonides[Avicenna] and Averroes, cf. Wolfson, Crescas, Prop. XI, n. 5, pp, 605-611;especially pp. 608-611.

99 If the celestial bodies, which according to the opinion of the philosophizers are

72

Chapter One

this is clear to him who is familiar with the fundamental principles of line 193Aristotle.It has been proved then in this treatise what the substance of the heavensis according to the knowledge of the substance of their forms andmatters. Not everything we have said was found explained in thosebooks of the sayings of Aristotle that have reached us, but some of thesethings were found explained in his writings and some of them followfrom what he has proved in the books that have reached us. However, itappears from his words that he has explained all of these matters inbooks of his that have not come down to us. And God is He Whoguideth one into the right path.100 This treatise is called "A DiscourseConcerning the Substance of the [Celestial] Sphere." It is more worthyof this name than the treatise of Avicenna bearing this title.101 This greatand useful treatise has been completed. Praise be to God; in Him wetrust.

composed of matter and form, can acquire eternity from something other thanthemselves, then also the terrestrial bodies, which are composed of matter andform, can acquire eternity. If this were so, everything subject to generation andcorruption could become eternal and thus the concept of generation andcorruption would have to be abandoned. Since this conclusion is absurd, itfollows that the original assumption of a composite celestial body that acquireseternal existence from something other than itself is absurd.

100 Ttmfi TBrnn Vxm. This phrase is reminiscent of such Koranic passages as:l i i i lJ \S\^p Jl i^o&J..., "[Allah]... will guide them to Himself on astraight path" (4: 1*74); yjjL.'.Jt }>\^p ^Jl $ J-i hi..., "[And he who^holdsfast to Allah] is indeed guided to'the right path" (3:96) ;p^-* ^}j-ej\ fT^H...."And [Allah] guides them to the right path" (5:18); n-£li *>Y^pJ\ ^\..., "And We [Allah] guided them to the straight path" (6:87).

101 Avicenna wrote a treatise entitledi^Ull f \yrH\ "The Uppermost Bodies." Thistreatise carried the alternative titles, *» jU-JI f l~? !l j*yr , "The Substanceof the Heavenly Bodies" and ,^1 j»>f I Ot;, "Explanation of the FifthSubstance." Cf. G.C. Anawati, Essai de Bibliographic Avicennienne (Cairo,19S0), pp. 125-127. This treatise appears in printed form as part of the collectionknown as Tis' Rasa'il. Cf. Anawati, op. cit., p. 325.As Steinschneider points out, the end of the treatise is probably TBT»nn VKHIn)i3:V, the rest of the Hebrew text being a later addition. Cf. Steinschneider,Hebriiische Obersetzungen, p. 184. It should also be noted that the last sentenceof the Hebrew text rhymes, which would have been unlikely had it beentranslated from the Arabic.

73

CHAPTER TWO

line i It is our intention to investigate in this treatise concerning the nature ofthe celestial body and to discover what those mean who say that it issimple, not composite, and that it is a body that is neither heavy norlight. And we assert that the proposition "the celestial body is notcomposed of matter and form in the manner of the transient ones"' istrue beyond the shadow of a doubt as has already been demonstratedconcerning it. For it has been shown concerning the matter of thecelestial body that it possesses no potentiality at all,2 for everything inwhich there is a potentiality, by which I mean a potentiality which is in asubstance, is [in] potentiality3 in respect to two contradictories.4 It hasalso been shown concerning the form of the celestial body that the formby which the celestial body is moved cannot belong to the same genus asthe forms of the four transient elements, for if the celestial form

1 Narboni comments (172v, 2): 13 naiisa nxv , m m nana asiia 'n^a Kin D"un...".. . this body is not composed of matter and form, that is to say, a form that isintermingled with the matter." This statement means that the celestial formdoes not inhere in its matter by means of the indeterminate three dimensions.That in a certain way, however, the celestial bodies can be said to be composedof matter and form is shown further on in this chapter. Cf. also Hebrew text,chap. 1, lines 135 ff.

2 Narboni (172v, 2): misn VK roa irKC ,nxv, "I.e., the celestial matter is not inpotentiality toward [any] form." In this passage Averroes speaks only of apotentiality toward a form, i.e., the kind of potentiality that underliesgeneration and corruption.

3 Literally: "is a potentiality."4 According to Jandunus (39b, B-C) the proof that the celestial matter possesses

no potentiality for a substantial form proceeds as follows:First Premise: Everything that possesses a potentiality for being (polentiam adesse) possesses a potentiality for two "contradictories, namely, being and not-being {ad esse et ad non esse).Second Premise: The heavens, being eternal, possess no potentiality for not-being.Conclusion: Therefore, the heavens do not possess a potentiality for being, i.e.,a potentiality for substance (..'. ergo "non ad esse, quae est potentia adsubstantiam).For this argument, cf. Metaphysics IX, 8, 1050b, 6-34."Froir> the aboveargument it follows that the matter of the celestial body exists in actuality andthat the celestial form does not inhere in it, that is, that the celestial matter issimple.

74

Chapter Two

belonged to their genus it would be either heavy or light and it would be ime 7moved in virtue of itself in accidental fashion.3 This is in accordancewith what has been demonstrated in the eighth book of Physics.6

Thus only one possibility remains,7 namely, that the nature of thecelestial form belongs to the genus of the nature of soul. But when weexamine beings possessing a soul that are here below, we find in themtwo principles of two kinds of motions respectively. One of them is aprinciple for rectilinear motion, that is upward and downward motion,in which case the mover produces the motion without volition. [Thiskind of motion is not due to the soul in those beings described aspossessing a soul. It is due to the nature of the four elements of which thebodies of these beings are composed.] The other principle is a principle

According to Jandunus (39b, D-E) two absurdities follow from the assumptionthat the movers of the celestial bodies and of the four elements belong to thesame genus. They are: (1) The celestial body would possess the attributes ofheaviness and lightness. This is absurd since heavy and light bodies come to restwhen they have reached their proper place. The celestial body, however, movescontinually. (2) The celestial form would move accidentally. This is absurdsince everything moved accidentally can be reduced to something that is movedin virtue of itself essentially. Thus the celestial body would not be the firstmoved. Cf. Hebrew text, lines 36 ff.

Cf. Physics VIII, 4, especially 255a, 24-255b, 31, and Long Commentary onPhysics, VIII, com. 31, Vol. IV, 368v, I-M.Having shown that the form of the celestial body cannot belong to the samegenus as the forms of the four elements, Averroes sets out to establish that thecelestial form must belong to the genus of soul. He begins with an analysis of theprinciples that produce motion in sublunar beings possessing a soul (that is,animals), showing in the present passage that these sublunar beings possess twoprinciples of motion: (1) their body which moves them with a rectilinearmotion in accordance with the motion of the predominant of the four elementsthat make up this body, and (2) their soul which produces translation in place.The motion of the sublunar being possessing a soul is the result of bothprinciples of motion together, that is, since the soul of these sublunar beingsinheres in their respective bodies their motion is determined by the body as wellas the soul.

Jandunus (39c, H-39d, E): "We find in the sublunar animals the natures of twoprinciples of motion. One of them is the principle of rectilinear motion.... theother is that of motion of advance (moius progressivus) and this contraryadvancing motion is different from the rectilinear motion, which he [Averroes]calls the motion of declination. For through the rectilinear motion the body ofthe animal is inclined toward the place of the predominating one of the fourelements."

75

De Substantia Orbis

line 12 for the motion of translation in place. [This kind of motion is due to thesoul in those beings described as possessing a soul.] And we find that thelatter motion is opposed to the motion of declination in each of them[that is, the already mentioned upward and downward motion, which isnot due to the soul]. And it is because of this motion of declination[which is not due to the soul] that each of the [sublunar] beingspossessing a soul is overtaken by fatigue and must necessarily come torest.8

8 The soul, insofar as it is soul, produces continuous locomotion and, thus, thesublunar beings possessing soul would be moved continually if "soul" weretheir only principle of motion. Since, however, they have a second principle ofmotion, namely, their body, their motion cannot be continuous, that is, themotion of their body brings upon them fatigue and rest.Jandunus (39d, E): ". . .and since this motion of translation, the principle ofwhich is 'soul,' is contrary to rectilinear motion, the beings which have a soulsuffer retardation in their motion of translation."

In his Long Commentary on De Caelo (II, com. 3, Vol. V, 96v, M) Averroesstates his argument more fully. In that passage he writes: ".. .et apparet etiamex hoc quod declaratum est ex sua natura, quod in hoc motu non cessanti nonaccidit ei labor neque fatigatio, et causa illius est, quia causa fatigationis quaeest in animalibus non est in eo. Causa cnim fatigationis in animalibus est, quiain eis est principium motus contrarium motui animae, scilicet pars gravis quaeest in eis. Hoc autem movet nos multum ad contrariam partem illi, quaintendimus moveri ex anima nostra, quapropter accidit nobis labor etfatigatio," " . . . and it also becomes clear from what has been said concerning itsnature [that is, the nature of the celestial element] that in its unceasing motionthere does not occur to it either work or fatigue. And the reason for this is thatthe cause of fatigue that is present in the sublunar beings possessing a soul is notpresent in it. For the cause of fatigue in the sublunar beings possessing a soul isthat there is present in them a principle of motion that is contrary to the motion[produced by the soul], that is to say, this contrary principle is the heavy part inthem [that is, this contrary principle is their body that moves with a motionproper to the four elements]. But this contrary principle moves us many timestoward a direction [literally: part] contrary to that toward which we desire tobe moved by our soul, the result being that work and fatigue comes upon us."Similarly, Averroes writes in his Long Commentary on De Caelo (II, com. 6, Vol.V, 98v, H): "...somnum enim et quies in animalibus necessario sunt in eisproptcr Iaborem, labor autem non est, nisi quia in eis existit principiumcontrarium motui animae...," "...sleep and rest in the case of the [sublunar]beings possessing a soul are in them by necessity because of work, but workwould not be/were it not that there exists in them a principle contrary to themotion of the soul."

76

Chapter Two

It follows then that the principle of motion of the celestial body can line 14belong only to the genus "soul,"' and that the motion that is circular bynature is the motion that is proper to the soul, insofar as it is soul.10Thisbeing so," it is this nature [of its soul] that decrees that the celestial bodyis neither light nor heavy, and that it is moved in a circle. Thus, oneshould not assert that the celestial body has a power of declination invirtue of which it is said to be neither heavy nor light and that theaggregate composed of this power and matter makes up the celestialbody; for if this were the case, the celestial body would not be simpleand it would be corruptible in virtue of itself.12 The only reason why ithappens to the soul in sublunar beings not to be moved in a circle is that

9 This is the conclusion of the demonstration that the celestial being has only oneprinciple of motion, namely, "soul." The implied argument proceeds asfollows: It has just been shown that the sublunar beings possessing a soul havetwo motive principles: (I) the principles of rectilinear motion, that is, the fourelements making up their body that are responsible for retardation and rest; (2)the principle of translation in place, i.e., soul. The celestial bodies havelocomotion, but they do not suffer retardation or rest. Thus "soul" is their onlyprinciple of motion. Cf. Jandunus, 39d, E.

As the conclusion to the first passage from the Long Commentary on De Caelo(II, com. 3, Vol. V, 97r, A), cited in the previous note, Averroes writes: " . . .Ethoc est quod dixit, non enim habet alium motum nisi suum: i. quiacaelum nonhabet motum naturalem alium a motu voluntario, et iste motus in ipso nonprovenit a natura, sicut motus elementorum, quoniam si esset naturale,contingeret quod esset compositum ex materia et forma, ergo generabile etcorrupt ibile," " . . . And Aristotle has the following in mind when he says 'for thecelestial body has no other motion except its own': The heavens have nonatural motion different from their voluntary motion, and this voluntarymot ion in them does not proceed from a nature, such as the motion of the [four]elements. For, if their motion were a natural motion, it would necessarily followthat they are composed of matter and form and therefore generable andcorruptible."

10 Since "soul" is the only principle of motion possessed by the celestial body, andsince the celestial body has circular motion, it follows that the soul, qua soul,produces circular motion. Cf. Jandunus 39d, E.

11 Jandunus (39d, F): "i.e., that the principle of motion is 'soul.'"12 Averroes here refutes the opinion that there is a special material power of

declination, in addition to the soul, which makes the celestial body neither lightnor heavy. If such a material power were to exist, he argues, then the celestialbody would be composite and thus subject to corruption. This is absurd. Theopinion refuted in this passage is that of Avicenna. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3,lines 38 IT.

77

De Substantia Orbis

line 19 it subsists in a body which [being composed of the four elements] ismoved with rectilinear motion."The proof that the soul is the only motive principle of the celestial bodyproceeds as follows:14 inasmuch as it does not belong to the nature of

13 The Latin versions have an additional phrase at this point. In text X this phrasereads "et sic opponitur declinatio circulari," in p "et sic componitur declinatiohie," and in V ,1, "et sic opponitur declinatio hie." The Hebrew manuscripts,which lack this additional phrase, have, however, p TiX'sn X3'i, "and theexplanation proceeds as follows," as an introduction to the succeedingparagraph.

14 The Hebrew text of the succeeding passage appears to be partially corrupt.Similarly, the Latin text in IP, as Jandunus already noted in his commentary,seems to be partially defective. Texts 1 ,p, contain a corrected version. Thiscorrection was also suggested by Jandunus in his commentary. Text X containsa shorter version of this corrected reading. (That the text in », though corrupt,was the original Latin text was confirmed by a sample of the Latin manuscriptsthat became available to me after I had virtually completed the present work.)In accordance with the conclusion of the argument of the present passage,which is intelligible and is the same in all versions, I changed the Hebrew text tobring it into agreement with the corrected Latin text (T ,f>).

The corrected Latin text, as found in "I, reads: "Sed, quia anima, quae est incorpore caelesti, non est innata moveri circulariter ab eo, quod est innatumcirculariter moveri, quia non est anima in eo, ut in corpore gravi aut levi, cumipsum moveatur ex se ab anima, ideo animam habet tantum, et non habet aliudprincipium...."The Hebrew manuscripts read: nsnn j'X bp IK naa D1J3 n©x WB:n nn'n ox>3X ,133 xVi bp )6 DIM rc?] ii'x nan .31303 yyiirTEMSTjaip nn mn 31303 ysunnw

rnnx nVnnn is rw *»a WSJ ^ xin nin wsz ton ms» nxoa yjmnn xw.The uncorrected Latin text in V reads: "Sed quia anima, quae est in corporegravi aut levi non est innata moveri circulariter ab eo, quod est innatumcirculariter moveri, quia non est anima in eo ut in corpore gravi et levi, quumipsum moveatur ex se et ab anima, ideo anima habet tantum et non habet aliudprincipium "Jandunus' commentary on this passage reads (40a, B): "Primo dicit, quodanima quae est in corpore gravi et levi, et est litera corrupta, ut videtur, et debetesse, anima, quae est in corpore caelesti,...," "He [Averroes] first states thatthe soul that exists in the heavy and light body, and a word is evidently corrupt,for the passage must read 'the soul that exists in the celestial body' "The present passage contains proof that (1) "Soul" is the only moving principleof the celestial bodies, and (2) circular motion is the only motion proper to soul,qua soul. The arguments are: (1) The celestial element is composed of body andsoul. The celestial soul cannot be moved circularly by its body, for this soul, ashas been shown, does not inhere in its body. Thus, "soul" must be the onlyprinciple of motion in the celestial body. (2) "Soul" is the only principle ofmotion in the celestial body. The celestial body has circular motion. Thus soul,

78

Chapter Two

the soul that is in the celestial body '5 to be moved circularly by some ime 20other principle whose nature it is to be moved circularly, for the celestialsoul does not exist in its body as the [terrestrial] soul exists in theterrestrial body,16 yet the celestial body, being moved in virtue of itself,possesses a soul, it follows that it possesses only a soul [as its principle ofmotion] and no other principle [of motion] exists in it. Since the celestialbody is moved circularly, we know that the peculiar property of thatsoul, insofar as it is soul, is to be moved circularly. This being so, thecelestial body possesses no other nature except the nature of the soulthat imparts locomotion.17

Since, however, the nature of the celestial body differs from the natureof its soul — for the celestial element is undoubtedly composed of thatwhich moves and that which is moved and that which moves is otherthan that which is moved1S — we must now investigate concerning thenature of this body. Since it has previously been explained concerningthis body that it is not generated nor corruptible," it seems that it mustnecessarily be a simple body, not one composed of matter and form.20

And since the celestial body is a certain individual being that exists inactuality and it possesses a definite shape — and all these attributesbelong to a body in virtue of matter and they belong to matter in virtueof form — it follows that this celestial body must be the matter of the

qua soul, can only have circular motion. Cf. Jandunus 40a, B-C.For a different argument establishing the first proposition, cf. above, n. 9. Forthe second argument, cf. above, n. 10.

15 Literally: "in the body that is neither heavy nor light."16 Literally: "in the body that is light or heavy."17 Jandunus (40a, B): "i.e., it is not its nature to be moved also by the motion of its

subject...."18 Cf. Physics VII, 1, 241b, 24-242a, 15.

The text of the Hebrew manuscripts reading yyunai r:a 'ifaa is difficult and Iaccepted the reading of the Latin versions. The text of the Hebrew manuscriptsand the phrase of which it forms a patt would have to be translated as: "for thecelestial element is undoubtedly composed of that which does not producemotion and that which is moved." Narboni comments on this text (172v, 2):yjrunn 'iton yjan tpwn jai sna 'iton svnnan trun p ,nxr, "i.e., the celestialelement is composed of a body that is moved but does not produce motion andof a soul that produces motion but is not moved."

19 Cf. De Caelo I, 3, 270a, 12-22.20 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 139 ff.

79

De Substantia Orbis

line 3i celestial living beings21 that move circularly in virtue of themselves, andthat this matter must be more perfect than the other kinds of matter.The reasons are that the celestial body is not subject to any of the laws ofpotentiality except that of potentiality in respect to place, and that it hasthe most noble kind of locomotion, namely, circular," just as it has themost noble and perfect kind of shape, namely, spherical."It has already been proved24 concerning the celestial forms that they donot subsist in the celestial bodies, for if they did, they would be moved invirtue of themselves accidentally, and would thus be in need ofsomething that is moved in reference to itself primarily and essentially.For it has been shown in the eighth book of the Physics25 that the thingsmoved in virtue of themselves and that are here below one essence inrespect to [their] species26 can undoubtedly be reduced to a being that is

21 Jandunus offers two reasons for maintaining that the celestial living beingspossess a kind of matter (40b, C-D): (1) the celestial bodies possess accidentsand all accidents require some matter as subject; (2) the celestial bodies moveand every motion requires some kind of matter.

22 Matter is classified in accordance with the type of motion it possesses. Aristotleshows that locomotion is the most noble kind of motion (Physics VIII, 7,261a,13-26), and that circular locomotion is the most noble kind of locomotion(Physics VIII, 9,265a, 13-266a, 9; DeCaelo 1,2,269a, 18-23), The celestial bodyhas only circular motion (De Caelo 1,2-3) and thus it has the most noble motion.Therefore, it has also the most noble kind of matter.

23 For the propositions that (1) the heavens are spherical, cf. De Caelo II, 4; (2) thespherical shape is the primary, i.e., the most perfect shape, cf. De Caelo II, 4,286b, 10-33.

24 Averroes demonstrates that the celestial forms do not subsist in the celestialbodies by showing that it is impossible for them to have accidental motion. Thislatter proposition is established, on the basis of passages from Aristotle'sPhysics, as follows: (I) the series of things moving and being moved must haveas its ultimate member something first moved, which moves essentially (PhysicsVIII, 5, 256b, 4-13); (2) this first moved must be composed of a mover andmoved (Physics VII, 1); (3) since the motion of the first moved is eternal, itsmover cannot be a power in a body (Physics VIII, 10); (4) therefore the moverof the first moved cannot be moved accidentally with the motion of its body.Aristotle proves the same proposition in a somewhat different manner inPhysics VIII, 6, 259b, 1-31.

25 Cf. previous note.26 r»3 Q"niDS»n ]K33 1K7X, quae sum hie una essentia in'specie. The literal

meaning of the Hebrew phrase is "which are here below essential [things] inrespect to [their] species." Both the Hebrew and the Latin are difficult, but sincethe Latin version seems to be better I based my translation on it. The meaning of

80

Chapter Two

moved in virtue of itself essentially. This being is composed of a mover ime 40and a first moved, and this mover " cannot possibly be a force in a body.It appears therefore that the forms of the celestial bodies, and, inparticular, the form of the most distant surrounding body,28 are in somerespects soul — namely, through the appetite in virtue of whichmovement comes upon them — and in some respects intellect." Andthis form is the simple first form in virtue of which the celestial livingbeing is composed of a mover and a moved. This is contrary to the caseof the sublunar living beings, for, in the case of the latter, it is clear thatthe mover belonging to them is in turn composed of two movers,namely, the soul and the object of its desire30 that exists apart from the

the phrase seems to be that the things here below, which are mentioned in thepresent passage, belong to the same species, that is, the species of living beings.This interpretation is based on a phrase occurring in Aristotle's discussion ofthe present problem. In Physics VIII, 6, 259b, 1-3 (cf. above, n. 24, end)Aristotle writes: 6puuEV 8e Kcti (pavepw? ovxa toiauTa fi KivEiauxa Sauxa, olovTO TCOV £uyux«v Kai xd xffiv £a>wv yivo$, "Further, it is evident from actualobservation that there are things that have the characteristic of movingthemselves, e.g., the animal kingdom and the whole class of living things."It is possible that the difficulty in the Hebrew and Latin texts arose from themistranslation of an underlying Arabic term. The Arabic ^ - i ! may mean Dxy(essentia) or ©S3 (anima). If this is the case, the original Arabic may havecontained a phrase equivalent to the Hebrew |'aa tfSJ 'VM JK33 lira, the Latinof which would be "quae sunt hie animalia specie."

27 run yjsn rr.T «bm, et quod Mud movens non sit. The text of the Hebrewmanuscripts reads: ...nxin nsmn irnn NVIPI, "and that this movement isnot "In accordance with the obvious requirements of the context I acceptedthe reading of the Latin version. The Hebrew translator probably misread anunderlying Arabic iljrf as £1^* . For similar misreadings, cf. above, chap. 1,n. 59.

28 I.e., the sphere of the fixed stars.29 Narboni (173r, 1) comments: 32> mpJ iax» ixai vsi runpi nwnn ixa run,

". . . in respect to its motion the form is called soul, and in respect to itself it iscalled intellect." This whole discussion is based on Metaphysics XII, 6-8;especially 7, 1072a, 19-I072b, 4. The main points of the passage in theMetaphysics are: the prime mover moves by being the object of thought andappetite; in the prime mover there is no real difference between thought and theobject of thought, nor between appetite and the object of appetite. Cf. below,chap. 4, n. 18.

30 pwnm, re desiderata. The text of the Hebrew manuscripts reads npwnmnppiniPan, "and a desire that desires." Since I could not find any interpretationfor this phrase, I accepted the reading of the Latin. It is probable that theunderlying Arabic term was JJin whose usual Hebrew translation is pwn.

81

DeSubstantia Orbis

line 45 soul and moves it.31 Therefore, in the case of the sublunar bodies, thatwhich is moved is composite, not simple.Thus the celestial body functions as matter for this incorporeal form,but it is a matter that exists in actuality. The celestial bodies, therefore,possess something resembling matter only insofar as they have anunderlying matter for the reception of form. Therefore, the term"subject" is more truly applied to them than the term "matter." n Thereason is that the sublunar matter is called by that name inasmuch as itis potentially the form that comes to be in it; but it is called "subject"inasmuch as it sustains the form and inasmuch as it is a part of thecomposite made up by it and the form.

Furthermore, it is evident that the form of the celestial element is not aprerequisite for the existence of its body, as is the case with the body ofthe sublunar living beings. For in the case of the sublunar living beings itis evident that their souls are a prerequisite for the existence of theirbodies, for these bodies would not continue to exist were it not that theyare preserved by the sensitive and imaginative soul." The celestial body,on the other hand — being simple, not changed by anything outside of it— does not require for its existence a sensitive or an imaginative soul. Itonly needs a soul that imparts to it locomotion, and a force that, beingneither a body nor existent in a body, imparts to it eternal duration and

Perhaps the Hebrew translator intended the term npplJHPB as an Arabism, thatis, as a Hebrew transcription of i$is«.

31 Cf. De Anima III, 10; especially 433a, 13-21, and 433b, 5-21.32 Aristotle does not distinguish sharply between the terms uXr|, "matter," and

CJIOKECHEVOV, "substratum" or "subject." In Metaphysics 1,3,983a, 29-30, hespeaks of "matter or substratum." InMetaphysicsXU, 2,1069b, 24-26 (cf. also,Metaphysics VIII, 4, 1044b, 3-8), he states that all things that change, whetherperishable or eternal, have matter, though different kinds. On the other hand, inMetaphysics VIII, 5, 1044b, 27-28, he allows matter only to those thingsadmitting of generation (yivcmq) and transformation into each other(ueTaftoXr) etc, SXXrjXa). In Physics I, 7, where Aristotle presents his generalanalysis of motion, the term "substratum" rather than "matter" is used.Averroes, in making the Aristotelian terminology more precise, distinguishesbetween two functions of matter: (1) something that underlies change; (2)something that serves as subject for the form. He calls the latter "subject," theformer "matter."

33 For the function of the sensitive soul, cf. De Anima III, 12,434a^ 27-434b, 8, and13-18. For the function of the imaginative soul, cf. De Anima III, 10, 433b,27-11, 434a, 10.

82

Chapter Two

eternal motion, that is, eternal in the sense of having no beginning and line 57no end.You should know" that the celestial body not only needs a force givingit continuous locomotion, but also a force imparting to it, with respect

34 In this paragraph and the succeeding one Averroes discusses the celestial formconsidered as an acting force ( ITCD rt3) in the celestial element. (For the term robyiD, cf. below, n. 38.) He establishes the following propositions concerning thisacting cause (force): (1) it gives the celestial body eternal existence; (2) itimparts to the celestial body all of its properties; (3) it exists in addition to themoving power of the heavens; (4) it is not temporally prior to its effect.In the present passage Averroes discusses the first of these propositions,namely, that the celestial form, functioning as an acting cause, impartscontinuous existence to its body. However, the following dilemma arisesconcerning this proposition: (1) since the celestial element is not subject togeneration and corruption, it appears that its body does not need a form givingit eternal existence, for it is eternal through itself; on the other hand, (2) sincethe body of the celestial element is of finite extension, and bodies having finiteextension can only have a finite activity, it appears that the celestial body is inneed of a form giving it continuous existence.

In our passage Averroes decides for the second of these alternatives, that is, thatthe form of the celestial element imparts continuous existence to its body.However, in the Long Commentary on Metaphysics (XII, com. 41, Arabic: p.1631, line 7-p. 1633, line 17; Latin: Vol. VIII, 324v, H-325r, B) he decides forthe first of these alternatives, namely, that the celestial body has continuousexistence through itself and that it does not need its form for its continuousexistence.The commentators try to resolve this difficulty. Jandunus explains that theacting cause produces eternal motion as if it were a final, not an efficient cause(41b, A-C): ".. . in substantiis sempitcrnis non est agens nisi secundumsimilitudinem, scilicet inquantum est forma conscrvans ut finis... Intellixit[Averroes] vero in praedictis locis caelum habere permanentiam ex seformaliter, non ab alio efficiente." Zimara, on the other hand, holds that theacting cause functions as an extrinsic principle that imparts to the celestial bodycontinuous existence (Solutiones contradictionum in dictis Averrois supersermone de substantia orbis. Vol. IX, 158v, b): "...bene tamen caelum habetprincipium extrinsecum dans sibi permanentiamacternam et conservans ipsumin suis dispositionibus necessariis et, si tale principium non csset, ita essct desubstantiis caeli, inquit Commentator hie, sicut de eius motu, et est locus istecxpressus contra Gregorium Arminensem, qui voluit aeterna et necessaria nonhabere causam efficientem."

It is clear, however, from the subsequent discussion that the celestial actingcause differs from the sublunar acting cause. For similar discussions of theeternal motion of the heavens and their eternal existence, cf. Hebrew text, chap.3, lines 38 ff., and chap. 5, lines 15 ff.

83

De Substantia Orbis

line 60 to itself and with respect to its substance, eternal duration. For, eventhough the celestial body is simple and has in itself no potentiality forcorruption, yet, since its dimensions are finite and since it is bounded byits surrounding surface, it is necessarily finite in its activity. Andeverything having this nature35—even though the intellect can conceiveit as existing in virtue of itself without something else imparting to itpermanence and continuity — necessarily requires, according to ouropinion, that just as its activity is finite so is its duration finite. It isnecessary, therefore, that the intellect of the celestial elements shouldpossess a power that imparts to the celestial body eternal duration justas it imparts to it its continuous motion. Not only this, but it is alsonecessary that there should exist a force that imparts to the celestialbody the motion appropriate to its activity, that is that one among themotions that is eternal, namely circular locomotion. And this forcemust also impart the shape proper to this motion, namely, the sphericalshape, as well as the measure proper to the activity of each sphere, sothat there becomes perfected from the activities of all these spheres oneactivity and this is the activity of the world in its totality. For as far asthe need for an acting force36 is concerned, there is no differencebetween a simple body having a certain description and a bodycomposed of simple bodies having a certain description, and it makesno difference whether this body is generated or not.37 We see thereforethat the heavens have a power that not only moves the universe but thatalso makes it eternal, acts upon it and preserves it, this being similar tothe case of the human body or any body that acts in virtue of a proper

35 Jandunus (41a, D): "...quod est finitae magnitudinis et virtutis in agendo,"" . . . which is of finite magnitude and of finite power in respect to its activity."

36 For the distinction between an acting force (ViriD m) and a moving force (nsyj»), see below, n. 38.

37 mna v t o IN mna, generatum et non generatum. To yield the required meaning"generated" and "not generated" the Hebrew would have to be the ratherunusual pual rnina vbz IK nrtna. This might, however, once again be a case inwhich the Hebrew translator took an underlying passive i)j£i (generatum) or'£)j£u as the active j j ^ * (generans). If the latter should be the case, thetranslator intended the Hebrew to be read as rnina Ti^a IK mina. For similarcases, cf. above, chap. 1, n. 59.

84

Chapter Two

end. The reason is that an end necessarily points to an agent bringing line 72about this end, just as a motion points to a mover."However," in the class of things that have to each other the relation ofan agent to that upon which this agent acts, there are those members inwhich the agent is temporally prior to that upon which it acts. This caseapplies to all the beings dispersed throughout the sphere of the world.Then again, in the class of things that have to each other the relation ofan agent to that upon which this agent acts, there are those members inwhich both the agent and that upon which it acts are by nature prior totime.40 This case applies to the celestial sphere that possesses time assomething subsequent to it and as one of its accidents,41 and it alsoapplies to the celestial agent,42 that is to say, that agent that is peculiar to

38 Averroes distinguishes between two forces producing motion: (1) an actingforce (^JriD; agens) that brings something to a determined end; and (2) amoving force (y>:a; movens) that acts without regard to an end.The form of the heavens acts in a two-fold capacity: as a moving force itimparts to the heavens locomotion and as an acting force it makes them eternal,preserves them and leads them to their proper end. For all this, cf. Jandunus41c, H.Jandunus (4 Id, E) introduces a distinction between the agent of the celestialbodies and that of the terrestrial ones. In the terrestrial bodies the agent bringsabout the end, while in the celestial bodies, in which the end already exists, theagent only acts to preserve this end. Cf. above, n. 34, and below, n. 45.

39 Having shown that the heavens possess not only a moving force but also anacting force, Averroes proceeds to describe this acting force more fully. Hedistinguishes between an agent that is temporally prior to that upon which itacts and one that is contemporaneous with that upon which it acts. The celestialacting force is a force of the second kind.

40 pin V» S3O3 imp. The Hebrew text is in harmony with the subsequent passagein which Averroes shows that since time is subsequent to the celestial body andto the celestial agent, this agent cannot be temporally prior to that upon which itacts, that is, the celestial agent is contemporaneous with the celestial body. Themajority of the Latin texts read "prius natura," thus indicating that the priorityof the celestial agent to the celestial body is a priority "according to nature" not"according to time." For this distinction, cf. Aristotle, Categories 12, andMetaphysics V, 11.

41 Since time is "the number of motion in respect to before and after" (Physics IV,II, 220a, 24-26), it is an accident in the category of quantity. But an accidentcannot be prior to that of which it is an accident. Therefore, since time is anaccident of the celestial body, it cannot be prior to this body.

42 Since the celestial agent imparts motion to the celestial body, thereby impartingtime to it, it is by nature prior to time; it follows from this that the celestial agentcannot be temporally prior to the celestial sphere.

85

De Substantia Orbis

ine 76 the celestial sphere for imparting the dispositions and attributes41 thatare required for the existence of that end that exists because of them.Since people do not know that this is one of Aristotle's opinions they saythat he does not speak of the acting cause of the universe, only of itsmoving cause. This is the height of ignorance. There is, however, nodoubt that its acting cause is identical with its moving cause, for theforce that moves the universe with its proper motion is identical withthat force that first bestows upon it those dispositions and properties invirtue of which the universe has the motion proper to this force. AndAristotle has repeatedly discussed this in many places44 of his booV.DeCaelo. And it seems that this force is more exalted and higher than theheavens.45 Diligence in explaining these matters has made us prolong thedigression from our subject, this subject being the procedure that is tobe followed in explaining the nature of the celestial body, the relation of

Narboni (173r, 1) and Jandunus (41d, F-G) correctly interpret this passage tomean that Averroes denies here that God is temporally prior to the world, thatis, he denies creation in time. On the other hand, Toledanus (p. 160, lines 8 ff.)distinguishes between God, the mover of the first sphere, and the movers of theother spheres, and applies the present passage to the celestial movers other thanGod. According to Toledanus God is, however, temporally prior to the world.Narboniwrites(173r, 1): DTip ,p©nn xim ,Vi»Dm , Kn Kim ."jyisn©uaai ,nxT]mn naa •]•&& xbv xVi jaia irmrr YISDHW KV .ptn by »3D3, ". . .and there aresome things acting and acted upon, so that the agent, i.e., God, and the thingacted upon, i.e., His abode [the world], are by nature prior to time, and thus thething acted upon is not temporally posterior to the agent and it is not true thattime does not follow from it."

43 Time is the primary attribute that Averroes has in mind.44 mpan m nViT3. Literally: "in another place." I accepted the Latin "in multis

locis" as a better reading, but I did not change the Hebrew text. Averroes doesnot seem to have a specific passage in mind.

45 Jandunus (42a, A): "...sicut causa est nobilior suo effectu," "...just as thecause is more exalted than its effect."The agent of the celestial bodies is more noble than these bodies because theagent has no motion while the heavens do have motion. Cf. De Caelo II, 12,292a, 22-24; 292b, 4-6, 10-23; 292b, 28-293a, 4. The nature of the celestialagent is described by Jandunus as follows (42a, A-B): "And it always has to bementioned that this first principle is the acting cause of the heavens... not as acause bringing them into existence, but as a form that preserves them andfunctions as an end for the sake of which they exist and have perfection. Butwhether this first principle moving the heavens belongs to the genus of efficientor final cause is a special question." Cf. above, nn. 34 and 38.

86

Chapter Two

which to the heavens46 is like the relation of body to animal. Let us now imc 84return to our subject.We maintain then that the celestial and the transient bodies have thefollowing factors in common: both possess three dimensions, both havea substance recipient of the dimensions, and both kinds of bodies arenever free from dimensions. However, we find that the substanceunderlying the indeterminate dimensions,47 as well as the dimensionsbelonging to that body48 that is common to all transient bodies, are onein number potentially,4' not one in number actually, that is to say theindeterminate dimensions common to all transient bodies are one innumber potentially and likewise the substance that underlies thesedimensions is [one in number potentially]. And all transient bodiesshare this body that is numerically one. All this follows50 from the

46 I.e., to the heavens in their totality. The heavens, analogous to the terrestrialliving beings, are composed of a body and a soul. As the subsequent passageshows, the nature of the celestial body is established by comparing it to thenature of the body of terrestrial living beings.

47 I.e., "prime matter."48 The term "body" refers to "prime matter".49 Narboni (173v, 1): DniK naa nan .'jro niK'sai 'Vpn xin nna nsona irm ,nxT

la nny wnv> inn Vn .ptwnn 'Vvnn p Vm p^na Trr pa man IK IT irm iia nvran,"[Prime matter] is numerically one insofar as it is matter and some one thingexisting in potentiality. And the substantial forms exist potentially in this primematter either insofar as one follows the other or insofar as many of them existtogether in a large part of prime matter, i.e., insofar as these forms do not nowexist in it."

50 The proof offered in the following passage establishes that the body underlyingsubstantial change must exist in potentiality. Three possibilities are considered:(I) there exists one body in actuality; (2) there exist many bodies in actuality;(3) there exists one body in potentiality. The first and second possibilities areproved to be false, therefore the third must be true. The rejection of the first twopossibilities is based on the following arguments:First Possibility: If the subject of changing elements were one in actuality, thena change of form would be an accidental change. Aristotle, however, has shownthat a change of form must be a substantial change. Therefore, the subjectcannot be one in actuality.Second Possibility: If we assume that in a given change both the body that isdestroyed and that which comes to be exist in actuality, then at some timeduring that change the body that is changed would completely cease to exist.Thus the second body would come to be from nothing. This, however, iscontrary to the principle "ex nihilo nihil fit."

87

De Substantia Orbis

line 92 observation that the body that is one in species31 passes from one formto another and from one set of dimensions to another, this second setdiffering in actuality from the first. An example is provided by thetransformation of the body possessing the form air into that possessingthe form fire. Now if this body, common to the form air and fire, werenumerically one in actuality, then the form would be an accident. And ifthe body receiving the form fire and that receiving the form air wereactually two, it would follow that when one of these bodies istransformed into the other, the attribute of corporeity would beremoved from the body that is destroyed. This body would then becomenon-body and the new corporeity would have to come from non-body.This is absurd. It follows therefore that the sublunar bodies have acommon corporeal nature.52

We must also ask53 whether these indeterminate dimensions and theirsubject are one or many and, if they are one, whether they arepotentially or actually one, and, if they are many, whether they areactually or potentially many. As has been shown, their nature requiresus to lay down that they are potentially one and many.54

It has been shown that, since the sublunar bodies are transient, they arecomposed of a substance existing in potentiality55 and of dimensions inpotentiality56 settled upon this substance. It has furthermore been

51 I.e., the body composed of prime matter and corporeal form.52 The concluding statement of this proof is insufficient as it stands. It is to be

proved that the common nature of the sublunar bodies exists in potentiality, notthat there exists an underlying nature. Jandunus in his commentary (42b, D)adds the omitted statement. He writes: "ex quo concludit, quod necesse est iliacorpora, qua adinvicem transmutantur, habere naturam corporalem com-munem, ita quod sint eadem in potentia et non in actu...."

53 The following paragraph presents difficulties of interpretation. It has just beenshown that the indeterminate three dimensions and their subject, prime matter,are one in potentiality. Thus, there seems to be no need to ask again whetherthey are one in actuality or potentiality. Only one new point is established in thisparagraph, namely, that they are also many in potentiality.

54 Jandunus (42c, F): "it [prime matter] is one in potentiality insofar as it is someone thing that lacks all forms, and it is many in potentiality insofar as it iscapable of having different [substantial] forms."

55 Jandunus (42c, F): "i.e., prime matter."56 Jandunus (42c, G): " . . . which are in potentiality toward different boundaries

and become actual through different forms."

88

Chapter Two

shown that when this body, which is one in potentiality and matter in line 103potentiality, becomes actualized, it becomes matter in actuality. Fromthis follows Aristotle's saying that matter does not exist in actualityexcept insofar as it is visible," just as form does not exist5S except insofaras it is intelligible.Since the celestial body, on the other hand, does not undergo alteration,it must necessarily be composed of a substance in actuality and ofdimensions in actuality. Therefore, it is neither generated norcorruptible. All this being as we have described, it follows that thecelestial body is the matter that receives the celestial form in the mannerthat has been proved to be proper to this matter. I mean to say, that thecelestial matter agrees with the transient matter in some respect and itdiffers from it in some. And both kinds of matter agree in that they arematter insofar as they are visible and insofar as they possess a power forlocomotion, but they differ in that the celestial body does not have thatpotentiality for alteration that is proper to the substances existing in thetransient body.

57 This statement appears to be based on Metaphysics XII, 3, 1070a, 9-10, whereAristotle writes: oijoiai 5£ ipsti;, rj u£v 0Xr| T<5SE TI ofiaa 1(5 (paiveaOai...,"There are three kinds of substance: matter which is a 'this' in virtue of beingapparent "Averroes' text of this passage reads -.a* t r " 1 * * * ^ «Ul» &-\jl\ Ul i& jijJAj.. . ^ U ,j>Je, "Substantiae autem sunt tres: una autem est materia et est hocsecundum quod videtur...," "But substances are three: one is matter and it is a'this' [lit. this thing] in virtue of being visible..." (Long Commentary onMetaphysics XII, t. H.Arabic: p. 1466,lines 2-3; Latin: Vol. VIII, 299v,L). Inhis commentary Averroes interprets this passage to mean that prime matter isnot visible in itself, but it is visible only after it has become actualized by asubstantial form. His text reads: j» j^iJI li* ^j *X>5 <&-* ty^i '•*•* J^J

\s\j \f\

\ J J J» "ill if~j U C- J j

"Et secundum hoc erit intentio eius, quod dixit est hoc secundum quodvidetur, i.et est ilia cuius esse non est nisi secundum quod sentitur, i. propter illud quo fitsensibilis: et haec est forma. Materia enim non est sensibilis per se, sed peraliud, i. per formam et non habet esse, nisi quia sentitur per aliud non per se, estenim ens per illud quod sentitur..." (Long Commentary on Metaphysics XII,com. 14, Arabic: p. 1475, lines 1-7; Latin: Vol. VIII, 300r, C).

58 The Latin texts V ,1 ,j? add: "in actu".

89

De Substantia Orbis

ime ii3 In a like manner it has been shown concerning the celestial bodies thattheir forms agree with those of the transient bodies in some respect andthat they differ from them in some other.5' On the basis of thisconsideration the sublunar being composed of body and soul and thetranslunar one composed of body and soul are each called "livingbeing" not in an equivocal sense, but in the sense of those terms that arepredicated of different things according to priority and posteriority.60

59 Jandunus comments (42d, G): "It has been shown previously that the moversof the celestial bodies agree with the souls of the terrestrial animals in that[both] movers impart locomotion to their respective bodies.... But the celestialand the terrestrial bodies differ in that the celestial souls are not sustained inbeing by their bodies, nor do these souls impart being to their bodies. Thus, thecelestial animals are composed of a subject in actuality and of souls, or movers,in actuality, while the sublunar animals are composed of souls and of a subjectthat exists in potentiality."

60 mrPKi nanp>2 nnaMii mown ja bM D©n t\avn v.b, non eguivoce... sedsecundum prius et posterius. Since the majority of the Hebrew manuscripts hasb2X, which implies a missing xb, and, since the majority of the Latin texts hasnon... sed, the present reading was accepted.It is, however, possible to find a meaning for the text of the other Hebrewmanuscript and Latin x, which have nanpa Dnaiun mawn ja b-\ am iimwTirrw, "equivoce, scilicet, secundum prius et posterius." To understand thisphrase, it is to be noted that predication "according to equivocation" occurs intwo ways: (1) "according to absolute equivocation" (T18J «yintP3); and (2)"according to 'generic' equivocation." In the first case the terms comparedhave only the name in common, in the second they have some other similarity.In the second case, equivocation is subdivided into kinds, and one of these is"amphibolous" predication. A subdivision of the latter is predication"according to priority and posteriority." In the light of this meaning of theterm, the present passage, in its alternative version, is to be translated as " . . . inan equivocal sense, I have in mind, [the kind of equivocation] contained interms predicated 'according to priority and posteriority.'"According to either version of the passage, Averroes argues that the term"living being" is predicated of celestial and terrestrial substances according topriority and posteriority. However, in other passages (cf. above, chap. 1, n. 6),he seems to hold that terms are predicated of celestial and terrestrial substancesaccording to absolute equivocation.

The two senses of predication "according to equivocation" emerge fromMaimonides' discussion in his Treatise on the Art of Logic, chap. 13, where he

writes: ...«S3Lll t ^ j . . . i l l ^ l W l &ji£l\ V* 'r1-*1 '""* H * - ^ - ^ ^...o'poioa nnai ....iiai «iinw o'sruwan nna ,0'f^n iV lpVrp D'onnwan mawm"Terms predicated according to' [generic] equivocation are divided into sixclasses, among them terms predicated according to complete equivocation,....according to amphibolous predication..." (Arabic: [ed. Tiirker], p. 59, lines

90

Chapter Two

It is necessary therefore in natures of this kind that the prior one is the line 116cause of the posterior," as has already been stated about this nature inanother place. In an analogous manner, things of which the term"warm" is predicated differ according to increase and diminution andaccording to stronger and weaker.62 Thus it has been shown in thistreatise that the heavens are composed of matter and form as are thesublunar animals. And it has been explained in what way the translunarand sublunar forms agree and in what way they differ. It has also beenshown how the ultimate mover of the celestial body differs from the lastmover of the terrestrial ones.63 Therefore, it remains for us to consider inwhat way the two genera of accidents, namely, the passive and the non-passive, agree and in what way they differ.We maintain that the celestial and terrestrial bodies differ in respect tothe passive nature, called alteration, and that they agree in thoseaccidents the change of which does not produce an alteration in theirunderlying substance. For it seems that this alteration, inasmuch as itinvolves a change in the substance of the transformed body, is peculiarto those bodies the substance of which is intermingled with apotentiality, that is, to the transient bodies.64 However, those accidents,the change of which does not involve an alteration in the substance ofthe underlying subject, are common to the celestial and the terrestrialbodies.The first ones of the common accidents are locomotion, andtransparency and non-transparency, as well as those qualities to whichthe latter accidents are subsequent — I have in mind the rare qualities

12,18-19, [ed.Efros], p. 35, lines 19-20; Hebrew: [ed.Efros],p.57,lines3-4,p.94, lines 6-8, and p. 124, lines 19-20; English: p. 59). Cf. Averroes, Epitome otIsagoge, chap. 1, Hebrew: pp. 2v-3r; Latin: Vol. I, 2b, 36v, I-37r, E.

61 The two natures differ according to priority and posteriority. Priority, which ispredicated in many ways (cf. Metaphysics V, 11; Categories 12), is predicated inthis instance according to cause and effect (Categories 12, 14b, 10 ff.).

62 For the "ambiguous" predication of the term "heat" as referring to fire andother hot objects respectively, cf. Wolfson, Harvard TheologicalReview, XXXI,p. 161, lines 3-4. It seems to me that the terms "stronger" and "weaker" areequivalent to the terms "primary" and "subsequent" discussed by Wolfson, op.cil., p. 157, line 3-p. 158, line 17; p. 166, line 32-p. 167. line 20.

63 I.e., how the celestial and terrestrial souls differ.64 That the celestial bodies cannot undergo alteration is shown in De Caelo I, 3,

270a, 25-35.

91

De Substantia Orbis

line 130 and the dense qualities — for it seems that density and rarity are thecause of transparency .and non-transparency. Yet, even though thecelestial and terrestrial bodies have the attributes of rarity andtransparency in common,63 these terms are predicated of the two bodiesin respect to priority and posteriority, as is the Case with the predicationof "corporeity" which exists in both of them."In an analogous manner67 the celestial and terrestrial bodies haveluminosity and opacity in common. In this latter case, however, it ismore nearly correct to assert that these terms are predicated accordingto equivocation, rather than according to priority and posteriority. Forwe observe that, here below, light is generated in the simple, fiery,transparent body existing within the concavity of the lunar sphere onlywhen this fiery element acts on a heavy and dense body.68 On the otherhand, it seems that the cause of the luminosity of the parts of thecelestial bodies, that is, the stars, is the density of that particular part ofthe celestial sphere occupied by the star that is transparent in actuality.And that the stars are the dense part of the celestial sphere becomes evenmore apparent through the density existing in the planets69 which, as a

65 Narboni (178v,2): DVapai mvsom rvu'Don .nxv, "i.e., rarity and transparencyand their respective contrary."

66 The term "corporeity" is predicated of celestial and terrestrial bodies accordingto priority and posteriority, one of the kinds of amphibolous predication. Cf.,however, Hebrew text, chap. 3, line 103 (and above, chap. 1, n. 8), whereAverroes holds that the term is predicated according to equivocation.

67 The argument in the following passage is somewhat obscure. Averroes tries toshow that the terms "luminosity" and "opacity" cannot be predicatedambiguously, i.e., according to priority and posteriority, but that they must bepredicated equivocally. The crux of the argument is that celestial and terrestrialluminosity and opacity are produced in entirely different ways. Thus, accordingto the implied argument, the two terms cannot be predicated as cause and effect,nor can they be predicated according to any of the other predications accordingto priority and posteriority. Thus they must be predicated according toequivocation, Averroes' argument is based on the following considerations:celestial light is a property of the celestial body, while terrestrial light is aproduct of the interaction of fire with a dense body. Celestial transparency is aproperty of the celestial body, while terrestrial transparency exists in actualityonly in the presence of light.

68 The light of the element fire becomes visible only when fire acts in a dense, i.e.,earthy and opaque body. When fire is unmixed and in its proper place it istransparent. Cf.'Jandunus, 43c, E.

69 Literally: "stars."

92

Chapter Two

result of this density, eclipse one another, and the most obvious imc 138evidence is provided by what occurs in the case of the moon.70 Since thedifference between the stars and their spheres has been made clear, it isevident that the stars and the substance of the heavens are of one natureand this is a proposition on which all the ancients agreed, as Aristotlerelates in the De Caelo.11 The celestial body, according to this opinion, istransparent in actuality in virtue of itself, this being contrary to the caseof the transparent bodies here below, which are transparent in actualityonly at a time when light is present. "And the parts of the celestial bodiesdiffer in respect to transparency and non-transparency, so that there isgenerated in them something like color, an example of this being theMilky Way.73 And since it is apparent in the case of the moon that it isdense and dark by its very nature and that it receives its light fromanother planet, namely, the sun, Aristotle asserts concerning it in thebook De Animalibus n that its nature is generically more like the nature

70 ni nKT© an nxiaa i n n ,nxp Qnxp onnpa vn pVi Q'asiaa nwx 'laynn nxnj nnnV2. This passage is linguistically difficult, but its meaning is clear. Havingstated that the luminosity of the stars is the result of the density of the part of thecelestial sphere in which the star is found, Averroes now marshals additionalevidence that the stars are the dense portion of their respective sphere.Planetary eclipses and, even more, lunar eclipses provide evidence that the starsare the dense portion of their spheres. For if this were not the case, eclipsescould not take place. The Latin texts have the easier reading: ". . .et hocapparet in stellis, quae eclipsant se adinvicem, et hoc bene apparet in luna."

71 It seems that Averroes has two Aristotelian passages in mind: (I) that thecelestial bodies and their spheres are of the same element. Cf. De Caelo II, 7,289a, 11-19 (cf. also commentaries adloc); (2) that the ancients believed thatthere exists an element different from the four elements. Cf. De Caelo 1,3,270b,1-25.

72 A transparent body in the sublunar sphere is not transparent of itself—forexample, air in a dark room—but it becomes transparent in the presence oflight. On the other hand, the heavenly element is transparent in actuality invirtue of itself.

73 (hi»Via. The Hebrew text retains the original Arabic term t£\ • This Arabicterm occurs in Saadia's Kitab al-Amdnat, p. 19, line 1, and Ibn Tibbontranslates it as nYiinn. Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Ubersctzungen, p. 139, n.229; also p. 186, n. 576.

74 Steinschneider points out that in Arabic and Hebrew philosophy this titleincludes the Historia Animalium, the De Partibus Animalium, and the DeGeneratione Animalium. Cf. Steinschneider, Hebraische Obersetzungen, p. 143,n. 67, beginning.

93

De Substantia Orbis

line 146 of earth than like that of the other stars.75 And it seems that the celestialbodies differ quantitatively in respect to rarity and density, both ofwhich are the cause of luminosity and opacity, even though opacityexists only in the moon.76 According to my opinion, the problem of theluminosity of the celestial bodies must be understood in accordancewith this explanation.Calefaction is another accident that the celestial and the terrestrialbodies have in common. And Aristotle noticed that the celestial bodiesdo not produce heat insofar as they are hot, but they produce heat invirtue of the velocity of their motion. He supports this proposition by anargument taken from the observation of a missile. For when a missile isshot, its lead melts.77 And Aristotle states in the Metaphysics that it is notnecessary for an accident to produce another accident like itself —either in species or genus — as it is necessary in the case of the qualitiesthat are substances. The commentators observed a second calefactorycause in the stars besides their fast motion, namely, luminosity. Theynoticed that light, insofar as it is light, is perceived to produce heat uponbeing reflected. They saw, furthermore, that the ability to produce heatthrough reflection of its light is not an accident peculiar only to fire, forit is an accident common to the celestial bodies and to fire. And fromwhat has been said concerning the calefactory action of celestial and

Jandunus in the commentary (43d, G) refers to iheDe Generatione Animalium. Icould not locate the passage.

75 Jandunus (43d, F-G): "... it is to be noted that the moon differs from the otherstars in that it has light, less in virtue of itself, more in virtue of another planet[the sun]; so that, just as earth is the lowest one of the elements, so the moon isthe lowest one of the planets, inasmuch as it is more opaque than the rest."There has also been raised a question whether the moon has light in virtue ofitself at all. I think that this question is a weak one. Since the moon, when it isnot illumined by the sun on the face which is toward us, is still seen by us, it mustbe that this occurs in virtue of the moon's own light."

76 Jandunus (43d, G): "...the Commentator writes: 'The cause of the spot(macula) in the moon is a difference in the parts of the moon in respect to rarityand density. Thus one part of the moon is rare and does not receive light fromthe sun in the same way in which the other part receives it. And these latter partsmake a certain figure in the surface of the moon, because of which the moonappears dark.'"

77 Cf. De Caelo II, 7, 289a, 19-35; also De Caelo, ed. Loeb Classical Library, p.180, n. a.

-94

Chapter Two

terrestrial bodies,78 [it follows] that it is not far-fetched to maintain that line 158the term "calefaction" is predicated equivocally of these two bodies, theevidence being that their actions differ. For the calefactory action of firedamages and destroys things — especially the kind of fire whichproduces light — while the calefactory action of the celestial bodiesproduces generation and bestows vegetative and animal life. This is thereason that there are two kinds of calefaction: that which is a passivequality changing the substance of the subject in which it inheres," andthat which is not a passive quality.80 The case of calefaction is akin to thecase of transparency and non-transparency, that is, there is the kind oftransparency and non-transparency that is the result of a passive qualityand there is the kind that is not.And since the statements of those who in former times investigated theactivities of the stars have been verified, namely, that some stars impartheat and dryness, some heat and moisture, some cold and moisture, andsome cold and dryness, it follows that these four qualities that thecelestial bodies and the four elements have in common are predicatedequivocally or according to priority and posteriority.81

And it seems that the celestial bodies impart to us here below heat, whilethey themselves are not hot, for it is not necessary that the agentproducing a certain accident be described by the same term as theaccident that it produces. Thus, for example, not everything producingmotion must necessarily be moved, nor must something producing

78 ma nnS'tP nam. This phrase may be interpreted in two ways: (1) it may refer towhat has been said generally about the calefactory action of celestial andterrestrial bodies, or (2) it may refer to what has been said in the precedingdiscussion. In the former case the reference would be to the arguments whichAverroes lists in the succeeding sentences. In the latter case the reference wouldbe to the argument which appears at the beginning of the present paragraph,namely, that the celestial body produces heat without itself being hot.

79 This kind of heat is aproperty of fire and thus occurs only in the sublunar world.80 This is the kind of heat that fire and the celestial elements have in common.81 Iirrn3i nn'ipai. The Latin texts have the disjunctive aut (IK) secundum prius el

posierius, which seems to be preferable. The problem is whether these qualitiesare predicated "equivocally" or "according to priority and posteriority." Theanswer seems to be that these qualities are predicated "equivocally" sinceAverroes shows (Hebrew text, lines 186-187) that they are not predicatedaccording to priority and posteriority.

95

De Substantia Orbis

line 172 blackness be black. And most accidents exist in this manner.82 Thesestatements are evident from the following proof: if something alteredwere the result of something else altered and if something hot were theproduct of another hot thing and the series went on to infinity, therewould not exist something first altered. But something first altered mustexist, just as it is necessary in the case of motion that there exists a firstmoved.83 It is necessary, therefore, that the series of altered thingsshould come to an end with something causing alteration, which itself isnot altered, just as in the case of moved things the series must come to anend with something producing motion, which itself is not moved.However, the difference between motion and alteration is that in thecase of locomotion the series cannot possibly come to an end withsomething moving itself, for everything moved of itself has a moverother than itself, while in the case of alteration the series can come to anend with something producing alteration in virtue of a prior, uncauseddescriptive predicate belonging to it. The beings having this latterproperty are undoubtedly the celestial bodies.84

But85 this prior descriptive predicate in the celestial body can belong

82 For other discussions of dissimilarities between cause and effect, cf. Algazali,Tahdfut al-Falasifah, XVII (ed. Bouyges, p. 282; trans. Hyman, p. 285), also inAverroes, Tahdfut al-Tahafut XVII (ed. Bouyges, p. 525; trans. Van den Bergh,I, 321, and notes, vol. II, 180); Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, I, 53(Arabic: p. 81; Hebrew: p. 76a; English: p. 120).

83 Cf. Physics VII, 1, 242a, 15 ft".; VIII, 5, 257a, 31 ff. Cf. also Metaphysics II, 2.84 The difference between locomotion and alteration is that in locomotion the first

mover is separate from its body, while in alteration that which first alters is aproperty inhering in the celestial body. The latter property does not presupposea prior cause existing apart from the celestial body.

85 Having shown in the previous passage that alteration in terrestrial bodies isreducible to something first altered in the celestial body, Averroes now showsthat the alteration of the celestial body and that of the terrestrial one do notbelong to the same genus. Thus the term "alteration" cannot be predicated ofthe two bodies according to priority and posteriority but it must be predicatedequivocally of them. In this passage Averroes seems to imply that thingspredicated according to priority and posteriority belong to the same genus. Inother passages he seems to maintain that things predicated according to priorityand posteriority cannot belong to the same genus. See above, chap. 1, n. 6, andchap. 2, n. 60.It seems to me that the term "genus" is not used in the present passage in itsstrict sense but that it refers to the factor common to things predicated

96

Chapter Two

either to the same genus as the property it produces in another body or it line isocan belong to a different genus. Thus, by way of an example of the lattercase, the property of calefaction that the celestial bodies have towardthe terrestrial ones is a nature that is neither hot nor cold, just as themotion of the celestial body takes place according to a nature that isneither heavy nor light. This is the most obvious statement concerningthe celestial bodies, but God knows86 the proof thereof proceeds asfollows: since these four terrestrial qualities produce and undergoaction in virtue of some quality apart from themselves, their series mustundoubtedly come to an end with qualities that act, but do not undergoaction. And it appears most likely and most proper that these terrestrialqualities are not reducible to qualities belonging to their own genus, noteven if it were laid down that these qualities are predicated of thecelestial and terrestrial bodies according [to the kind of "generic"predication that is said to be according] to priority and posteriority,87

for it would necessarily follow that something not passive would belongto the genus of passive qualities. And this is far-fetched. And from thisdiscussion it is evident that fire, being passive, is not the first calefactoryelement,88 but it is necessary that the first calefactory element shouldproduce heat by means of qualities that are not passive,89 in the same

according to priority and posteriority. This type of predication is distinguishedfrom equivocal predication, which refers to a sameness of name only.

86 V1V Vsm. This phrase, absent from the Latin version, reflects such commonKoranic phrases as: Ll£ i j l j «Ul o j . . . "...verily, Allah is embracing(omnipresent); knowing" (2:109); £Je £ * i iiT !)\... "...verily, Allah ishearing, knowing" (2:177); £-&• Lii'Mj ... "...and Allah is knowing, wise"(9:15).

87 Literally: "and if they were laid down to be predicated according to priorityand posteriority." Averroes wants to establish that the four qualities—warm,cold, wet, and dry—are predicated of celestial and terrestrial bodies accordingto equivocation. To that end he shows that no predication implyingany kind ofsimilarity between these attributes in celestial and terrestrial bodies, not evenone according to priority and posteriority, can be applied to them jointly.

88 Since fire is one of the four terrestrial elements, and these four elements aresubject to generation and corruption, it follows that fire can undergo change.Since, however, all things that change can be reduced to an unchangingprinciple, it follows that fire cannot be the first calefactory principle. Thisargument is against those who maintain that the celestial bodies are composedof fire. Cf. Jandunus45a, C. For a different argument showing that the celestialbodies are not composed of fire, cf. De Caelo I, 2, 269b, 10-13.

97

De Substantia Orbis

line 189 manner as the first90 mover produces motion by means of a descriptivepredicate that does not undergo motion.In respect to this question our discussion has run the course of theproofs that have been written about these matters. And these proofs arebased upon principles that we have received from one who has given aperfect exposition of these subjects, namely, Aristotle, the son ofNicomachus. And since we have discussed these problems according tothe measure of understanding that our natural knowledge has attainedconcerning the divine things that are remote from our place, let us drawthe treatise to a close at this point. And let us rejoice in the wisdom thathas come to us concerning these honored matters more than we rejoicein the wisdom that has come to us concerning those things that are closeto us and that exist here with us. Though our wisdom concerning thethings of the sublunar sphere is prior to our knowledge of the things inthe celestial sphere, yet a little knowledge of that which is noble, andwhich is beloved by us, is of great value. And, perhaps, a small amountof knowledge concerning the celestial sphere is more worthy to be theobject of our choice than a large amount of knowledge concerningsublunar matters. May God bring us to human salvation and to theultimate perfection that can exist for us, for when one investigatesconcerning human perfection one finds this knowledge to be one of themost wonderful things. May God not place in us those impedimentswhich keep one from attaining this perfection, these impediments beingboth things existing within us and things assailing us from without."The treatise is completed by the attainment of that which was intended.Praise be to God, blessed be He.

89 The celestial bodies are the first heat-producers.90 ruPNin VJDn, primum movens. I supplied the missing word VUPXin from the

Latin version, since this is obviously what Averroes had in mind.91 A similar phrase occurs in the Guide of the Perplexed, I, 68, end, where

Maimonidcs, describing the intellect of God, states: ^YtxVx \S rf? p'XS xVl...inViTa xVl iDxyn x1? mu>nn p lb yjin ytn -. HTJ p x"?i nnxi p x*7.".. .and thereis no impediment cither proceeding from its essence or from another that mighthinder His apprehending."

98

CHAPTER THREE

It has been shown' that the celestial bodies are composed of that which line imoves and that which is moved, and that the celestial mover does notinhere in its body2 in the manner of the other things moved in virtue ofthemselves.3 The proof thereof is found at the end of the eighth book ofthe Physics* where it is explained that the motion with which thecelestial body is moved is eternal, not transient. And from thisproposition it is demonstrated there, that the celestial mover cannot bea force inhering in the body that is moved by it, as is the case with thesublunar beings that are moved in virtue of themselves, that is, the livingbeings. By this I mean to say that the movers of the sublunar livingbeings are forces within bodies.All this can be proved once two premises have been laid down. One ofthem is that every force within matter is finite in motivity, the other, thatthe force in the celestial body is infinite in its motivity. From thesepremises it follows that the force in the celestial body is immaterial.

1 It is demonstrated in the succeeding section (Hebrew text, lines 1-23) that themover of the celestial body is incorporeal. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 13Off.Averroes' argument, which is based primarily on Aristotle's discussion in BookVIII of the Physics, proceeds as follows:First Premise: Every corporeal force produces a finite motion (Hebrew text,line 7).Second Premise: The force moving the celestial bodies produces an infinitemotion (Hebrew text, line 8).Conclusion: Therefore, the force moving the celestial bodies is incorporeal(immaterial) (Hebrew text, lines 8-9).Having set down this proof, Averroes offers one proof in support of the secondof its premises (Hebrew text, lines 9-11) and two proofs in support of the first ofits premises (Hebrew text, lines 11-15 and 16-23).

2 DB>J 'nVa D3 y:nm. Literally: "and that the mover belonging to them is not abody." More precisely, this should read "the celestial mover is not a force in abody." Cf. Toledanus, p. 218, lines 14-15. The usual phrase is: nip Wr\ Kaoi vb(D Etta) fua ro K i (Dei) TU *6: DDJ 'D. Cf. Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed.II, 1; Arabic: p. 171, lines 8-9; Hebrew: p. 13b.

3 Jandunus comments (45b, B): "scilicet, in animalibus." The soul that movesthe heavens does not subsist in the celestial body in the same manner as the soulthat moves the sublunar living beings exists in its body. The celestial soul is not aforce inhering in a body.

4 Physics VIII, 7-10. For references to specific arguments, cf. the succeedingnotes.

99

De Substantia Orbis

line 9 Now, the proposition stating that the force in the celestial body isinfinite in its motivity is among the ones proved in the eighth book of thePhysics, and it is derived from the eternity of motion and the eternity oftime. As for the premise5 that states that every force in matter is finite, itis proved from the fact that every force in a body, which is the same as amaterial force, is self-evidently divisible by the division of its body andthis according to subtraction or addition.6 And since, as has been shownin the third book of the Physics,7 every body is finite, it is impossible thatan infinite force inheres in a finite body. This is clear throughinvestigation.In the eighth book of the Physics, Aristotle endeavored to prove thesame thing8 from fundamental principles already established by him

5 According to Toledanus (p. 219, lines 5-6) and Jandunus (45c, E), Averroesoffers two proofs for the proposition that every corporeal force produces afinite motion. Cf. above, n. 1. The first of these proofs is stated in the presentpassage (Hebrew text, lines 11-15), the second in the paragraph following it(lines 16-23). The first proof, in turn, can appear in two forms: (l)accordingto"addition" ('131; multitudd); or (2) according to "subtraction" (oiva;paucitas). Cf. below, n. 6.The first proof, the one according to "addition," proceeds as follows: everycorporeal force is divisible by division of its body. Thus, other factors beingequal, a larger body possesses a larger force than a smaller body. Furthermore,every body is finite and it is possible that for any given body one larger than itcan be conceived. Now, if it is assumed that there exists a finite body possessingan infinite force, it is possible to conceive a body larger than the given one. Theforce of this larger body would be larger than the force of the given smallerbody, that is, it would be larger than an infinite force. But the existence of aforce larger than an infinite force is impossible. Therefore, every corporealforce is finite (Jandunus, 45c, E).

6 'laim uiyaa. As indicated in the previous note, the proof contained in thepresent passage can proceed either according to "addition" (131) or accordingto "subtraction" (Bisn). In the proof according to "addition" a body isassumed to be added to a given body. The resultant larger body is thencompared to the given body (cf. above, n. 5). In the proof according to"subtraction" a given body is imagined to be divided into parts. The original,whole body is then compared to one of its parts. The proof according to"subtraction" proceeds in the same manner, mutatis mutandis, as the proofaccording to "addition."

7 Physics III, 5, 204a, 34-206a, 8.8 This is the second proof demonstrating that every corporeal force is finite (cf.

above, n. 1). It proceeds as follows: every motion takes place in time. Now, ifthere existed an infinite force in a finite body, this body would move in no time.

100

Chapter Three

before. This proof proceeds as follows: every motion takes place in ime 16time.' Now, if there existed an infinite force in a finite body it wouldnecessarily follow from this assumption that this body would be movedby its force in no time. For one body exceeds another one in respect tovelocity or retardation of motion only in virtue of an excess of materialmoving force, and an excess of force is subsequent upon an excess ofbodies,10 that is to say, the body with the greater force has the fastermotion. Therefore, if there existed'a body possessing an infinite force, itwould follow that this body would move in no time. But it has alreadybeen shown that every motion must take place in time, for in everymotion there is a prior and a posterior element, and the prior and theposterior elements are the parts of motion. "Thus a motion taking place

But motion in no time is impossible. Thus, an infinite force cannot inhere in afinite body.That an infinite force in a finite body would move this body in no time is provedas follows: if the given force of a body is assumed to increase, the velocity of thebody also increases while the time necessary to cover a given distance decreases.The larger the force the less the time. However, as long as the force is finite thetime is finite. If we now conceive a force larger than any given force, that is, aninfinite force, the corresponding time would have to be less than any given time,that is, no time.The proof of the proposition that every corporeal force is finite is based onPhysics VIII, 10,266a, 24-266b, 6. In setting forth his proof of this propositionAristotle examines and rejects two possible assumptions concerning an infinitecorporeal force. They are: (1) an infinite corporeal force moves its body in notime; or (2) it moves its body in some time. Averroes in the present passageconsiders only the first of Aristotle's alternatives.For a statement of Averroes' complete proof, as taken from his MiddleCommentary on Physics, cf. H. A. Wolfson, Crescas (text), pp. 266-270, Prop.XII, Part I.

9 Cf. Physics VI, 3, 234a, 24-234b, 9.10 D'amn riDtyn^ tavoi mron nDi»m, et excessus virtutum sequitur excessum

corporum. This phrase has no function in the present proof, since only acomparison of velocities and forces of bodies is involved, not one betweenforces and sizes of bodies. However, in the second part of Aristotle's proof, thatis, the one based on the assumption that an infinite corporeal force, moves itsbody in some time (cf. above, n. 8), a comparison of sizes and forces of bodies isrelevant. Perhaps Averroes had the two parts of the Aristotelian proof in mind,though in the present passage he makes use of only one part.

11 vpbn on. In place of this Hebrew phrase, the Latin texts and the Hebrew texts T0, V, have: "quae sunt in tempore," ]ST3 an, "which are elements existing intime."-

101

De Substantia Orbis

line 23 in no time is an impossible contradiction.12

All this is as we have stated. It has also been shown that the celestialbody is composed of that which moves and that which is moved, andthat that which moves does not subsist in that which is moved, nor doesit inhere in it, but that which moves is completely free from all matter.All this being so, would that I knew " whether that which is moved, thatis the celestial body, is composed of matter and form in the manner ofthe sublunar bodies that are moved in virtue of themselves by a firstmover in them — I refer to the bodies of living beings that are moved bya soul — or whether the celestial body is simple without possessing anyforce at all? M By force I mean a form through which the body attains acertain activity, this form being different from the already mentionedmotive form which does not subsist in the body, that is, different fromthe form that imparts to the body infinite motion and motivity.15

We affirm " that if it is accepted by us that every force in matter is finite

12 ptv KV •p'rn. Propositions containing a contradiction are divided into twokinds: (1) those false and impossible, and (2) those false but possible. Theformer propositions are false at all times, the latter are false at some time butmay become true at some other time. In his Epitome of De Interpretatione, chap.4, Averroes 'provides an example for each case: (1) of the contradictorypropositions "every man is an animal" and "not every man is an animal (someman is not an animal)," the former is necessarily true, the latter necessarily false,i.e. false and impossible; (2) of the contradictory propositions "every manwrites" and "not every man writes (some man does not write)," each may betrue or false at a given time. If it is false at a given time, it may possibly be true ata future time, i.e. it is false but possible at the given time. Cf. Hebrew: 1 lr, lines14-20; Latin: Vol. I, 2b, 42v, G-H. The source of this distinction appears to beDe Interpretatione. chap. 9, especially 19a, 23-19b, 4.

13 nsrcmi p* *n. For this expression, cf. Wolfson, Crescas, p. 565, n. 9.14 Averroes inquires whether the celestial body possesses a soul that inheres in it,

just as the bodies of the terrestrial living beings possess souls that inhere inthem. '

15 This question, as Averroes' answer shows, is occasioned by Avicenna's teaching' that the body of the celestial element is composed of matter and form.Disagreeing with Avicenna's opinion, Averroes argues that the celestial body issimple, i.e., not composed of matter and form. For a full discussion of thisproblem, cf. Wolfson, Crescas, Prop. X, Part II, p. 261 (text), and n. 24, pp. 594-598. Also cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 168 ff., and chap. 2, lines 26 ff.

16 Having shown that the form of the celestial element does not inhere in its body,Averroes now demonstrates—against Avicenna—that this body'in turncannot be composed of matter and form. The crux of the demonstration is thatthe celestial form is incorporeal, whether it is conceived as active or as passive.

102

Chapter Three

— and it makes no difference whether this force is active or passive, that line 31is, receptive " — and if it is true, as has been shown, that the celestialbody is capable of infinite movement, it follows necessarily that it is notcomposed of matter and form and that it is simple, that is to say, thecelestial body is a simple subject for the first mover, which is its form.18

For everything composed of form and matter is necessarily finite inrespect to its receptivity, just as it is finite in respect to movingsomething other than itself." Therefore, the peculiar property of thatwhich is moved in virtue of itself, namely, the celestial body, is that itsmover is not in matter and that that which is moved20 by this mover issimple, not composite.If we desire to affirm as true the premise we have set down, namely, thatin the case of every force in a body the motion that this force produces aswell as the motion that its body undergoes is finite, and if we accept atthe same time that the celestial body has a finite force apart from theforce which, neither existing nor inhering in it, moves it — this is as ifyou were to say with Avicenna that the motion of declination21 in virtue

17 For the distinction between active and passive powers, cf. Metaphysics V, 15,1021a, 14-19; IX, 1, 1046a, 16-29. This phrase contains an answer to anargument that Avicenna might advance in support of his view that the body ofthe celestial element is composed of matter and form. For Avicenna could saythat since the form of the celestial body is a force that receives a motion ofeternal duration from another force, it is a force infinite in respect to passivity.To this he could add that while a force infinite in activity cannot inhere in abody, one infinite in passivity can. Against this Avicennian argument Averroesmaintains that even a force that is infinite in respect to passivity cannot inhere ina body.

18 Jandunus(46a, B): "...that thebodyisonlyasimplesubjectforitsfirstmover,i.e., the mover imparts to it motion, but not existence (esse)."

19 Every material form, whether producing or undergoing (receiving) motion,must be finite in virtue of its inhering in matter. Thus, its receptivity as well as itsactivity must be finite. Since the celestial substances undergo infinite motion,i.e., they are moved through an infinite time, their bodies cannot be composedof matter and form (Jandunus, 46a, B).

20 1300 yjrunonun, et quodist'udquodmoveturab eo. The Hebrew manuscripts havethe active wan yjannn, "and that that which moves." For similarmistranslations, cf. above, chap. 1, nn. S and 59.

21 n'UJ. For the various meanings of this term (r>0 in Arabic), cf. H. A. Wolfson,"Hallevi and Maimonides on Design, Chance, and Necessity," Proceedings ofthe American Academy for Jewish Research, XI (1941), p. 120, nn. 5, 7.

103

De SubstantiaOrbis

line 41 of which the celestial body is said to be neither light nor heavy is theresult of this material, force, and that the aggregate of this force andmatter constitutes the celestial body — then it would necessarily followthat something eternal has within itself the possibility of beingdestroyed, without ever actually being destroyed. And the absurdity ofthis latter proposition has already been demonstrated at the end of thefirst book of the De Caelo.22

This being so,23 it is not true that the term "necessary existence" ispredicated in two ways: necessary in virtue of itself, and necessary invirtue of something else, possible through itself.24 If this distinction werevalid someone might think that it applies to the celestial body, that is tosay, one might think that the celestial body has in it a finite force, while

22 Cf.DeCaelol, 12,281b, 18-283b, 22; especially 281b, 18-282a,4,and282a,21-25. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 6, lines 20 ff.

23 The text of this passage is somewhat obscure. A comparison with a parallelpassage in the Tahdjut al-Tahafut IV (ed. Bouyges, pp. 276-284, passim; trans.Van den Bergh, I,pp. 163-168,passim; trans. Horten, pp. 188-197,/>aH/m)yieldsthe following interpretation: Avicenna distinguishes between two kinds ofnecessary existence: (1) necessary in virtue of itself; (2) necessary in virtue ofanother, possible in virtue of itself. Furthermore, Avicenna maintains that thecelestial bodies have the second kind of necessary existence. Against Avicenna,Averroes argues, in the present passage, that the celestial bodies cannot havethis second kind of necessary existence, for if the celestial bodies were possiblein virtue of themselves, it would follow that they have a possibility of beingdestroyed. But Aristotle has shown that the celestial bodies can never bedestroyed. Thus, the celestial bodies would have a possibility that is neveractualized. This is absurd.

It is to be noted that Averroes applies the term "possible" only to potentialityfor generation and corruption, not to an accidental potentiality, such as apotentiality for locomotion. Furthermore, as is clear from the passage in theTahdfut, Averroes does not reject the notion of "necessary through another,possible through itself," as Jandunus interprets. He only limits the applicabilityof this term to transient beings, excluding it thereby from the heavens.

24 For a discussion of the terms "necessary," "possible," "necessary in virtue ofitself," and "necessary in virtue of another, possible in virtue of itself in thewritings of Avicenna and of the proof of the existence of God based on them, cf.A.M. Goichon, La Distinction de I'Essence et de {'Existence cfapris Ibn Slna(Paris,-1937), pp. 156-180.For the meaning of this distinction, its origin in Aristotle, and its relevance toAvicenna's and Averroes' doctrines concerning the cause of the celestialmotions, cf. Wolfson, Crescas, Introduction, pp. 109-111; Prop. XIX, n. 1, pp.680-682.

104

Chapter Three

it acquires necessary existence from an infinite, immaterial force, as line 47indeed Avicenna thought. And he was under the impression that this isan opinion of Alexander found in some " of his writings. And upon thisassumption Avicenna built his proof of the existence of a first principle,a proof different from the one based on the existence of eternal motion.26

But Avicenna's proof is based on faulty premises as you can see."But28 there arises a question concerning this problem on the basis ofAristotle's remark in theDe Caelo that the forces of the celestial bodies

25 nxp. This term can mean "one" or "some." Cf. Wolfson, Crescas, p. 491, n. 14.26 Averroes here alludes to Avicenna's proof of the existence of God, known as the

proof from necessity and contingency. This proof, which is a metaphysical one,is based on an analysis of the concepts of necessary and possible being. Thisproof is distinguished from the physical proofs of the existence of God based onsome natural occurrence, such as motion. According to Averroes only physicalproofs of the existence of God are valid proofs. Cf. the succeeding note.

27 Averroes here attacks the Avicennian proof of the existence of God derivingfrom necessity and contingency. The proof, as taken from Maimonides (Guide,II, 1, Speculation 3), runs as follows:I. Concerning existing things three assumptions are possible: (1) None ofthem comes to be or passes away. (2) All of them come to be and pass away. (3)Some of them come to be and pass away; some of them neither come to be norpass away.II. (1) Propositions I, 1, and I, 2, are proved to be false. (2) Therefore, I, 3,must be true, and thus there must exist something that exists necessarily.HI. Necessarily existing things occur in two ways: (1) Necessary in virtue ofthemselves. (2) Necessary in virtue of another, possible of themselves.IV. If we consider the things necessary in virtue of another, we know that thechain of things necessary in virtue of another cannot go on to infinity and thus itmust come to an end with something necessary in virtue of itself.Averroes' objection in the present passage is that Proposition III, 2, which, inthis proof, must be applied to the celestial body, is absurd (cf. above, n. 23. Fora different argument, cf. the passage from the Tahafut al-Tahafut cited in n. 23).Thus this proof is not valid.Thomas Aquinas also uses this Avicennian proof as one of his proofs of theexistence of God. Cf. Summa Theologiae, I, Qu. 2, Art. 3, Argument 3.For a further discussion of the controversy between Avicenna and Averroesconcerning this proof, cf. the commentary of Narboni on Maimonides' Guide,II, 1. Also, cf. H. A. Wolfson, "Averroes' Lost Treatise on the Prime Mover,"Hebrew Union College Annual, XIII, 1 (1950/51), 683-710; Fragments 1-5, pp.687-702.

28 Averroes now sets out to resolve a difficulty occasioned by two conflictingAristotelian statements. Aristotle affirms in some of his writings that theheavens must possess a finite motive force, while in others he maintains that thesame celestial motive force is finite in one respect and infinite in another.

105

De Substantia Orbis

line 53 must be finite in their activities inasmuch as the celestial bodies are finitein magnitude.2' And he uses this premise30 to show that the celestialbodies are of finite magnitude,31 and he gives this premise as one of thereasons for the fact that some celestial bodies move one star while some,namely, the sphere of the fixed stars, move many.32 And he maintains

29 This proposition is not demonstrated in the De Caelo. Averroes seems to havederived it from the following premises: (1) a finite body cannot have an infinitemotive force (this is proved in Physics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 6, and it isquoted in DeCaelo I, 7,275b, 21-23; II, 12,293a, 10-11); (2) the celestial bodiesare finite (De Caelo I, 5-7).

30 I.e., that the motive forces of the celestial bodies are finite.31 TiiNPn 'Vian D"a'own D'minrc nx'3 nmpnn run 'JDm. The expression 'Von

fssvm is obscure and Toledanus and Jandunus differ in their interpretations.Toledanus comments: "finitae quantitatis numero," i.e., the number of stars inthe celestial sphere is finite. He seems to consider the present phrase as anintroduction to the proof that the number of stars in each sphere cannot begreater than it is.Jandunus (47c, G) interprets the expression as "finite in extension." He refersthe present phrase to a proof demonstrating that the celestial bodies are finite,since their motive forces are finite. Cf. De Caelo 1,5,272a, 7-273a, 6. This proofis independent of the proof that the number of stars in each celestial spherecannot be greater than it is.

32 In setting down this proof from the De Caelo, Averroes is not interested in theproof as such, but only in one of its premises, namely, the premise stating thatthe motive force of the celestial body, though infinite in one respect, is finite inanother. Averroes uses this proposition to show that Aristotle stated explicitlythat the celestial motive force is finite in some respect. Fora parallel discussion,cf. Hebrew text, chap. 6, lines 121 ff., and below, chap. 6, n. 47.The proof that the number of stars in each sphere cannot be greater than it is isbased on De Caelo II, 12,293a, 4-11. Averroes'text of the passage reads: "Andif there were in any of the planetary orbits more stars than there are, theultimate orbit [that of the fixed stars] would do work when it moves the orbitscoming after it.. . And we have already said in many places that every finite bodyhas also a finite power. For this reason there exists in each one of the planetaryorbits only one star" (Long Commentary on De Caelo II, t. 71, Vol. V, 145v, G;note also com. 71,145v, H-146v, H).Averroes' proof proceeds as follows: the motive force of the sphere of the fixedstars is of a given finite quantity. Now, if there were more stars or planets in oneof the orbits, either the whole heavens would be without motion or the velocityof their motion would decrease. Thus, in order for the celestial bodies to have adaily motion of a constant, finite velocity, a certain force must be added to theforce of the outermost sphere. This new force would be added to the originalnatural force of the heavens. Thus, the new motion would be a violent motion.But any violent motion must come to an end. Thus the heavens would cease toexist. This is impossible and, thus, the assumption that the planetary orbits

106

Chapter Three

that, if the stars in the sphere of the fixed stars were smaller or larger, it ime 56would be impossible that the finite force should move them.31 Andgenerally, it was shown there, in the general treatise,34 that if the heat-and motion-producing forces in the celestial bodies were infinite in allrespects, then the motion of those bodies that are here below would takeplace in no time." And this consideration brings one to think that thereare in the celestial bodies active forces that are finite.We say briefly that the term36 "infinite" may be applied in two senses:first, in the sense of a force of infinite action and passion in time butfinite in itself, that is, finite in velocity and intensity;37 second, in thesense of a force of infinite action and passion in itself.38 Now, a force ofinfinite action and passion in itself cannot exist in any body, whether itbe celestial or transient, for only an infinite body could attain a force ofthis latter kind. And since an infinite body is impossible,39 it follows thatthe celestial spheres produce and suffer motion in time.40 On the other

contain more stars than they do is absurd. Cf. also, Averroes, LongCommentary on Metaphysics XII, com. 41.

33 The argument contained in the preceding note will also apply if it is assumedthat the Fixed stars are larger or smaller than they are.

34 Vran nnnaa. This phrase can mean either: (1) in a general statement (Latin:"universaliter"); or (2) in the general treatise. Since the reference seems to be toPhysics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-31, I accepted the second interpretation. Stein-schncider accepts the Latin, referring it to the De Caelo. without, however,giving an exact citation. Cf. Sle'mschneider,Hebra'ischeUbersetzungen,p. 185,n. 574b.

35 Cf. Hebrew text, lines lfr-24.36 unnxaip. Literally: "that our terms." Perhaps it is an adaption of an

underlying Arabic dual crvdliu , "the two terms," even though this reading alsoleaves something to be desired. Cf. below, n. 49.

37 The concept "finite in intensity and velocity" seems to be based on De Caelo 11,6, 288b, 30-289a, 4, where Aristotle shows that, since celestial bodies move insome definite time (i.e., not in no time), they cannot accelerate to infinity,... OUK fiv Eir) <tei fijirraoic, Tfjq <popa<; For the concept of "infinite in time,"cf. Physics HI. 8, 208a, 20-22.

38 I.e., in intensity and velocity.39 The term pVi can be construed in two ways: (1) as translated; or (2) as "and

since a force of infinite action and passion in itself cannot exist in any body "40 l»ia unrarri vrv D'Va'nn vn pVi. In this passage it is to be established that the

force of the celestial body is finite in some respect. The argument is:First Premise: If the force of the celestial body were infinite in itself, i.e., in

107

De Substantia Orbis

line 66 hand, the existence of forces infinite in time with reference to bothaction and passion is necessary for the celestial bodies. And as for thetemporal infinity of these forces with reference to passion, that is,declination,41 it is due to the fact that these bodies are absolutelysimple,42 and with reference to action, it is due to the fact that the formsof the celestial bodies have no subsistence in their subject.41 But infinityin time with reference to both action and passion is impossible in thecase of the transient bodies, because transient bodies are composed ofmatter and form.Now the existence of a force of infinite intensity whose cause is assumedto be a body, insofar as it is a body, is impossible in the case of thecelestial body or any other bodies.44 On the other hand, a force that isinfinite in respect to time is necessary in the case of the celestial body,inasmuch as that which moves and that which is moved in the celestialbodies differs from that which moves and that which is moved in thetransient bodies. And a force of infinite duration is impossible in thecase of the transient bodies since their motive forces are material and

intensity and velocity, it would have to reside in an infinite body. (A finite bodycan only have a finite force.)Second Premise: The existence of an infinite body is impossible.Conclusion: Therefore, the force of the celestial body is finite in itself. (Thestatement in our text, "the celestial spheres produce and suffer motion in time,"is equivalent to this statement.)

41 rrujn V'1. The phrase occurs neither in the Latin texts nor in the citation of thispassage in Narboni's commentary. This seems to indicate that it is a lateraddition. The phrase has no special meaning here and simply means "i.e.,motion." Cf. above, n. 21.

42 Jandunus (46d, F): "...since the celestial bodies are simple, they do notundergo any change except change in place, and, therefore, they can undergoaction and motion which are infinite according to time."Narboni (177r, 1): b» na ntf> p n obmaa Q'DWD QTW 'JOB nsiann OVIK .nsrTODnn, "i.e., they are [infinite] in motion because they are absolutely simple andthus they have no potentiality for corruption."

43 Jandunus (46d, F): "since the forms are separate [from their bodies] they haveno contrary nor a subject through which they subsist in being, therefore theycan act during an infinite time." .

44 Jandunus (46d, H): "...that is, an infinite force cannot be the form of a body,for every body is finite and there must be a proportionateness between thequantity of a body and the action of its force. Thus, if the body is finite, its forcemust be finite in intensity." . .

108

Chapter Three

since their bodies, which are moved by these motive forces, are line 73composed of matter and form.Thus, the celestial and transient bodies have in common that thepassion and action belonging to them are finite in themselves. And thisis the reason that the motion of the celestial bodies takes place in time,and some of them move faster than others, in spite of the fact that theirmotive forces are immaterial. For, since these motive forces are finite inthemselves, the celestial bodies receive them in a finite way. In respect toduration, however, the celestial bodies receive the motive forces in aninfinite way.And from the fact that there exists in the celestial bodies a force of finiteaction and passion in itself, it does not follow that there exists in them aforce which is finite in time, nor does it follow from the same fact thatthe celestial body can be destroyed or that it is composed of matter andform. But that possibility of being destroyed would only follow from theexistence of a force that is finite in time, and so also the possibility ofbeing composed of matter and form.And it is clear45 that if there existed in a body composed of matter andform a force infinite in time, it would necessarily follow that a force ofinfinite action and passion in itself would exist in this body. Theabsurdity of the latter proposition is demonstrated by Aristotle in aproof based on the assumption that the forces by which the celestialbodies are moved infinitely are corporeal.46

And it is clear that from the fact that a body receives a passion that isfinite in itself but infinite in time, or an action that is finite in itself butinfinite in time, it does not follow that it is composed of matter andform, as would have to be the case if the body's action and passion werefinite in time. For to be finite in respect to action and passion in itself

45 From the preceding distinction between two kinds of infinite forces, Averroes,in this and the succeeding paragraph, adduces two arguments againstAvicenna's statement that the celestial bodies are composed of matter andform. They are: (1) if it is assumed that a body composed of matter and formhas a force of infinite duration, it would follow that it also has a force of infiniteintensity. But it is absurd that a force of infinite intensity inheres in a body(Physics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 6); (2) from the fact that a body is finite inaction and passion in respect to intensity, it does not follow that it is composedof matter and form.

46 Cf. preceding note.

109

De Substantia Orbis

line 90 belongs to a body insofar as it is body,47 while to be finite in respect totime belongs to a body insofar as it is composite.48

The reason for error concerning this question and what makes it seemthat Aristotle contradicts himself is the equivocation in respect to thetwo terms49 "finite" and "infinite." For if one does not distinguishbetween the finiteness and infinity that are true according to time andthe finiteness and infinity that are true according to action and passionin itself, the above-mentioned confusion takes place. And concerningthat finiteness that the celestial and the material bodies have incommon, Aristotle showed in a general proof that every corporeal forceis finite, however, not according to the finiteness that the body hasinsofar as it is composed of matter and form.50 All this is clear to himwho reflects on this matter. And through this discussion the doubtsconcerning Aristotle's statements51 have come to an end, and it is clearthat all his statements are in agreement with each other. And God is HeWho guides one into the right path.52

And someone might argue that, inasmuch as every body acts in virtue ofone principle and suffers action in virtue of another, it follows that everybody is composed of matter and form.53

In answer to this we say verily the questioner has spoken the truth.54

However, one must realize that there are bodies that are composed ofmatter and form in such a way that the form does not subsist in thematter and that the matter is only a subject, not a matter existing in

47 Narboni (177r, 1-2): BWD xin DKI tertian ma©jn i so lV n r r m '3i ,nxv, "forthe body must have finiteness in respect to action and passion in itself because itpossesses the attribute of absolute corporeality, even if the body is simple." Cf.also Jandunus 47b, D.

48 Everything composed of matter and form must be destroyed at some time andthus it is finite in duration.

49 imBK». This term seems to be an Arabism. It reflects the Arabic dual cjillit, asthe Latin duorum nominum indicates.

50 But according to the finiteness that a body has insofar as it is a body.51 Jandunus (47c, E): "...sometimes Aristotle says that the celestial forces are

finite and sometimes that they are infinite." Cf. above, n. 28.52 Cf. above, chap. 1, n. 100.53 Jandunus (47c, F): "... and that which acts is the form and that through which

the body undergoes action is the matter,... wherefore every body is composedof matter and form and, therefore, also the heavens. This seems to contradictwhat has been said previously."

54 Jandunus (47c, G): "i.e., that every body is composed of matter and form."

110

Chapter Three

potentiality. Bodies of this kind are the celestial ones. Then, again, there line 101are bodies that are composed of a matter existing in potentiality and of aform that subsists in the matter. Bodies of this description are thetransient ones.55 From these considerations it is clear that the term"body" is predicated of celestial and subcelestial bodies equivocally, sothat the eternal bodies and the temporal ones have absolutely nothing incommon. This is already apparent from the fact that the celestial bodyneeds a subject only because it undergoes locomotion, while thetransient bodies need matter because they are subject to generation andcorruption.56 Both bodies, however, need a form because of their action.But they differ in that the form belongs to one of them according toinfinite time and to the other according to finite time. Thus the celestialforms are immaterial. And you must understand the question in thisway.

I have solved this problem only after a great deal of research and afterhaving spent no small amount of time on it. This question is one of themost exalted and subtile, inasmuch as one cannot attain humanperfection as long as the answer to this question is withheld from him.And there is no Lord besides the God Who helps, and the mouth ofthose who understand is filled with His praise. May He be praised andexalted. The question is completed. Praise be to God Who answerseverything requiring an answer.

55 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 47 ff.56 Cf. Metaphysics VIII, 4, 1044b, 3-8 (also Averroes, Long Commentary on

Metaphysics VIII, t. 12, Arabic: p. 1074, lines 6-8; Latin: Vol. VIII, 219v, M;com. 12, Arabic: p. 1076, line 16-p. 1077, line 18; Latin: Vol. VIII, 220r, E-220v, G).

Ill

CHAPTER FOUR

line i Since' Aristotle2 has shown that the motion of the heavens is the firstmotion,3 and since he has demonstrated that motion exists in that whichis moved/ it follows that the body that is moved with the first motion iseternal. For if this body were transient, its motion would not be the firstmotion.5 And when Aristotle investigated, subsequently,' concerningthe motion of the celestial body and whether it can be at rest, he alsoconcluded that, since its motion is the first motion — and this motion isnot preceded by any other — it is an eternal motion.And,7 after the following propositions had been established byAristotle, namely, that this body is eternal and that it is moved, he firstof all investigated concerning the motion of the heavens. And he foundthat the heavens are moved by a force that is neither light nor heavy.8

Now, inasmuch as every force that is heavy or light either exists in atransient body, or is of a transient nature,' or — in the case of thesublunar living beings — the soul exists together with the transientnature,10 it follows that the celestial force, being neither heavy nor light,

1 It is to be shown that the celestial body is eternal. The proof, as reconstructedfrom the present passage, is composed of the following two parts: (1) since theheavens are moved with the first motion and that first motion is eternal, itfollows that the heavens are moved with an eternal motion; (2) since theheavens are moved with an eternal motion and motion exists in that which ismoved, it follows that the celestial body is eternal.

2 D3nn. Literally: "the Sage," i.e., "the Philosopher."3 This proposition rests on the following two premises: (1) circular locomotion is

the primary kind of locomotion (Physics VIII, 9); (2) the heavens have circularlocomotion (De Caelo I, 2).

4 Physics III, 3, 202a, 13-21.5 This statement appears to be based on Physics VIII, 7, 260b, 29-26Ia, 12,

especially 261a, 7-12.6 The succeeding passage appears to be based on Physics VIII, 7,261a, 27-261b,

26. Since the present passage follows the one from the Physics cited above, in n.5, the term nnriK, "subsequently," seems to have the meaning "in a subsequentpassage of the Physics."

7 In the following paragraph it is shown that, in one way, the celestial force existsin separation from its body, while, in another way, it exists in it.

8 De Caelo I, 3, 269b, 18-270a, 12; also cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 15 (t.9 I.e., it is a contrary.

10 I.e., the soul inheres in the body of the sublunar living beings.

112

Chapter Four

exists in a simple body," and that it possesses neither a subjectl2 nor a line 9contrary.13 And without any doubt the celestial force is a soul that is notintermingled with a transient nature," but it is the soul of an eternalbody. In one way this soul does not exist in separation from its body, yetin another way it does. It exists in separation insofar as this body, beingpermanent in virtue of itself, does not need a soul," for to need a soul forthe existence of the body is proper '* to the sublunar living beings inwhich the souls exist together with the natural forces. In another way,however, the celestial soul must exist in its body, for everything movedin virtue of itself must be moved by a force existing in it.And when Aristotle considered these powers in the celestial bodies, itbecame clear to him that, of all the powers of the soul, they possess onlythe appetitive one.17 And when he analyzed the celestial appetitivepowers he showed that they are moved by a desire for an object moreexcellent than they.18 Furthermore, when he investigated these celestial

11 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 27 ff.12 Jandunus (48b, A): "in virtue of which it exists." Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines

139 ff., and chap. 2, lines 47 ff. It is to be noted that in this passage Averroes usesthe term "subject" as the equivalent of the term "matter," while in the other twopassages cited he makes a formal distinction between these two terms.

13 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 135-147, passim.14 The celestial soul does not inhere in a body subject to generation and

corruption.15 For its existence.16 j"jyn i»3, sicut est dispositio. Literally: "as is the case."17 nV iPDin mrou wpwn ro KTIIP IV imnn .ninsn i K3 j " s n i w i . The literal

translation of this somewhat awkward passage is: "And when [Aristotle]considered these powers, it became clear to him that it is the same as theappetitive power among the powers of the soul." Absent from the Hebrewmanuscripts, this phrase was supplied from the Latin version. In the Latin itreads: "Et cum consideravit in istis virtutibus, declaratum fuit ipsi ipsam essevirtutem appetitivam de virtutibus animae tantum."Jandunus (48b, D): ".. .and the Commentator states in the twelfth book of theMetaphysics, that intellect and will [appetite] (jntellectum et voluntatem) are theonly powers of the soul that the celestial bodies possess. In our passage he hasthe same twofold distinction in mind, though he does not speak of the intellect.In the present passage he intends to speak only of the appetite, which issubsequent to the intellect." Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 6, lines 94-97. The basis forthe twofold distinction is found in Aristotle, Metaphysics XII, 7, 1072a, 26 ff.Cf. De Anima, III, 10.

18 Averroes distinguishes between the appetitive powers of the celestial bodies andthe intelligence that is the object of their desire. The appetitive powers impart to

113

De Substantia Orbis

line 17 appetitive powers, he found that they are finite." And when Aristotleconsidered the continuity of their motion, it became clear to him thatthe cause of their continuous motion is not that principle by which they

the celestial spheres motions finite in intensity and velocity, the intelligencemotions of infinite duration. In the De Substantia Orbis Averroes does notexplain how the appetitive powers are related to the intelligence that is theobject of their desire, and the commentators differ in their interpretations.Toledanus holds (pp. 248-249) that each celestial sphere possesses its ownimmaterial intelligence, which, as object of that sphere's appetitive powers,imparts to it eternal motion. Jandunus maintains (48b, D) that each spherepossesses its own appetitive powers but that there exists only one immaterialintelligence, the prime mover, which is the common object of desire of all thespheres. Robert of England in his Glosses on the TractatusDe Spera of Joannesde Sacro-Bosco expresses the same view. Cf. P. Duhem, Le Systeme du Monde,IV, 551. It is to be noted that Averroes does not mention the intelligence thatproduces the finite celestial motions in the present passage, but it appears thatthis intelligence is identical with the appetitive powers.In the De Substantia Orbis Averroes does not decide between the two opinionsset down by the commentators. But his views emerge clearly from his LongCommentary on Metaphysics. In that work Averroes shows that each celestialsphere possesses its own intelligence that produces the eternal motion proper tothat sphere. But, in addition, the prime mover serves as a second object of desirefor the appetitive powers of each sphere. By desiring the prime mover thesepowers produce the eternal diurnal motion common to all spheres. Cf. LongCommentary on Metaphysics XII, com. 43, Arabic: pp. 1644-1645; Latin: Vol.VIII, 326v, L-327r,C; com.44, Arabic: p. 1649,line 8-p. 1650,line 6; Latin:Vol. VIII, 327v, K-M. Cf. Duhem, op. cit., IV, 548-559. In the light of thisdiscussion Toledanus' interpretation seems to be correct.But a difficulty remains. In the present passage of the De Substantia OrbisAverroes speaks of the appetitive powers and the intelligence as if they were twoseparately existing principles. This also seems to be his view in the LongCommentary on Metaphysics (XII, com. 41, Arabic: p. 1630, lines 1-4; Latin:Vol. VIII, 324r, E) when he writes: " . . . the celestial motion is composed of twomotive forces ( t £ ^ * u*; ex duobus motoribus): a motive force of finitemotivity, and this is the soul that is in it (*j ^ <jj^ y*J; et est anima existensin eo), and a motive force of infinite motivity, and this is the force that does notexist in matter (osU j c~-Jj)l ijill ^ j ; et estpotentia quae non est in materia).By contrast he affirms in cither passages that the appetitive powers and theintelligence are different aspects of the same celestial form. Cf. Hebrew text,chap. 1, lines 168 ff., and chap. 2, lines 41 ff. It appears to me that our presentpassage and its parallel in the Commentary on Metaphysics can be interpretedaccording to Averroes' second view, that is, the two movers of each sphere aredifferent aspects of the same celestial form.

19 ' I.e., finite in intensity. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3, lines 61 ff. According to ourinterpretation of this passage (cf. above, n. 18), it is shown that the form of a

114

Chapter Four

are moved, but that the principle which imparts to them continuity [of line 19motion] is the object desired by them. And since continuous motion canonly be the product of a completely unmoved mover, it follows that thismover can be neither a body nor a power in a body, but that it must bean incorporeal intelligence. This has already been proved in the DeAnima.10 It has been shown there that a mover of this kind must be anincorporeal intelligence and that the celestial body conceives21 thisintelligence. [Thus the-celestial body is moved by an object of appetiteand by an object of intelligence] for the object conceived by theintelligence is an object that Aristotle generalizes to mean the same as anobject of appetite.22

given sphere, considered as appetitive power, functions as efficient cause andproduces a motion of finite intensity, while, considered as object of theappetitive power, the same form functions as final cause and produces a motionof infinite duration.According to Jandunus (48d, E-F) who (as was seen above, n. 18) offers adifferent interpretation, it is shown that the form of each sphere functions asefficient cause and produces a motion of Finite intensity, while the firstunmoved mover functions as final cause and produces a motion of infiniteduration. To this explanation Jandunus adds that the first unmoved mover isinfinite in respect to intensity as well as in respect to duration.

20 It is not clear which passage of the De Anima Averroes has in mind, since thenature of the celestial intelligence is not discussed explicitly in any part of thiswork. In the De Anima Aristotle only mentions that the intellect does not inhereinabody.Cf.Z)e^n//naII,2,413b,24-29; III,4,429a, 18-29; especially III, 5,430a, 17-19. A better source for the present passage seems to be MetaphysicsXII, 7, especially 1073a, 3-12.

21 T'XO. The emendation is based on the Latin (intelligit) and on the meaning ofthe context. The text of the Hebrew manuscripts (... b Visa) may have arisenfrom an ambiguity in the underlying Arabic term. For the participle, j ^ t « ,depending on its vowels, can be active (jjiil) or passive (jjiii). The Hebrewtranslator took it in a passive sense. For other instances in which the Hebrewtranslator took an active for a passive, cf. above, chap. 1, n. 59.

22 run '03 inrfrw "HPK Kin Vann TPXTO '0^ bawn HT i"xa «a'a©n mm m n^roinpwnn. The translation of this difficult passage is based on the assumption thatthe phrase '03 innVar1 reflects the Arabic J* jU»l, which can have the meaning of"to generalize to mean," and that Averroes has in mind the following passage inMetaphysics XII, 7,1072a, 23-27: "...there is also something that moves [thefirst heaven]. And since that which moves and is moved is intermediate, there issomething that moves without being moved, being eternal, substance andactuality. And the object of desire and the object of thought move in this way;

115

De Substantia Orbis

line 25 Aristotle also investigated the cause of the eternity of the heavens and heproved at the end of the first book of theDe Caelo11 that the celestialbodies are without any potentiality at all. And concerning the forcethrough which the celestial bodies have locomotion, namely, theappetitive soul, he demonstrates that it possesses no matter apart fromthe one that is potential in respect to locomotion only.24 After Aristotlehad established by way of demonstration the knowledge of these threecauses,25 he had completed the science of the heavens.And from the sum of these principles26 the following proof, found in thesecond " book of the De Caelo,2> also becomes clear. Aristotle proves in

they move without being moved. The primary objects of desire and thought arethe same "Alternatively, the present passage of our text may be translated: " . . . and thatthe celestial body conceives this intelligence; for conception by means of anintelligence is that which propels the celestial body in accordance with thisdesire." According to this interpretation the passage seems to mean that theform of the celestial body considered as an intelligence conceives the object ofthis form's desire. This conception causes the celestial form, now considered asan appetitive faculty, to impart to the celestial body the'circular locomotionproper to it. The sources on which this interpretation is based are the passagesfrom the Metaphysics and the De Anima cited above, n. 17.The alternative interpretation is akin to the reading of the Latin texts. Thoughthis text occurs in a variety of readings, in its best version it appears to state:" . . . et quod istud corpus caeleste intelligit hanc intelligentiam; intellegere enimtransmittit ipsum ad illud appetibile."

23 De Caelo I, 12.24 Cf. Metaphysics XII, 2, 1069b, 24-26.25 niaon iVK3. I.e., the material, efficient and final causes of celestial motion.

Toledanus interprets (p. 250): (1) the nature of the subject of the celestial livingbeing; (2) the nature of its soul; (3) the nature of the mover giving it continuousmotion by reason of being a final cause. Or: (1) the orbit; (2) the motor; (3) theactivity going forth from the orbit. Or: the three ways in which it was shownthat the celestial body is simple, i.e., (1) the way from the eternity of motion; (2)the way from the priority of motion; (3) the way from the lack of contrariety inits motion.Jandunus interprets (49a, C): (1) the subject of the heavens; (2) the propermotor that is called its appetitive power; (3) the prime mover that moves asobject of desire and is completely immovable and incorporeal. Cf. above, n. 18.

26 I.e., the material, efficient and final causes of celestial motion.27 'Jwn, in secundo. The Hebrew texts have pWKin, "in the first," and so does the

Latin p. However, the other Latin texts have the correct reading (see criticalapparatus).

28 Cf. De Caelo II, 12,-293a, 4-11, and Averroes'Long Commentary onDe Caelo II,

116

Chapter Four

this passage that if there were more stars in the heavens than there are, line 31or if the existing stars were of greater size, then the motion of theheavens would come to a stop. And if the celestial motion stopped thenthe continuous existence of the celestial bodies would also cease, formotion is one of the prerequisites of continuous existence.From all these considerations it is clear that the one who givescontinuity to motion is the same one who gives motion to the heavens,for if this were not so, motion would be destroyed, and if motion, thenthe heavens, for the heavens exist only in virtue of their motion. And ifthe motion of the heavens were destroyed, then the motion of thesublunar beings would be destroyed, and, consequently, the world in itstotality would be destroyed. Thus, it has been shown to be true that hewho imparts continuity to motion is he who gives existence to the rest ofexisting things.29

Now the proof that Aristotle produces at the end of the eighth book ofthe Physics,10 namely, that an infinite force, whether material or im-material, cannot exist in a finite body, has given rise to a doubt on thepart of some people. And we have already spoken about the solution ofthis question arising from this subject.31 And it may be copied here.32

t. and com. 71, Vol. V, 145v, G-146v, H. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3, lines 52 ft",and above, chap. 3, n. 32.

29 In this passage, Averroes considers the heavens as one thing and he speaks ofthe mover of the whole. Narboni and Jandunus propose divergent inter-pretations of this passage. Jandunus interprets (49b, A): "...and this is theprime mover, since all exist in virtue of it. And if the prime mover did not exist,the other beings would not exist. And thus everything depends on it for itsexistence and perfection as on a final cause. And from this, the way in which thefirst cause gives existence to the other beings is also clear... for it does so not asan efficient and a productive cause, which gives something its existence afternon-existence... but as a conserving and perfecting [i.e., final] cause."Narboni (179v, 2) interprets: Kin DJ»K niJHnwnn mNXMn niR'sntP "irm ,nsTpun rmi o'atpn nx trn K vra rwjna ion mVi .ViriDn Kin srann nan .worn,"Inasmuch as those beings that are moved exist only through motion, thereforethe prime mover is'the agent [efficient cause] of the universe. Therefore it iswritten [Genesis i : l ] : 'In the beginning God created the heaven and theearth.'"

30 Physics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 6.31 According to Jandunus the question that Averroes has in mind is: if the infinite

motive force of the celestial body is completely incorporeal, and if there existsno other celestial motive force besides it, it follows that the celestial body is

117

De Substantia Orbis

line 42 We have likewise stated that something first moved in virtue of itselfcannot be moved accidentally by the nature of its mover, and we have

moved in no time. This argument, Averroes implies, was the one that led hisopponents (primarily Avicenna) to posit two celestial motive forces: one,infinite and incorporeal, which imparts to the celestial body a motion of infiniteduration; the other, finite and corporeal, which imparts to the celestial body amotion of finite velocity.Averroes denies the existence of a corporeal motive force in celestial bodies,maintaining that the same incorporeal motive force produces the finite velocityof celestial motion as well as its infinite duration. Cf. chap. 3,passim; especiallyHebrew text, lines 61 ff.Jandunus bases himself on Averroes' discussion of this problem in LongCommentary on Physics VIII, com. 79, Vol. IV, 426v, H-427v, G. Jandunus'commentary reads (49c, E): "Notandum est, quod quaestio... est, quod siomnis virtus existens in corpore est flnita, igitur omnes virtutes caelestes activaesunt finitae: quare non poterunt causare motum perpetuum. Et, si dicatur quodvirtus terminans motum perpetuum est inflnita, tune sequitur quod movet innon tempore: quod est impossibile...," "It is to be noted that the question...is: if every corporeal force is finite, then all active celestial forces are finite andthus they cannot cause eternal motion. If, on the other hand, it is maintainedthat the force that produces an eternal motion is infinite, then it would followthat this force moves the celestial body in no time. This is impossible...."Narboni, for reasons given in the succeeding note, identifies the question of thepresent passage with a question that Averroes discusses at the beginning ofchap. 6 of the De Substantia Orbis. In that passage Averroes discusses theproposition that the celestial bodies possess a finite corporeal motive forceapart from their infinite incorporeal motive force. However, the discussion inchap. 6 differs from the interpretation offered by Jandunus cited in the presentnote.

32 JK33 j?nVI. This phrase is absent from the Latin versions. There exists, however,no need to maintain that it is a gloss added by an editor since, as ourinterpretation shows, it fits within the context. Averroes does not seem to referto any specific passage in his writings that may be copied here. This view issupported by the Latin version which, though not containing the presentphrase, reads: "et multotiens locuti fuimus." Our interpretation takes theHebrew term pnsn as a niph'al or hoph'al reflecting a passive form of anunderlying Arabic Ji>.Narboni, in commenting on this phrase (179v, 2), shows that it appeared in thetext that reached him. Since in this version of the text, chap. 6 followed thepresent chapter (cf. my article, "The Composition and Transmission ofAverroes' Ma'amar be-'Esem ha-Galgal," p. 306), he saw in the present phrasean allusion to that chapter (for the text of Narboni's commentary, cf. my article,p. 306, n. 2). Narboni appears to have taken the phrase ]R33 pnvi in the sense"and we [?] shall pass on from here [to a discussion of this question]."Steinschneider follows Narboni's opinion. Cf. Steinschneider, Hebrdische

118

Chapter Four

discussed the nature of this moved." This is what we intended to line 43explain. And it is obvious that he who does not differentiate theknowledge of the heavenly bodies in accordance with the causesenumerated in these three questions'4 will not have completed hisknowledge of the nature of the heavens. And God is He Who guidethone in the right path.35 May His name be blessed and praised. Amen.The treatise is finished. Praise be to God.36

Ubersetzungen, p. 187. I have shown in my article that originally chap. 6 wasindependent of chap. 4. Thus I do not see in the present phrase any specificreference to chap. 6.

33 Averroes seems to allude here to another argument denying the existence of acelestial motive force that is corporeal. For, if it is assumed that a motive forceof this kind exists, it would follow that the heavens are moved accidentally. Butthis is absurd. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 6, lines 98 ff. and below, chap. 6, n. 38. Asbefore, I do not see in this passage an allusion to any specific discussion of thisissue. It is to be noted that, of the Latin versions, only X has the correct reading.

34 Narboni, who rearranged the text, refers the three questions to the threechapters of his third treatise (cf. my article, "The Composition andTransmission of Averroes' Ma'amar be-'Esem ha-Galgal" p. 300). In hiscommentary on the third of these Narboni writes (179v, 2): O'Brmarrrrun ,ii 'ETV© nt nwx jwxin naKaa Kim ,33"na viVa "a'awn aim '3n33 DKI .nanan ma mm , p KVI naa K^ Kinsn ,m 'JDV IVX w n naxns Kim .OD'assV "irr> o^3, "And the three questions that he [Averroes] has in mind are:(1) that the celestial body is not composite, and this is discussed in the firstchapter of which this is the third; (2) that the celestial body is simple, and this isdiscussed in the second chapter that precedes the present one; (3) and that it isneither heavy nor light, and this is discussed in the present chapter. And thesetopics are sometimes discussed together."According to Toledanus (pp. 2S4-2SS) the questions are: (1) the composition ofthe celestial orbit; (2) the infinity of the force in respect to duration andintensity; (3) the separate existence of the motor {abstraccione motoris).According to Jandunus (49c, E) the three problems are: (1) the final cause(prime mover); (2) the efficient cause (the mover proper to each sphere); (3) thematerial cause (the body of the sphere).

35 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, line 198, and above, chap. 1, n. 100.36 In the Hebrew text there follows an editorial gloss that reads: ran ntPX poem

nVron mxn iVi .snvn VKm .nrt -\va-> IVK naxaa inv naKan ma, "The questionwhich Averroes has raised in this treatise will be answered in the treatise whichfollows. God knows and to Him greatness is suitable."This gloss describes the relation between chapters 4 and 6. It must have beenadded by an editor who considered these two chapters as part of a largertreatise. Cf. above, Introduction, pp. 15-16.

119

CHAPTER FIVE

line i We must now investigate1 concerning the statement of those who saythat the celestial body is simple and spiritual. We maintain that themeaning of this proposition is that the celestial body consists ofimmaterial dimensions, this being the reason that it undergoes neitherchange in quality nor change in substance.2 And the matter stands asThemistius explains, namely, that the sun, the moon and the rest of thestars are either forms, whereby he means immaterial dimensions, that is,spiritual bodies, or they are material bodies in such a manner that theterm "matter" is predicated of them and of the sublunar bodies in anequivocal sense.3 The argument proceeds as follows: no one doubts thatthe celestial bodies are bodies, for they undergo motion. Nor doesanyone doubt that bodies undergo a change [in quality] and a change insubstance only because they exist in matter, this being the reason thatmaterial bodies are more than one in number and that there are amongthem species and genera.4 Since the celestial bodies possess none of theattributes proper to material bodies,5 they are immaterial bodies.

1 In the following paragraph it is to be established that the celestial body isimmaterial. The argument proceeds as follows:First Premise: Everything having matter undergoes alteration and substantialchange.Second Premise: The celestial bodies undergo neither alteration nor substantialchange.Conclusion: Therefore, the celestial bodies are immaterial.That the celestial bodies are not pure forms but bodies is demonstrated asfoliows: (1) the celestial bodies are moved; (2) things moved must have bodies;(3) therefore, the celestial bodies have bodies.

2 Everything undergoing substantial change or qualitative change, that is,alteration, must be composed of matter and form. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2,lines 106 ff.

3 Cf. above, chap. 1, n. 6, and references there.4 Jandunus (49d, E-F) explains that sublunar matter has potentiality for forms

that differ in species and in number.5 Literally: "And since this is so." Jandunus comments (49d, F): "But since the

celestial bodies undergo neither alteration nor substantial change, and since inthe case of the celestial bodies one species does not contain a number ofindividuals, it follows that the celestial bodies are immaterial." It is to be notedthat each celestial body constitutes a separate species.

120

Chapter Five

One may doubt, however, concerning the celestial bodies whether [it is line 10right to assume, as is done,] that they have a kind of matter required bytheir potentiality for locomotion, inasmuch as every potentiality existsonly in matter.6 But it seems that this matter of the celestial bodies hasan existence intermediate between that matter that is completelypotential and pure actuality, I mean to say, that this matter consists ofthose three dimensions which have no potentiality at all.7 Thus matterand potentiality have degrees. And because of their potentiality forlocomotion the celestial bodies require that there enters into them amover that has no potentiality at all."And John9 has raised a question concerning the eternity of the world,and many of those who speculated10 on these matters found it difficultto evade this question. It is: if the world is eternal it must necessarilypossess an infinite potentiality. On the other hand, Aristotle showedthat the world is finite [in extension]," and since it is finite, it has a finitepower.12 Whence it follows that the world must be generated andcorruptible.The answer to this question is:" generation and corruption as well as

6 Jandunus (49d, H): "Since the celestial body has potentiality in respect to place{ad ubi), it must have some kind of matter."

7 The prime matter of the sublunar bodies possesses the three dimensionsindeterminately, i.e., in potentiality. The celestial matter possesses the threedimensions only in actuality. Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 148 ff.

8 The celestial mover is in complete actuality, i.e., it has no potentiality forsubstantial change or alteration.

9 I.e., Johannes Philoponus (Grammaticus), beginning of sixth century, who inthe Arabic literature is generally referred to as <Sy£\(^-h}£ and in the Hebrewliterature as jnpinn (TT) jam'.

10 D':"»B T\yv\b, plures consyderantes. The Hebrew manuscripts read D'rjsa andDTJVno. This is obviously a copyist's mistake.

11 De Caelo I, 5-7.12 A finite body can only have a finite force. Cf. Physics VIII, 10,266a, 24-266b, 6.13 Johannes Philoponus' question: "Why is the world neither generated nor

destroyed, if it is finite in extension?" is answered by making a distinctionbetween potentiality and privation. Potentiality is a positive state (pp: habitus)and, thus, a potentiality existing in a body is finite. Privation, however, is not apositive state, so that it is possible for a finite body to have an infinite privation.The celestial body is a body of this kind, that is, it has infinite privation, butnever a potentiality for substantial change or alteration. Thus the celestial bodyexists eternally through itself, i.e., it is neither generated nor destroyed.Averroes also discusses John Philoponus' question in the following works:

121

De Substantia Orbis

line 18 every other motion proceed from a potentiality that is a positive state.But everything that lacks the causes of motion must have the contrary ofmotion, that is rest,14 which is the privation of motion. And it is notimpossible that the celestial body that lacks motion and its causes has aninfinite rest," even though its body is finite, for rest is privation andprivation is not potentiality.Thus, Aristotle states that since the fixed stars lack the causes of motion,they must have the opposite of the motion belonging to the othercelestial bodies, that is, they must have infinite rest.16 And in like mannerAristotle maintains that the earth must be at rest—which is a privationof motion — since it lacks an agent that moves it infinitely.17 Therefore,he maintains that the rest that the earth possesses must necessarily bestronger than the power by which the heavens are moved above it, formotion cannot belong to that which is absolutely at rest, since thatwhich is absolutely at rest '• lacks the causes of motion. This is self-evident. Thus the heavens have an infinite privation, even though theyare finite, inasmuch as rest is a privation, not a power, as those thoughtwho demanded that the heavens are at rest in virtue of a power. In

Long Commentary on Physics VII, com. 79, Vol. IV, 426v, K ft; MiddleCommentary on De Caelo I, quaestio, Hebrew: 124v ff.; Latin: Vol. V, 293v, Ift".; Long Commentary on De Caelo II, com. 71, Vol. V, 145v, K ff.; LongCommentary on Metaphysics XII, com. 41, Arabic: p. 162, lines 10 ff.; Latin:Vol. VIII, 324r, B ff. Cf. H. A. Wolfson, "The Kalam Arguments for Creationin Saadia, Averroes, Maimonides, and St Thomas," Saadia AnniversaryVolume, American Academy for Jewish Research (New York, 1943), pp. 201-203, and H. A. Davidson, "John Philoponus as a Source of Medieval Islamicand Jewish Proofs of Creation," Journal of the American Oriental Society,LXXXIX (1969), 357-391, passim.

14 nmian. This term refers to an absence of motion, i.e., a complete absence ofsubstantial change and alteration. However, it does not refer to an absence oflocomotion.

15 iinua, quietem. The Hebrew manuscripts read nin, "generation." The Hebrewtranslator seems to have misread iij£*>, "rest," as iijf, "generation." Cf. above,chap. 1, n. 59.

16 Cf. De Caelo II, 8, where Aristotle shows that the fixed stars have no motion oftheir own.

17 Cf. De Caelo II, 14,296a, 24-297a, 7, where Aristotle shows that the earth is atthe center of the universe and that it is immovable.

18 m Kint? MO3 run bs, in eo, quodest quiescens. The Hebrew manuscripts have bsns KintP nna nan. This is obviously a copyist's mistake.

122

Chapter Six

reality, however, the heavens must be at rest in virtue of the absence of a line 29power.Thus we find that those who discuss this question ask whether theheavens are permanent through themselves or through a propertyadded to their substance. The answer is that they are permanentthrough themselves, for permanence is a privation of motion and onlythat which lacks an agent for motion has privation.And reflect upon this question for it is a good one. The treatise isfinished. Praise be to God.

CHAPTER SIX

Among those who philosophize there are some' who raise a question line iconcerning the nature of the prime mover by saying that it isunnecessary that there should exist a completely incorporeal mover.2

And they maintain that the heavens possess two powers: one, whichmakes them to be eternal; the other, which makes them to be composedof matter and form, inasmuch as it is the nature of every body to becomposed of matter and form. From these premises concerning thecelestial powers it follows, according to the third figure of thesyllogism,3 that some eternal bodies are composed of matter and form,and these bodies are the celestial ones/The reason for this conclusion isthat the philosophizers thought that the proposition "everythinggenerable and corruptible is composed of matter and form" is notconvertible. The truth, however, is that this proposition is convertible.For the statement of him who says that every body that is generated andcorruptible is composed of matter and form is the definition of

1 The following arguments are directed against Avicenna and his followers.2 The philosophizers deny that the completely incorporeal mover is the only

mover of the celestial bodies.3 Cf. Prior Analytics I, 6, 28b, 11-13. Cf. Averroes, Epitome of Prior Analytics,

chap. 4, Hebrew: p. 19a, bottom- 19b; Latin: Vol. I, 2b, 48r, B-D.4 The,syllogism of the opponents is:

First Premise: Some bodies [the celestial ones] are eternal.Second Premise: All bodies are composed of matter and form.Conclusion: Therefore, some eternal bodies [the celestial ones] are composed ofmatter and form.

123

De Substantia Orbis

line 7 generated and corruptible, and definitions are convertible with thatwhich they define.Furthermore, everything composed of matter and form is subject tochange and everything that can undergo change is generable andcorruptible. Therefore it follows that something composed of matterand form cannot be eternal. Does it not follow, therefore, that theheavens are not composed of matter and form?Aristotle explained this matter as follows. Inasmuch as the heavens donot undergo substantial change and alteration, for they have neither asubject nor a contrary, it becomes clear concerning them that they aresimple,5 and that which is simple is necessarily eternal. It is also clearthat the heavens possess only the kind of matter that has a potentialityfor locomotion. For this reason the term "subject" is more properlyapplied to the heavens than the term "matter".6 And since Aristotle hasproved that something simple does not move itself, it follows necessarilythat the heavens have a mover that is added to them.7 And it also followswithout any doubt that this mover does not have its subsistence in theheavens, for if it did, the heavens would not be simple and they wouldpossess a potentiality for receiving that form that moves them. And ifthe celestial bodies possessed a potentiality, they would have to bedestroyed.

And Aristotle produces the following argument in support of thesimplicity of the celestial body:8 if there existed in the celestial bodies a

5 De Caelo I, 3, 270a, 12-35.6 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 46 ff.7 The heavens have a mover, which exists apart from their body.8 The following argument is composed of two parts. In the first Averroes shows

that if it is assumed that the heavens are composed of matter and form it followsthat the heavens have been destroyed at some past time. This conclusion is falsebut possible. The proposition that the heavens have been destroyed, in turn,leads to the conclusion that something eternal has been destroyed. Thisconclusion is false and impossible. Invoking the logical principle that a falseand impossible conclusion cannot follow from a premise that is false butpossible, Averroes shows, in the second part of his proof, that the originalassumption that the celestial body is composed of matter and form is false andimpossible. It follows, then, that the celestial body is simple, that is, it is notcomposed of matter and form.In detail, the first part of the argument is composed of the following threedivisions:I. First Premise: The heavens are composed of matter and form (assumption).

124

Chapter Six

potentiality, then the assumption of those who subscribe to this view, line 20that is, the proposition affirming that the heavens have alreadyactualized this potentiality, I have in mind, that the heavens havealready been destroyed,9 is a proposition that is false but possible, for itis the nature of potentiality and possibility to become actualized at sometime. And if this proposition were correct, then there would follow fromit a conclusion that is absurd and impossible, namely, that somethingeternal has been destroyed. But it has already been shown in the Prior

Second Premise: Everything composed of matter and form has a potentialityfor being destroyed. Conclusion: The heavens have a potentiality for beingdestroyed.II. First Premise (I, Conclusion): The heavens have a potentiality for beingdestroyed. Second Premise: Every potentiality must be actualized at some time.Conclusion: The heavens must be destroyed at some time.III. First Premise: Let it be assumed that the heavens have been destroyed.(For the meaning of this proposition, cf. below, n. 9.) Second Premise: Theheavens are eternal. Conclusion: Something eternal has been destroyed.The second part of the argument proceeds as follows: The conclusion of III isfalse and impossible. But a false and impossible conclusion cannot follow froma premise that is false and possible. Since the second premise of III is true, thefirst premise of III and, in turn, the first premise of I, are false and impossible,not false and possible.The present proof is based onDe Caelo 1,12, beginning, where Aristotle showsthat something eternal cannot have a potentiality for being destroyed, that is,that the celestial body is not composite. For a full statement of Averroes'version of Aristotle's proof, cf. Middle Commentary on De Caelo I, 102, 3-4,Hebrew: pp. 120r-121r; Latin: Vol. V, 289r, B-289v, L.The logical structure of the proof is described in the Middle Commentary onDeCaelo I, 102, 3, Hebrew: p. 120r; Latin: Vol. V, 289r, C as follows: gnvni.. .

aiana ip. niPDNn aiana a"nn' vb ywnw vpm nsoa iKan:p na Kin w n3T3 KV rnana " lpo ata maipna v rnpv vpnn mVin irnnEW ^ n

"...The second principle, which is explained in the Prior Analytics, is that anabsurd conclusion cannot follow from a premise that is false and possible butonly from one that is false and impossible. I mean to say that, if the conclusionof a syllogism is absurd, then it is necessary that among the premises must beones that are false and impossible, not false but possible."Cf. Prior Analytics I, 15, 34a, 5-34b, 2, especially 34a, 25-33; and PriorAnalytics I, 22, 40a, 4-18.

noD3 naa ^ i n ,^jnsn bx inxnaa onw. Since the heavens are eternal a pane ante,it may be assumed that their potentiality for being destroyed has beenactualized during this past, eternal time, i.e., it may be assumed that the heavenshave already been destroyed. This proposition is false, but possible.

125

De Substantia Orbis

line 22 Analytics10 that from a proposition that is false but possible no absurdconclusion can follow. Since it has thus been verified that the heavensdo not possess a power, it follows necessarily that they are simple andthat that which moves them is not a form inhering in them in the mannerin which forms exist in matters, for forms of the latter description aretransient. And a body of the former description is necessarily simple.When Aristotle found circular motion to be infinite, he started toinvestigate concerning the mover producing this infinite motion. Andhe asked whether it is possible that this mover be a force in a body —and it makes no difference whether this body is simple or composite —or whether it must be a substance separated from every kind of body. Heobserved that it is a well-known proposition that it is impossible thatthis infinite activity should proceed from a finite power, but" [at thesame time] this infinite activity would be completely impossible unless itproceeded either from a force that possesses no passivity at all onaccount of its being an immaterial form or from an infinite force that isdescribed by the attribute of infinity on account of its being in an[infinite] subject, for [in the latter case] a force that is a form subsistingin a body is not described by the attributes of finiteness or infinity exceptinsofar as the subject in which it subsists [is described by theseattributes], for a form of this kind does not attain this qualitativeattribute [of finiteness or infinity] except in virtue of the body [in whichit subsists] that attains [attributes of] quantityIJ in virtue of itself. And

10 Wpnn 1D0. Literally, "the book on the syllogism." For the reference to the PriorAnalytics, cf. above, n. 8, end.

11 Having made mention of the proposition that the infinite motion of the heavenscannot proceed from a finite motive force, Averroes next considers thepossibility that this motion proceeds from an infinite motive force. Concerningsuch a motive force one may assume either: (1) that this force exists inseparation from the celestial body; or (2) that it subsists in the celestial body. Inthe case of the second alternative it can further be assumed (a) that the body inwhich the celestial motive force subsists is finite; or (b) that it is infinite.That the celestial motive force subsists in an infinite body is disproved in thepresent paragraph, and that it subsists in a finite body in the succeedingparagraph. From these two arguments Averroes concludes that the celestialmotive force exists in separation from its body.

12 The quantity of the force inhering in the body is proportional to the quantity ofthe body. Thus, if the body is finite the force inhering in it must be finite, and ifthe body were infinite, the force would be infinite.

126

Chapter Six

Aristotle noticed that if these [celestial] powers were described by the line 33attribute of infinity in virtue of their subject, it would follow from thisthat they inhere in an actually infinite subject, that is, in an infinitebody, and he has already proved that the existence of an infinite body isan impossibility." It is evident then, that there does not exist a force ofwhich it can be affirmed that it is infinite in the just-described manner,the reason being that no infinite body can exist. From this argument it isclear that the proof of the existence of an incorporeal mover rests uponthe verification of the proposition that it is false that something actuallyinfinite exists.Thus, it remained for Aristotle to ask in accordance with the requireddivision of the argument:M perhaps this power inheres in a finite body,either in one composed of matter and form or in one that is simple? Andhe begins to prove that it is impossible that there exists a power that isinfinite insofar as it exists in a finite body.15 For this assumption, that is,the assumption of one-who maintains that there exists a power that isdescribed as infinite insofar as it exists in a subject, while at the sametime this subject is assumed to be finite, is self-contradictory.In order to show this, Aristotle begins to use" the kind ofdemonstration that arouses doubt in those not accustomed to it. NowAristotle has already used this kind of demonstration in many places ofthe Physics, for example at the beginning of the seventh book and of theeighth.17 This type of proof proceeds as follows:IS he takes a proposition

13 Physics III, 5, 204a, 34-206a, 8.14 Averroes now considers the assumption that the infinite motive force of the

heavens subsists in a finite body. Cf. above, n. 11.15 nViao DIM, in corpore fmito. In place of nVns D"U3 the Hebrew manuscripts

have nVoo noa, "in the genus of'finite'." If, as has been assumed, the Latin hasthe better reading, it is possible that the Hebrew translator misread anunderlying Arabic f~T as (j-^T. But this suggestion is tenuous, since the Latintranslation of this chapter was made from the text of the Hebrew manuscripts.

16 nTOS^npVl.ThisisanArabism.TheLatinsimpryhas/ea/.TheHebrewtermnp^reflects the underlying Arabic jj-\ whose primary meaning is npV. However ij-lcan also mean Vrwn. Thus, a better translation would be nwsb V'nnm. Cf.Hebrew text, line 26.

17 '3'»rcm, ociavi. The Hebrew manuscripts have 'wwm ,'Bwai, and 'vn, "andsixth," respectively. This seems to be a copyist's mistake. Cf. Physics VII, chap.1, and Physics VIII, chap. 1.

18 Averroes' statement, in the present passage, is condensed. The proof that he hasin mind is one by reduclio adabsurdum (*]lVn Wpii; syllogismusadimpossibile).

127

De Substantia Orbis

that is possible in virtue of itself, though impossible accidentally. To ithe joins the premise the denial of which is sought, and he concludesfrom it something absurd. But he knows that a false and absurdconclusion cannot follow from laying down a premise that is possibleinsofar as it is possible, but it can only follow from a premise in whichthere is doubt." But a premise from which something absurd follows isitself absurd.This conclusion is true inasmuch as Aristotle had already explainedpreviously in the Prior Analytics that an absurd conclusion can[not]follow20 from two possible premises or from one. As an example of thishe showed that a line, insofar as it is a line, can be divided infinitely eventhough its accidental division insofar as it is a line in a natural body,

Cf. Averroes, Epitome of Prior Analytics, chap. 7, Hebrew: 22b, top; Latin:Vol. 1,2b, 50r, F-50v, G. The main syllogism [II, below], which is the only onementioned in the present passage, is a composite one (33110 Vpn; syllogismuscompositus), i.e., one the premise or premises of which are based on anothersyllogism [I, below]. Cf. Averroes, Epitome of Prior Analytics, chap. 8, Hebrew:23a bottom, ff.; Latin: Vol. 1,2b, 50v, M ff. Schematically, the proof proceedsas follows:I. (not mentioned in the present passage) First Premise: A proposition that ispossible in virtue of itself, but impossible accidentally. Second Premise: A trueproposition. Conclusion: A proposition that is possible in virtue of itself, butimpossible accidentally.II. First Premise (I, Conclusion): A proposition that is possible in virtue ofitself, but impossible accidentally. Second Premise: An ambiguous proposition[below, n. 19] (the opposite of what is to be proved is assumed). Conclusion: Anabsurd proposition.The absurd conclusion [II] cannot follow from the possible proposition [II,First Premise], nor from the premises on which it is based [I, First and SecondPremises]. Thus, it must follow from the ambiguous proposition [II, SecondPremise].

19 The ambiguous premise (psioan nmpnn) is a hypothetical disjunctiveproposition. Cf. Averroes, Epitome of Prior Analytics, chap. 5, Hebrew: 20a,top; Latin, Vol. I, 2b, 48v, G-H.

20 The Hebrew manuscripts have the reading 3"nna nanw and the Latin,translated from the Hebrew, reads "sequatur." However, on the basis of PriorAnalytics I, 14-22, especially 20, 39a, 4-13, where Aristotle demonstrates thatfrom a possible premise no necessary (in this case necessarily false) conclusioncan follow, the opposite conclusion seems to be warranted. In the light of thisconsideration I emended the text to'read 3"nrf> KV mnv, "non sequatur."

128

Chapter Six

such as water or fire, is impossible.21 Aristotle has also demonstrated the line 53following premise:22 if it is assumed that there exists a finite body thathas an infinite force, for example, the celestial body, then it is possible toassume that there exists a body larger than the celestial body though thisis impossible accidentally.23 To this he joins a premise that lays downsomething well known about these forces that are in bodies — whetherthese are forces of simple or composite bodies — namely, that the forceof a larger body is greater than the force of a smaller body, for thesecorporeal forces are described as great and small in accordance with thesize of their subjects in which they reside. Now that this premise hasbeen verified by him, Aristotle assumes that there exists a body that is

21 Averroes alludes to a proof that a given finite line cannot be infinitely divided inactuality. The proof proceeds as follows:I. First Premise: Given any unit line measuring a given finite line, a linesmaller than the given unit line can be conceived. Second Premise: Given twounequal unit lines, the number of divisions made by the smaller is greater thanthat made by the larger. Conclusion: The number of divisions made by a line ^that is smaller than a given unit line is greater than that made by the given unitline.II. First Premise (I, Conclusion): The number of divisions made by a line thatis smaller than a given unit line is greater than that made by the given unit line.Second Premise: A unit line that makes an infinite number of divisions inactuality exists (i.e., a line that is infinitely divisible in actuality exists).Conclusion: The number of divisions made by a line that is smaller than thegiven unit line is larger than that made by the given unit line (i.e., one actuallyinfinite number is greater than another). This is absurd. Thus the secondpremise of II is absurd. Cf. above, n. 18.

22 The proof of this passage proceeds as follows:I. First Premise: A body larger than the heavens can be conceived. SecondPremise: A larger body has a greater force. Conclusion: The force of the bodythat is larger than the heavens is greater than the force of the heavens.II. First Premise (I, Conclusion): The force of the body that is larger than theheavens is greater than the force of the heavens. Second Premise: The forceinhering in the heavens is infinite, i.e., the infinite force of the heavens inheres intheir finite body. Conclusion: The force of the larger body is greater than theforce of the heavens, i.e., one infinite is greater than another. This is absurd.Thus the second premise of II is absurd. Cf. above, n. 18.Aristotle reaches the conclusion of this proof in a different manner. Cf. PhysicsVIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 6.

23 A body greater than the celestial body can be conceived, since, given a finitebody, one larger than the given one can be conceived. In actuality, however, thisbody cannot exist since, as Aristotle has shown, no body exists outside theheavens.

129

De Substantia Orbis

line 59 larger than the heavens, and the existence of such a body is possible ofitself, [but] impossible accidentally. From these premises he concludesthat the force of this body is greater than the force of the smaller body,that is, the force of the heavens, the reason being the one we havementioned before, namely, that a force is described by a quantitativeattribute in accordance with the size of its subject. Now that this premisehas been verified, he adjoins to it [by way of conclusion] that there existsin a finite body an infinite force greater than the infinite force that existsin a smaller body. And this conclusion, namely, that there exists oneinfinite that is greater than another infinite, is absurd.Since Aristotle knew that this absurdity could not follow from thepossible proposition that he set down in this syllogism,24 nor from thepremise stating that the force in the larger body is greater than the forcein the smaller one, he knew that the absurdity could only follow fromthe premise stating that there exists a finite body in which there exists aninfinite force. And this is a valid proof, one about which there exists nodoubt. For Aristotle has shown already that a finite body cannotcontain an infinite force, and it makes no difference whether this force isassumed to exist in a body composed of matter and form only or in asimple body. This proof is known to be trueof body in general, whethercomposite or simple.

And it is known concerning the celestial bodies that their activities arefinite, that they move in finite times and that some move faster thanothers and some slower than others. And since the principles in virtue ofwhich the celestial bodies are moved toward their proper mover areknown, and these principles are the appetitive powers of the soul, itseems to be impossible that these forces are natural forces. For a naturalforce is only moved in respect to a certain place, and it is a force uponthe existence of which follows alteration, and it is a force which issubject to generation and corruption. On the other hand, the forces bywhich the heavens are moved are neither generated nor corruptible.Since the celestial forces are, therefore, not natural forces they mustnecessarily be a kind of soul.25 This is evident, for it would be impossible

24 Namely, the proposition that a body that is larger than the heavens can beconceived.

25 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 9 ff.

130

Chapter Six

that the celestial body be the most noble of the living beings withoutpossessing a soul. Since this celestial soul, not being generated andcorruptible, is not the result of alteration, it is separated from this bodyin respect to that property26 in virtue of which a soul is said to be theresult of alteration and in virtue of which it is said to be transient. Thereason for this is that the motion of something moved in virtue of itselfcan only come from a soul that exists in it in a manner different fromthat in which the forms of composite bodies exist in their matter, for, incomposite bodies, generation precedes alteration.It is also self-evident that the larger body has a force producing a fastermotion. Thus from the assumption that an infinite force exists in a finitebody it follows that this body is moved with a motion that is faster thanany other motion, so that it is moved in no time. This is absurd.27

Demonstrations of this kind, when they are set down in this manner, arevalid demonstrations. And only a person who is ignorant of what hasbeen explained concerning this topic in the Prior Analytics will find,difficulties in them.Thus we find that Avempace28 seems to deny the validity of these proofsand he understands from the clear statements of Avicenna that thereexists doubt concerning these matters.29Therefore we find that most ofthose who rely upon his30 books affirm as true that from the fact that theheavens have31 infinite motions it does not follow that they possess animmaterial mover.32 The reason for this error is that it is possible,according to their opinion, that in an eternal body there existssomething composed of matter and form.It is clear then that if the celestial body is [in motion], it must have an

26 I.e., the property of subsisting in its body.27' This is another proof that an infinite force cannot inhere in a finite body. C(.

Physics VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 6.28 VNibx px 133 13K. Abu Bakr ibn al-Saig (ibn Bajjah) was known among the

Latins as Avempace.29 I.e., that the mover of the celestial body is immaterial. Avempace holds with

Avicenna that the celestial bodies are composed of matter and form.30 Can refer to either Avicenna or Avempace.31 o'apn VK lV3' mViso 'rfan mjrunn, motus infmitos, quifinirentur in caelo. The

Hebrew text and the Latin translation made from it are obscure. Perhaps thereading should be Vs iVrP instead of b* "fry.

32 I.e., an immaterial mover only. •

131

De Substantia Orbis

line 94 appetitive power through which it is moved toward that mover that is itsfinal cause," that together with this appetitive power it must possess anintelligence,34 and, furthermore, that that appetitive power, despite itsexistence in a finite body, must be infinite. And in addition to all this,the celestial body is simple in accordance with what we have saidbefore.Aristotle has already proved this proposition" by means of otherdemonstrations. One of these proofs proceeds as follows:3* inasmuch asit has been shown that in the sublunar world there exist things moved invirtue of themselves that are of such a nature that some of them generateothers in a series of infinite succession, as is the case of man generatedfrom man and horse from horse, and the like, it necessarily follows thatthere exists something first moved in virtue of itself that is the cause ofthe existence of this infinite number of moved movers." For it is possible

33 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 162 ff.; also chap. 4, lines 15 ff.34 The form of the celestial body moves this body insofar as it conceives the

celestial intelligence.35 That the celestial mover does not inhere in its body as form in matter.36 The following proof is divided into two parts. First, it is shown that there exists

something first moved of itself, and afterwards that this first-moved is simple.I. The first part of the proof is based on Aristotle's proof of the existence of afirst cause (cf. Metaphysics II, 2, especially 994a, 11-19): (1) In the sublunarworld there exist beings that are generated from other beings (for example, manfrom man). Since the world, according to Aristotle, is eternal, this series isinfinite, i.e., it has no first member. I shall call this the horizontal series. (2) Inconsidering cause and effect, a series having three types of members is possible.These three are: (a) something that is only a cause; (b) something that is acause and an effect; (c) something that is only an effect. I shall call this thevertical series. (3) If there exists something that is both a cause and an effect itcan only exist if there exists something that is only a cause, for the vertical seriescannot go on to infinity. (4) The individual members of the horizontal series areboth cause and effect. Thus, even though they are infinite considered asmembers of the horizontal series, as members of the vertical series theyultimately presuppose something that is only a cause. This first cause is movedof itself.

II. The second part of the proof shows that this first cause, which is moved ofitself, cannot be composed of matter and form: (1) The sublunar beingsundergo alteration because they are composed of matter and form. (2) Theheavens do not undergo alteration. (3) Therefore, they are not composed ofmatter and form.

37 Horizontally, the series of mover and moved is infinite; vertically, it must endin something first moved of itself (cf. previous note).

132

Chapter Six

that an infinite series exists accidentally, while it is impossible that line 102something first moved exists accidentally." The reason is that thosecauses that exist in virtue of themselves undoubtedly ascend to a firstcause existing in virtue of itself, and that in this series " there must exist afirst and a last member. And those causes that are infinite accidentally,40

and which have no first or last member in their series, are necessarilyderived from this first cause. Therefore, the mover of that which ismoved in virtue of itself is moved in virtue of itself, inasmuch as it isfirst. Thus, by its very nature, it is impossible that it is movedaccidentally in the manner of those transient beings that are moved invirtue of themselves. The reason is that in the case of everything movedin virtue of itself in the sublunar sphere its motion follows uponchange41 and that change comes upon a body either from without orfrom within. But in the case of that which is first moved in virtue of itselfits motion is not preceded by change since no body exists outside thisfirst-moved, nor is this first-moved composed of a form and a matterthat is in potentiality toward the substance, but this body is simple. Andby the term "simple" Aristotle means that the body has no otherpotential matter except that which is potential in respect to placeonly.Inasmuch42 as the celestial body possesses a soul, and this by reason ofthe fact that its motion is continuous, even though [its body] is finite ofitself, thus implying that it is moved by a form in it which is an appetitivesoul, and inasmuch also as that which possesses a soul is moved by

38 I added the phrase nwxo 11PSK 'K on the basis of the Latin. The sentence is stillsomewhat obscure, but I take it to be a comment on the previous phrase. Itstates that even though horizontally there exists an infinite number of causesand effects, vertically the series must be reducible to something moved in virtueof itself, not moved accidentally.

39 The vertical series.40 Those causes that are both cause and effect and members of the horizontal

series.41 In speaking of change in this passage, Averroes has in mind primarily

substantial change, that is, generation.42 In the following, rather involved, passage Averroes sets out to demonstrate

once again that the motive force of the celestial bodies is an immaterialintelligence. He mentions incidentally that this motive force moves the heavensby being an object of thought for them.

133

De Substantia Orbis

line 114 desire which this soul has for an object of desire, and, inasmuch again asevery body is finite in respect to potentiality, it is quite evident that, ifthis appetitive power existed in this body insofar as it is a body only, itwould be finite in its motivity. And it is clear that the body acquireseternity of motion from that mover toward which the motion is directedas toward a final cause.41 And from all this it clearly follows concerningthe nature of this mover that it is an immaterial intellect and that theheavens are moved toward it only insofar as they conceive it as an objectof thought.If one were to imagine44 some celestial body in which there exists aninfinite force,45 it would follow that the motion of the whole and of thepart would be the same,4* and that each one of the things, existing in thesublunar world, which are moved by the heavens, would come to an endand the motion of the heavens would take place in no time. And this isthe meaning of what Aristotle says on this subject:47 if there were in the

43 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 2, lines 59 ff.44 In the passage that follows Averroes sets out to show that while the celestial

motive force is infinite in one respect it must be finite in another. For if it wereonly infinite, the motion of the heavens and everything contained within themwould be instantaneous. This conclusion is absurd.Having set down this proof, Averroes cites in its support a passage from the.DeCaelo which is based on the proposition that the celestial motive force is finite insome respect (cf. below, n. 47).

45 The meaning of this passage is: "If one were to imagine some celestial body inwhich there exists an infinite force which is infinite in all respects "

46 The motion of the heavens as a whole as well as that of its parts would be ofinfinite velocity. Consequently this motion would be instantaneous.

47 The proof that follows is taken from the De Caelo. In the present discussionAverroes is not interested in the proof as such but only in one of its premises,which states that every finite body must possess a finite potentiality. From thispremise it follows that the motive force of the celestial body must be finite insome respect. This passage from the De Caelo is important because Averroestakes it to be the one in which Aristotle states explicitly that the celestial motiveforce is finite in some respect (cf. quotation at the end of this note).For a citation of the relevant portions of this passage from the De Caelo andAverroes' Long Commentary on it, cf. above, chap. 3, n. 32. For Averroes'discussion of the finiteness of the celestial motive force, cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3,lines 52 ff. Cf. also, chap. 4, lines 30 ff.The manner in which the celestial motive is finite, and the problems arisingfrom this proposition, are also discussed by Averroes in Long Commentary onPhysics VIII,' com. 79, Vol. IV, especially 426v, H-I, and 426v, M-427r, D. Inthis discussion Averroes states: "Et haec dubitatio est fortior omnibus

134

Chapter Six

body possessing stars more stars than there are, this body would stand line 121still since its moving force is finite above that which it moves. And if thisbody stood still then the first mover could not impart to it continuity ofmotion prevailing over the principle of destruction and thus its motionwould be destroyed. And if its motion were destroyed then it itselfwould be destroyed by rest, and all those beings that exist in virtue ofmotion would also be destroyed. Praised be He Who has provided thisworld with the existence of this noble body that has finite motion in onerespect48 and infinite motion in another.49

Inasmuch as the movement of that which is first moved in virtue of itselfdoes not come to an end, and inasmuch as this first-moved is not movedaccidentally, for the mover which moves it as an efficient cause is thesame as that which moves it as a final cause,50 it is clear that the firstmover belonging to this first-moved is one and simple and also thatit cannot undergo alteration seeing that it produces motion con-tinuously. And it is also clear that the first-moved is one and simple,inasmuch as it is not moved accidentally, for if the first-moved werecomposed of form and matter, it would be moved accidentally. All thisbeing so, it is evident that there exists a first mover which is simple andunchangeable and which is necessarily immaterial. And it is also clearthat there exists something simple that is the first that is moved by theprime mover, and that is the heavens. This is what we wanted toexplain.

Aristotle has already explained this matter by stating that if there existssomething composed of two opposites, and one of these opposites existsseparately, it follows that the other one also exists separately. For

dubitatioaibus, quae possunt accidere hie. Maxime cum Aristoteles expressedicit in secundo de caelo et mundo quod caeli est potentia finita: ubi redditcausam quare non insunt caelo stellae maiores his quae sunt illi: si enim dicithoc esset, fatigaretur," "And this question [concerning the fmiteness of thecelestial motive force] is weightier than all those questions which may occurhere. Especially since Aristotle states explicitly in the second book of the DeCaelo that the heavens have a finite potentiality, in which passage he sets downthe reason why there do not inhere in the heavens more stars than there are inthem. For he states, that if they possessed more stars than they do, they wouldbe subject to fatigue..." (426v, L).

48 That is, in respect to intensity (pnn; vigor). Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3, lines 61 ff.49 That is, in respect to time (JOT3; in tempore). Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 3, lines 61 ff.50 Cf. Hebrew text, chap. 1, lines 174-176.

135

De Substantia Orbis

136 example, if there exists something moved, which in turn movessomething else, and if, furthermore, there exists something which, beingmoved, does not move something else, it clearly follows from this thatthere must exist something that produces motion without being moved,this latter existing completely separate.51 Another example is the case ofcolor. For if there exists a color composed of whiteness and blackness,for instance, red," and if, furthermore, black exists by itself, it followsthat white also exists by itself, separately from red.Also," as Aristotle maintains, a principle must be prior by nature to thatof which it is a principle.54 The reason for this is that a principle does notneed for its existence that of which it is the principle. For if it had need ofit, then it would not be prior by nature, the reason being that somethingthat is prior by nature is of such a kind that, when it ceases to exist, thenthat to which it is prior also ceases to exist.55 This being so, no formsubsisting in matter can be prior to the matter in the sense of prior bynature.56 Therefore it is not true that there exists a first principle57

51 Cf. Metaphysics II, 2, especially 994a, 11-19.52 According to Aristotle all intermediate colors are composed of black and white,

which are contraries. Cf. Physics I, 5, 188b, 24-25.53 The following passage presents another proof that the celestial body is not

composed of matter and form: (1) The motive force of the celestial body doesnot need the body for its existence, while the body, on the other hand, needs themotive force. Thus the motive force of the celestial body, that is, its form, is bynature prior to its body. (2) In transient beings the form is contemporaneouswith the matter, for the form cannot exist without the matter and vice versa. (3)From this it follows that the celestial body cannot be composed of matter andform.

54 Ax\s\o\\t,MetaphysicsW\\, 10,1087a,3-4: "...the element or principle is priorto the things of which it is the principle or element."

55 Categories 12, 14b, 11-13: "for in those things, the being of each of whichimplies that of the other, that which is in any way the cause may reasonably besaid to be by nature prior to the effect."Physics VIII, 7,260b, 17-19: "A thing is said to be prior to other things when, ifit does not exist, the others will not exist, whereas it can exist without theothers."Metaphysics V, II, 1019a, 1-4: "...others are called prior and posterior inrespect to nature..., i.e., those which can be.without other things, while theothers cannot be without them."

56 In transient substances matter in order to exist needs the form and vice versa.57 Namely, an ultimate principle of motion, that is, the heavens.

136

Chapter Six

composed of form and matter. Furthermore, everything composite is ime 146potentially simple and there is no eternal thing that has a power throughwhich it is dissolved.58These proofs that Aristotle uses in such a measureare, as you can see, trustworthy and true.May God be pleased with us that we have written concerning thisquestion, which is a most worthy one, and it is the most important oneabout which philosophers have erred. This was written in Morocco inthe year 574" according to the reckoning of the founder60 of thereligion. It is finished. Praise be to God.

58 In composite substances the matter is one and simple in potentiality, but manyin actuality, while in the celestial bodies it is one and simple in actuality. Thisstatement implies another argument for the fact that the celestial body is notcomposed of matter and form.

59 This date corresponds to the year 1178. Cf. Renan, Averroes, p. 64; also L.Gauthier, Ibn Rochd (Averroes), (Paris, 1948), p. 13. Gauthier suggests that apart of the De Substantia Orbis was written in 1178 and another part in 1179. Heidentifies the date of our passage with the year 1179. Note that Gauthierwrites: "1178: Partue du commentaire (sic!) sur le Sermo de substantiaorbis...."

60 m ? tnnnn poV, ad computum innovators legis. The Hebrew manuscripts readmV umnnn pnV, but since there are other instances in which the translatortook an Arabic active for a passive (cf. above, chap. 1, n. 59), I accepted the textof the Latin version. Cf. also, Steinschneider, Hebraische Ubersetzungen, p. 186.

137

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books, manuscripts and articles cited in the notes

Alexander of Aphrodisias, FT Mabddi' al-Kull C'The Principles of theAll"), in Aristu 'ind al-'Arab, ed. A. Badawi, Cairo, 1947.

Algazali, Tahafut al-Falasifah (Tahafot al-Falasifat), ed. M. Bouyges,S.J., Beirut, 1928; English: A. Hyman and J.J. Walsh, eds.,Philosophy in the Middle Ages1, Indianapolis, 1983, pp. 283-291.

Alvaro de Toledo (Toledanus), Commentario al "de substantia orbis,"ed. M. Alonso, S.J., Madrid, 1941.

Anawati, G.C., Essai de Bibliographic Avicennienne, Cairo, 1950.Aristotle, Opera, ed. I. Bekker, Berlin, 1831-1870 (reprint, Berlin,

1960-1961).

— The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, ed. W.D. Ross,Oxford, 1908-1931.

— Opera Latine cum commentariis Averrois, rec. Nicolas Vernia,Venice, 1483.

— Omnia quae extant opera, et Averrois Cordubensis... commentarii(see Averroes).

— Aristotle's Physics, ed. W.D. Ross, Oxford, 1936.— De Caelo, trans. W.K.C. Guthrie, Cambridge, Mass.-London, 1945

(Loeb Classical Library).— Aristotle's Metaphysics, ed. W.D. Ross, I-II, Oxford, 1958.Assemanus, St Ev. & Jos. Sim., Bibliothecae Vaticanae Codd. MSS.

Catalogus, Rome, 1756.Augustinus Niphus,... Commentationes in librum Averrois de substantia

orbis, Venice, 1508.Averroes, Latin translations of commentaries on works of Aristotle, in

Aristotle, Omnia quae extant opera, et Averrois Cordubensis in eaopera omnes, qui ad haec usque tempora pervenere commentarii, I-IX, Venice, 1562-1574 (reprint, Frankfort o. M., 1962). In thefollowing items: Omnia.

— Kol Meleket Higgayon (Epitome of Organon), Riva di Trento, 1560(Hebrew). References to the Hebrew translation of the books ofAverroes' Epitome of Organon in the items that follow are to thisedition.

139

De Substantia Orbis

— Epitome of Isagoge, Hebrew: Kol Meleket; Latin: Omnia, I, 2b.— Epitome oiDe Interpretatione, Hebrew: Kol Meleket; Latin: Omnia,

I, 2b.— Epitome of Prior Analytics, Hebrew: Kol Meleket; Latin: Omnia,

I, 2b.— Averroes' Three Short Commentaries on Aristotle's "Topics,"

"Rhetoric," and "Poetics," ed. and trans. Ch. Butterworth,Albany, 1977.

— Lang Commentary on Physics, Omnia, IV.— Middle Commentary on De Caelo, Hebrew: MS Oxford, Bodleian,

No. 1380; Latin: Omnia, V.— Long Commentary on De Caelo, Omnia, V.— Middle,Commentary on De Generatione et Corruptions Hebrew: ed.

S. Kurland, Cambridge, Mass., 1958; Latin: ed. F.H. Fobes,Cambridge, Mass., 1956; English: trans. S. Kurland, Cambridge,Mass., 1958.

— Long Commentary on De Anima, ed. F.S. Crawford, Cambridge,Mass., 1953.

— Long Commentary on Metaphysics, Arabic: ed. M. Bouyges, S.J.,I-III, Beirut, 1938-1948; Latin: Omnia, VIII.

— In librum V (A) metaphysicorum Aristotelis commentarius, ed. R.Ponzalli, Bern, 1971.

— Tahafut al-Tahafut (Tahafot at-Tahafot), ed. M. Bouyges, S.J.,Beirut, 1930; English: trans. S. van den Bergh, London, 1954;German: trans. M. Horten, Die Hauptlehren des Averroes nachseiner Schrift — Die Widerlegung des Gazali, Bonn, 1913.

Avicenna, Al-Shifa", Metaphysics, ed. G.C. Anawati and S. Zayed,Cairo, 1960; Latin: Opera, Venice, 1508.

Beit-Arie, M. & Colette Sirat, Manuscrits mediivaux en caractereshebraiques, II, Jerusalem-Paris, 1980.

Bonitz, H., Index Aristotelicus, Berlin, 1870 (reprint, Graz, 1955).Davidson, H.A., "John Philoponus as a Source of Medieval Islamic

and Jewish Proofs of Creation," Journal of the American OrientalSociety, LXXXIX (1969), 357-391.

Duhem, P., Le Systime du Monde, IV, Paris, 1916.Ermatinger, C.J., "Notes on Some Early Fourteenth Century Scholas-

tic Philosophers," Manuscripta, III (1959), 155 ff.; IV (1960), 29ff.

140

Bibliography

Feldman, S., Philosophy Manuscripts from the Library of the JewishTheological Seminary of America, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1974.

Firkowitsch, A., Handschriftlicher Catalog der mss, I. Sammlung,welche jetzt in Petersburg, n.d.

Gauthier, L., Ibn Rochd (Averrois), Paris, 1948.Gilson, E., History of Christian Philosophy, New York, 1955.Glatzer, M., & Ch. Berlin, Hebrew Manuscripts in the Houghton Library

of Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass., 1975.Goichon, Ame"lie Marie, La Distinction de I'Essence et de I'Existence

d'apres Ibn STna, Paris, 1937.Goldstein, Helen Tunik, "New Hebrew Manuscript Sources for

Averroean Texts," Journal of Near Eastern Studies, XXXVIII(1979), 29-31.

Hyman, A., "Aristotle's 'First Matter' and Avicenna's and Averroes'

'Corporeal Form,'" Harry A. Wolfson Jubilee Volume, Jerusalem,1965, English Section, I, 385-406.

— "The Composition and Transmission of Averroes' Ma'amar be-

'Esem ha-Galgal," Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A.Neuman, Philadelphia, 1962, pp. 299-307.

Ioannes de Ianduno (Jandunus), In libris Aristotelis De Caelo etMundo..., quibus adiecimus Averrois sermonem de SubstantiaOrbis, cum eiusdem Ioanni commentario ac questionibus, Venice,1552.

Joseph ben Judah ibn Aqnin (Aknin), Ma'amar bi-Mehuyyab ha-

Mesi'ut (Drei Abhandlungen), ed. M. Lowy, Berlin, 1879.Koran, ed. G. Fliigel, Leipzig, 1858.Kristeller, P.O., her Italicum, I, London-Leiden, 1963.Lacombe, G., Aristoteles Latinus, I-II, Rome, 1939 and Cambridge,

1955; Supplement, Bruges-Paris, 1961.MacClintock, S., Perversity and Error: Studies on the 'Averroist' John of

Jandun, Bloomington, Ind., 1956.Marcus Antonius Zimara, Solutiones con'tradictionum in dictis Averrois

super sermone de substantia orbis, in Aristotle, Omnia quae extantopera... (see Averroes), IX, 158v-159r.

Maynettus Maynetius Bononiensis, Commentarii... in librum Averrois

de substantia orbis, Bologna, 1580.Moses Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, Arabic: ed. I. Joel, Jerusa-

141

De Substantia Orbis

lem, 1930-1931; Hebrew: trans. Samuel ibn Tibbon, ed. J. EvenShemu'el, Jerusalem, 1981; English: trans. S. Pines, Chicago,1963.

— Treatise on the Art of Logic, ed. M. Tiirker, Review of the Institute ofIslamic Studies, Istanbul University, Vol. Ill, Parts 1-2 (1959-1960); corr. ed., Ankara, 1961; Arabic text in Hebrew letters: ed.I. Efros, Proceedings of the American Academy for JewishResearch, XXXIV (1966); partial Arabic text, medieval Hebrewtranslations and English translation: ed. and trans. I. Efros,Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, VIII(1938).

Moses of Narbonne (Narboni), Commentary on Averroes' Ma'amarbe-'Esem ha-Galgal (Hebrew). The manuscript cited in the notes is:Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 918.

Nardi, B., Saggi sull'aristotelismo padovano dal secolo XIV al XVI,Florence, 1958.

— Sigieri di Brabante nel pensiero del Rinascimento italiano, Rome,1945.

Neubauer, A., Catalogue of Hebrew Manuscripts in the BodleianLibrary, I, Oxford, 1886.

Nicold Vito di Gozzi,. . . Commentaria in sermonem Averrois de sub-stantia orbis, Venice, 1580.

Pasinus, J., rec, Codices Manuscripti, Biblioth. R. Taurinensis etc., I,Turin, 1749.

Pietro Pomponazzi, Super libello de substantia orbis expositio etquaestiones quattuor (Corsi inediti dell'insegnamento padovano},

ed. A. Poppi, Padua, 1966.Renan, E., Averroes et I'averroisme, in Oeuvres Completes de Ernest

Renan, ed. H. Psichari, III, Paris, 1949.Saadia, Kitdb al-'Amdnat wa'l-'I'tikddat, ed. S. Landauer, Leyden,

1880; Hebrew: trans. Judah ibn Tibbon, Josefov, 1885.Steinschneider, M., Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der koniglichen

Bibliothek zu Berlin, II: Verzeichnisse der Hebraischen Handschrif-ten, Berlin, 1878.

— Die Hebraischen Handschriften der.K. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek inMunchen2, Munich, 1895.

— Die Hebraischen Obersetzungen des Mittelalters und die Juden als

142

Bibliography

Dolmetscher, Berlin, 1893 (reprint, Graz, 1956).Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, in Opera omnia, IV, Rome,

1888; English: Basic Writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas, ed. A.C.Pegis, I, New York, 1945.

Thorndike, L., A History of Magic and Experimental Science, V, NewYork, 1941.

Tiberius Bacilerius, ...Lectura... in tractatum Averrois de substantiaorbis, Papie, 1508.

de Vaux, R., "La Premiere Entre"e d'Averroes chez les Latins," Revuedes Sciences Philosophiques et Thiologiques, XXII (1933), 193-245.

Wolfson, H.A., "The Amphibolous Terms in Aristotle, Arabic Philo-sophy and Maimonides," Harvard Theological Review, XXXI(1938), 157-173 (reprinted in H.A. Wolfson, Studies in the Historyof Philosophy and Religion, eds. I. Twersky and G.H. Williams, I,Cambridge, Mass., 1973, pp. 455-477).

— "Averroes' Lost Treatise on the Prime Mover," Hebrew Union

College Annual, XIII, 1 (1950-1951), 683-710.— "Avicenna, Algazali and Averroes on Divine Attributes,"

Homenaje a Millas-Vallicrosa, II, Barcelona, 1956, pp. 545-571(reprinted in Studies in the History of Philosophy..., I, pp. 143-169).

— Crescas' Critique of Aristotle, Cambridge, Mass., 1929.— "Hallevi and Maimonides on Design, Chance and Necessity," Pro-

ceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, XI (1941),105-163 (reprinted in A. Hyman, ed., MedievalJewish and IslamicPhilosophy, New York, 1977, pp. 34-92).

— "The Kalam Arguments for Creation in Saadia, Averroes, Maimo-nides, and St. Thomas," Saadia Anniversary Volume, II, NewYork, 1943, pp. 194-245.

— Philo, I, Cambridge, Mass., 1947.Zimara, see Marcus Antonius Zimara.

Zotenberg, H., Catalogues des Manuscrits Hibreux et Samaritains de laBibliotheque Impiriale, Paris, 1866.

143

I N D E X O F R E F E R E N C E S

References are to chapters and notes; for example,I, 1 refers to Chapter One, note 1.

1. G R E E K A U T H O R

AristotleCategories12 I, 65; II, 40, 6112, 14b, 11-13 VI, 55

De Interpretation9 HI, 12

Prior AnalyticsI, 6, 28b, 11-13 VI, 3I, 14-22 VI, 20I, 15, 34a, 5-34b, 2 VI, 8I, 22, 40a, 4-18 VI, 8

TopicsI, 5, 101b, 39 I, 18

Physics1,5 1,23I, 5, 188b, 21-23 I, 23I, 5, 188b, 24-25 VI, 521,7 I, 23; II, 32I, 7, 190a, 13-190b, 10 1,20I, 7, 190a, 31-190b, 1 1,17I, 7, 191a, 7-12 I, 351,8-9 1,21I, 8, 191b, 13-17 I, 21II, 1, 193a, 28-31 1,11II, 2, 194a, 12-13 I, 1111,3 1,85II, 3, 194b, 23-29 1,1111,7 1,85II, 8, 199a, 30-32 I, 11III, 3, 202a, 13-21 IV, 4HI,5,204a,34-206a,8 III, 7; VI, 13HI, 8, 208a, 20-22 111,37IV, 9, 217a, 26-33 1,39

IV, 11,220a, 24-26 11,41V, 5, 229b, 14-21 I, 23VI, 3, 234a, 24-234b, 9 111,9VII, 1 II, 24; VI, 17VII, 1, 241b, 24-242a, 15 1,4; II, 18VII, 1, 242a, 15 ff. II, 83VIII, 1 VI, 17VIII, 4 11,6VIII, 4, 254b, 12-17 I, 4VIII, 5-6 1,92VIII, 5, 256b, 4-13 11,24VIII, 5, 257a, 3 Iff. 11,83VIII, 5, 257a,31-258a,2 1,4VIII, 6, 259b, 1-31 II, 24VIII, 6, 259b, 1-3 III, 26VIII, 7-10 111,4VIII, 7,260b, 17-19, VI, 55VIII, 7, 260b, 29-261a, 12 IV, 5VIII, 7, 261a, 13-26 II, 22VIII, 7, 261a, 27-261b, 26 IV, 6VHI.9 IV, 3VIII, 9, 265a, 13-266a, 9 II, 22VIII, 10 II, 24VIII, 10, 266a, 24-266b, 24 I, 74VIII, 10,266a, 24-266b, 6 III, 8,29,

45; IV, 30; V, 12; VI, 22, 27VIII, 10, 266a, 24-31 III, 34

De CaeloI, 2-3 II, 22 -1,2 I, 4, 77; IV, 3I, 2, 269a, 18-23 II, 22I, 2, 269b, 10-13 II, 88I, 3, 269b, 18-270a, 12 I, 78; IV, 8I, 3, 269b, 29-30 1,2

144

Index of References

I, 3, 270a, 12-35 VI, 5.I, 3, 270a, 12-22 I, 9, 71, 79; II, 19I, 3, 270a, 25-35 11,64I, 3, 270a, 33 1,2I, 3, 270b, 1-25 II, 71I, 3, 270b, 2-3 1,2I, 3,270b, 11 1,2I, 3, 270b, 22-24 1,21,5-7 I, 75; III, 29I, 5, 272a, 7-273a, 6 HI, 31I, 7, 275b, 21-23 111,29I, 9, 278b, 9-21 I, 1I, 12 IV, 23; VI, 8I, 12, 281b, 18-283b, 22 HI, 22II, 3, 286a, 11-12 1,211,4 11,23II, 6, 288b, 30-289a, 4 III, 37II, 7, 289a, 11-19 11,71II, 7, 289a, 19-35 II, 7711,7, 289a, 30 1,2II, 8 V, 16II, 12 II, 45II, 12, 293a, 4-11 III, 32; IV, 28II, 12, 293a, 10-11 111,29II, 14, 296a, 24-297a, 7 V, 17III, 1,298a, 24-298b, 11 1,10III, 6 I, 10III, 7, 306a, 9-11 I, 12

De GenerationeI, 5, 321a, 9-13II, 4-5 I, 10II, 4, 331a, 12-23

1,39

1,50

De AnimaII, 2, 413b, 24-29 VI, 20II, 6, 418b, 9 1,2III, 4, 429a, 18-29 IV, 20III, 5, 430a, 17-19 IV, 20III, 10, 433b, 27-11,434a, 10 II, 33III, 10 II, 31; IV, 17III, 12,434a,27-434b,8and 13-18 II,

33 .

MetaphysicsI, 3, 983a, 29-30 11,3211,2 II, 83; VI, 36, 51III, 4, 1000a, 5-1001a, 3 1,12IV, 2, 1004b, 27-28 I, 25V,2 1,85V, 2, 1013a, 24-29 1,11V, 7, 1017a, 35-1017b, 9 1,30V, 8, 1017b, 21-22 I, 18V, 11 11,40,61V, 11, 1018b, 11-19 1,65V, 11, 1019a, 1-14 1,65V, 11, 1019a, 1-4 VI, 55V, 15, 1021a, 14-19 III, 17VIII, 4, 1044b, 3-8 II, 32; III, 56VIII, 5, 1044b, 27-28 II, 32VIII, 6, 1045a, 36-1045b, 7 I, 30IX, 1 I, 30IX, 1, 1046a, 16-29 III, 17IX, 8, 1049b, 17-29 I, 22IX, 8, 1050b, 6-34 II, 4X, 4, 1055a, 3-10 I, 24X, 4, 1055a, 33-38 I, 25X, 7, 1057a, 18-30 I, 24X, 8, 1058a, 9-13 I, 24X, 10, 1058b, 26-1059a, 10 I, 12XII, 1, 1069a, 30-31 I, 2XII, 2, 1069b, 24-26 II, 32; IV, 24XII, 2, H)69b, 32-34 1,25 .XII, 3, 1070a, 9-10 II, 57XII, 4, 1070b, 18-21 I, 25XII, 6-8 11,29XII, 7 IV, 20XII, 7, 1072a, 19- 1072b, 4 I, 95XII, 7, 1072a, 23-27 IV, 22XII, 7, 1072a, 26 ff. IV, 17XII, 7, 1072b, 27-30 I, 96XII, 8 1,96XII, 7, 1073a, 3-13 I, 88XII, 8, 1073a, 23-1073b, 1 1,92XII, 9 1,94XIII, 10, 1087a, 3-4 VI, 54

145

De Substantia Orbis

2. KORAN AND MUSLIM AUTHORS

Koran2:109 11,862:177 11,86

I, 100I, 100

1,1001,10011,86

3:964:1745:186:879:15

AlgazaliTahafut al-FalasifahXVII 11,82

AverroesEpitome of Jsagoge1 11,60

Epitome of De Interpretation4 III, 12

Epitome of Prior Analytics4 VI, 35 VI, 197 VI, 188 VI, 18

Short Commentary on Topicsp. 161 (ed. Butterworth) I, 18

Long Commentary on PhysicsIntroduction I, 15I, t. and com. 62 I, 17I, com. 63 I, 17I, com. 67 I, 21I, com. 69 I, 35I, com. 70 I, 21, 30, 31VIII, com. 31 11,6

VIII, com. 79 IV, 31; V, 13; VI, 47

Middle Commentary on De CaeloI, 102, 3-4 VI, 8I, quaestio V, 13

Long Commentary on De CaeloII, com. 3 II, 8, 9II, com. 6 II, 8II, t. and com. 71 HI, 32; IV, 28II, com. 71 V, 13

Middle Commentary on DeGeneratione

I, part V, chap. 2 I, 39

Long Commentary on De AnimaIII, com. 14 (p. 433, ed. Crawford) I,

15

Long Commentary on MetaphysicsV, t. 15 I, 18VIII, t. and com. 12 III, 56X, t. and com. 26 I, 12XII, t. and com. 14 II, 57XII, com. 41 II, 34; III, 32; IV, 18;

V, 13XII, com. 43 IV, 18XII, com. 44 IV, 18

Tahafut al-TahdfutIV 111,23XVII 111,82

AvicennaAl-Shifa"Metaphysics, II, 1 I, 66

3. JEWISH AUTHORS

Hasdai CrescasOr AdonaiI, Prop. X, Part III, Prop. XII, Part I

146

III, 15III, 8

Joseph ben Judah Ibn AqninMa'amarpp. 11-12 (ed. Lowy) I, 66

Index of References

MaimonidesTreatise on the Art of Logicchap. 13 II, 60

Guide of the Perplexed1,53 11,82I, 68 II, 91II, 1 HI, 2, 27II, 3 I, 15

Moses ben Joshua of Narbonne(Narboni)CommentaryonMa'amarbe-'Esemha-GalgalSince this commentary follows theorder of the text, it was not indexed.The references in the notes are toMSX.

SaadiaKitab al-AmanatIntroduction II, 73

4. CHRISTIAN AUTHORS

Alvaro de Toledo (Toledanus)Commentary on De Substantia OrbisSince this commentary follows theorder of the text, it was not indexed.The references in the notes are to theAlonso edition.

Iohannes IandunusCommentary on De Substantia OrbisSince this commentary follows theorder of the text, it was not indexed.

The references in the notes are to the1552 edition.

Marcus Antonius ZimaraSolutiones contradictionum in dictisAverrois super sermone de substantiaorbis II, 34

Thomas AquinasSumma TheologiaeI, qu. 2, art. 3 III, 34

147

INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS

Numbers in regular type refer to pages; numbers in subscript refer to notes.

Abraham of Balmes 7 17 1732

Accident, Accidentscommon to celestial and terrestrial

substances compared91-98

does not necessarily produce

another — like it 94-98 9682

Acting Causecelestial — eternal 85-86celestial form as 83M

distinguished from moving cause

8538

in celestial bodies identical withmoving cause 86

two ways in which — acts 85-86853,

Action and Passionin celestial and terrestrial bodies

compared 107-110Albertus Magnus 26Alexander Achillini 27Alexander of Aphrodisias 28IOO

72,8 105praise of Aristotle 44 4415

Algazalion celestial soul 72,8on corporeal form 41, 63M

Alonso, M. 7 8 13 14 18M 27 27M

Alterationcelestial and terrestrial bodies

differ in respect to 91 91M

9683

celestial body does not undergo 89

124

celestial soul not the result of 131difference between locomotion and

96M

series of altered things must cometo an end with something

causing — which itself is notaltered 95-96

see also ChangeAlvaro de Toledo (Toledanus) 7 9

13 14 18 26 and passim in notesAnawati, G. C. 63M 731OiAngels

identical with celestial souls 72^Antonius Brasavola 27Antonius Faventius (Antonio

Cittadini) 27Appetite — see DesireAristotle 7 9 14 15 17 21 28 29 32 34

46 47 52 53 54 65 66 67 68 69 7073 86 89 93 94 98 100 105 109 110112 113 114 115 116 117 121 122124 126 127 128 129 130 132 133134 135 136 137 and passim innotes

praise of 44 4415

Assemanus, St Ev. & Jos. Sim. 134

204J

Augustine 26Augustinus Bonucius de Aretios

(Agostino Bonucci) 27Augustinus Niphus 26 2677Avempace (Ibn Bajjah) 28100 131

1 3 1 M 29 30

Averroes (Ibn Rushd) 7 8 9 13 14 1517 18 21 28-35 and passim innotes

Avicenna (Ibn Slna') 21 28 30 31 33708, 73,o, 131K,

celestial body composed of formand matter 102l} ,6 103,,1094S 123-124 1234 131 1313O

celestial body possesses both afinite and infinite force 104-105 U73I

148

Index of Names and Subjects

celestial body possesses a power ofdeclination in addition to soul77-78 77I2 103-104

celestial efficient and final causesdiffer from one another 70-71

celestial souls are forms in matter72-73 72,8

on corporeal form 417 53W 6\m

63-65 63W

on necessary and possible existence104-105 10423 24 10526 27

proof of existence of God 104-10510526 27

Badawi, A. 44,5

Beit-Arie, M. 14,, 23i9

Berlin, Ch. 146

Body, Bodiesevery — is finite 100 127heavens are immaterial — 120identical with the indeterminate

three dimensions 56the term — predicated of

celestial and terrestrial —equivocally 111

simple — are not generated orcorruptible and do notpossess a common subject59

see also Celestial BodyBonitz, H. 392

Bouyges, M. 9682 10423

Butterworth, Ch. 4718

Calefactory Form, CalefactoryForms, Calefaction

in celestial and terrestrial bodiescompared 94-98

operation of — in water 55predicated equivocally of celestial

and terrestrial bodies 95

Cause, Causesacting — and moving —

identical in celestial bodies 86dissimilarity between — and effect

94-98 9682efficient and final — in celestial

bodies are identical 69-7170*, 71H 135

efficient and final — in terrestrialbodies differ 69 69g5

finite and infinite series of 132-133

13236

of celestial motion 116 11625

of fatigue and rest in sublunarbeings 76 768

of luminosity of stars 92 92^of transient and eternal cannot be

the same in species 42 42,2

priority of — to effect 85simultaneity of — and effect 85something lacking the — of motion

must be at rest 121-123see also Celestial Form, Force,

Mover, Prime Mover, SoulCelestial Body, Bodies

as matter of celestial forms 80-818021 82 89

calefactory action of 94-98cause of the different velocities of

109composed of form and matter

(Avicenna) 1021516103171094J

123-124 1234 131 1313O

does not have two moving forces103-104

eternal motion of 99eternity of 85 85^ 112 112, 124luminosity and opacity in 92-94not generated or corruptible 67not heavy or light 67 74not subject to alteration 91 91M

not subject to quantitative andsubstantial change 120

149

De Substantia Orbis

possesses a force finite in intensityand velocity, infinite in time105-110

possesses both a finite andinfinite force (Avicenna)104-105

possesses no potentiality forsubstantial change 74 742 4 8489

possesses only potentiality forcircular locomotion 80

properties common to — andterrestrial bodies 87

properties of 65-66receive dimensions in virtue of

their forms 67-68simple (not composed of form and

matter) 67 72 74 79 84 102-103 102,5 108 113 120 124-126

1248 132-133 132,6 135-137136M

spherical shape of 80 802J

spiritual 120transparency and non-

transparency in 91-94Celestial Form, Forms

as cause of eternal motion andduration of celestial bodies82-84

as intellects 81 812,as souls 81 812,belongs to the genus "soul" 75-79differ as efficient and final causes

(Avicenna) 70-71do not belong to the genus of the

forms of the four elements74-75 755

identical as efficient and finalcauses 69 70,0 M 7193 135

incorporeal (immaterial) 6668-69 72 74, 80-81 8024 99-102108 11M30-131 133-134 135-136

nobler than celestial bodies 8686,5

not a prerequisite for the existenceof the celestial bodies 82-83

properties of 66Celestial Sphere, Celestial Substance

composed of form and matter 39-40 404

composed of mover and moved99 102

eternal 122-123form and matter in — differ from

those in terrestrial substance74-75 110-111

has a kind of matter 1216

terms by which — is described39,

Changefactors in which substantial and

accidental — agree 47-4947,,

factors in which substantial andaccidental — differ 49-51

kinds of 482J

substantial and accidental — interrestrial substances 46-4746I7

Colorin celestial bodies 93composition of 136

Contrariety, Contrariesas cause of generation and

corruption 59as causes of substantial and

accidental change 48-49 482J

4924

substantial forms are 56-59 56^terms by which first — are called

4923

Corporeal Form, Corporeitydistinction between the substantial

and the — in the terrestrialelements 53 53J7

150

Index of Names and Subjects

nature of 417 6366

predicated of celestial andterrestrial bodies according topriority and posteriority 9292*

predicated of celestial andterrestrial bodies eitheraccording to equivocation oraccording to priority orposteriority 41-42 428

Crawford, F. S. 44,5

Davidson, H. A. 121,3

Definitionconvertible with its definiendum

123-124nature of 47,8

Density and Rarityas causes of transparency and non-

transparency 91-92Desire, Appetite

and intellect as causes of celestiallocomotion 113-116 113,, ,8114,, 11522 11617 „ 130-134

in celestial body 71 81object of — as principle of

motion 81 81N

only power of celestial soul 113

113,7Determinate Three Dimensions

come to be through the substantialforms 53-54 5336 5439-

in the celestial bodies 67-6867a,

Dietrich von Freiberg (TheodoricusTeutonicus de Vriberg) 27

Dimensions — See Determinate ThreeDimensions, IndeterminateThree Dimensions

Duhem, P. 28,, 113,8

Earth 94

at rest 122 12217

is the center of the universe 122(7

Eclipse, planetary 92-93 937O

Efros, I. 90K,Egidius Romanus 26Elijah del Medigo 27Ermatinger, C.J. 278, n 83 88

Eternal, Eternity

cause of — motion of celestialbodies 133-134

celestial form as principle of —motion and duration 82-84

83M

— of motion and time 100— of world 121-123 121,3something subject to generation

and corruption cannot become- 72 72,8

Feldman, S. 1410 23J7

Ferrandus de Hispania 27Finite

in velocity and intensity, infinite intime 105-110 10737 113I8

114,, 1173,infinite force cannot inhere in —

body 127-130 129^line cannot be infinitely divided in

actuality 1292,two senses of the terms — and

infinite. 110Fire

calefactory action of 94-95how the light of— becomes visible

92 92,,is not the first calefactory element

97-98 9788

Firkowitsch, A. 14,«Fobes, F.H. 543,Force

celestial form as acting 83M

151

De Substantia Orbis

celestial —incorporeal (immaterial)66 80-81 99 134-135

celestial — infinite in motivity99-102

celestial — not a natural force130-131

corporeal — finite in motivity99-102

finite in intensity and velocity,infinite in time 105-110

in finite body 121,2infinite — does not inhere in finite

body 100 127-131properties of celestial 66-67see also Celestial Form

Form and Matteras causes 42n

celestial bodies composed of

(Avicenna) 102,, ,6 103,710945 123-124 1234 131 1313O

celestial bodies not composed of102-103 102,6 10317 135-137

in celestial and terrestrialsubstance 39-40 74-75 89-90110-111

how — are predicated of celestialand terrestrial bodies 40-43416 82 120

see also Celestial Body, CelestialForm, Substantial Forms

Frigorific Formoperation of — in air 55-56

Gauthier, L. 13759

Gilson, E. 44,5Glatzer, M. 146

God, Allah 73 731OO 97 97M 98 110111 117W 119 119M 135 137

Avicenna's proof of, the existenceof 105 105M 27

Averroes' critique of Avicenna'sproof of the existence of10527

whether or not — is temporallyprior to the world 8542

Goichon, Amelie Marie63M 104*

Goldstein, Helen Tunik18 18}]

Gregorius Arminensis 83M

Heatproduction of—by celestial bodies

and fire compared 94-98Henricus Totting de Oyta 27Horten, M. 1042J

Hyman, A. 15*, 39, 41, 96,,2 118,2119M

Indeterminate Three Dimensionscannot be the first form of prime

matter (Avicenna) 63-64 63M

are the first form of prime matter53-54 53* 61-65

potentially one and many 88-89potentially one in number, not

actually 87-88see also Prime Matter

Infinite — see FiniteIntellect

and intelligible are identical incelestial bodies 71 7193 w

celestial form as 81 8129

celestial — as cause of eternallocomotion and duration ofthe celestial body 82-85

celestial — as cause of celestialmotion 113-115 113,7 ,8

see also Celestial Form

Joannes de Sacro-Bosco 11318

Johannes Philoponus 2810O 121121, „

John of Jandun (Ioannes Iandunus)9 15 19 25 26 and passim in notes

152

Index of Names and Subjects

Joseph ben Judah ibn 'Aqninon corporeal form 63M

Judah ibn Tibbon 9373

Judah Romano 7 25 26 27

Knowledgeman's — of the celestial and

sublunar spheres compared98

Kristeller, P. O. 26,2 27M 8J 86 8, 94

Kurland, S. 54W

Lacombe, G. 2672Levi ben Gershom 27Life

in celestial bodies 71-72Light

calefactory action of 94-95Living Being

predicated of celestial andterrestrial substancesaccording to priority andposteriority 90 90M

Lowy, M. 63M

Luminosity and Opacityin celestial and terrestrial bodies

compared 92-94predicated of celestial and

terrestrial bodies according toequivocation 92 92^

Lutsky, M. 19,8

MacClintock, S. 26,4Marcus Antonius Zimara 26 83M

Marx, A. 1938

Matter, "Matter," Mattersand "subject" compared 8232

11312 124celestial and terrestrial—compared

121, 137J8

classification of 8022

exists in actuality only as visible,form only as intelligible 8989J7

nature of celestial 121124see also Celestial Body, Form and

Matter, Prime MatterMaynettus Maynetius Bononiensis

26 2676

Michael Scotus 7 17 17j,Milky Way 93 9373

Missile 94Moon

nature of 93-94receives its light from the sun

93-94 94,jspot in 94,6Themistius' opinion concerning the

nature of 120Morocco 15 137Moses ben Joshua of Narbonne

(Narboni) 7 9 15 16 17 27 andpassim in notes

Moses Maimonides 72,8 96g2 98,, 992

praise of Aristotle 4415

on predication according toequivocation 90«>

on proof of the existence of God10527

Motion, Locomotion

and alteration distinguished 96

9684

— in terrestrial substances75-76

— must take place in time101-102

requires an unmoved mover 96see also Change, Soul

Mover, Moverscelestial — finite in some

respect 13447

incorporeal (immaterial)99-103 99, 124 126-127 126,,133-134

of sublunar beings are corporealforces 99

see also Celestial Form

153

De Substantia Orbis

Nardi, B. 26,5 27,oNecessary

in virtue of another, possiblethrough itself 104-105104:3:4

in virtue of itself 104-105 104:3 24

Nicolas Vitigozzi 26 2679

Nicolatus Vernia 14Non-being, Privation

as factor in change 47-48 4821

Oliverius Arduinus (OliveriusSenensis) 27

Pasinus, J. 14,jPico de la Mirandola 27Pietro Pomponazzi 7 26 26^Pines, S. 44,5

Planets 92-93Ponzalli, R. 47,8

Poppi, A. 7 26,8Possible, Possibility —see Necessary,

PotentialityPosteriority

according to nature 62according to time 62see also Priority

Potentialityand possibility 4822

and privation 121,}

in celestial bodies 121see also Prime Matter

Power — see ForcePredication of Terms

according to equivocation 42 42g90 90a, 92 92* 67 95 9581 9685

110 111according to increase and

diminution 91according to priority and

posteriority 42 42, 90 90^,9161 92 92,6 67 95 9581 968S 97

according to stronger and weaker91 9162

kinds of 416 90*,Prime Matter

exists only insofar as it is visible89 8957

how — is known 52 5235

how — receives quantitativedetermination 5955

indeterminate three dimensions arethe first form of 56-57 5745 60

never without the indeterminatethree dimensions 55 5541 565745

not simple in actuality 54-55one in number potentially not

actually 87-88 8749 50

potentiality as the nature of50-52 50,0 5131

potentially many 60-62potentially one and many 88-89potentially receptive of

enumeration 59Prime Mover

as principle of celestial motion

812, 97-98 113I8 117 117W

question concerning the nature of123

simplicity of 135see also Celestial Form

Priorityaccording to nature 85-86

8539 40 4I 42 136-137 13655

according to time 85-868 5 3 9 40 41 42

and posteriority predicatedaccording to cause and effect91 91 t l

Privation — see Non-being,Potentiality

Proposition, Propositionsambiguous 128 128,

154

Index of Names and Subjects

no absurd and impossibleconclusion can follow from a—that is false but possible124-126 124g

no absurd and false conclusion canfollow from a — that ispossible 127-130

two kinds of contradictory102,2

see also SyllogismPsichari, H. 1731

Qualities, Fourin celestial and terrestrial bodies

compared 95-98predicated of celestial and

terrestrial bodies according toequivocation 95-98 958, 9785

Radulphus Brito 27Renan, E. 173, 27 2787 „ ,2 M ,5 13759

Restearth at 122 12217

in celestial bodies 122-123Robert of England 113lg

Ross, W.D. 42,j 5235

Saadia 93,3

Scotus, H. 15Series

finite and infinite — of thingsmoved and moving 132-133

Sirat, Colette 14,, 2359

Solomon ibn Ayyub 7 8 13 132 1422

Soul, Soulsas principle of celestial locomotion

77-79 77, 7824

as principle of terrestriallocomotion 75-76 757 76,81-82

celestial — are material forms(Avicenna) 72-73 72,,

celestial — is immaterial 133-134celestial — is incorporeal in one

sense, in another not112-113

celestial — possesses onlyappetitive power 113-116,

113,7circular motion proper to 77-79

77,o 78,4

in celestial bodies 71-72 74-79 75,81-83 130-131

in terrestrial beings 112-113sensitive and imaginative — in

terrestrial beings 82 8233

Stars 94 106-107 10632 120 122 122,6134-135

activities of — in producing thefour qualities 95

luminosity of 92-93the same in nature as their spheres

92-93Steinschneider, M. 13 13, 2 5 14

14, , n 15 15,, ,6 162, 17,, 2045

22M55 5,23 235,5,24,0 25 25,0 2727,2 „ „ 44,j 73,o, 937J „ 107*118,2 137(0

Subject — see MatterSubstantial Forms

are contraries 56-59 56<4are divisible in virtue of the

divisibility of their subject 53Sun

gives light to the moon 93-94 94,5

Themistius' opinion concerning

the nature of 120

Syllogismby reductio ad absurdum 127,,third figure of 123see also Proposition

Themistius 281OO 120Thomas Aquinas 26

155

De Substantid Orbis

proof of the existence ofGod 10527

Thorndike, L. 27W

Thoughtin celestial body 71-72 71,4

object of— as principle of celestialmotion 81N

Tiberius Bacilerius Bononiensis 2626,5

Timeas accident of the celestial sphere

85every motion must take place in

101-102Transparency

and non-transparency in celestialand terrestrial bodiescompared 91-94

common to fire and air 56and non-transparency compared

with calefaction 95Tiirker, M. 90«,Twersky, I. 416

Van den Bergh, S. 96g2 1042,de Vaux, R. 17M 3, 18^

Walter Burley 26-27Williams, G. H. 416

Wolfson.H.A. 132 414,428 44,5 482252M 5747 71* 72,8 9162 100* 10215

1O321 10424 10525 27 121,3

Zayed, S. 6366

Zotenberg, H.235,

133 147 22j,

156

n,rnpn nVvn btn nan bH nininn 12: a processivus

180:K appetitus motus ad inferius aiaoa pnynn pijrun]

114:1 desyderium 11:3 aut ad superius motus localis in

"jrmm nVi3» 'nVsn nsnann 67:3 circuitu

74:1 desyderativus 27:1 motus infinitus nJWJPin nvunn

WD: ,rn c a n s DI nm n'nsi f i s DJ HKT ut primus motus

rrVan -rk23: n infinitus

(96:'

91:1 aequivocatio 68:3 perficitur

38:1 infinitus in actu

mVao ,n»:a o'3n» OJ nxn"UPDX 'X) J3n' X7 :: |3n

19: X impossible est

n:ian

30:3 figura

mfVipn njiann

4:1 figura tertia

Tan129:1 continuus

59:3 semper

nvran63:3 aeternitas

116:1 continuatio

'XJn

40: X necessarium est

in:nn :: mn39:1 cogat

ninan

10:3 motus

m w n ninann11-10:3 motus rectus

oi,7B3 nsninn

5:K motus localis

n'Bipa nsnin

27-26:1 localiter

manan nmain57:3 motus aeternus

?r>ujn nvun

motus declinationis

12:3

ntnnn njnyin

50:1 motus aeternus

31303 nwin

34:3 motus circularis

nmaon nyiinn

26:1 motus circularis

01,782 pnvnn nsn»

motus localis

15: K aequivoce

(99:2J

80: x communicant

61: N communicari

94: J conveniunt

86:3 communicat

lonr

29: X conveniunt

mxn115:1 desiderium

nxin' :: (7»ID) nxn

31:1 denominatur

34:1 denominarentur

(DV) nxn

31: X dispositio

25:1 denominatio

ixnn aT3

164: X huiusmodi

151: K tali modo

rnVin

51:1 conclusio

n,77 -ps nxn nooin

V>nnn :: Vnn26:1 incoepit

nVnn95: X primitus

126: X primum

196:3 prior

nVnna45:1 in principio

tvbsn58:3 finisM n'Van f x

20: n infinitus

164: X perficiens

pnnxn maVuTi :: niBVifultima perfectio

198:3

uy)115:3 illic

71:3 caelum

107:1 sub caelo36:1 inferior

mis(66:2i 'y,71) "B'BB?

64:2 caelestis,DU;J .DIJ D'3i» oi nxn

mix ,TIO* ,'n

145:3 sol

niurn :: (VJTID) nys

175:X differat

1JB"

162:3 transmutant

96:3 transmutaretur

ninur* xV mica

alterans non

175:3 alteratum

31: X transmutatio

transmutatio

secundum

12:1 substantiam

38:1 falsum

0*1 jTO

117: K impossibilia

(17: 2J tps) nntp

193: K fundamentum

,»3U ,m3'K D'31» DJ 17X1

mo*VWOT :: 7Xtt>

99:3 quaerendum est

nVxtt

149:1 quaesitum

91:1 quaestio

(ov) -urn3:H alius

32:3 caeterus

rrwn : : mtt>

125:1 providit

VllWfl :: V"TtP

16:1 laboravit

1Bltt>

72:3 conservanst\rm

140:1 nigredus

nnmr139:1 nigredinis

«]»p»n nwiwi :: row

superficiens continens

62:3

68:3 mensura

148:1 quantitas

Vsann :: (tonD) bsv105:3 intelligitur

ilratt"

118:1 intelligunt

bsnvn37: K considersvit

lVsnttrp

73:1 intelligerentur

(QW) Van?

43:3 intellectus

23:1 intelligentia

Viaj bsw

intelligentia abstracta

21:1

T1D3 VaiP

intelligentia abstracta

• 22:1

59:3 debes scire

i>n invn185:3 dignius

VT ,1?n , p 0'3-W DJ HKT

66: X signum

pwxn104:1 primus

,n»wn .'VIM D'3i» DI nxi,JT>J» ,nana ,nain .nVnnn

nviin ,nao .wisna .avoao'jiwxnn

140:3 antiqui

homines priores

23: K

ns p » nKi an(14: h an) lan

104: K multitudo

':rm1:H spiritualis

DB;J yis DJ nxn|nrn

159:3 remotus

jnm iriTn

25-24: X ultimus

yja ,o"n D'ais OJ nxiaair :: aan

2:K componitur

x nai29:3 demonstratus

nsr> :: n n4:H idest

ninn'149:1 complaceat

T i n

20:1 hoc est

29: X scilicet

naiV 'nn4-.n idest

13: X scilicet

51 :X videlicet

'aan123:3 passivus

nwp141 :X levitas

(49: 2 J Vap)naj?

81:3 acquirit

up190: X acquirunt

vnp192:3 adepti sum us

njpn

65:3 largitur

n3,r»

facere acquirere

123:1

166:3 largitur

60:3 largiens

(32: h . . .V ]nn)nij?n

29:3 largitur

pp18 :H habitus

maim T.YI) Tixpa :: nixp

(63:2J

61:3 breviter

nxp4:1 aliquis

nxp nnxp139:3 se adinvicem

182:3 frigidus

131,7' :: 31,7

73 :K vincirrari

rnp18:3 contingit

an,?195:3 propinquus

(16:h nV«)nxu :: atC\28:3 apparet

nxr173:3 apparet

41:3 videturnxv

82:3 indicatjnnw ixn :: i x i

713,7

18:1 receptio

48:3 recipiens

aVl3» "p» 02 HKT(41:21 ani)lJ73,7 :: 73,7

39:2 concesserimus

77:2 recipiuntnVsp

144: K receptio]8T "pj HKT Blip

nanp16: K prius

' mpn :: Dip

82:1 praecedit

onpa50:1 praemiserat

ip

52:1 IineaV3B3 DTip :: Blip

praecedat naturaliter

144:1

"75:3 prius natura]BT3 o n p

prius tempore74:3

0"p :: Bip

48:3 fixus

50:3 est fixus

101 :K generaretur

•up76: K frigiditas

mip96:2 accidit

imp88:1 difficultasVnj p s axn pop

172: K existerent

7271 "p» D2 n«T

v?2:3 levis

ixa ma77:2 ex modo illo

ma txa ]ai114:3 et ex hoc modo

IX 7V

24:1 secundum

ma ixa 7s?108:3 hoc modo

7» ,7ir :: ,TtX

36:1 verificetur

anw13: K forma

warn mix108:3 forma caeli

rv*att?2a ai ixa

forma corporal is

70: K

avjaa anixa29:2 forma movens

miaxsn nmxaformae substantiates

51:K

nT'a'att'a nmxa

formae caelestes

36:3

pix69:3 indigentia

'nax161:3 vegetabilis

VK «]nx3 :: «inx

55: K respectu

"puxa :: "px56:3 indiget

jitsr

55:3 indiget

•puxn143:1 indigeret

38:3 indigent

313J7

136:3 concavus

" • Toon86: X corrumpat

pOD1 :: ,7S0

32:1 cessaret71»D

74:3 act us

130: X actio

71:1 opus(V»1D) 7VD

136:3 agit

VVD'

98:2 agitV»on

72: K agens

76: X facit17W

135: K agere(31:22 aVl»D) (DV) 7 «

135: K actio

68: X actus

aVi3» 'nVsa Vyon

29:1 actio infinita7VD3 i n x

89:3 idem in actu

,ri3 .KX* o'sns D2 nun

mtan .aVisamow) men' :: no

(112:22

45: X differuntU1D3 : : u")0

42:3 maximeuinm

66: X simplex

\3VDV> :: Bt»D

74: X denudatur a

77: X spolietur a

TXB :: iJf

122: X ex paneixa ms

secundum hunc36:1 modum

(3:2i aasya)iaxy nxoa

7:3 ex se

,na ,VK cany 01 nxn

IJB> .yyuna

niaxy

16:1 substantia

imaxy

177:3 se

mastya

38:3 essentialiter

173: X substantialiter

iniaxya

60:3 in se

omaxya

30: X per se

mawa6:K ex se

•rnaa .narox D'any DI nxn

mix.Tian D'any nxvaxy

nvaxy

32: X quidditas

3 T W :: 21V

127:3 admiscentur

...a ony69: X denudatur a

pnyn :: pny

93:3 transfertur

pny92:3 transferri

(nxin) VsnD

69: 3 activus

8:K agens

nao .nia'x D'any DI nxn

HOD: :: TOD

21:1 fuissent corrupti

noc81:1 corrumpatur

. loon

123:1 corrumparetur

1700'

19:1, corrumparentur

163: X constitutus

30: X existens

187: X existere

mow153: a plumbum

p y :: py

3:1 consyderavit

py:27:3 consyderare

irya :: p j

106:1 eodem modo

Vx iVy :: (7yiB)nVy

103:1 ascendunt in

44: X reducitur ad

(Otf) aVy

117:3 causa

lT>7y nnv : : jvVy

82:3 altior

nay

121:1 staret

:: (27:21 DVp) m'By

nray iV px

non constituitur

158: X

non habere

36:3 constitutionem

p y

63: X dispositio

61:1 modus

122:X res

pyn ins3:X sicut

own' :: (Vyis) oxy

54: X substantiatur

(DP) D?y

31 :X substantia

Wan oxy

1:K substantia orbis

am Van 7-ta: DXV

substantia separata

29:1 ab omni corpore

o'»a>n oxy

194: X- substantia caeli

(101:2i ipVno*) ipVioi

97:1 abscinduntur

mi'oo

131:3 raritas

niTBO

79 :K diaphaneitas

nn'oon myn

non diaphaneitas

131:3

TOO

136:3 diaphanus

orci 7w oi nx-

pOO :: (7yiO) pOO

dedit quaestionem

15:n

ipoo

1:1 dubitaverunt

(ioi:2i antnp) (ov) poo

97:1 dubitatio

41:1 quaestio

poo xVa

40:3 necessario

POO *73

26:3 sine dubio

aV136:3 densus

•nay

131:3 densitas

onV nvr) i o n y :: «]iy

(20:2i pnn'

18:1 excedunt

myj :: my

18:n caret

imy:

22: n carunt

Vx D'Viy :: aViy

185:3 reducantur ad

oViy

69:3 mundus

iaiy

-38:1 consistit

. , 145:1 constans

13:3 accidit33:1 contingit

25: K comprehendit

123: K acciditytf :: lr

147:1 dissolvatur152:3 resolvit

nao19: K causa

nron nao79:3 causa movens

nVviD nao78: a causa agens

rmvtn nao103:1 causa prima

21303 :: 313015:3 circulariter

nirun jw DI nmrnao

26: K opinio

nVuo122: X proprium

Vaio33: X deferens

11043 :K genus

nan fis DI nxnmo' :: mo

76: K cessantimo

5: a contradictoriumWDJ3 nmo

sibiipsi contradiceret'" 42:1

77: a ignoraveruntmVson mVan

79:*a valde absurdumpVlO' :: pV

144:1 aufertur

56:3 in loconyiiwin

anima appetitiva27:T

anima desyderativa114-113:1

78:1 animatushabere animam

180: Knwwn

9: a animalia.ns .vrr D'any DJ n

nmo .

74:1 animalis

O'VlXJ :: VlSJ54:3 salvarentur

ninsa190: K aeternitas

|atn mnsjaeternitas temporis

11:1

nsunn mnx:aeternitas motus

11-10:1'nxj

3:3 aeternus

104:1 non aeternusnviin f i » DI HKT

8:71 absolutus

45: a apparet

185:3 apparentius

1XUH

30: n maneat

31: n permanentium

ivon :: xm'•' " '65:1 accidit

KBHJ128:3 deferens

]nu34: T dator

mpain p udator continuationis

34: T

rru:40:1 declinationvnn yis DI HKT

133J

197:3 nobilis•mi nnv

34-33:3 nobilior

19: n impossibilis

impossibilis per- 60:1 accidens

28:K est17: X existens7:H invenitur

91 :K entia• nan *p» DI nxn

TWB3

20:1 sequiturTOD:

22:1 corruptibilis97: a corruptus

51:1 instabilismn "ps DI nun

Vaw p s nun TIDJ

189: x animanatan vnn

"anima imaginativa54:3

nwnan »DJn54:3 anima sensibilis

" "' oipaa inyjn vmanima movente ipsum

:: y«193:3 pervenit

73 :K perveniuntuyjn

193:3 pervenimus

29:1 perveniat

perducat nos198:3

( 8 : 2 J sr>sn) ron :: ma55:1 posuit

(40:2i u»xn) i:n:n38:1 posuimus

rw27: K ponit

m i100:3 ponere

mm65:1 positum fuerat

rwv54:1 poneretur

WJV186:3 ponantur

101316:1 appositus

W :: »13172:3 movet

16:1 mutat

65:} movent

6:3 moveturyyimn

19:3 moverilyyiirp

27: J moventur

194:3 accidit41:1 contingens

(36:21 mi») (D38: K subiectum

6:1 convertitur•jVnna

114:3 differens14: K diversa est159:3 diversatur119: K succedens

14: K diversae specieIDD»3 nioVnn

diversae in numero94: K

58 :S dividiT»n»

57:3 aeternus113:1 continuus

nsmn y\s DJ njnvmnn

190:3 mobilis120:1 motus

6:K moveturinsy nKD» vinuia

99:1 motus ex sep a w yjnuia

100:1 primum mobileprimum motum

109:1

incipientes189: K philosophari

Vyona88: K passivus

98:2 patiturJYD'X J\S DJ nKT

50: h (T1BJ) Vl33158 :K abstractus183: K separatus

•vm inv :: inaj197:3 eligibilius

onsVman D'prnandimensiones simplices

77: K

nwVwn B'pman60: X tresdimensiones

79: K communis150:3 conveniens

172:3 quod nigrificattVTWB

160:3 destruitT^B' :: ( 3DD) fDO

164:3 sequitur

130:3 sequuntur

178: K intellects184: K intelligens

HI Vwa :: (DW)^»51:1 verbi gratia

175:3 alterans

primus alterans174:3

182: K appetens

9:1 alterabilis126:3 alteratus

55:3 transmutabilis106:3 transmutetur

rnrwointransmutabilis

129:1

68: K communicarimnna

97:3 generatusisnna

67 :K contrarius

no

- mx'xa35:1 entitas

40:X esse

nixnraa77:3 in inveniendo

per inventionem125:1

'rnann niK'xanesse necessarium

45:1

Vapa32:1 receptivus

7:X recipiens47: X recipit

vipa139:3 eclipsat

Vaipa31:1 concessus fuerit

na pain? 'IBBI) yaipa

(44-43:21

id quod congregatur114:3

et quod aggregatur41:1

m faipaa30:1 ex hoc toto

B"ipa102:1 constituitur

mpa25:3 locus

Dipsn nt nVita118-117:3 alibi

nirun ,vm p'3i? DI nxinirun yis nio n'aipa

mW ,D11 D'31» HK1 «l'pBmpa

161:3 largitur

rnpa34: K accidens

was *riy nxi»DI -py nxi nwna

prna62: K dimensio

nao ,na D'aiy DI nKiD'soa

113:3 conveniens72: X convenit

non sint convenientes17: X specie

yian :: maimpossibile est

106:1

1S0B3 in» :: 1D0B

89:3 idem numerounum numero

104-103:X

nooaa nnv31:1 pi u res

qVnna -ps DI nxi(14:21 DVB) UIVB

13:1 paucitasamya

10:1 admixtus

uva196: a modicum

T0DB

160:3 corrumpit

BTIDB

155:3 expositor

KSB

30: X invenit

1JKS8

10:3 invenimus

17:1 esset

11: H existit

110:3 inveniturt

59:X est

5-4: n habent

Kxsn98: X inveniretur

IXJtB'

_„ 88: X sunt

113: X inveniuntur

nan nVias115:1 flnitus virtutis

n'Van Vya) iwoia nViaa

(64:21 18«a62:1 flnitus in se

n'Van Via) Vycn nViaa(55:2i Vinon

53:1 flnitus actionisn^Van Vya) Viapn nViaa

(37-36:2i Viapn

flnitus receptionis

35:1

Via 'nVa) nViaa 'nVa(15:2i n'Van

138: X infinitus

^nVa) nyjnn nViaa 'nVa(9:2i nminn n'Van Vya

infinitus motionis

8:1

.Via ">nVa) ]8ta nViaa 'nVs

(86:2i |8T3 n'Van

infinitus in tempore

83:1

Vinea nViae 'nVa35:1 infinitus in actu

.Vyo.na.pT D'siyDinxinimn

ysiaa12: n medium

nmjB19:H quies

y j 8

19:1 motivus8:X motor

9:X movens129:1 movet

pnnxn m«snultimus motor

122-121:3

]wm y »27:1 primus motor

pimn yjan121:3 ultimus motor

TO

wnna66: K contingens

(35: h ix"i)annB172:3 debet

140:1 necessarium est85: X necesse est

142:1 oportet138: X sequitur

3*nna vfonon sit necessarium

1:1

aana188:3 calefaciat

pwxin oananprimum calefaciens

189:3D'aw "pv nxn noa

naspiroxi in' 'a :: 'a(27: 2J nan ':x

quaerendum est26-25:J

inva38: X proprius

D'a73 :K aqua

1'B31: K modus8:H species

paa mx14: K idem

,0'soa D'aij oi nxi«]Vnna

asisa121:1 stellatus

(13: 2i n'Vsn V»s) nViaa107: K Hnitus

n'Vsn Via) nvjnn nVisa(8: 2 J nsnain

7:1 finitus motionisn'tan V»a) lets nVisa

(83:2J pT3finitus in tempore

• . . 80:J

nsiaa94:1 ambiguitas

via166:3 consyderans

nma192: K est impossibile

»DI "ps n«n nana0*1318

30: n loquentesn»ma

13: n gradusmna

70:3 generatuminv) Tna ini' :: Tnannnai ;22:2a nnaa

(80:21 . . . 8

21-20: J velociorrnrna

152:3 velocitasVaaia

61: K terminatusVsJia 'nta

68 :K non terminatusm»ia

8:1 definitumBVni83 :: B^ma

78: N simpliciteruVman

70:1 absolutuspma "p» OJ nxn

noia191:3 demonstrate

'nn« nciademonstratio vera

67:1

D'Nna 1]K :: KSia

92:3 invenimusasnia

3:K compositusVsnna •

178:K intellectumnaina

7:K compositus

12: K similis33:1 ut

. . .W 1B3

181:3 verbi gratiaf J» p » DI mo

mas34: K quantitas

rrav :: rna13:3 cogitur

nwV13:3 fessitudo

139:1 albedinis

mnV167:3 humiditas

n,?V

66: X accepitunpV

22: K accepimusrip

45:1 accipiatnooin inp

73 :X augeri

(24:2i inxna) nmx»117:3 posterior

nmxa ini '72:1 tardior

TXB

160:3 illuminans1BXB

praedicamentum34: X

1:X sermo2:K tractatus

Taixn naxB•6:1 dictum dicendis

(101:21 nVlJ)nK13B

195: X declaratum193:K manifestumest

1BW33 1X138

18: X manifestum est

10

ni'B'&wn mrnaripotentiae caelestes

135:K

wjyiBTn na

virtus desyderativa

95-94:1

iTB'Btt'n ni'piwin ninan

virtutes appetitivae

16:1 caelestes

naa im<103:3 unum potentia

naa craiin potentia multa

126: K

plures in potentia101:3

nViaa py DI nxi»:na

110:1 potentialisVan :: Va

119:1 totus

78:3 universum

nVa165: K sit finitum

nVa'120:1 finiretur

VK nVa'175:3 pervenire ad

nVan127:1 finitur

VK nVan177:3 pervenire ad

117:1 ad...finiturVK iVa'

91 :.l finirentur in

Wa100: K omnino

•VVaa186: K universaliter

. 1»3quemadmodum

146: K

. 25:K sicut

VVia37: K communis

una :: pa133:1 intendebamus

(40: 2 1 D'attTin

38:1 intendimus

1B13

89:1 negans

(iKin) ara

21:1 falsum

na52: K posse

52: K potentia

136: K virtus

•nann nan) 'aVrnn nan(13:21

12:1 virtus materialis

'iau na74:1 virtus naturalis

law Vima nViaa 'nVa naVia 'nVa na) mVyon IK

IK iaxy Vnoa n'Van(87:2i niVyonnn

virtus infinita in ipsa

actione aut passione

84:1

Vyon nViaa 'nVa na'nVa na) p t a mVyDnm

Vyen n'Van Via(64:2i |8t3 mVyonnm

virtus infinitaeactionis et passionis62-61:1 in tempore

Vyon nViaa »nVa na'nVa na) w w a mVyonm

Vinon n'Van Via(65:2i lOTja mVycnnm

virtus infinitae- actionis et passionis

63-62:1 in seyjan nan

' 40:1 virtus motiva

nta iV IVIJ :: (Vmo) iV»

136: K conclusit

nra TVin143: K conclusit

iVv3:1 concluditur

iVw99:1 generatur

110'87: K elementum

niaiKn nmcnquattuor elementa

6:3

materia (?) caelestis

155-154: K

104:3 exit

Vwon VK IKS'exivissent in actum

20:1

nKnr83:3 digressio

Vy min :: nv73:3 significat

nr136:3 Iuna

ViVi p y DI nKininai p y njn "w>

]K33 :: |K3

10:3 hie

133

2:3 gravis

ma75:3 sphera

i n a'35:3 spherica

1313

141: K gravitas

aaia137:3 Stella

ViVi py DI nxi

-no

'nunn vaun124:3 natura passiva

onp "py DJ HXT

'MO

77:1 naturalis

T ,DtP3 0^3137 D3 iTXl

na. . .a aiu nnv :: aio

17:T nobilius

ISO :: art:

150:1 erraverunt

91:3 deceptio

92:1 error

ratiocinatus est

20:1

152:3 ratiocjnatur

S i f

56:1 notus

WDJ3 vrpn

84:1 per se notum

nirp

196:3 scientia

n'saun nirrn

scientia naturalis

193:3

VTIJ :: VT

69:1 notus est

i x n j i » D2 nxn

W3V

167:3 siccitas

nnv14: X magis

79: X plures

. . . a TJVP

7.-n plusquam

nrp96: X insimul

(ow) orp

56: X comparatio

iaarr .-.• nan151:3 calefaciunt

norp -.: ion

76: X diminui

rn152:3 sagitta

(16: 2J unon) rrcpn

22: X perscrutatio

15:1 inductio

(VsiD) npn

6:T perscrutabatur

perscrutatus fuit

139: X

niprp

199:3 perscrutabitur

mpnvo ixn

perscrutandum est

^ipnsv . . .niisn

intendimus

2:X perscrutari

mpnV nxna

perscrutaturi sumus

1 1 : K

mynn

83:3 amor

lattm :: asm

5:1 putaverunt

aivn Tnv :: aivn

149:1 nobilior

•jwn

145:3 obscurus

piwn

114:1 amatus

17:1 appetibilis

nsvn

134:3 obscuritas

•nnn' :: inn

46:1 venatur

yaU

2:K natura

animal caeleste

44-43:3

•wn

161:3 animalis

nvn161:3 vita

oan150:1 philosophus

nasn

26: X scientia

pxw) Vn

130:X esse

156: X existere

103:3 existens

nnV «iVnnn :: >iVn

121:3 differunt

tU /flit

176: X differunt

29: X diversificantur

118:3 diversantur

(^sio)...a pVn

126: X negavit

pVrp

52:1 dividatur

pVnn109: X dividitur

pVnn'104: X dividitur

ipVrar

157: X dividuntur

(QV) pVn

45:3 modus

137:3 pars

on118:3 calidus

own150:3 calefacere

58:3 calefaciendus

181:3 calefactio

nianjn

72: X calidas

159:3 calor

sequitur necessano42:2

de necessitate habent

23: a

a«an'89: X contingit

17:2 contingeret

19: a necesse est

154: a sequitur

65:1 sequatur

84:1 sequeretur

50:1 sequatur

aV aTinn

24: a debet habere

pnn62:2 vigor

(VsiD) Via

111:K existit

Vian

117:X existere

1U:K existunt

Via125: X existentia

aia

167:3 calidas

nain27: X materia

|wxna naina78 :X materia prima

pa110:1 extra

paa45:3 extrinsecus

unn72: X sensus

84:3 animal

B«na

animalia caelestia

32-31:3

(19:22 ptTlVaa) ]8TnVlT3

59:2 in instanti

18:2 in non tempore

121:1 sine tempore

.aViaa ,aa cans D2 nxiDTip .ronjn

nan55:1 coniunxit

62:1 coniunxerat

44:1 coniungat

urna92: X factio

153:3 fiat

umrp

84 :X fieri

a«n :: am130: X concludit

47:1 conclusit

17:2 intulit

4:T fuit necesse

la ia

117:K accidunt

31W

46: X cogere

188:3 necesse est

175:3 sequitur

89:2 sequeretur

(82:22 3"an') 13 3irP

81:2 debet esse

iV a'aip aia*

16: a ,debet habere

ainn

67:1 concludatur

100:1 conclusit

63:3 necesse est

16:1 sequitur

84:2 sequeretur

. -. ,, maaa a«nna

minim42: X, factio

aVnnn22: X pnncipium

asianna aVanaaprimum pnncipium •

50:2

moVnna72:2 diversitas

pVnna58: X divisio

manna :: aiana103 :X semper

(4i:22 ajn:n) niwiiaa

172: X motus

lniwnina

39:2 suum moveri

aa TW axn niVsenaanna

4i:T dissolutio

...1

11 :X igitur

14: X sed

(3i:22 'nVa)nViT

168: X aliusab

29:2 praeter

169: X non esse

,pt ,'maa o'any D2 nxn

Bipa

p t

74:3 tempus

, VysjaViaa . . . p i

(H2:22 pta ...n'Vaa

107:2 tempus finitum

iiVa ]8t) aViaa 'nVa ]at

(H3-ii2:22 n'Van Vva

.tempus infinitum

107:2

, , „ ^ BTTpa p i

•• ^ antiquum tempus

, 166:3

•nyn

40 :K non esse

19: n privatio

nTPDo p y DI nxn

nsnin p y nxi pnyn

loan' :: (^yis) ion

6:1 convertatur

lonnn

12:3 esse contrarium

(DP) -|Dn

. 43: K contrarius

T,Dna

44:3 contrario

nvaon92: X contrarietas

TODn

91 :K corruptio

84: X destructio

mn p y DI nxn

(69:2i mVyonn) niVyon

67:1 passio

67: X pati

na p y oi nun

ma'x p y nvn 'mVyon

raruxn nn^imn:: nnton

felicitas humana

198:3

naipn

51:1 praemissa

7:1 propositio

vpn65:1 syllogismus

nnxun

31: n permanentia

n»m156: X .existentia

n:wxn nnwn nn'n

existit...primitus

- „ 8 1 : K

iranvn

2: n alteratio

mpxmn19:1 continuatio

(ioo: 2i n'Van

107: X finitas

n' an ^ya xV) mban xV

(97:21

93:1 infinitas

mana :: man

25: n necessario

am p y DI DKT

mman

47:1 necessitas

'man73:3 necessarius

'man) mVn '»a 'man

(48-47:21 mVrt 1X8

necessarius ab alio

46:1

'man) imaxy '»a 'man

(47:2i iaxy i x n

necessarium ex se

46-45:1

mx'xa p y DI nxn

!Vn174:3 procederetur

nuan

93: X numerus

y:an

35:1 impossibilitas

xxan143:3 praesentia

(5i:2i nyxn)nnw

20:1 positio

nnin 'Vya

169: X situs

(34:2i nyian)nwn

81:1 motio

127:1 motus

177: X movere

n'Van TiVaV nyjn

movere infinitum

30:1

nViaa p y DI nxi

(2i:2i pTn') noim

19:1 excessus

(nxin) mn

122: X generabilis

•TODJ mn

generabilis et

19: X corruptibilis

genitus et corruptibilis

19: X

DT0DJ xVl Din DJ'X

non sunt generabiles

neque corruptibilcs

76:1

TODJ xVi mn »nVa

ingenerabilis et

143: X incorruptibilis

DVI .era oony DI nxi

••nn

82:1 generatio

"room mn

generatio et corruptio

5-4: X

nxrnn

73:3 significatio

(U: 2 i j?Vnnn)p^nn

109: X divisio

;2 i : 2 i nanV)'JxVi'n

(76:2i 'nan

19:1 materialis

unnn TiVa) 'jxVi'n 'nVa

(113:21

108:1 immaterialis

nman ;8:2i nanpVrn

(11I:21

111:1 hyle

13: X materia

pwxin 'Vrnn

69: X prima materia

na p y nxn vbvn

iffn

96:1 esse

17: X quod

nvnn

. 146: X ex hoc, quod

;97:2i n'Van Vya)mVan

3D

(95: 2J V» awn) Vv noir91:1 fecit putari

m p'Bi :: p'm136:1 exempli gratia

172:3 verbi gratia

ran22: X opinio

vrm44:1 quaesitum

ISTTO na :: "pi

21:3 innatus

54:1 gratia exempliin* "yna

9:X inquantum idem

o m a |'K141-140: K noninnata

iam ir»nw naa83:3 a principali

•pi bvsecundum modum

128:1

i s n ma; na Vai62:3 et omne tale

•pin nt "orvm naomne quod est tale

22:1

niniKn109:3 convenientia

mxn134:3 illuminatio

(33:2i BnoajVian69:3 differentia

»ax»n iVianeius differentia

52: K substantialis

nip3"in

18: T continuatio

mnn' :: (bsiD)mn42: K fit

mnnn" 97:3*generari

n'noon o'awincorpora diaphana

142:3

corpus spirituale4:H

o^attn ooi55:1 corpus caeliH«n) «a'8Bm owin

(26:2i <5r>,nn

127: K corpus caeleste

97: a non corpus

ox» -py DI nunniavi

15: K corporeitas'»W1

98:3 corporalisT11X J\2 01 HKT

(6i:2i naxajmaT198: K sermo

mpan20:1 continuatio

(DP) 131

8:K aliquid

16:1 res

in« iaia

98:1 peraliudKXBJ 131

46:K ens

nan28: K similis

1103 nan146:3 unigenea

nBT> :: nBI48:3 assimilatur

11: n videtur...v nar

170:3 forte

navp119:1 imaginaretur

DiKn «)ii72:3 corpus hominis

Itl' :: (^yiS)1«32: K facit

VlVl

1:K orbis

nrn bibi136:3 orbis lunaeira^n n'aawn Vi i

n'aan'an B'aswn iVi)(53-52:21

orbis stellarum

56-55:1 fixarum

oss? *p» oi nxinVi

197: K declaravit

]3 »

39: K amplius

5:3 etiam

11B1

12: n purus

IBlV :: 1B1

I69:K omnino

(4: 21 DV1) Oil

18: K corpusTOD JI mn o n .lODi nin o n

corpus generabile et4-3: K corruptible

1'pan pirnn Dim42:3 ultimum continens

B'B»n B11

,54:1 corpus caeli'Vjnn owin) '"a'a© o n

'JT>pin «)lin ;2:21

(48:21

2: K corpus caeleste

(30:21 «1«) DW1

17: K corpus

onoojn oinn o'awincorpora generabilia et

12: K corruptibilia

53:1 corpus naturale

22:1 absonumbay :-. (^siB)^ua

96:3 destrui

^uan35:~i destrueretur

i w a84:3 declaratio

]31'tt> 1X1 :: (VviD) Tf2

148:3 est intelligenda

'nVa26:3 alia a

D'ooVonan DTK 'aa :: |aviri philosophantes

1:1

H13

49:1 fundavit

113

50:1 fundatus

. . .V»a n'rr :: V»a48:1 habeat

,'n ,nmn trans ai nxnn'Vsn ,B>BJ

mai inv :: maa82:3 nobilior

Vn» :: oion)Vn»57:1 maior

. .a Vni inv....»inr Vm55:1 maius

popm Vninmagnum et parvum

137: x

pupm Vni3secundum maius et

94: X minus

(DW) m i

33: X definitio

pi i

144:3 color

iV nnin :: nni

16:3 facit ipsum esse

«yu, . 8 4 : 3 corpus

-an :: (TsriD) nx354:1 declaravit

50:1 declaraverat

1K2b

41:1 declarare

(2:2i nxani)ixann

declaratum est

5:K

declaratum fuit

64: X

declaratum fuerit

156: X

determinatum est

3:X

179:K dictum est

manifestum est

103: X

nxanndeclarata fuerint

122: X

1X3IP

102:3 declarabitur

est declaratum

4:K

77:1 declaratur

103:1 videtur

Vi31* :: Via

92:1 distinguitur

Trial'

20: X differunt

xan :: xia43:3 existens

apva nxasuccedens sibi

71:X

3j?v3 vbv xan

81 :K succedit sibi

jnaa :: |na9:3 inspexerimus

Vwa47:1 destructio

(87:21 *ij?W) O f i n ) ^ a84:1 impossibile

(84: '1 nVDK)1VBK178:3 potest

84: X possibilis

TOOK 'X

82: X impossibile

74:1 non potest

29:1 non possit

122:1 non posset

'nVan TODX 'X

116: K necesse est

•TODX nn

57:1 possent

ninxya "IWDK

possibile per se

59:1

•IXD i v D X ) i n i » x v n ntrox

(48:21 1BXV

possibile ex se

46:1

nnwsK41 :K posse

82:1 possibilitas

UVXXTOX :: VxX

27: X quae sunt hie

uVxxvquae sunt apud nos

59:1

px146:3 terra

VK

94:3 ignis

TOX

136:3 igneus

itPXai :: "WK

37 :X cum igitur

"WXO

173:3 ex hoc quod

secundum hoc

110:3

XiniBTXD

in eo quod est

25.X

140: n .nam"? j-nayn oopoa rniwm naxan nx D'r'sa mayarrvnaoopua nsr£3ia nrx :: p'on 'is^ nawan na'n .140 rrnv ,i naxa :pxa

ix una'ttrnvmx n'TiVa pn x^x maV ix nmixa

max38:1 verificatio

paxnV :: fax: K ad opinandum

DJBK

l l . n forte

68:1 iam

40: X non...nisimrcaxa :: niwrax

131: N medians

naxnn .-.• (^yiD)naxverificatum est

23:1

37:1 verificatur

raxn'146:1 est verum

naxnn38:2 verificare

(•c) nax6:1 veritas

'nax93:2 contingens

">nax "inr49:3 dignius

noia py DI nmnjxn Vx :: njx75:1 adubi

nixa10: n ad ubi

roxn Vv111:1 adubi

nnVxn p y nm *ttnjx'o Vy I\K

55:1 licet

"flTVK16: X posterius

19:2 tarditas

ms'X

34: X qualitas

yanxn ni'O'xnquattuor qualitates

168:3n^mVycnn m»a'xn

qualitates passivae162:3

niVyenan nvrxnqualitates passivae

187:3niVyona 'nVa nva*x

qualitates non189:3 passivae

mVwB nTO'Xqualitates activae

184:3B"aann m»a'xn

qualitates passivae163:3

30: K individuum

oxyn wvnindividuae

64: X substantiae»nVx

194:3 divinusnaxn iVxa :: iVx

" 40:2 verbi gratiaSnSaVx

144:3 galatia

DnX140:1 rubeum.

199:3 homo

«)12 ,73 D'any D2 nxn

ainx

197:3 desyderatus

nix93:3 aer

- (12:22 O]BK)DVIK

17: X autem

38: X enim

2:3 igitur

68: X quia

66:2 vero

.nax'w naixV px :: naixnon est dicendum

168: X

naxa py ai nm(95: 22 BID) piK

91:2 modusnix

135:3 luxmxn :: (Vyis) nix120:3 convenit

•mx43: X isdem

.pa ,na , p i D'any 02 nm1DDB

...v nnx82: X cum

pinx62: X ultimus

mato ,yjo D'sny DI nm

naxa

irrn xsan n^apa n^a jxaa nvroa xmrca a"i iccnx p»n nt nx a naai 135DXP m p w .nwxaa Vrai a"j XSB' inxn ran nix'xaa Viaj on^wanxiaa ran ,jna TiVa yjruna nan xxa' TI» ,»'ja swuna nan |xaa xxa1

naiV svuna 'nVa sraa xm nai ]xaa XXB'P nta a"ina xm©.nnrwm |ai >na aama pw |xaa xsa' nwxa» nt p'ai .a"j mx'xaaxsa1© a«ina xm nan /imaxsa mnwn xsa1 tiy ,nnxn naxn 140

.onxna Viaa miaxsnna \>» »aoa na-np n'nn» anna n nnnnw iconx naiprc laa p axi

DXB? 'DV .n^nnn iV X'n» na Vx mx'saa inosn xVo?a nn .n^nnn iVna pVic pVitwa n®N xm »aoa o-npnu? 'DV ,»aDa na-np nrrn xV nt bxna-np na^p Vvna mai»n misn px nm ,p rrn i»xai .vb» rnip xmw 1453"ii .'Vi'nm misna naama n!?nnn nmn© naxrr xV ran ,'Vimn V» vaoan^noian i x nm ."]nvw V» ns ia TIXI nnx xVi DIU;D naa xm ran aama Va

.nxnn nrcxa mnaxm pnoan p am nwwn nta luonx Da wanttr> nwxnnvm niVx^a© naiwn nnv xmu; nVxo;n nxt uana uaa Vxn nnrr ,naxmxa u?ani D'sntm n»anx nw ©pnaa nt n'm .D'aann 1a IVDW naa Vra 150

unnan*

a Q^apa [D'^'apa 135...nn] 143 nKinB7[Kvnp 142 SKxai[Kxa' 139 n s n 1 * 137 s p i ] 136I > j 'Viw misa ['Vi»ani misna 146 » pVio'wa [pVio'wa 144 J [nVnnnnJia[oa 148 '3<Dn>i^n I ' j aania^a njn [H3n...Va 147 "Vwn pVpnmabwz I ' n j a« ttmnan[«nnan 151 ' D'aan [D'aann iso aannvnpnv 149

n D^IS KmaV mv DV©JI on » w n laxan aim [b~n

138 n TITI n*i» I n [jxaa] 137 •> aama [jxaa | n [a"i] 135145 n p'?nnn...nTi] 143 T I ISI p i s 140 i [iKaa] | n [3"J] 139

150 n nma [nKT | n uana© naa paana uaa | n paK] 149 n pia^p]n [V»n DV©:] I n o a m a Vn> mV 151 T ni

naxa

b>y 'wa 'Vvm mixa asma xin x"?i ,am uaa fin px xmw 'B1? nunrcn nomxn •?» xVx 'ans 'Vpn ia px xinrc QWS max psn .unz?s xin 'rax nxyn

.rbrcwn x'm ,ia mixa yyuna ,iu?M3 nViaa x'm mana wyun.piumV ia npuzma yyurr max r a n'm ,i"a "a'arcn man n'm ,xmrc naa msn nn n'n iVx mxnn naw nxiaa nan ,nan n^iaa ma b»a n'm 1 is

nsunn mran mp max xin© nxisai .n»inn n^isa n'n nabxina> yjan nt p y a nxsnn nmai .vVx nyunn nVsn nu;x

.imV'a^'B; na nsa x^x vVx ISSDJIT XV D'awm ,nannan»un nirn n^isa vrta ns is a^a'awn o'amn p ona naiT iVxi

.pt nVna insun nrrm ,ana Q'svunan \o |xaa© na a n^ai .nnx j?b>nm nona» ,nnw nana can B'aaia aaiaan mas n'n i^x ,ioonx man p » nn|iiz>Kin yiaa nu?ox 'x man nay iVxi .jrrw na y nViaa msu; 's^ manwsmn nosn ib>xi .mosi inyun nnvn ,piaKn Vy nyiinn niran imp1©

.nyuna onix'sa nwx mxsam Va n o s i ,nni3aa xin IDD'nViaa xin *iwx nasan ntn D©an mx'saa oViyn ma n'aonu; 'a mnw 125

.*inx nsa nViaa 'nVai nnx nxa nsnann'S3 mpaa yyi^n1 x^i myan n^an x » iaxy nxsa pu;xnn yyunan nvnaiyjanu; nxiaa xin .rr^onn -\-\~i Vy yaan xm yisn i m ^y 13 yianw.ran raa xinw 'DV njnwa 'n^a xmoi DIWBI nnx xin iV pwxnn•rnpaa yyiina 'nVa n'nu? nnx ,OIU?DI nnx xin pwxnn yyiananw nxiaai noxin ,p m n"»nu;3i .nnpaa yyiana n'n 'Vrm nmsa naina n'n ox xmrc 'DV.D'nanna Vnai nnana xim mnwa 'nVa DWD pwxn y j a yxaa 'a nxiaa

na nn .o'awn xim pwxn toiws uaa yyiana ]xaa 'a nxiaai.inix'3

I 'xa inns p i s s 1112n'm 114 n Kim [2»'m | n»K KWI ['KVVI | n« nama [rnana 113wpniVaaroj | njao'aipnttntQ'awm 1 is a<nViDan'maV>n^iaa 116

2 '03©'[Dna?| n K a p w a 121 a w n p n 121 » n'anjna [canan \a 119'ja '3Da pas I ' insnjn pnsan 127 >ia r""<] 126 K piann nnai<n 123'» B1»D \)W\ [J1B7KT U1W0 133 J [mpB3...'E)V] 130-129 V < K V > / 1 > 129

pmK'3 m o w 134-133

n a s p s i 111 1 misi 'Vi'na pVi'ni misa nonsrun pnjnin 120 n p'VK] | i D'awnan [D'awm 1 is n UWDS ii?3i [' ixa 126 n Vxn m pa 125 n nsnain [mm 122 i IVKI P^K 121 n

130 injnPBVtoiFiJnwB'ifaKinBn 129 T <pVn> 2nsa |

?i?m osys naxo

3»nrr nyun Tna inv xin na Vmn ottunrc lrcsia yiTna 3"j nm© naViny nyun 73B T>na im1 yyiirw nVisa DOU nViaa 'nVa na nmna ss

.mua nn .jat nVits yyurwn'n X7i Q"nax D'nsia vn ,t,Dixn nn imv "upxa .oviDiana pan nt nan

.rcpnn nooa ma nxsnnw na 7iao'w 'a? xVx 'crip ona•naxa 'VMB paai ,onix nsia xm i?xa j'xtVx p naaisx D'xxia ux ]a?inisnann nax' vnoo Vy nay© 'a an xxaa pVi .j'jyn nta pson T O px M7133 yja }xaa n'n1© nta a«ina irx xinu; ,0'awn 7X173' niVisa 'nVsnn3T 13 n'n'rc 'nsin QB?J3 nnV nwsx xm '3 niyon ms nsom .Qnanna

.nmxi nana 33mans 13 n'n'u? 'nVsa n®sx 'x [yyiana] "a'a^n man n n DX awx nxisa ran,?'3»a "pwnn nan ny n'n'un ,n'Van xm nrcx yaan Vx yyun1 is "pnwi 95nm DXI ,n'73n 7y3 TIVS .nVisa ou;a3 invn ny /"puzmn nsn nt

.o'3B7 Dnaxo; na 'S31X33 '317 nx3nn» na?© ana .onnx o nDiaa pjyn nt luonx nx'3 naaimxa mx "frwv ias ,n'?an ^737 nsp nnxp T?V easy nxoa D'yyunaiasy nxsa p»xn yyuna jxaa nw© 3«nnn ,nt7 nan© nai DIDB DIDI 100naax r\w 'D7 ,on7 n'73n px O'yyi3nan D'snan i?x nvns nson xmrrnonrc ->tH ,mpB3 p©xn yyi3na mx'sa nwsx 'x* mpas mix'sa nt&sx13 xsa' n©x xmi ,niBxya nswxn nao 7X i?yu; pDO px masya

px mpB3 onV n'Van px niso ]wmn ma is nn"1! .pnnximim n©x miasya yyunan nt y»3B rr>r\v nB7i .pinx xVi |i»xn 105

pjyn las mpas yyianan invn y3an wys |ai ,y\wm mvn? xm maxyaD'Btt;na noa7 yyiin'© 'a 73© nnx ,onDD)n Dinn omasya D'yyunasfine ox Q©J7 nm' nunwnm ,mjnu;n? na^aa msnin wax ,iaxy nxDB

Dip1 X7 ran iasy nxsa p©xnn yyunan QVIXI .isma ox uaa

8488 2' <[na]> 85 n

]3K 90 nxnaKannxa | 'naj'S7Kpn33i3K[rKiVKpn33i3K 89l/<'nX3>/13T 92 niMTINprK 91 n3KnO['B I nD"3 JK3'O]3K'3 0"K [TO[nvrim 95 nx ["piamn...i3] 96-95 a on^3> ns | T U S K [»»i3naj 94'K] 102 a n'Vsn on7 [on!? n'73n | nnvnV[nvn3 101 »a pnVa] 96 aI >» p©Km innx [pnnKi pwKT 104 'a x'm [Kim 103 TiaaK [nwsaa sjnina pmin'B'B 107 ay:an[»'3a 105 '/<n'Vsn>/]»K | axn3o[m3o

'n mp' K x v [mp* | 'a isina DKI [isinn DK 109

'nsiB [o'nDiana pan m 87 n <i7 cr>> Vna invn [?nan 8499 n [D'JD^] 97 n nra p»x 94 n nsn pnaxa 89 n |'an

nxaa] 109 n |iiwm pnnx [pnnKi psmn 104 n pmK'xa] 102 n [DJBK] 101[Dip* I n pass

11

naVi ,na nn i©x orrxcm '3sa ppm VITAS man* 03ax n'Buua nn n©xmox»a -rosx xim o'arcna Vina nnv D©J n'3n ,nxtn nmnn i!? nnaxnn©xw i©x ppn ntwin nao Vm inv ina D©an nt mm© a"m ,mpaa vani 60.x©i3n ixa maaa nxm' 03ax nan nvn xim /max n©x n yV ,n'a©n'nVa na ia xxa' nViaa D©a 'a wbx nam ,nrann nxt ib> nnaxnnB? nabina xsa'o V"n ,mua nn .]opa iwx nViaa 'nVan nana Vna *inv nViaa

.1!? n'Van px© noa'Vna nnv i > n'Van fxwnanpnna sVi wpnn nta nam n»K nwoxna a«nn' xV nuan nt© w n»xai 65y r ,ppn DBHQ n»x nana Vna nnv Vnsn ou;ja n»x nan 'a maixn'nax nsia xim ,nViaa v f o na n n^iaa owa nmna ainn oaaxxb> ,nViaa 'nVa na 1a x nViaan nmav nx^a D3ax loonx 'a .ia pso

xm oaax mx'ai ,t3i»sn ooaa Vax -ah misi nana aanian.DIWD ix aama n'nw pa ,oVman owaa 70

anon mViaa DmVyD© xm tD^a'awn D'Biaa SHT XXBJ nt n'mnraxai .nspa nmxa nnv onspi nxpa Tna w nnspi D'Viaa onata,na nnran oyaa ^x ca'arcn D'anan lyyiarr oa n»x niVnnnn lVanon'">*h ,'yao na vnw nwsx 'x on© DJ'jya X T '©Djn "piu;nn nan V"nxim ,minwnn imx'saa yom na xim ,mxn Vx yyun' Diax *yaon nanw 75xV nwxai .ctoDj x^i Din DJ'X o^awn oa lyyun' n»x ninam #IDB3 mnona naaa nnvn "vows nt nxan' naai .mana »DJ on nan o«yao vn'bVi .©S3 Vya n'n1© 'nVaa n©sx ""X ,"B'B»n Dnan xim ,©D3 *Vyanax'n n3n ,mos3 xVi mn xV nn'n© nnx (m3n©nV na©a3 n3'x ©D3n nxt©.moss mm nunrcnV na©B3 X'n© ©«33a nax31a n©x pyV man nta nVras soXSB3 ©on ia XSB'© naa xb»x nysnn xV iaxy nxsa yyianan nann 'a nsann'in mpn n©x D'aaiian D'a©aa onana nmsn ixxa^© na ns Vy xV

.ni3n©n

5863 'a naai [nsVi 62 a pro] 60 a am nnv nnv DWJ 59 i ppnn

I »nT[nTw 65 j<m>xx»'tt> | ' sa ' j in[VT | nx nVisa'n^a[n^isa68 »nannw 2' painw 67 »nanpna 2' [naipnna | ax nwsx na

| imvnprm 71 2 •rnnv [H -IV 70 JDo;jai[2DipJ3 69i •unnin* [»yin' 75 as ' n n [V"n 74 n lVsun' pVsnorp 73

mpn [mpn | J <Dnana> onana 82 2' <ia nxsai> n.b 81

inva [jupa 63 n <'asa> xim 61 n ]tjp -mvn [jopn 60|op invn [ppn | n Vna m m [Viun 66 n mwanw p j n me; 65 n pp

74 n DVWB[D»'3aVx 73 mVnpnamnpipxinw[a'innD38NnaTnB>' 6781 T [one] I n mwsa [vsz 77 n n'n»w IWDX 'X xmw ir:»a p'nf

n [xsaj] I n 1

H3

QN© nNii .max»3 maan ww IWK Diwn 'JDB NVN ni3'Nn nNnn ni'tf nta 3'ina NW© ONum 'JDB nfonn *n»n3 iVNn nmsn n x w

niN'sa snan iV nN3nn naai .nViaa Yfo otw V H ,^5DD3 nVoa v f o 35,ixn nt3 nVna v f o Nino? vVy pTX' ns NXB' NVW nNsnm /ft n'Vsn pN

3P3B V» nsian *3 ,nta nNisa nan .

Nin nsn m 'VINI ,IV naN'u; npiVnn ininnw na 'S3 vbv nNrcj nm.OI©D DU?J n'n IN nmxi nana 3ama nm own n nw p n >i3a 40

T\KW 'DV ,nVi3a ou;a3» Ninu? 'asa nVwa TI^S ns Nxa'rc nu>DN 'N© nN3 >nVisa ^ 3 Ninws nNirr m naiNn nmn V"n ,n»si3 rnmo nmnn

.nVisa Ninn Nwun n'n ,NU;I33 Nin»n33i .13 IV'^T Nb© 'a ^y 13 psio'ff na nsian |B nt3 ni©jrt> npVi

nanpn np1© Nim .'rarcm* '•yswn nVnns nti ,»a»na n'sn maipas 45mnn' n»N nanpn w^x nsni ,mpB3 n»3B3 n n w S"»NI ,mas»3 rrwmnanpnn nrana 3"nn' NV naiaan 3T3n» srn .nnaa ma 3«m ,nViD33'in» nai .ns psioan nanpnna 3*irr DJBNI .rrn»SN N'nw na3 nnrcoNn

.n:un Nin nin .niuan uaa3Mnnn [NV] nanw wpnn noos nN'3i onpn nss Nin» 'DV ,p m n'n n©N3i 50••3 nNsnn n33» m bwa ,)na nnN IN nmwDN vmanpn ">n» "?y nma mVinna nsa rnpoa ip^nn waa n'n DNI ,n'^on 'nVsV pVm ip Ninw naa ipn

mi' DNP nnann nNi iV nN3nnu; naVi .WN IN D'B 'JHD D®J3 ipnu?DN Nin nin ,D'a»n m i Vrca "JIT Nim (nVi3B 'nVs no is

,nsn my .mpas yasi n'nw B"»NI ,D'awn o»aa nnv Vnj owa 55IN vn D'DIWS D'BWJ nm3 on DN ,D'b»a3 on n©N mnan I^N pava S I T

nmsn nvnb ,ppn noun nsa bna nnv Vran D M raw ,o'33iia

36 n »'3»n [won | n [nVi3a...^»iD3] 35 J n Kn p^n 34I J D « 3 nvpp [own n'nw 40 'n» own 2' [nan | J pi nn [nj?iVnn 39[mmo 42 'man noa [owja | n 'DO f jsa 41 1 wnw [n'n | 2' <pmsi]>

aK[K^©] | jpsonrt[na...m3 44 ' sa ' j in ["7-n | 'JK nvno46 1 naipnn [nanpn | n 'im ' j -<m>yi ax 'awm praawn 45

] so n navnp pine* | jna^piai | 1 [pDioan] 48 '3'ni[3"m 4754 »a mKsnnw pKsnnw 53 nonanna | 1 vivv bs pns? » 51

TK[D'33maiN 57-56 »Dvjtwn [D'aipjs 56 2'<[0'8e>n]> I K /<am>/i am ['own I 3 [n3a...'DWjn] | n nsnn; [nsa? 57 »

n [owl] 40 1 nasa© nox'B' 39 -»n^] I "> Q^» [D^ 3* 1 x^"3 [KEnaa 34'j'Bwni I n 'won sai^na [sawna 45 n ne?yi [nw»V npVi 44 n niin [n'n 43I n yranni'n [Vnjn 57 T [nji>a...»Ti] 49-47 n <i3> np'ar | i

nnxa?y o'asnna m u m ,TODin mn7 ma xin nmxi '?vna aama xin nw

.nmianrcxai .1033 mn xin mn mnrca Vai ,mnu>a nmxi nana aama ?a nan aMai'nVa D'arcntz? ibv x?n .'nxa 'nVa nmxi nana aama Va nan ,p m mn 10

?misi nana n'aamanxya *iaw nn7 xxa' x? rrnw naa D'aumrca p y n m nx'a lotnxi,D'DIWD nnip o n v o nxann ^sn xVi NOW on? ]'xu; nnx ,ni3nt»nmonoi naV mxa na nac; nann ]'3»a Qa xsa' nn»i ,mana 'nsi on»smiV nxannu; naVi .nann ou?a on n»xa xunan nwi D"nax nni'n ni7 wax 15n'n'u?i .nn'W «]Di3 y j a D'a©7 mn'u; a"nnn imasy r r xV tyn»sn nannu?D'au>n vn x? ,]a m mn i7xrc 'D7 n'ao;a n r a s 17 px J7DD xVa »'ian ma«nnn na na mn 17x1 .nmx yjan nmxn 7iaj?7 na Da mm ,

naa onu? ,onmn nn'n na oa mn i?x xmu>a nt7 )»DI 20a"nn' m nmn a"xi .mnrosxm nan p y nro 'D? ,n©sx aia ,nos3 naan^Dxn aianu; rcpnn nsoa nxann naai .nooj 'nx:nrc xim ,waj Voa n:aaVJFW a"nnn na na ]'x D'awn 'a naxnn nu;xai .naua uaa a"in' xV'37 n'nana mmsn ixsa'u^ na nx Vy na nmx nn7 yaan mm xVun wvws

.nnana un»3 xin n:n nxnn nta xmu? nai .n'Tosa nin vm arw 25mpnV 7'nnn ,n'7an 'n?a? ysrunn maiaon nvunn itsonx xxa noxaintwn [nT nx] ,nu;aa na mmu? nu>sx nxn nViaa 'n7an nsrunn nxiV yaanam 'a niyvrn | a» nxm .ncj 7aa Vnaa nxy mn' ix ,aama ix uiu>3 mnnnana no;3x 'x xinon ,nViaa naa mm© nrcax 'x nViaa 'nVan 7»3nix nnanna nVnaa nmx xm» 'jsa 7Va 7vsn' xV naa nx mmu; 'nVaa 30x'n ni»x nan» '37 ,xtt>ua xm» 'asa nxnn ma nxin'i nViaa 'n7a naa mmx?© nnx ,ia nu?x xtt>un '33a xVx innsna X7i m?ana nxm' xV o r a nmx

' j nan [«Vn 10 i <xin> nin | a p 2» p"ji 9 J onuVi p m i m 7•>ia <DjaK> onim | > BTODI [owsm 14 a n»^ [naa | a D'airn^ [D'arcntto 12QN> 2na I 'a nyaan [y^an 18 3 p n'n [p m n'n 17 s mass pmass 16jpPioi----m:in;i] 23-22 J3"nnnp»nn' 21 KK"7KnVs2o J < p2' <[n»»i«in]> n nvsunn [»jn:nn 26 n« inKsa'H? r>Ksa'» 24 a [D3] 23

E;Jnnx [QTOnnTQK 27 J ['nVi3a...DNn] 29-27 3 v:a na [»':ana 272' <[mis]> 32 n nnann p [onanna | j Vsona fawn' 30 ' [naa] 29

n ona [D3 14 i pV\ [K7n 10n [sania IK] 28 -i <Kin»> nooj 21 n [poo K73] 17 n naw [jrr 16

to nsa Kina;a n'n'u; [n^isa... IK 31 -30 n [onanna... 'itoa] 30

naxa

myn D'au>a mn .ircsia nxiaa nn .nyunn mao myj noxa m# xinip naa•>a aumu; laa na xV myn nnuan nn'nrc nnx ,D'7iaa vn DXI ,17 n^an px

.nan nnyn 'aoa nnana nvr Vax .naa mm mo? nnV nnuan a"nu>ix miaxya nxtwn xm nxn max' nVxrcn nxia onanan D'xna ux jaVi 30myn ninx^nnu? 'D7 iniasya nxE>3 xim .imaxs V» ona i:aa nxma nx»:'a n7X»n nxt ?y mavi .nsnin? Vjnon im»n7 nn,?' oaax mynm ,nyunn

.V'n DVB;3 .naitj x'n

27

w [na KV] I u [D'Voa...DKii] 28 n D'awn [OV:B>3 | 'urnsaK na [m | 1 Kinu ias»3 pniasM 30 i nas ' i [nan | 0[n3n...^3K] | H r n ' B p ' T O 29[mp' 32 u imas»3 HK»: [nsiann nnsn 32-31 u j nmas»3...iK] 31-30piixn pym nnnaKnaVanV»m na jji3nm> n^K^n | v [nsmnV ^jnsn] | 'tn»3K Kip'

' 0 [V"n OVUN] I o <'n' n n u 'a na VKn T»«n> naiu 33 u <na

mwi p ™ n^Ka | wnpx [m Kinu; naa] 27iaB7na;[na3...3»nB7 29-28 x<ppiK>na 28

Kin | wn I V K » ' X lpsc n""3N' | tvnps own UK [D'KXIB UK 30^ | a] | w\p)t ['nKWJ] 31 vn IKUN px I K » J

nso> D7W3 I »x [D7»3] | lynps <iKa> naw 33 vnp tb mp's p'oc [mp1 32[7"n] I p <'iai> np <7J7jn

a'ina 'nVa xmo> maNtt>a .yian piya IJ7DD D'DD7Dnana mx '33 31 2KI77

•nu; ona nnx ,mna 'no; cnwbw max cm? xim .773 DB?aa i r x v i a |xaanVv nan . o n 73 p y ntE> nnx nmxi nana caania one; nnnxm* ,D«nx3on i7Xi ,nmxi nana Q'aamo o"nxjn D'awan nspc .n'tt^Vipn miana ,max? nn ,nmxi '71'na aama nooj mn Vau; ison nnrc nn .D"a'Btt»n D'anan 5

mn nna 7a naixn naxa 'a nn .nssnna nanpnn nxitt» naxm .n,snn'

n [bv[D'Bn;?^ | ' inn[Kim 24 'ni3K DnantonermnKm 3 »JinK[nnK

naipn 2 ' [naipnn 6 ' i s man [nn 5 ' 10m pana | naK <D'3aiian>a pa]

2 T <ptPKin> yjan 1

31

naxa

D"pj D'BWJ on D"B'a»n D'apan nan ,m n'n "roxai .D'aioi D T B

.'Vpnnabo 'a nn ,niX3 oa nox nan 'JDB nanna pa Dnb> oxn DI'WB psio' DJBXI 10

ur> 'Vrnn nt nwrc nav mas b>3x .'Vvna XXB' OJBX mn naircx nrcVrcn c p m s n V"T ,7)aan Vvsn pai naa iu>x 'Vrnn f a yxiaa

n a'Bian lanoy nan IXBI .mams onV n'n'i ,^a na oa.V?a na la px yaa

xin 'a nn ,D'3"»B» nainV UBB "nsnnV nwp pso nVi»a ••arr pso naai isnx'ai ,nViaB 'nVa na "ft n'n'w a i m 'nM nVisn n'n DN

.mn nosa n n'tz; a ina mn ,nb>iaa na lV nViaa n'n QNI nViaana Vai .]'3p sin naa on nan nsrun Vai Tosnm ninn 'a naiwnm

irxi .nm»n N'n nu?K nmaan NVTI nnsnn i sn i > a«nn' nsnann mac,na n'!?an p« nrrno* ,n'maoi nsnann m i s i nu>K "B'a^n maa xxa'w 20

.na u'N m»nm ,nn»n nmian nan ,nViaa man n'n DKI^Dn iV a«nn' ,n»unn maoa m»aw naV ,D'aaian 'a loonx naxtr? na pVinas' ]ai .n'^an 'nVa » nmio onV a"nnn ,D"B'B©n D'ana^ nwx nsrunnns nsninn Vino nmsnV .nsnann msn N'n nu?x .nmaan nV a"nn pxnu;rrnnrc mana a'in' na xsan ~im nnnanu? nax'» nB pVi ,n'Van 'n!?a *?x 25mn» Vy nwaa nsrunnw 'sV n' >v* 1a wsmn' n»x Q'Bo;n naB nptn

12 onaa'?3K'xnaT^3K[naT...I73K | 3[KXB'] | J [n:n]b [nab \ ' >VD [WS 13 n -sn pmbvn | 0 [n©Virn...)'''n] | '»3 ':ixn

I n'jnv J"in1 n ' 15 aixanxai 13 u [V^3...ixan] 14-13[n3...'n"73] n-16 'D> 3"nn' [Sim 16 2'ut»3 o'j'jyna 'ns Q'r:»a

n T oVisn [QVisn^ | SK [IBOIK] | 'WJ IK3 n33i p>rai 1620 'tKim[«'ni 19 mooj nun [niniooi | u pVoa rra iV] | 2u

| O O ' S K D B W 21 wn^ps | 'UTn»3Knin[nmj23 'J3[nyiMin...3"nn'] 23-22 u [n^3n..."n»nni] 25-21

26 u OBOIK> IQKVD 25 n m»n^ [nnyn^ | i nnuaa [nm:an 24 ' ]3nsn [mrt | ' nyiai© [nsunnw | 0 DH'VK nn

ip [cawj] 8n'ni 13 w-\pv <bbx> n33 12 anx njKn K [nans | unps [pa] 10

rwn | wnps maiia nan^ <x w>i m m a nsV w jsVi [mjiia['nxj 16 wnps [oVun] 15 wnpxyjaViyjao'jsnV 14-1319 snpx toon nin pin IDDI n wnpx [n3...TiV3] 17-16

23-22 »npx [n'nisoi] | tmpx nVisa [«8'awn 20. . .p i ] 24-23 WTpx<nyiainm»nK'mwK>n'V3n 23

V> »px <nsnjnm> 13 26 » i p <n'Vsn 'nVsV> nm:an 241 nnvin DJ irps nnuim

x:

naxa

nxisa nani .mx'3 urou? na nn ."naa yyunan yao nvm 1^ yuan

n y r n iV abu?n xV nrcVrcn i >xn o w n ni303 n y m VH3' xVu;

nao; ,naxan ohm .px i p x iarc ' m TV nyi3J > ittr"an Vxm .n'arcn pya 45

I J irnmaw [IHISTT | n [uaa] 43n] I n n >xn x Vxn pVxn | u <ynnn n'Vana> 'n j r rn 44

moten iiaa nx33 D'a^n p»a nvvn nV DV»n xb© 'ai [bub... Vxm 46-45 unsya HSTC 'a naxn Vx ynnani nnaiV Ttp"an >xm .myns iV yr ip IWDXI J nbwn psn' ['nn 'n' 45 u b-n poon rnm V~» naxan 0*7 1 T"jn .]ax iiBxasnm'naxannTsnsTiipxpDDn^VxVns© 46 njax[]Bxi | i<tsb> anaxB3 nnvnaxan nT3 mi "wx pDom> nx <nVnjn mxn ibn nva bxm .mb ysa"naxas nnv nsxsn ni3 nai IIPX psom> a <nVnnn mx' iVi snvn ^xm .

nsxan nT3 ins: ns?x psom> j <nVnnn mxn iVi nvn* <n*7nnn mxn iVi siv bum .nt

...nvm] 4346-45 s [msos] 44 wnpx

TDNJD

. ' jnn Kinun DUPD xmw "a'awn Qwa maxaa mprau; 'ixn naai 32 ,xi7i

min^nn ^ap' xV pVi .'Vi'n nVita •'>j7ma xirrc? i r j y »a

nvm u?ao;n '3 ovnoan nax'u; iaa 13 p»m .oxva nunwnn

DXI ,Q"irrn D 'BW V"n ,nan nVna o'pma HXT ,nms VTVW QX

nnx psc x!? 'a nn .|X3a nwx onann o» own ^inwa nan nnV 5

nun»nn D'^JJB vn max D'own '3 j73O'» xVi .D'yyuna nnvnb

vm nsoaa "rnxa mv Dna xsaa n n fsVi .^vna onw na 'joa Dxya "

x ixn i33i <ian ]3 nsx ."B'awn DWJV nan p mix .nxT x'm mV mix Dann sna ii»> 1nnx msx nann ana ii»> a IXT nasi <n»a nax .nxT K'm mV nnx mix nsnn 3ns m»>mjx .nnx x'm n^ msx D3nn sns nw> '» IKT 1331 oen p nax .nxT x'm m^ nonvia<icn p nax ."B'BBTI Qfi^ nun |3 m»x> n IXT naai <icn '| nax ."B'a»n amb Taunvs'xs[ma'xa 2 'Ojao-ii3[oci3 | t5ixm33i<n8xa"3nVnaxB>TixTn33iu D'prna n»a D«nn D'B©J [D"3im D'BBU 4 ' t j ovooan [ovnoan | » ma [13 3

n 'Vapa [D' apa | 'D <inx> psc xVi 6 0 nann p»n 5

13 w e ins 'a 3t D'prna xmB7 ma '3 [O'pma... naxn 2-1 n 'jrrm pinn xmsn 16 onpit lbxn [jxss nwx 5 wnpx [mwwnn] 3 wip o'prna

D3 [ona 7 ttnpj; <p DJ |

naxa

D'aa?na pipxin naxan iioa 17 nxanni carcn ninxi naoa a"a p y i 25nyian catpn iyyun"> ia ircx na p y a a"a nxiaai ,77a na Da pxtp D7iymoipaa naa x'n 'Vvn x?x 'Vrn 17 px xmrc .rrpronn WDjn xim rraipapya n y r n 17 naVun wbwn niaon lVxa n y r n 17 mxann ircxai n

,xinu>a D7iym D'awna ' inn* naxaa a"A naxrc na m pij7aa nxanm 30may V7» Dn» naa D'Vna nnr ix nooaa nnv caaia n^awa vn iVx'xan nsninnuj nnx nnV xsaan mpainn pos' ,n»i3nn tiavn 171 .

.nipain,nt ">W?m .D'au?n nsun ]nu xm nsnan? mpann ]mw 17a ma 17 nxanm

on max cau;nu; 'D7 ,D'awn 170a' nyiinn Vuan i?i .nsnjnn boan 35noaV I P X rnxsaan nvun Voan D'awn nsmn 7tsan i?i .onsrun

]nu xm nyi3n7 mpain ]nu 'a ma naxnn nan .1773a nVivn 7&ana n'm.mxsa^n nix^sa nx»

nVoa 'n7a na xsa' X7 xmwa yau;na ' raon iioa n^y ie?x noian D7ixi.D'U;3X 7y nt psio naa nan ,n'n X7 ix ^xVrn na 1a n'nrc f a nViaa nwa 40

.]xaa pnyi .ia 7Dun poon mnna max naai'isa mpaa yyuna 'n7a imasya jic;xnn yyunana a"irnz> naa unax p i

I i pwa [naoa 2528 3 nan mpaa [Dipnn naa | 'j3Kin[K'n | 0 [2iVr.i] 27 nNa

p n p w n 30 u nnV^Ji [na?en | u [B>?HK7] | a mao wVu'n34 u[mpain...Ksajn] 33-32 J I ' JK IP?! 32 u n?K»p^K.mwa 31-30

I u J IVKI pVi 36 0 ?oann [2^uan | 0 J lVm p?i 35 ua Kin pit | a msun[2ny»n | uaa "?D3nn [2?oan | a nurun n« ['nsnin] | u ^osnn n n'rus1 ["roannVian...na | a KSOJ [«sa' 39 na« [2jnu] | u mpainn [mpain 37 a msn:n

n'n'© pa [n'n© pa | Io<n"a?"n>nViaaD»aa 40 'u<n"aaV"i>nnx K?K nnn V» iiay1? n©p xim o»a U'K poo> O'»:K ?y | 0 'anVvn na ia nvr

a pDon <HT> I a naN pnax 41 u <nain

26 u;ip naxan] | TJT i? ixann p? nxanm | nx i"» ncxai n"»i 25| i p x p - a ] | snaanTj'3ipanK3nm[nB...nKanni 30 unpxnx'ainps <D'JBpinvix> n'Vna 31 iwn'jE'a p pcxia x'JB'na'nrVira

32 unp vniyun na» s msnan may [nsnnn may 32-31 »npx p'^yposTi> w ipx nyiain mpai [on? xsnjn mpainn | unpx jai [runwn Tiayn

nps ma [mo | w ipx p?] | s nNann n^nai fiionni 34 s <D'aiwnp?7aa...n'm 37 1 D'awn 3*a wpx D'aurm [D'awn i?oa' | irnps [27oan] 35Va? niK'xa x niKsaw IKWV niK'sa [mKsam nwsa IKW 38 wnps oViyn p iyawna | »npx ia wan^n pwy 39 v mKsaan nKW mx'sa np ninxajn IKW[D'wjK...njn I Tp[na] | »nps pa] 40 w\px K7» V T [K? Kintra | n O K 3 7 >pnsn] I unpx <man D'ayn> lnax 41 WTpmyBnbxD'aTK'anxmyun Vxrnpaa | wnp mViiai x mVita xVi pnVa | n <?"i> a'in'w 42 wipx

X <73K>

7J7an oxya naxa

npn ,yyuna invm ">tm onan nt nrn V"n .coatn iVx i? ia«ipna 73 nmrc naVi .naa xVi 7p X7 naa D'yyiina oxxai o'arcn nyuna nVnnnt Dy nn'n ox WMI ,ios] mn yaoai ,tosj nm maa xxa' max Vp IX Taa1? n'n' XVBM ,QIVS maa ,7p xVi naa xV xm nwx ,nan nt n'n>© a'irr yaon

xm Vax yaon oy aniya 'nVa pso xVa wsi n'n'on ,"]sn xVi ,xom 10nVnaa nt oy rrnntpi nawaa n7na3 'n^a rcwn nxt n'nnun ,'nsa mj7

ay nu;x nircsia pjyn laa ,inaxya nxwa xm© 'D? T>7X "pox1 X7 ou?an nttr?naax lniaxya yyuna Vau; 'D? ,ia rcoan nxt nmn lbxi .nvyaon niman

.ia naa yyun1

,na7 u>sm ninaa n"piu?n na x'n© 17 ixann mnan iVxa ]«y ircxai* is7X lyyian' DJBX nnu> 17 nxann nva'au;n nvpi^nn ninaa ]*»» nwxaixsa nva'awn nvpwnn mnan iVxa |«y nwxai .ona aiu nnv xm piwnnnipain nVy» 17 nxarr onyun nipatna p y nu;xai .niViaa nnu> nmxpiu;nn xm max nipainnn on? nap' nwx»i ,w»i3rv" na nrcx nxt xm n3'xnt rrnva a^nn' .Vba yyisn' X7 yaaa a"irr max mpann nmc; naVi .nn7 20nta a"a nxannw na 'Da 7nas 73© n'n'tzn ,Q»aa na x?i DWJ 'nVa yaanman nt nm'un ,TIM 73© xm pnn nt isrtu? na i » x a o;Din nsoanxt 'sa mnVw nwx xm 73»a nvsn© ">S7 73»n nt T»XB» ^a'a^n

.npwnn

^ 7 'i'nn[V"i | j

u moos ['noD3 | > IKS»' [KSO' 8 » /<?ap'»>/ nnViu 13nViaj [n?i33'n?a 11 0 [yaun...i>n^a] 10 »[Kin] 9J38 oxn> K^ 12 HJSK <K?> nVtai 11 u pa...nn»ja] 14-11'waaK [mVi3a...n©KDi] 18-17 J nss [mnaa 16 'unjax na?...nwK3i] isI 'UJ nxann pK3n' | n nyun [oninjn | a mpsinna [mpaina | w p y [\"S 18p"nn' I uanipainn[mpain 20 OJ [n'n©...mpainnn] 20-19 2'<[n?»©]>

1 ntV Tixon 'ona« m? v i s a [at v x a 23 s ni [nia 21 'ua a"nnn

I unpx [onaia] | wipjt nK3nn ob ia«ip 6I »np S3O31 [S3OB1 8 T <1K> n3 | 1 [D'SlnMIB] 7 1 <3"J> VSIintt | T pT]p x IK [KVI 9 w nann nT n nanw [yaon nt 9-8 n nxxaan [ay nrrn DKwnpx <uaa> n?iaj | un owaa [nnwaa | x [©SJH] 11 »npx nann [ysun 10»npx <Kxa:n> n33 H »npx n»Ki p?Ki 13 »npx Dvn 'Vv33 [nwsia 12nsunn [Dnsnan 18 np xxa wx HKT pV nionn | npx mnan i"?K3 [ninaa 16mpannwp nnmaimpai x nimnnmpan [onipain | x[n?»]iv | npp^] | xn'nxanI i»npxn»K©?3KpB;KBn | npsjrun'psnnn' | wnp<n3n>nKT 19 n onminsI pnn?[naVi 20 w^pnapiwnx pupnn nT [onV pipnn 20-19 T iV [on^I Vip bivb»-t X 73W n«"<0 22 Wipjf [nTB] | X p-J] 21 WipX [V?3]innV»n»KKin[innVttr'n©KKin | n awnn? [?3W3 nvxnw 23 it nn [m n'ntnVKppinwn?x piwnnnT VK [npiwnnnKt'oa 24-23 snp inMiurncK Kin x inanwi

»p at

na

naxanmxi naa xin nana a'aania arw na anai .'ypnn nmn xim ,naa*lintz?3 an'by naxa own 'a nxana nanai ,mosjn minn xim ,nana naipa

nt nxT naai .773 nnx nana isnnu?' x? 'nxa 'nVai 'nxmun ,au;n,na7a aipas nyunn 'JDB xun:n 17 3"nru BJBX 'ypnn iiano? 110

na«nm nmsn aaaxi .noonm n inn 'aoa nvnann nnooan minn D'awaV7ya 'nVa )aia one nnxV n'Van Vya xmw 'JOB m s m ?ax ,7yion 'jsa onVnxta pjyn pvw nt 73n .trnan iVxi anan 'nVa onix vn nt7i .nnxa n'Van

n'm .usna 'nVa pn nn'pn an p'y nnx ax 'a mVy 'nnay x? nVxwn nxn 115n»sx 'x n7xu?n nxt uaa naVymo 'a» ny x'n nwxa maim ma'o;nn p.naxan aV©] .nnu V lanna uanr bxm .773 rrunaxn ma7B?n 17

109 a run [nanai | V KMI [Kim 108a <mnann>mnann | 2Vminn V [nnnn ill a a«nm p"nn« 110 apVsi I a v to [Qnan 'nVa | V pinxa] 113 n [Dna] | a [mDni...''Joa] 112nvpm [jan nrpn | a nan t nan [an 115 m ma [nxia | a jav [pvw | V np a m a u a m ' i n ^xm[K'n | BVnvnmni3'tr>nne[maTm...p 116

sm D'a»n nso> T D BTI [DV»3 | a marn VK [mar^ | a uamanK> nVnn .aiwy\ Qn> KV naim 11s a

rise 17 nxsnm ,miB;xnn nyunn x'n a'ai»n nyianw 17 nxann© naV aann 20 ,mn mn 17X» '37 .'nxj ns yyunan nt n'n'o; a"nnn .yyunaa nyunnw ntonmaai inyuna nt nnx py n^xai .nawxnn nyunn inyun nn'n x? ,nosjnsnin n'nnrc .nyun n'joV px ,miwxn nyun inyunu; msys 3"j 3"n

.rrnxi 5

a nann <» lam p nax .'^ttrn na«an> 'nx oann <f n»a nax .'UPton naxan> 1| u Dann <t» nan 3"i "ft nnxa> j D3nn <w ion p na

u lnmjn ['ninin 4 j ]"»' [j"y 3 2' m i ' na [ns 2 u

'3DB] 2-1 tt»npV] I nimnnnKta[n3 | tt>np<n7a>a"nnn | x nsnann©'jDaw [nmyinf 2| unpx cnwDK onaia [m nnN | p m Djn n^xai | urnpx <n:n> IODI 3

[n\inc I x <mnx> 2nm3n | » x ['nvun] | x p"j] 4 n nmjai

ta

nana aaiia KVI I O D ^ '-H&DN own rrrrtf iaxy m^ysnm Vsnon.aaiian p i ,]ata n Van Vva na niN'xaa nn^sxn la a«nn' WBNI

pta n^an "?ya viVa na mixi nana aaman o r a NXBJ ONE Nin ™iaaixim ,mVysnnn IN iaxy Vvisa rrVan >ya 'nVa na la Nxa1© a«nnaVN Q'jpj?nn n^awan Dna lyyum ircx nman uyxna lotnN a«n

nvna ]a DJ a^nn' xV xin» nxiaa Kim 90,pia n^an Vva ">nVa ias»a n^an ya Vino Vap« IN ,jaia xb> iasya

n'^an >sa imVy£jnn IK inV»D n^n' a 1a nt a^nn^w laa mixi nana aamaNinu? naa 'j^m ,naVa nm xmo; naa 1V a'ina p©xnn ••a ,|atn

,m'non )a loonx V» awnw na ••aoi nVsu;n nxta mson ^D p DNI 95V>"ty xbu>a Kin© ,n'Van Vya 'nb'ai n^an Vva maxaa "vox msnnwnnn'Van ^ya NVI n'Van Vyaa |atn '3Da nwwan m y n IN n'Van VyanVyan nt 'isai .naiaan nxt 1a x>wn ,iasy mVysnnm bsnon 'isa n•»a 'WD nixa IDDIN 1a nxa onanm D'jrpnn c a w n 1a «innur>nn .misi iana Ninw 'joa DU?JV mipn n^ann ^Da NV n'Van Vya OTO Va 100^Nm .o^a iniNi loonN naNaa nrunpn lp^nc ntai .ia ]«yu;

.mur>n VnnN lana Vysnai* nnN nana Vyis rrntt? maya ov ] Va 'a naixn naN' naai

.mixi nana aama D W >a n'n'o; a^'nn' nans"yN ,misi nana aama Nin» na D'a»an p Vax .pTis ma ]n naxn 105

nan NV ia^a N » U Kin lannrc D"yNi ,nana nvp nV |'N mixnu;

84"miaai> aaiian pi 85 a n"iH?SK wavxi b '(PDK o»jn piwDK owan | a 1'n'wn'"?an Vsa 'n^a na la n'n'ip a"nna nan misi nana aama ••wp-ia omn ussn QKW Kinnan nmxi nana aama 'ypin DH>jn uvsn DK© Kin iKiaai> 1 <]aia mVsonnn IK "rvisnaania 'ypnn nwm ussn mv Kin nKiaai> V <mI7»Dnn IK Vssa n"aa na la nvrw a«nnaa <ml?yDnnn IK Vinon n'Van n^sa 'nVa na 1a n'n'w a"nna nan misi nanaa[n'Van...pT3] 87-86 aaama[aanian | »KXB'[XXBJ | a [DK»...nKiaBi] 86a<'n'?a>niiyDnVm^VDnn[mI7SDnnn 90 anvn[Kim | a m^son [ni^vsnnn 87na m a"nnnip iaa V n»n'u?a 13 m a'nn© iaa prn'wa... iaa 92 a passa... K^] 91V [Qm...ia^a] I V a«na [3"ina 93 a miVsonnn pniVosmn | a n'nn»aa ['n'Van...'nVai 97-96 V 'joa [\a | a nWum [n Kwn | V [nisun] 95I a pa 'V?a] | t pa] 99 V n^an nVsaa [n^an ^»aB | a u'^an [narroan 97pawn 103 a 133'ma pjanr 102 b <vam ]»al?> VKm 101 b pa]V D'awjna [trawin p 105 a [n:n] 104 aVn nnK--l?5'Dno'1] I[D'SKI 106 T pinna...D"»K] 106-105 Vnamp[Kinrc | 8Dna[na | a

a Kwnn [KBDJ Kin | T D"»K

ia

'3 nou . 'C'VIP naxa

na D'yja vn n'Van 'Vya vbi bbsn niyyunnm mann p D'ypnn D'atwa Mur c y p i n D'arcanc? aiumV N'a' nasa mi .p i viVaa a'arcan p UVXNU;

.n'ban 'Van o^sns nina Dna•TON .D^'JV ">3»3 nax' n^an 'Vya 'nVa nina max© ma»n IYT naxnV"T ,naxya n'Van Vya Nim pta m^ysnnm Vysn n'Vsn ^»3 'nVs na ana

D33 mVysnnm !?3nsn n^an !?»a 'n!?a na '3iz;m ,nn'naai pnns 65vno? )n !?!?a DPaa xsa' NVI ,iaxy ni VDnm Vyss nViaa 'n^a nan

,n'Van ^ya 'nVa* no;a Kinu? ixa otwn a»E>n naax nto 'jsa ,IDDI mm IN

•"Vys ^nVsn ninan mN'xa VaN .]ai3 n'yyunai D'yaa D'srpnn vn nt i,mVysnnn DIBN ,n'ypnn n w a 'man om pta mVysnnm n^ysn n'Vannrp onV* pN nn'nmxc 'IDB yion VON ,moVn3 D'OIU;D nnu? ^sa 70nnrc ^sa ,DHDD3n o'nnn D'atpan Vy lyaa' on3T 'ic; n^Ni .omiaa

.nmsi nsna D'aania

>y yjai ,DTO Nin n^Na own inao n»N ,pnn3 iV rv^on |'N nnN NSBJ DNI

]Bt3 n»N rr^an ft pNP na niN'xai .on^n IN DH c y p n n cawan'Tinn D'BTOV ia yyunam y'3Bn ms^nnnV n'ypnn D'au;an 75

yyunan amattrai ,nan yaan nna nvnV DHODin cnnn D'swjn ^y yjan.n-rm nsna aama miaya

m^ysnnn nvna DHODan n'nnm D'ypnn msun •'am lDnncr )a DNonsp NXBJI ,pra Qnyan nn'n ntai .laxya n^an Vya ^yom ona NXBM

ma i^ap1 DIBN on 'a .nnan 'n^a D'yaan Dn'nina© ny nnspa nnna: so

.rr'ran bya nVa Nin pta QIBNI ,n^an n^ya nVaplasya !?yioai m^yanna n^an !?ya 'ypnn Dtpaa na mN'san p a«nrrn'Van ^ya na iniN'XB maya a"nn' N >I .pia n^an Vya na ia

I» 60^ D'»»jnn [D'nipjn p 61 ^Tn'^nVya'nVatn'^n^ya'n^ | » Dianna [mannn [2n'Van...naK'] 64-63 V ['n^3n...nnn'] 64-63 1 naum pnx" 63

66-65 bt iwrnn prom 65 V nbivsn [Vysn 64 T naxi pox1 63I T <Q'y'pnn> m^yonm 66 «s [m^»Dnm...TODJ3] 66-65 b piinn

| V DHDDJ nooj mm 67 avn'wp'nw | a <KVK nsna pan m>a HT njn T pi [Dm | b nViyon [nVssn 69 V D'yjmna [D'ssunai 68

sa | a /<mu'7nn3>/ Vinsn | bi bm [bin 7073 a on'Kttnja [onaiaa 71 ^<nan3>Dvp

74 aK)ioi[bss:ni | aonaopnao | a pV]ab nnoD:mmmnn [Dnosjnomnn | a i m pa 75 Vvn[on | at o'^pi^i D'a^j ['BE;J 78 a naama [aama 77 a [»':an] | a mm [»3an 76a nspa [as onspa 80 b nsn:nn [Dnsian | m n'n [nn'n | 1 masya passa 79ja 82 a<m^Da>n^annb»a 81 a < >ap'> T <i"?ap'i> a i smxa nsnnia 81-80

a Ksaw [Ksa'w 83 a ITIDI [^yisai | a^ mx'saa

na

ViVm oxya naxa

nynnn Vapa 'ypnn nurcn n'n' nxi ,Vapa ?"n ,Vysna ix Vyia n'n'» pa7"i ,oiu?s n'n'un ,nmxi nana aama 'nVa n'n'» xin 'ixn ,n'Van 'nVa Vx 35Vya naim nnixa aama Vac; 'aoa ,inms xin nox ,prcxnn yjaV DIPS miant nVuo ,p ox .inVuV nyunn n'Van Vya xinu> laa ,mana Viapn n'Vanuaa yyunanun nana ii'x lyuau? 'ypnn nwan xin nwx lasya yyunan

.aania xV OIOD

inyjn owa na Va» na uyxn nwx nanpnn 13V naxnms D'awin ir'n DX 40rrVan Vyan 'ypnn nraaiz; rnu oxi ,n'Van nVya |a DJ myum rrVan nVyana naxn iVxa ,na ovp xV pxi la px nc;x ,y3an nan 'nVa rrVan Vya na"•asai nana xm nan nro D"yx Vp xVi naa xV xmu; ia naxi nu>x n«D3nnnana a"nna ,'ro |a m nax'» iaa ,'ypnn nmn xin nanm na paiac?lioa iViua nxana^ nan nn .nos'tz? 'nVaa nosnn mn^sx ia 'nsaV xsa'o 45

.oViym cvawn nsoa pu;xnn naxan'nnanni ,iaxy ixa -"nnann ,D'pVn >>3» 'nnann nix'san px ,]a nann oxiV"n ••ypnn iua a«?na m IVTVV nt Dxu; laa ,iaxy ixa nrcsx mVit i s anana [nmnann V"s] nVymn Vap max xinun n'Van Vya na Vya xmrcnyn xmw ia a^n'i ^o p ni nxru; laa ,nann |a nnom n'Van Vya •'nVan sonix'sa Vy imx'a T O p ma nysnn nxt Vyi .vnaxa nspa maaoVxmanpn Vy 'ua mxa xim .n'nsm nyunn nix'xa 'nVaa niiu;xnn nVnnnn

.nxnnrc laa nnosiD'awn nxn:c? ^Da nViyni o^awa iuonx naixu; naa m Vy p s i c naa Vax.myon n Van 'Vya n'ypnn D'arcan nvnV Vyisn n'Van 'Vya D'ypnn 55ni'na naon ]nn .myrca n"a D«ypnn D'a^n© nx'a nanpnn nxt 'isaicaaian VJVJ xim ,D'an n'aaia nnspi ,Tnx aaa I W n'ypnn D'a^m nspn'n xV ,D'Vna nnv-i D'jup nnv ia nu?x caaian vn iVxu? naxi .a'a^van

mnan vn iVxu> 'Wan naxaa • » nx'ai .Wa nyunn nna nu;sx

b n»Kni© [naxnntt' 40 b I B S M a [insyn] 38 a [Kin] 3544 a D"»K1 [D"SK I T [Vp] 43 B Dn3 [n3 42 V OUttnW [D»J3B; 4146 V c a pro p I a X\T [Kin | V nnnn nnnm | V Q3 [ns | a47 V nVism D'awna T D'awna [oVism D'awn nnoa | b 'K T

50 Trwniatnsnn | »/<nsn>/^ap | a['7»a] 49I V D»3 1 KJD ]3 [»io p | a innna pann ]a | 1 itfon V»an V [n'

ja I V n33T -noa nas [nia | a mjoabx t niiaoKn rn«°VK 51 a ps] | V 3©mO'BBTC 54 V /<ni'nxi>/ mmpn | V <i>nVaB> 'nVaa 52 V c a T sro ja proa snoa [b>yisn | V ['n'Van] 55 a oVivm D'awn ioea V D'awa [DViym[O'Vv»...ia I a pnn] 58 a i pnK] 57 Vnaofnaon | BT nirwa...1|JDai] 56

V 'Wa ['Wan 59 B o'lop nnn D'Vnj nnv ia n D'Vnj nni' D':op on

na

'a nou ,'©'V© naxa

,nyunn n'Van bvn xin nana na bw nna nnxn ,manpn 'n© uyxna nnma nV>n'i .nyunn n'Van Vva 'nba xm 'ypnn ntwa n©x nan© mrcmn©x nan© maxn nanpnn Vax .nana xV xin 'ypnn D©aa n©x nan©» 10'3DB nn / n naxaa nxanj© naa nn nsmnn n^an Vva 'n^a 'ypnn D©aaxin nana nan >a© rnaixn nanpnn njaxi .pm nwxn nyunn nwxj mxa

nxv /nann nan xim ,nawa na !?a© -osa imxa' xin n^an,n'Van bsa am Va n'n1 DXI .ana ix oyaa Dtwn pVnnna p^nna

na n'n1© nu?ox x ,»a©n )a '©^wn naxaa nxanw na 15.wisna nb»M nn .nuraa

,mpa ib nxana naac? nnpya ^ ra^n naxaa iconx nt nxa > Vnnu;n naain^an \>»a 'nVa na xsaj n'n lVxc; nta a^nnai .pta nsun Va» xim,]at 'nVaa ia vyuna xmn owan n'n'© ma a«nna n'n n'Van Vso

mnaa nann' ' jsa n w x i nn'naa pnn' nnb> n'n' max D'au?anu? 20xin Vna inv ma n©x ou;an V'n ,D'aunn pnn'V i ^a i mnan pnni ,nanV,n'Van >ya 'n!?a na ia » '» am xxa' ox ,p nann nxi .nyunn nnaa invVa© 'jsa ,|ata nyun Varc nxam naai .pt 'n\?aa jwurvu? mana a"nn''x npu? nn .pta nn nnxnani ompm ,nnxnam rnipn na » ' nsnann

/1PDX 25

yjan mu;i ,»»i3nai y jaa naina 'ypnn ou?ano; nxanai p nain n'n' nxinan 'JX naa ,Wa nan aa 'pa xin Vax ia xsaa u'xi yyi^naa m>p iV ]'xnana aama xin ,'ypnn own xin ircx ,maya yyunan m DX ,p DX

aya nasya uVxx iyyun' ni»x D'atwa pyn laa , m mix ,©D3n maya Q'yyunan D"n '^ya mou V"n ,ona n©x 30

nyaan misn 'nVa nnx nbiys maa unnnn© mix V"n ,nVyi nnv na.n'^an 'nVa Vx nyiinn ort> ]nn n©x V"n ,na nvp px

ma ©non px ,n^>an ya xin naina na Vau; uVsx Vaipa xin DX© naxai

nns [Dnn nnnn | 1 ••w pnw | aV orxna n^^xna 8

...nVn'i] 11-9 V [Kin] | a [njninn...n':»m] 9 a T IM nana | a paI a Dana na i t o [nsninn...'nVa 11 aV [m»Kn...nanw] 10 tnaxna 15 T n»na] | ana [nan 12 a DanmaKaa t 'Kmaxaa ['b n»aa na [n'Van...na | b sovna [sown p | a 'in naxna b 'i i»N»aI a(ia] 19 iKVppVKn? 18 ^Tnn prawn 17 V mni [nbw | a [o^ja] 16a <ov> xsa' 22 a [Kin] 21 V nin'xai nin'Ki 20 t jat 'nba [ p i 'n^aa[inKnanimipn 24 V[njnwn...jata] 24-23 V aaw tf>arc | ^ a«nnn [a«nn' 23DK] 28 V ssninaai [simnai 26 ^ <inx> nnxnam <Tnx> mipm | a nn«nai DTIJ?

29 a <DK> 'S'pnn | T D»J [omn | b xmw [Kin nt?K | a [2DKJ | b [ja

31 1 jai pai | an <©Din IK> vsm 30 a UVSK nasvab [nsiinn] | aoa oavp V na oavp [na ovp 32 a »':an pis'jan] | t vnnnv

1 torn pona 33

ja

naxa

'JDB m nxv naai .Wa inx naia ismw xVn'inn D'aiab1 a'im naV nipaa nyunn 'JDB xum i"? a"in "a'awn 105

nsa Dn'jwb a">inn mn mixn oVixi .noDnm n'inn savn pVi .nViaa nnxai nViaa 'n^a iata •mjiya nnxV xvira

.nxtn nb»xu;n pwrc 'lxn m 'DD mn .o"jx^vn 'nVa nmxp xim .oyia 'n^a |an nan m'j?n inx xVx n^y 'may xV nbxwn nxn

'X mn rbxwn nxt iiaa nsanw 'au? ny x'n n»xa maim* nWan no'si mVu mx ]'x nnyn ^xm .^a 'unaxn m a ^ n

nVnn .nVxwn nan / m 'n

105-104 '> nnx pnK 104TDM K7N NOTJ iV Om" K7 |N33> ! 3 <]W7 |non ]N33 '3 7"3> H3K <DnOl>

105 '<Dnmpnonnm3iN33> K Q n a i p n o n n x m n ' m p D

108 nnnxainnKai | »xma;i on»[N'nu | n m c p n a n 1 107<n7i3n> vi73 | a Dn'Vs [n'7» 109 'J <nin> nan | a n"3K7

| 'njaKnnTmpvoim no » n'm a K'm [xim | n•>J pEna...n7nn] | a fni] 112

105 wnp ['JDO] I unp <3"j> u;np nta [m | n 'ns:n© 'IDD ['nsjntyn 104n "rax [QHOD3n...3'im I n X7X xun: 17 I»K u>px N7X ,17 xt;i3 jna x1? [xunj iV

]n: [on'w? a"inn 106 n DHODin Dinn D'mi? Vax u;px on1? ]nj Dnoojn D'inno«JX7vn 108 s nVoa 'nVa pVisa | s nVoa [n7isa 'nVa 107 wnpx DHV[n7xwn...nVxipn 109-108 n <nv3X7vnmmxQH IVXI> tfps <D"3X7i'n DH 17XI>

mip pnx x?x | wnps <nnx |ai> rr?y 109[attna...jan] 112-109

ma iircxin naxan iioa ma; n»x n W n "?y TOT ]a Dann naxyjanun yyuinai yjaa nnama onu; D^ypnn D'awn ]a nxanaw inxp 'rarcn naxan iioa nn ,nasya Q'yyunan nxwa pjyn laa ,nm 'nx^i nnn 'nVa ,wnw nwm m na yyunn TWX nyunna; DU> nxanai .

nwx owaa na n'mw nwsx 'X yjan nw m 'JDB aw nxanai .mosjan .irtxx nwx aaxya cyyjnaa f wnw iaa ,ia

mna

naxan 3 V D'a^jna [D'awin ja 2 V mx'ana pwan m a | T IH;T px psn ja 1in3[na...iH7x 4 V sa^na[sawnp 4-3 V-maxa Txmaxan

6-5 a [ma?] | a niw [uv | T nxanj p ox pxanai s 0a D'jnan? [D'yjanw 6 V DSjnjnn [13

aa

naxa

"roan xim .m^ysn ix iaxy ^ysa nViaa Ti^a na la xxa'P a^nnn'•nVaV D^a'awn D'ara Da lyyun* nu;x ninan w'jna loonx a«n 85

nViaa ni^ysn Vapa yy Dtwn nvna D"J a"ina viVa xmw 'D1? nxiaa ximaama n'n'c; ,jata nViaa vfa iu?D3a nViaa VVD Vap' IX ,pta xV TOB»

]aia n^iaa x n m^ysnm bvsnw nt iV a^in1^ laa ,nmsi nainaam Kinw naa ' ^ m ,na!? nu;a xmu? naa xsa' 90

nxta mi?on |DIX a"xivran ix mVann ^ a v x!?u?a xintz? 'D1? .nb'iaa 'nVa nViaa lrnaxaniVysnm Vs?sn 'jsa n^naxn niVan xVi m"?anna |atn 'joa n^naxnD'anan 1a isniu;' nu>x ni^ann nt ^sai .naiaan nxt ia nru;n ,nys3a'33a x> n^iaa ma nw bau? ' ^ o nix'a IDDIX ^x'a D":xVvnm D^a'awn 95.ia ^ancw 'a1? nxiaa ^a nti .mm ^vna xmrc 'jsa D^V mij7n m^ann

.njia:^ Tu;""an Vxm .n^a mix'i IODIX naxaa nij7son ip^io1 ntain:n nnx nana ^ysnai nana ^ys' n'nu? naV DV) "?ac; naix nax' naai

.nnixi nana aama nm Va nwc; a'in' naanmxnw ^y ,nmsi nana aama xinc; na D'BWH p ^ax .pms nax naxai 100nm ,naa imx'sa '^vn ab na> xcni xin nannty ^yi nana nray r\b f xna«ipa nmxi naa xm nana aama xinu; na onai .n"a'au;n D'anan

mn^a nrnVy naxi onanw nxan1 nanai .nnDDJi n in Dm ,nana

Vbl 84I | j 12 rrwa [un^na | J 3"nnn [s"n 85u a [23"J] I 1 3"inn Ninip'n^V [3"inn...'DI? 87 > <jai3> n'V

91 J pT3 Kinc na'D3 [sine; nas 90 T I S N [xsa\..nT] 90-89| J nxi [nt 94 n x"?2ra [KV»3 | n maxa n ^ n s n 92 13

3 naxaa [naxaa 97 J o"3KVsvnm [•"JxVram 95 i [2i3] | HSK[Van 101 ' misty bs 2-> [misn© V» | '» HTB; [Kinc 100 J na« nmx 98

' onai [ninai | ' i onoDi [QHDDII 103 | ' bs

S 3«n© '3D8 [3"n n©K 85-8487 u>np jaT3 s D»J3 ona nnx jnw [DWJS n'Vsn 'nVal? 86-85

2 '89 n[]BT3...in] I n nVoa'nV>3 [«V 88 wnp [23"J]]unaxa 92 n p"xi] 91 T < K V > 2 Q » J 9 0

93 » n p s m^sn «Vi [rnyn IK | unpsr[1H3] I X ['tt>3 niN'3] | tW nOOIK] 95 tWTpX ['13] | ©ipX [1B?D33] 94

w n p x i u pBKaa 97 wnps p3...nti] | n <33iia> Kinw 96Vn x ia»[ja^3K 100 x<nVi3a>D»s 99 wn""] 98

u>px "B'a»n man V"T [D"B'B«;n D'aiin om 102-101 n p m nI n D1B»jniB3typxD'BB'jnVn[Dm 103

xa

naxa

.nxunaa nray otf> px onmxw 'joa mn b>ysn nxi

sm 'Vrnna D'aaiia DHE> "osa .D'TODM D-nnn n^a-un

xin ,D2tt xinw nan neon wao -ra>x ,j?nnai > n^an pxtz; na nix'xa nan 70

a^ina jaia i > n'Van pxw na nix'xai .inVit I N D^a-wn D'aian

D'lnn D'aiiV na ssmnam yjon moVnnna D"a'aE>n n'anan

,D"3N^>vn D'yaan omns nvnV DHDDjm D'linn D'anan

.nmxi naina D'aania ana trvsunan

D3 xsaan m^yonn nvm Dnosan n'inni n^a^a^n D'anan isnrw 3"xi 75

Dnx[?a Tna inv onsp xsan ,|DTa onsnin nrvn mai ,itt>s33 n^iaa ^ssm

Vnp nxn nta nVa[7"» one; ">si ,n<"3NVi<>n DJ'N* D^yjan oninatz; ni D»«

.nViaa TiVa nan ]at DVIXI ,nViaa

Vvsm mVysm n^iaa «a'au>n Q V U na nix'sa ^sa a'^n1 xVi

snm Vs?sn nViaa na mx'saa a^in1 xVi .pia nViaa na na xxa^c; so

1a a'ln' oiaxi .mixi iana aama ix IDD'U? "WDX man n'n'» iu>sa

.aaman p i ,pta nViaa na nix'saa nnrcsxn

jaia n'piaa 'n^a na mixi nana aanian Qtwaa xsaa nx xinu?

nyjnn [bxta 68K/<D"a'OBTt>/D'anjn 69

x /<rrn>/ ' j "a'aau [D"a'aB;n 71 1 run [Kin | ' Kin [Kino 70 2 <nn>na Qnvn"? [nvnV | 'a ciosjin [OHODjm | HK [DnoD3m...y:aji] 73 »a <n'n>' nspa [Dnspa | J lnsnan [onyiin 76 '» D'awn [D'anjn | n «]nw [lDnnar 75I » niK'xaa [niK'sa')DB 79 J ojasi [DVIKI 78 'naax [Qrx] | 'njan[nTD»] 77'ax KVI 2K px 81 1 a'ina [a"im | 1 la [Q3 SO 1 TODI n^ojs I s [aaua]•"a'au;nQtt;jKsajQsa;nKiaaKim> 33man | j /<|'*xi>/ jan 82 n jaxVi J <nvnp>jaia 83 1 <]nn mVssnni Vssa n"?iaa Vss n 'n^ vsszz a«nnn nmxi naina aania

n <p7a nVisa 'n >a na ia xsa'» a"nnn pia nbiaa 'n^a na ia KSB'W a«nnn>

68•na n'n'E7> inVi: | urnp Q"B'aE; IK [D"B'awn 71 n [niK'XB] 70 ns la'ac xV 1° " ^ ' " wi'n 76 wnps mo^nnna [nioVnnna 72 p <n"?iaaon© •'sb .D"wVi'a orx D'y:an cnima© m D» t2nViaa... D» 78-77 unpD'y:an Dmmaw 'D^I p s n'riaa 'n^a Viap xV ,|BTa nbiaa iap isn niB iVap'onimaw 'DVI n nViaa Viap x^ .jaia nViaa 'nVa Viap nsn ma iVap1 nan ,D":xVvn orx•<s^> v nViaa 'nVa Viap xV .pia nViaa Viap isn ma iVap' mn ,D"JxVrn nrx tryjnn'IDB 79 "i <V73 mtan 'nVan lVap1 tub nan D«3x^vn Dn Dnosam nninn nimawx <na;Dx n'nw> T [ii^Dja] | p n^iaa 'nVa [nViaa | x XXB' DXB? m 'JDB tnwxoix I vnpx nvsi] 81 x na XXB'QXH; ma [na nix'xaa | i»npxia[Da 80n aama n'n'tm npx aaiis n'ai paman p i 82 unpx pa] | ©npx

sn n"?iaa na ia n'n'c anrr ,nmxi nana naina "a'B»n Dnjnw wma ox©x nViyo [na 83 ©npx <]Bia m^»Dnm

a

maipn V» 'ua n w a xin .n'nxan nvunn mx'a nVita nnrcxin tfpnnnn so,nxirnp laa nvrooj

canan nina -wxa nViym D'arcna iomx nax'rc naa m Vs psiD"> naa ^ax 4inxt •'jsai . w o n 'Viaa c w a w n mswrn nvnV Vssn 'Viaa D'^arcn

nvna naon ]nn ,my©n 'biaa a^a'arcn crananu? nx>a nanpnnxim .D'an D'aaia vrv nnxpi ,inx aaia w r n^a'aon D'anan 55

v ix D'aop nnv 1a w D'aaian vn i"?xi» naxi . a w p n D'aaianninan vn iVx» VVian naxaa DU? nxiaa mn V^aai .Dvr» ib I^DX n'n xVni»»unnn n'n nViaa 'n^a VVaa nyim Q'anna D"a'Btt;n D'anaana D^a'a^n D'ananu; ai^n!? x'a' man nn .jai nVna a'arcana

.mViaa m'jsiB mna 60'nVa na nna nnx ,a 'n» wa nax' nViaa 'n >a maxarc nispa naxnna ">W7n ,pnnm mTnaa >"i , iwsn nViaa nm pta ni^yDnm >»sn nViaamVssnm Vyoa nViaa 'n^a nan DVIXI .iwsaa m^ssnni bson n^iaaD3ax mu; •>*?? ,IDDJ mn ix ""B'au; n'nn© ^a Vb>a owaa xsa1 x > nm ,

.pta lyyun1! i » v n'h^an vn ]aVi ,nViaa 'nVa» xino; "raa Du?an a^n 65••man xin nan pia mVysnm ^vsa niViaa 'nVan mnan mx^sa

•nira 50pnnx>i|nK psicnaaVa«<T'annK> 52 'nnoDjn[rvnosj 51nnnns'iy [nas'E? | niaapna | i pDionaal?aK<iB'Ti3naK> a pDionaa VaK <ittmK nViaa pbiaa 54 x nViaa [2iVnaa | 1 tanvnV [nvnV | HK nViaa ['^laa 53

60 ' msjrunn [nwimnnn sg J mn .VVaa [run Vaai 57 ' [O'B"pn] 5662 3naKi[naK' | i3i3naKaB7n:naKa» 61 ' m^iyo 1 mbss

n /<n©Dia>/ J prim [pnnm | '»a ':isn [V"i | ni niVssnnm [mVssnm | MN n^aaI n <mvnaa b'-\ IE;D33 nViaa Dm> 'mVsonm | nx nVaa 'n^a ['nViaa 'nVa 63

65 J rrnw [n'nnw 64 j n^iaaTiVsn [ nViaa'nVa | 2'<[nan]>...QVIK 67 ' niVvonn [mVsonm | ' nan 2' [mnan 66 '3

'a <[n'uan Vn]> | j u!?maa on© 'JDB run nyimn max [uVmaa

m m [rrnsjn nsninn mx a 50D'aona 52 »npx xim [xin | wnps n^nsjn nsiann mK'sa xinw na| n mna© » p s mnaw "T [mna nrcxa | w D isni o awn nsoa n D'nu;na

56 unpx[O'a'"pn...x'im] 56-55 »nps [D'aaiaiyr] 55I -ip QnVni Dx n'n xV [lVircsx n'n xV 57 wnps D'B"pn D'aaiannVna 59 u>Tpxm^aa'nVa [n^iaa'nVa | s ["?Vaa] 58 wnps <

x mVnaxn naxji 61 s <myja> m^iaa 60 w ips nnsa [jat63 npxim[oni | v m^yonn [rnVsonm 62 unpx

[n'Din Vn] 67 unpx <DWJ> xmw 65 wnpx [VVa] 64

naxa

ma Vran px nan ;nViaa x'n ran 'Vi'na na 73© uV Vaipa n'nn»mn ?apa "a'arcn o-un n'n nxi ,Vapa V'n ,?ysna ix Vina n'n'u? pa.mui 'Vrna aama vi7a n w o a"ina xm ran /ixanntz? laa ,rrVan 'n?aVaama 7au> 'S7 ,imix xm n»x ,pB?xin snaV OIPD xuna 7"T ,DIB?D nm'oi,p oxi .inViTV nsnnn nViaa xmu> laa ,mana Viapn nViaa 'Vvm misa 35ii'x vnnv xm "a'a^n man xm ircx ias» nxoa yyunan nt nVuo

.aama xV DH»D maa »s;i3nanu;i# '7rnanm Du?aa na 730; na unm nox nanpnn nV naxnn^ D'soia irm DXInViaa na "a'a»n onaaw uVap DXI ,nViaa a"j mi^yunm nVoa m»m

laxn i7xa ,ia nray 17 yxi ia ii'x nu?x ,17 yjan nan nVit 40'7Tna xm nan nw 7V naa xVi Vj? X7 xmc; 17 nax' mia»a

mana a"nnn />ro |ax nt nax'u? laa ,"a'at»n Dnsn xm '7i'nmiVioa nxann naa nai nn .TDD'U? 'nVaa losn1? mnu;Dx ia 'nsm

.D7i»m D'au?n nsoa pc;xin naxan'man ,D'p7n ' i» 'mann mx'xan px awx ran ,p nT nm nwxai 45

aunn xm awn'u; *IU;DXB? laa ,imax»a -WSR inVn 'aoa 'mam /inan ja mmann rap Diax xmc; n7iaa na 7i?a n'n'tp 7"n "a'au;nmao xmu; ia aiu;n'i T D |ax m mace; laa ,'Vimna Viam nViaa '

7» mx'a ' ro px raa nrann nxr Vsn .vnaxa nxpa

'HJ3 Kin [K\T 31

u a 'nxn [V'n | ' <n'rran> ax vn'ttn [n'n'En 34 ' ia 'jisn [Vn 32is 2' [vb I 'Hjas vjnen [yyiannnci 37 » N'n [2NW 36 ' |I»NT

39 ' a m naa 2' [Diyja na | n a [na | n naNna; [nnNnnc 38[Nw©...2ntt;N 41-40 'lb'anVNa | J /oV>/ nray | j nman [yjon 40

I j[ni] 42 j'VrnrVvna I 'na[nan | 'iVpNVnaanVnaa.-.N1? 41 'jnannN'Nin 46 i DN [|'K 3"N | J []3] 45 J <m> 3"nnn | HD"5J N30 ]3N PJO pN...Nine | 'ja'nnLV'n | 'jamia[D^ja 47 JattnnNin^'ani'aattnnmp^inI ' "jnama ["?ia3n 48 ' nimanna njp DjaN NWU; 1 rrmann mn QjaN [mmanna TijaoVKn [mjao^Nn 49 n c a ' » NJ'O pN a C N pjo ]3N | J 'Vvnn ja ['Vvnna

n D"a J Nio pN 'a C N ['i'o |3N | T\i |

3"ina 33 un [ p ] 32 s nT pa [j'a ma 32-31 f n p s pjV] 31nps<V"n> 2Kin 36 np [mana] 35 s n'n1 N?KTI [VHm©D n'n'un 34 sxnana[3nViaa 39 p wyjm pnsjn njn 39-38 s [a©ia] | wnpxpiV] 38iaa .rraiao nimn VN n'uj nV vrw V a ^ na«' mava ni»N na [n'om | unpx ['i^] 40.n'3130 nsnin onV c;'© D'aa; naN' m3»3 IU;N ns p Dnms3 mar1 nsnan xna;x 41 -40 urn (© w o J ) ntjan nmsa m©' nsun <v *?«> D'Vpi

sojn 44 u> mosnV p M ^ 43 -1 p:] 42 n V-n nurx46 f n p x < y n > D'pVn | urnp<NI?N>limann | xfi'N] 45 n

[vnaNB...Vnajn] 49-48 unpx Kinttn [Nina; 47 an nTDsurnpx [nmnn] 49 urps pa] | urpv pi ] 48

nV

naxa

ninw ^QB nn ,'rau?a. nxanno naa xm nm nymn nVoa 'n?a "B'awn 10nViaa xm nm 'Vvna ns Vau; naixn naipnn nVixi .jam ninxai nyunnNino m y a nxr ,'3?i'nn nan xmi ,nrcaa ns 73© 'jsa mxiaa x'n nannxannu? na 'D3 .nVisa DIPS 73 n'n nxi flaim uiyaa noan pVnna pVnnanxia nn .nViaa Dwaa nViaa TiVa ns n'n'u? pn ' xV nan ,yatt?na w>bv>2

.nvpna 15xim ,D'iD717 nxann na3 D'u?n»a 'raiya laonx m mx'33 7inu?n naaia^nn' nbisa ntyja nViaa 'nVa na xsa' IVXU; ma 3"m .pta nsun Vac;IDH»' njax D'aronc; 'D7 ,|at n?iTa ia yjmna xmn ott>an n'n'u> mamnan nonsni ,ni'3xVi'nn niyaan mnsa os'n»n ^sa mmxm nirnaa^nT' xm nan Vna inv ma n'n nc;x Du>an«; naiVa .D'awn nsnvnV nau;a3 20a«nnn ,nViaa Ti a na ia am xxa' nx ,nan ,)3 nt n'n ircxsi .n»i:n Tnanan nsian Vsw 'jsa ,]aTa nyi:n 730; nxann naai .|aT n7iT3 ysun'tt? msns

.]3n' xV iiVn nt .vpin on nmxam rnipm nmxam mipn nayjan nTtyl ,5?si:nai yjaa naina "»a'ac;n msnu; nxanm p nt n'n nu;xai|n' 'a ,773 'Vrn 73a 'pi xin 73X ia XSBJ xm xVi svwnaa nra» 17 px 25'?vna aama xm ^'a'a^n man xm ircx ,i3aa vyunan m DX,oa nu?x JWXT raaa nasy nxsa lyyun' nox D'att>ja pyn IBS

mis 'Jisn ,7V3 na ia pxi BTOS xm IX ,tt?sma D'yyunan n"a 'am:pn -iu?x VH ,ia nnray px -itt>x nyaan misn n^n na Vyis naaa

nymm nyunn 30

14 ' ':sVvnn j ^NVNvnn HK 'Vvnn ci^vna | »aa Kim [X'm 12' 17 a <yni?a> 'rai»3 | n HT iwaa 100ns puonx m ms na 16

19 1 [13] I n Dvia a Q»J [mra is a p7iDn QI»J3] | 2

I a msunan [n3«;»: 20 a niDnvm [noism | a nT]N7NTn;i [nvixVvnn | a3"nnn | a [rrn] | a nvnann [nyiai 21 nx [Vna] | x /onv>/ 'inv | aa [a pmsam oiipni] | n nnNnm mip a mn'xm mipn prnxsni mipn 23 a2'<['»]> I a<njn>VV3 | nrrnt'Kin 25 a nr) [man 24 a<aa D"nn'VM [n"3 28 'a poKnn yiano [pwxn vaaa 27 nxnrx[mDK26

'aa 'iisn [7"n 29 'fiax syiwan [D'vyunan | ' n"an

[jain mnsn | s nswn [nyi:nn 11 unpx [mi] 10s [nVisa] 14 wipx <*awn> nan 12 unpx [naipnnj | lynps pimI i,?x[Droi] 18 iynpx[nTa] 17 unp:*[0'js7] | c<ya©na> »ra»a 16unpx [j3n\..nT] | u^npx p i s am [vp7n...onipm 23 x pT3 NVI [pi n7iT3I WTpx[?73] 25 sr nTonKanni [man | vnp D'awn miw ["B'awn manw 24[2'31XT 28 W [|TOX1] I U'TpX <1J7XX> lSSlin' 27 UnpX 7"T [Kin n©K 26

,manan> nvunn 30 n <mixn> p <miX3> 7"T | tt^npx [na] 29 urn xVi

u n p <Vn

axs?a naxa

inai i nv arc ircx xinn wan 'Vix Vax nan w y r wVx amxmxxa:n pinxn maVrcm rroroxn nnVxnn x mya' xm .|X33 3in jaKV Vxm .onaiaw xVwna xmrc nxT ,mxa uaa "lipn'rca ,xm mn oaV

.pna nrcxi ua n^xsaan Dmyn on uaa 1^ D^p'sanrc nnixa ua'rc' 200!?xV nVnn .13 nmsan misn nwna naxan

]a [NVsjna 199 J uV [UVSK 198 'a irnvn1 [ W V T 197 a

I n iV p3 201 a n^n ' . . . DVPJ] 201-200 2 ' <'3> uaa 200 aa

'a

<V3U3> n 133 pjV 199 n pi^SK] 198 n n"?nj psn | i m»'T<i inVn 3ia[pna UPKI 200 n Qnam Vaa 1333 mv [•1313^ s^Djna | n DIKH

n nnan'.-.D^wj] 201-200 1

TDND

svunai yaaa D'naina nnu; n^a'arcn n^anan p»a nxsnnrc naV 15 2an51103 nn ,oasy nxsa n'ssunan nxrcs pirn ias ,DU?J T1V3 D3

nm TiVa ,n'nsa onsn nt 5?yi:ni> na I B K nyunnu; arc nxanm .iniwa na n'n'rc nwsx 'x yaan m 'a ni sa nrc nxann .

om , u ^ x nu;x naxy nxsa D'jwnnaa pyn ias ,13 5.D'atwa mns nn^ D^'aanrc

nn nViaa xm nan ^vna ns VSB; ana nnx ,nian,?n 'nu? imana nnnani» ma a'lm* .nsann n^iaa Ti^a xin "a'arcn maa nu;x nan©trua nu;x nsnrc maxn naipnn Vax .nana xV xin ""a'arcn maa

a n«3nnu; na1? <tum p naK .'3©n iaxnn>' n K ix3nn» naV <iv Y'3 nax ,wn iaxan> 1n m prawn 2 a yjam [yjanan | a iKsnnc naV <icn p nax .wn iaxBn>[one 7 ' n"3n a D"nn ' S3 [D"n 'Vsa 5 a iX3nm pisann 4 a oa [na 3'man [maKn...ain'] 9-8 a 'am prawn 8 a <'inu; WIK> nyjnn | »a pa

ia nxann© [Q^iKanm 3 x nma [«]ioa 2 n,? yjani [»':anun 1pxann | XQWjm'n'n,ntnK3nntP':D8i[lnt...nK3nn 4 |

[Dm...D'yyi:na] a 5 tyipx pa »jn:n' IWK] 5-48 x ona p©Kin [ona nnx | tynp <nxsnn> nn 7 n Dma [D'awaa 6

x na ^aw

naxa

xin poo x ?a mi ,n »v i> f K DTij? 13 nxna n w a Vx p y n rfryw

onVita lmVys-'c; na aioa n'n'tt? Vac ,ia ircx onpn xinn nxnn Vax isoon xV J?3D DHB ntaa^u; naV na xxa' ~\wx Diann mn'tt? ias ,DJioa n wnxii invn inn .Vp xVi naa xV V3O oa 03 nyunn xxan© ias nj? xVi

wnxn nva^xn iVxw ••isa ,yn' b>xm ,D3 onaxana^siD ni'3'x *?x 03 ymn rbyw pso px nm on^ita

D'Vu? ]X33 ic;x ib>xn nva'xn vrr> xbc; IXT nnvm nan nxni nnvm iss3"ina xwc? 'sV nimxi nanj73 nnaxi imv DXI ,DJioa onTivis^x

'a ma nxT nu;x mn .pirn nn ,^ssna irxw na niVvanan mia^n sioarrrvw msns 3'in' "?3x nbssna x^nu; 'DV niwxnn naanan nrx »xn

,m!?yDna Ti^a nT»3'X3 oana p^xnn oanan.ssuna TiVa nxna 190

n'nsian nxna nVxu?n nxt3.unaaip'3 p lotnx xin ,i ?xn omsin n^wana omx irap

V yjnw na w a n nt3 3ina u»an n33E> inxinaana nau?3i .]X33 Tain piosi n:n ,nt uaipaa D'pirnn Q"nVxn

p nVsun nasns unnau;a nnv onaaan i^xn nnana ub 195u»an mn ,Dmx3 "unsnTO nVnn D3 unasn nrrn nxi .133 nix'sam uaa

I ' i <'3sn> Dnn 181 2 ln^ss1© pmVss'w 180 J s>n [sin | »a Dnp> [Diip 178I JDnvmpnvm 185 i nsanxn [yanKn 183 J[D3] 182 1 MU 16 [>6 MUspin] 187 s<Dn>DnaK3 | lonnvrN'aaDnw^KiDrrnvia'K 186 u a [n«n3][nsnn | 'JKinnrpnT 191 'naaK [2|i«?Knn] 189 'K naann 2' [nannnn 188p poonx K ©axaip'i p iocnx [ansaip'] ]a loonx | J i3Tp prap 192 J mxna

VKoiuonK n waaip'j ja IUDIK J sroxaipa ]a oiVuiuonK a anaaip1:| nx [0^1313...!^] 195 'a nrjn» [rjn» | a -man pisin 193

178180 wnpx [pao x^a] | n pa] |

xVnn lgi-iso w ips inbus lnVss'w [onVns imVss'c | twnpsunpxi>3UBxiinD'jinnn3VyD'"iH;x[y3B...tittm ISII «>npx [jnv...onaxanB] 183 v i p x yaona x'n orumn© [»at3...xxanw 182s <na> nva'x | n ni nx m [onVita 184 i [sanxn] | u;s ':DBI pasapnav I i»ipx nna'x [orrana'x 186 »npx pivs'Ka] | unpx [nan] iss

'nVa nva'xa 189 » xin[w 'sV] | np onaxair ixn [onaxa | s nivp S T x1?© [»':'B7 | » i p x n^yona 'nVa <© nxxajn> ma'xa

1 mn [jxaa 194 n [ma] 193 | n inn pn: 191 »px [pan'...mi] 201-191naannvxm>IJ'VX 197 i i x s a ' t v m [mx'sam 196 Tpa^nVoian] 195-194

n1?

naxa

i r x xinu; ,ma lax'tz? naai .rcxV) D"a'aran D'am1? D'Drwan onpan••a nn .nD^nna DnViSDB? n'xna orcn «iinwa Da ma'ann n'n'© pirn,nvxan u;xn maai ,nmx nnnrcai mxxain mesa x'n rcxn ma'annin m 'sai .n"ivnm n"rtaxn nvnn njpa mna D"B'aipn D'BBJH ma'am

D"m"75?Dnn nva'xn p x'n ma'an ,o'j'a ->w ma'ann

i r x ma'am ,ia xm nu;xna nnai 'at»nn rvD'xn yvnw na nnai^ '3isn .mvDon m»m

raj?' nnxpu?a ,nnpn ]ata D'aaian niVisro D'D'aan nax'c? na naxnn DXI,»avm nipn Dnspi ,mn!?m mpn onspi ,mnVm Dinn Dnxpi ,u?avm Dinns?anxn t n w m D"a'ai2?n D'atznV D'Dnwan sanxn nva'xn vrv nr\

.mn'xai nanpai own i in^a onaxiDmu?D3a orx i .nia'ann |xaa i > D'jpa D"a'as;n D'aijn vn'u; n a n nompaa nxina xinn b>snDn n'n'tt? na rnj?a Vsnsa a"ina 'nVa xm 'a ,D'annvrw Tnu>an x1?! ssrwna n'n'u? a"ina Y>VW na >a px m ]vm ,xmnn:nu?an n'n ox ,-ircxa nt nxn' naai .D'xsai naa Dnpan am ,mnc?iaa |TOXT n:u>a xsa' x1? .n'Van 'nVa^ m iVm ,Dnna onm mncanaiaa nan©' xV mwa Vx p»n n!?a'u; mana nan .nrsn nsuna a'in'u? 175'X Dipaa nyunnw on'3U> |'a Vrann Vax .ssnan* xV v :a ^x p y n

v :a imaxsa ssuna Va1? "?ax imasy sna nai bx nVanu>

I j <Qnpa"?> o'snwan iss[tnsai 160 > nisVnna omViysw [no^nnB DnVissw | a [oa] 159 jnDTi[naaij n'n [>on | 1a ma'ann [ma'sn 162 1 QTpnm [n"3vnm 161 nx unDiI J nyansn ['vanxn 168 » "an;nm ['aann 164 n iaizr> p w | n mm' [sin] I 2'<pa]> n i n i mmxi pin'Kai 169 s [»anKn...Q'Dnwan]

I 'janiniPBa [nanirana 174 unworn 173 ij'aacp'BT 172177 i nyjnnw [nsninnw 176 K paa] 175 J mwKT

'VINT pas'B; naai | WTJJS "a'atsn ma"? [Q"B'ai!7n caii1? 158, npn'mnma x [n'Nia] | iyTi7XO8K3>mB'ann 159

imp pain] 163 »np <n"n;man> n"naxn | s "B'Bi&n a m [0"B'arcnI snaK'pnax'© | unpxn8Nnm[nBNnnaKi 166 wnps [D"BEnnni'3'sn] 165unp vn'n^mxvnnpvrnjn 168 s [mn^m mnn Dnxpi] 167 nx n"7i»D [m i»D'JDB [j'K m 172 »npx []K3a 13 ] no unpx nanpa IN [nanpai 169...am] 173 w n p x < 3 " i n a > w n p s T n B 7 ' » n a I ? 3 ] W V |n:n n"?m | x <-no'ina iio'm> nnna | x onn iaa [onm 174v KVI [K1? I p njni [njn | wnpx [m'»a] ns wnpx K [ | p ^p pmaxv] I x <K"7K> n"?3n» 177 unp nan© [nsninnn; | ©npx pi^rc] 176

V " x inViT JPJB imaxyai pnVit...'raK | VV

naxa

'£30 xinu; na 'S3 "a'awn mam .nViym D'awna IUDIX IDDB;

I'm nntp V'n ,jxaa iwx D^TDDH a'Biwa pyn "pna iniaxyany niTson mym niTsoa m pya iD^mv D'pVnm .i ixn xxan nyam y a HXT rrrn mm? na^i fhaaVxa pyn laa jnaa nan nan naiconx ia nax ,u?au;n xim /inbiTa mxn Vaj?' xinwi in»n ay iyaaa xinu? 145vn'u? noTi .D^aaian nxu;a nnv p x n yaoV xioa nan lyatsu? n"an nsoa/jumm mxn nao nn^iy nu;x nwDDm 'layn pya i s n y aOT0'awn o'aianrnxna ,^sx ,pyn p v » 'IXT ^sa n:n .naV n ra xVx nt xsa' xb n'n DXI

.n^a'au^n c s r a.mann nn o'lown D'inn D'auVi D"a'au?n n'auV n'srwan nnpanai 150nsa laan1 "?axi .o^an nnu? naa iaam xV D^a'aron D'au;;nu; nxT IDDIXI~\nv nw na iVov nc?xa yra nxTu; ma pyt:'i .na IIPX nyunn niTnampan wirw a"ina ""n a xinu^ yaon nnxs; naa nax i .na nu?x rnsiyn.D'asy on nu;x mia^xa a'^nn'^ laa aioa xb>i ] aa x^ inaa mpaxim m'nan nyunn nVn rrau? nao D'asian oian naoa I X T D'^nsam 155I X T I .oian /pnnn iu;xa ww nix xinu? naa mxn I X T nnu; nn .mxnn]a xinu; *>s>b ,u;xa nnnvan nnj?an p i r x ,mx iisn man V

143-142 ' l a xm K im [Nina; 141144 u a n i n p i I 'jaiKsnniKsnn 143 ' S T m i V n 142

'3-]iB?n3E;nic7n3» 145 ' m ' 2 * [ m v j | na'sa [mi'som] | r\2n iDVnn'psny 147 n n'n1© [vn'B; | HK [Jioa] 146[D'amnp | ' j nxn a nsn [nxv isi a a n'man [D'n^jn 149 nI n unna [}-n3 | n [D3 ium] 152 a man [2innn' | a "?ax [Vaxi | 'a[inns 154 3 njpon [nnpnn | aa enmw [unmp | 2 ' <[n»3]> 153 a 13 pa

a Danv [vnv 156 a x'm [«im 155 a nnnn

141

142 T

» niTooa s nivaon ma [nvraoa nT |'i»a | s <iD >nn' 3"ai> is^nn' 143 x-au3] us WT n'm [n'n© naVi | x <onV> nan | wipx n'n'© p'Vrw 144I n?5t naxi pax | np wawna [©a©n | unp -pinn nron | x p»] | ©npx py[nao I unpx omwK [Qn':©n©x 147 x nx© »aoa px^o '46 ttnpx pa]K> vn [m...n'n 148 ©npx nawnm n©nm | wnpx mxnn pixn | u;np rvnoI w\p "a'a©n mab [D"a'a©n D'aiaV iso np mxm [nnxns | tynp iVx ixxa1

I npnaxwxnaNwnxrinxT 151 ©npxxm[Dn | «;npx ninm [Qinn D'a2<naa> ma | urnpx [D3 na;x] | X rmmnn [nyunn 152 wnpx [2iaarrj

naa 153 ©nnampjn 152 px[na...njn] 153-152mpaampattmn©pna3...Bnn© 154-153 x isau nnx© naansmnn nVii] | wipx [O'asisn man nsoa] | ©Tpx w r pxv 155 ©npx maaI unpxnxTTmxinipnB3TmnBmax'Dn©nn [wjnv...nn 156 ©npx [nrnan

Kin Vsx [Kina 'D1? I ©npx pnix...Vn] 157 unpx n a x i pxni

naxa

.nnpana n^aion "W D'a^aoa nn naa \»vw nxon naai .nnix > ninxn.isVnn' nt naai ,'aun 'n^ai 'aun

rmnwn xnp' nrcx xini 'atznn vaon xw nan la iDbnrr ircx nVix IBXII 38 2ai73nunrcnn 'a nn .mxa oxyn nirw xV n»x onpan on nan oa la 'ac "iu?xi» 125iu?x D'arcaa inva xmw inya nxT nw narwan oxy 'uw xinrc nsa ntnxV n^x nnpan QVIXI .D'lDDjn D'mn o'au?an Dm nan D» nass aisn1

.in' D'arcan ''J©'? D'Dnwa on ron ,DnV x^un axy nanu?'nu?x nTna'xi .mi'son iism mn'som .mpaa nsunn X'n i^x nVnmn a r xmc? mi .Q'asan nvia'xm amsoan nvia^xn 'iisn Vx nnV i a w no

,nT ay Vaxi .mTson -mm mn'son nao nn nvrsom 'laynpyn laa nimxi nanpa nnaxa caunn 'awa mTsom

.on'j^a nxsamown 'om^a Tn'» anp inT xin 'a nn .nawnm mxnn pya iDnnu?' |ai

unrr ojax ]xaa mxn o-'xn IDXW nn .mn'xi na^pa nnaxs v n ^ a 135aiapa ni»x Diu?sn 'Tson ^xn

p^nn ^ay .n'aaian nm ,n')i>a'au?n D'arcan 'p^n nnsn nVy mnnc; naTvn pVi ,0'aaiaa nt»x -nayna nxn: nn .baban ]a byoa 'TDDn xmnnan ,ia m n'n ic;xai .m'a m nxru? na ixiaa nnvm ,nsp onsp n'Tipalaa ,n'nu;xin vVy waonw na 'sa inx yao nn n'aron nsyi caaian 140

-\m> 124p M3H> a

2'<[K'n]> 129 'njax [msn...nu;Ki] 125 s...NiniP]> Bi-130 a '1'jn piun | > [i7R] no i nva'xm [nna'xn | J n'n'i3Q3[Dn | »a nu'Bon [nvrsom 131 a nan p a r uo 2'<[2nirsonI a nsamnni [nsisnm 134 'J ma^jn yivz [ma^w | n nvj'son [mi'Don 1321 i3»n [nasi |' a ViVjn [nrn VJVJ 136 a <ias> nin'xi 135 n pa] 2K /'a/

' Kin [mi 138 a **xn [niKn 137

123 wipv oVKn> D'jion I mxannV wps i"»7[]"S3» 122I ps nann [»aon | "1 [Q7IKJ | wnps naxji] 124 u;npx patm

126 p m s a Dsvmitt; xV n»K [msB...nwx | w [ D I S B . . . ^ K I ] 125m]n...x7ni»s 128-127 unpxvjxanjniP'na/KOf V'n> nia'

s nrvson saui [niroom | s n7nn tnVnm 129 unpx xcnan[Qia»an...nvi3'xn 130 wiV«7laa'B'1 nwK p7x...n©K 130-129 u>nps [mrsonI w\?maopno I wnp<773a>nn 131 s o n n ' B ^ n a T | wnps lasmnu'Don

[ma©aa p s n i a a | » n p s [niTaom nwDon] 132 s [on^a;]135 snsnn»' ] 134 wnps [on':»anxsaan] 133 »Tp

138 unpx o a s a n s n i ) vipv naspnipp] 136 W)p nvia m?s oax»> nan | s m nx-n ['m...nnvm 139 wnps ircx [j37i | wnp

un 1831 pas I wnps 73 naxw p'7» iB'sonw | unpx xm [on 140

aV

nanV pxrc locnx naxw na pVi .VvDa nan au; , >yDn Vx.Vaunn nrcxa xVx nix'xa iV p* nmxntp laa nxv nrcxa x^x Vysa 105

naina n'n'w a'wa ,njnrca n'n xVw nab> mn "B'awn onan DVIXIlaa iVa nr n'n nrcxai .now xVi mn vfta n'n pVi ,^ysa D'pnnai >yoa xinnrcx ntn nxn Vy D'arcn mix Vaj?a nan xin "a'arcn onan mn ,mxn»uaa iD^nnni ,naia nosjn mnn nanV immxna b>"n ,nann nt p » a nxannVy nan oa xsa' a"j nc;xa ]ai , IXT nu;xa nan a "a n n w >ai .nana noonaa D'xsajn D'axva iaa* ' w n by na "B'awn onaa pxi .mj?aa nsnann

.nosan mnnD'inn mmxV n'aoa xmw iraya nxann naa ,"B'au;n nnaa p s n p iWMB |xaa nu;x Taij7Bn n'n mn nsn p i .nana on1? i^nnai nana D'Tosjn1inu?a xV n"a ©sn iiaa QU; nc?x pipaV DU? nx'np DV n"a xnj?' mai 115Q'yaon iVx iaaa a'nir p^i .nin'xi nanpa nnaxsn mau?n ja bax ownm n^ita yaon nT p y a nax'» na 'sa nmxaV n^y i^xa nmj?n n'n'o;pnonm nsoma isVnrr Dm D'Bn on'!?y nax' n©x cnann laa ,mpannmsa Q'nama D'awn© naxan ma nxann naa mn .unVn nmi pm nnvannix nmx > i"?x mix mxn nt naa nxanm .jxaa n»x n"aa p y n laa nam 120yjam iVx!? pmnn yaan I'jnn' naa awa nxanm .onb i^nnn m naai

2V 104108 i /<n»K'>/ "wxn 105 |

H3 'HJ3K paa] 111 a p c w ^ - m a ] 112-109 'J3 ':isn [Vn 109115 n Diin^nra1? ' j a x •'in!? 2K [D'inn rims'? | ' omn p y a [DI;Q

HK ^"i ["rax 116 1 «yirmn [«]inipa | 'naax [KV] | J i n n n u n | s I'aipoVi' j u?Vn [cnVn 119 'a ^Nn c s a u n [D'saumVK 116 1 ptt;K...a"nrv] 118-116[naai 121 x /<o™>/'r ims'? nnmxn[rnixV | ai^nVx | ' n m s n K [ r m s ] 120

122-121 •>! ai [nnb | > ^nnn [» >nnn | » iaa i

'n' [atp | 1 n^xa mnvn wp na;«ai x pi^Ka] 104107 w\ <xanjmxa> p <TVK> n:n©a 106 u n p <VyDa>niK'xa 105

^>aa'a [Qn'iu; Vai 110 x DHODjni Dinn posjn mnn 109 x n'm [n'n pViD'xsajn D'axym>'iron 111 unnxnjpKT | x nans pan | x [ '3"j ] | u>n nn'wx n m x Dm [D'axw IBS | v\p <'i:B'n b« H33 orx "a'acn Dnaa D'xxaan D'BXMmaonB7D:':»a [D'inn...i:'jva 113 wip <D'xxajn D'BX»3> D'xxaan | np c a x s mx [xV] 115 irnpx D'sVnnai [«]*7nnai 114 Vip D'a'aoa onip o n y a x ma'aoa«;npx pVx3] 117 u^npx [D'nnxjnmawnp] | x Vn [^sx 116

D'aH7nB; | u;npx paxan ma] 119 | u;npx jiupm Vni3 [BnVn...nsoin3 119-118iVnnn 121 x [DnV...nxanm] 121-120 u n p my pxsnm 120 x <xV>pimn pVxV pimn yjan | np nasi wx 3wn p a s a"J nxanm | wip iDVnn' [ariix iVxn D'yjana pnnxm [amn1? pnnxn y : a m 122-121 x iVxn

VaVan Dxva naxa

xxaa invna c i o w n ninn traian ns? innu;1 a^a'awn cnanrc naxn 1 2

]a D'oVaj nrx D'anan *aw bsun ,D'prnan Vapa ossn .D'prna nu?Vrcaxinn maa D'pmam ,D'pmaV xrcun Dx»n uxxa urnxu? xVx .D'pmanV H .^vsa nnx x1? ma nsoaa inx .DHDS^H mnn DwaV ^nwan|DI ,naa ^ o a a D'inx on D'-IODM tnnn tra^an "?aV D'smwan D'pmanu; 90a^ain aV *)nit»an xin isoaa inxn noam .a'prnan iVxV x^un oss?nmix ^x misa pny u'aa inxn Di»an D'XSIB HXC? nn .nnosjn oinn^x TIX xin "wx au?an pnsn iaa nnViT annx Wsa n^prna Vx cpmaaiwxn rnisi Tnxn misV i n w a ntn arcan n n iVxi .ox xin nrcx D»J n'n'u;

nrcan V H ,"7»Da D'3\» vn •ftxi .mpa misn nn n ^ysa nsoaa nnx 95a'nnn rwn Vx nna ^x njnom ,-nxn rnisi »xn m i s "?ap

nn ,orca xVa mnnan maoan mnnnun n»a xV x los^n awn p niaoan.•>au?a imoa sao nnV n'nno a'ma nan .nnaa

ix naa nnx oxn nan nnx vn DXI o an ix n^nx I'JX nxn 3"a VxonVx i^sn m a 1 nan .naa ix *?SDa 3"a D'an on oxn D'ai vn DXI 100

.nxannu; IBD naa cam n^nxxm ns»a nnaina nnu; n'nosj Din |xaa num lVxn D'a^anc; nxa ^xanrl,naa nam naa ^x xm -iwx ,mn nu;an ""Di ,n3a ia D' n D'pmai naa

n -inuM <TO nnN> a na«3i <nu?n p n»K> JK nasji <IKTI ja I»K> 86I 88 a [Q1pman...Dx»i] 88-87 n 'ja 1 'ia a n»Vw/n/n [n»b>i»n 8711ST 'a 'jnn [V'T I ' j D'a jV [D'amV 89 aa nnnn [Ninn | n« KBTII1? [KenanI ' i [Kin IIPK] I ' Qmn [DWJ 94 '» <n3a> nseaa 91 J [naa] | ' J Kin [on 90' nmsi [rrnxi | •> nmxV [rnixV | sa inwan [inwa | 3 [u>« Kin] 2K <[»K xin]>'ja n'n'tt; [nvinu? 98 1 rn nw [nn 97 » na [nna 96 ' » i m [VT 953 p"i] I i can fa DJ p"J D'an 100 a mrm [hnK | a <oa> VNOTI 99

as Tiam nam | na3K <3"a> 'nas | aa <nn> na 103 a onrc/a/ 102

unps 13NSB un3K [iJNxa uraKC 88 n DS» Kim u>p DXS Vn [ossn 87D'prnam D'pman xcnan s D'sVnnan D'anas D'pman x^un [D'anaV-.-KEnin 89-88bow [D'pnnanu; 90 s <nsoaa> 2iriK 89 u?np D'anaa IK nosjm mnn maas Kim [Kin 91 unpx nso»3.. .pi] 91-90 np [DHOsm] | np D'pman

I P laxi pJXP nn 92 sfip [DnoDjn...Kin] 92-9194 wnps nu an VK [Du;a n'n'» VK 94-93 wips [on iT] 93»Kn mis [misn 95 <ynps ©xm [»xn misi | ip

s [mnnan] | s VSD3 p o s " 97 unpx piKn...V*n] 96-95 u npI lyipxnnxnT [DinxiVx 99 wnp <iaxsV>'jma'a 98 wpx pma nn] 98-97nan[n3aix...Dnoxn 100 s [2nnx] | ipp<nvi>Dxn | ©npx [vn] | XDX[IKin'JiB? [onnx Dmjj© 101-100 s[n33...mn] 101-100 s DK [ix | onpxnT^»npx pxsnmznas] | p D'3T mnai [naa D'aii 101 p nnx na n'lic u?n naa nnxon MDK [2naa | x Dxyn ma pa 103 w <an> s <nm> jKaa | wnp pVxn] 102xm np o'arn s nan Kim pam | s pnK] | n pcm] | u?np 'a a"ai pai | wnp nas

s nan D» [4n33 | » D'an

naxa

IX vwz am ^oa Vsnsn nsn x Tiixn p Vnan px xin '3 ,1^33viVa ix mna uvnn n^u; p nxnn nn D'OUPDH D'arcana ssma inx DUN 70Tana "?3x ,7& Wsn jna vfo inx ns D'arcVu; n'xn uxrc na jsVi .mnann .mnva rr^on ^sa Vys^ DEN V331 tnxn 1^3 p»n ias naicn

.y>:an ^y njmnn min» ias ,n*rnan nxmn Vyion >y mmna xmi I >I»D Vy ]ata DTIJ? bsvaw na uaa Vissni ^jnsn niw xVxxim ,ptn Vy »3t:3 DTip xmu; na IVWDI Vvisn mai ,D^wn nn33 unDrvw 75

nnran Vn ^snsm ,vj'c;aa rwai 1V yum pm -mm , ^annt iVsow nab>i .mia»a nxsai ircx n'Vann mx'xaa D^mann anxnm

n:axi ,V3V n^jns n3D3 nax* x> xinu? nax .loonx* nnsoa OIKnn .1^ vaan xin 1V snon '3 pso pxi .m!?3Dn rrbsn nn .na > nyja naos

nnxnm m:i3nn n!?nn imj7n ntt>x xm ia mnvan nsrwnn myj ' n^x son!?iT3 iconx vVy n3i»n ircx xin nsn nil? mm'an nyunn nip tmsys^ xmu? nxTi .nViym D'a»n3 nDD3 oipan

naa nx'^n Vx Dnsnn n*?x mx'3 bv msnnn uns'^an nssiVx 3iu;3i .'nna iwn n m a n^aiyna mama nu;x "a^awn man vao nix'3a

.13 13«n IPX 85

1V733 69

D'amno 70 ' m a * <nan'l?DnDii7nb'DnNn3inK>m | |nnNnDyi:n'nVan2^...n3 | ' D'OIP bw [Q'a ViP 71 J'S3 <Va> Kim I nxiVyspViyD 74 2N <[Vyisn]> 73n iwaa [TS'WOO 76 s IVISD lVyisn pVisoi Vsisn | ' i ^inn'c; [wnsn'B; 75

I KomsxpK'nsK oinpnnmsK puons | TISB maoa [nnson 78so s v ia n3D3 pyja ns'os 79 ' Daax Vss [Djaxi | s nsoa

82 ' i nn piV 81 s '3 [is | n myiai ins'j' 'JSK insiin 2K pns'i'[is...^K 85-84 'J IVN [HVK | 3 wn3'»an pins'wan 83 ' o'acs s D'au;n

's 13 II'VHP naV

[DOT IK 70-69 U T [U1CD] | WT,? *733<1 QCJ3> VyiBH 69

na] 72-71 unj?x<ynnpa>"iKnn 70 w\p DH;J3173 tynj7x unman fisavo | ^TPSDOTSIIDO'JVSSI | w < V3n> IBIBTI 72

na o^yisna JIDS KVK S Kinu> na D'Vsnsna KVK [byisni2;...KbK 74 s <mnva>nn33Kini»Ksa3l?3Kim p<7i»Di...Kim 75-74 wipx Vissn P^IVD | »np Kin©mai *7jnan ma Kin oViyn ni irna KIOT na bsi s Visoni ^yisn mai D iyna VSK .D iynu;n VJVW DS jam p s i a s [bibm Kim 76-75 p ]ai3i n [jain V»] 75 uns Vissn

V? s'tir IE;K ps iV s'w nu;Ki n p'S'waa s'vai] | n ['iV...ncK] 7677 wnpsf iniK ©inan p!? nnron | n <ViVjn DI» wpx

[nn3oa 78 »npx nna [mx ':a 78-77 Bnpx mi3S3 KXBJ na>Kxinnncps smnsnnn [Kinnsnn^ 81 p paV] 79 i» [baV] | tt»np m3oamaipaa [mpart m nViia 82-81 tynpx VVK TBT ncK p'by n3tt»n ni»K | n nsn m[nis^nn 83 unpx 133: nm1 [ni3J inv | n pVism] 82 wnpx D'3TpS P3...31W11] 85-84 ITTpS [S3U] 84 UHpX <Vn> 13113 | UTTpS H3nKn

D3

naxa

nwan n r a pyn laa imx'xaa 'xan innix r x "a'awn n-nnw* nxT naaimx'xaa 'xan Dn Dn'niwojw nra?B HXT )xaa nu;x n"an 'a .]xaa ircxDVIXI .na^m nwnan rcsaa na t tw na -»Vnb» D'VIXJ vn x1? xinun on'auninix'xaa -pD*' xV ,pna ninwa 'nVa vsws n'nw naV nan ,"a'awn mm 55,nai ,mpaa inynn ww Vx TIDXH n:axi ,nana woi *?K XV\ nu;na ©DJ VXam manan nsunm Tanan nnxrcnn mi:pnV ,Q«;ja na xb>i DBJ l r x

.n^Van xVi nn1? n*?n,naV Tan mpaa i n v i ' na "?x i n o r x1? "a'au?n r»n mane?ows n'n DXI ,xint» 'sb> .Tanan nnxc?nn ias»i imaxi?a map' na Vx Vax 60D'pman n^iaa xinu? 'DV mana ^ IDPI nViaa xm nan ,iosnn >y na ia ^xxsai bown n^ia1 n^xa ,mn ,iam nro na ^ai .ia 1'pan nuunps?n n'n'ty ubsx a«nnn on*?!! niTanm nnx^nn imp'u; nVnana )xaa n'n'u; "?au;a a ina pb"\ .-whins niVana p»n laa mnxu;n ni^anaVax .la1? nt ^x i .manan nsrunn injpnw laa Tanan nnxu?nn map1 65N'n nwx /inVivsa mnvan nvunn injpn iwx xm na isaa mn'u; a'inanxta mni'an nnanm ,aiaoa pnvnn x'm ,nu?i:nn -\KW paa niTannxim ,nnx VVID aV?aa ubvrw m ,-rwwm ,n'nnan miann

52DrmsmK'isa2 'KJn m'K D^a'at n O'anjnis TISK irnis ms'D"n 'V»3 'a rra [n"an 53 ' n"3n 'BIPJS 1 D"n '"?V3 D'sra [rrsn awnK©3i» pnacju; | ' sViV ['ViV | 1 onun [smim 54 a DnwDJ© [Dn'nn nxn '3 "D) nana 56 n p i ra ] 55 1 nanan ni [naiam | n

VspVa v«an MUH B;D] naiV nsn .Vs© Kipa nm'anm nnxenn nxai UJDJ mpiI n <'rB> rvniwnn | '? [ns] 57 n nvin 'a insnjn [lnyjn | 1 <m'?pm nn33nI ' V N / V 60 3 /<"Tann>/ run DUTO 59 TiBKTanai jTanam : N [Tanan2K /<n'asDi>/ m3H3 | n mn [Vyisn | j <KW> mn 61 a massi paxynI ' nyijnn [niyi^in 67 K inVvoa pnViyss 66 a p3] 62 'nas <D-iayDi>

nx K'm [Kim | a pnx] 68 ' nsiwm ,' pyianm | n Kim [K'm

pirns 52I unp<o"n'IHnn>0'Vixj | ToiKinun 54 u;p'au;ja |unpx firmn3ia [fine | WTps'n^ipnVs | psinabnin] 55 unpx...om 58-57 uH|?x[n3] 57 wip<Tan> mpa3 | u»npx[2u;D3] | T IK [KVI 56I impx s'lan pnyr 59 p n^nnn nV ]'K IIPK Kim u>nx nVnnn l1? j'K na;K [DHVtl'K 61 wpmxMipaxsn | wnpx napan pmp' | x <3"j> Vax 60 x [ran]

62 x nou/a D'Vsnan D'pman nVisa [HUE'S...2n^i3a 62-61 unpx64 »npx [IJVXK] 63 wnpx <Kinc> 'rstt'n | tvnpx man

IK pnVivD3 66 wnp <mnvan> nsiann 65 u>nx <imax»"7> mnvnn | E;ipx mpas ninann [pnsnn 67HT VK nt onrs mniKm .D'anan IVXB im VsV invan> nwwni | u»npx [miann] 68

<ma3i mos

na

'aw naxa

nnvn pnynn ]ai mpan 7y nan X7X nan 'ma la px xm 'a nn .'Vi'nnnnvni nuianatz? maaa nnvn lV ww laa .aiaoa nyunn xim ,uaa naa]

.n'nnan njiann x'm ona naVtp 35n'anaa nray nnV |'xu> nv'B'aipn nnsn WISH nxann naa n'nw naVinnpaa Daxy nxsa D'yyuna vn ,nn'ay nnV nn'n oxrc ,'D^ ,n"a'au;n

nxann naaw nn .maxim n7nn iaxy nxsa yyuna 7x lanoxi,i7»' nan ,paa D"niaxyn jxaa nurn naxy nxoa n'yyunanty ,yau?na

yyunai TTIX yjaa nama n'n'» xim ,masya iaxy nxoa yyuna Vx ,pso 40mmsu; nxn' p7i .V?o e r a na ntn yjan n'n' X7tyi» niyxn

npiwnn '3Da nn ,©D3 nsa nnu? ,i'pan pinnn nnan onsai ,o"a'awn'nn n'n na nc;x .miwxnn nDiu;Dn nmxn x'm .73© nsai ,nyann na xanxmo nn .]xaa n©x nwaa pya nisna .nnx yyunai y^aa nama "a'arcnyjan fina piu?nm* wain ,D'yna 'au?a nama xm i7xa yjan 'a nxna 45

.oiU7D 'n?a aama xsa' na yyuna pVi ,u>si7.7ysa xsaj nan xim n?nam nmxn nxi7 nann laa "a'au;n nnan a"xi•u? n'n p7i .nmxn 7iap7 D"p nan xm xVx nana naru; 'a oa |'x ]37i

nan xnp' |xaa n^x nann 'a nn .nann nu?a 'nax nnv na xtt>im,nmsn n"p' xmu; 'jsa xuna xnp'i ,ia nwmnan nmsn naa xino 50

.nmsn JBI uaa aaman |a p?n

I j n'na; [mrr© 40 a ]ass [DBSS 39 1 'Vi^ pVi*nn 33I J [VVa] I ' m a x nKin nv^nn a»an K7Bn [aTa...N7En 41 a nnK

2 '<pxai]> I ' awan/v a awnm [n»:na 43 a i>pam [q'paa 42

...pwnm 45 K<n"2>n"33 | mwxnnK 44 'asaviansx'n [avins | ansaa ay:aa yinja nppin»an apwnm 'aa« amen pna nppin^aa apiamm [vian

48 a <amsa> V»S3 | a nVia:V 'a [n?i3:n 47 ' 'n?3a n« '73 pnVs 46a ]nn [pi 51 a o«pa [Q"p' so a ?ap?

[nan 'jna | u>px '3 [Kin 'a an 33oipaa ain:na [pnsna | px <13V> lynpx mpas [mpaa ?y | wnps mnsa

anpjt [nyi^inj | tunp 0713a paaa 34 urnpx 1335 nnv [1333 inva 34-33I ©n maxsa [massai 38 unpsr [aras] 37 »npx [anana] | x [N'ai] 35x D'a'aoaiK j'as D'DVnna D"max»iK D'npa [pas D"max»a 39 u? <?n> nxsna7K [msxya...?K 40 np mans u;x [pso KV3] 40-39 unp pas nnK maxyyyi:na bx u;p syunai max»3 iaxy nNBB via ?K X max»3 naxs nxoa »si:nai viaI T [Dnaa] | tt;npx<mix>unsai 42 wn [p?i] | xnaa[na 41ixai,y]am,D3xxanEm[?3E>...i8m 43-42 xm»Qi[c;D3B> n p [ajWKia] 43 w -\ p 3» nxa K'n avjna <u; T:DB>I 0 as) 03 NXBJ n»s x 73i?u n Kia '3 [Kim 47 unpx H?D3na [n;s:n | a>npx <7"n> D'y'JB | ip [i?Ka] 45

Kin© .naV ms K7K [Kin KVK | wipx nanV nan' K7 pnn3...p< 48a"paa [nuninan | v mixn 7K [anixa 50 x Kia n»K [Kia© 'JOB 50-49np nsnas r»on si "'ip 33""n f'-Ti [33iiaa...a'aii 51-50

T3

naxa

r\-\p D3DX ]xaa ircx rc s:nan ,W9» IDS'1! OIU?D n^n1 xV 'a /»a'arcn man

. r rw nsmn swuna man nrvrasw 'isa aiaoa yjrnnn x tz? nV

nama px Vp xVi naa XV maa nwx u>sin nrrn DX» .JD nix'an xa*i 20

Vj? maa laa WSJ ia pxw 'isa ,aiaoa ysnirrw WTTO naa aiaoa yjrnnrra

1a pxi na7 WSJ "757a xin run .PDJ "?5?a iaxy nxoa yyuna xm *?ax naa ix

x'ntp naa nxtn ^san nViaou? 13»T aiaoa »yuna n n© naVi .mnx n'rnnn

nyaan ©wn sao xVx i»ao ]'x man nt nxi ,aiaoa vyunnu? x'n ©si

.mpaa 25

,pso xVa ,naina xinty 'D1? ,i»S3n »ao Tiba Dian va

naVi .nin man yaoa ps?ju; a"ina ,»jri3nan 'n^a v iam

xini» ,i3'3»a nxna ,TOD3 XVI mn xV xmu? i n y a mp> naa man nt n'n»

vix naT B I D n ntp naVi .'Vvm nmsa aania TiVa DIU;S ma n'nw a«ina

o'xsan ,'Vvnn 'jaa au?aV D'xsaj D'i'jy nVa iVxi ,nnx nnan Vsai ,b>»oa 30

D"nn 'bva ^vn xm "a'arcn ntn man n^n^u; a^nrr ,misn

' j 'a nx^a cfttp nnv n'n'un naxs? nxsa aiaoa D vsnanan

H33 i«...u;D:n nrrn DK 22-20 nx <"a'n©n> 0153 | 3 mnTnsw [nm'ay© 19,31303 yyiHi'iP I3n» nn n:n 31303 yjnjnnu; 1311a px 7p ix 133 DU3 II^X wsm nrrn DXssunn© nsma ]'x Vp ix 133 DUS IWX worn nrrn DX X 133 N?I Vp xV DUS ©DJ i rx nm©sin nn'n DX 3 133 x"?i Vp xV DU3 B;D] i rx njn ,31303 yjmrrw isn© nn nan ,31303i rx mn ,31303 ssnin'w isnau; nn run ,31303 »»iinnE' nsina \>n ?p ix 133 DU3 I B Xnan ,31303 yyun^ isnn ]'x 7p ix 133 DU3 IIPX ©Bin nn'n DX J 133 X7i 7p xV Di)3 WO:D I M IB;X B>DJH nn'n ox n 7p xVi 133 x1? DUS »DJ U'X nan ,31303 yyun'w i3nau; naX7 DU3 u»D3 u'x nan ,31303 yyun'c isnip na nan ,31303 yirnnnp nsna ]'x Vp ix 133

24 1 [313O3...IJ»T] 24-23 J |'x [j'Xi 22

[»»ijnan...y:aa 27 1 »':an py:an | u <p> DXI | nnaixsa:i> vVx | n j n'n'^ [n'nw 29 J <n:> Dip 28 'max ssninaioun ["a'a^n mn Dun 31 J'7vm pVvnn'»a | aoj"i»[D'n» 30 >J<VVXI xni303 [31303 32 2 ' D"nn 75D J D"n'Vy3 'nx n"3 [O"nn '7S3

' jax 'na 2x pra

nni'ay WDJWjsa [nnrav^'joa 19 un 'n 7»3m ps crsjm [©Djnan isp <]X33 n'u:n isina pVi> x <n'3i307 n'o:n Dnnn pVi> m r

w ("a'awn 7"S) 133 ix 7p i p ""B'nwn [?p... xV | v n p nnVi [DX 20 w i < jxssp ©D131 S WBjni [' WO: 7»3 | »11©X3 [73X 22 p 1'XI [pCW 'JBa 21

'n73»':am 27 ps[»»i3nai...K73] 27-26 wips i7] 'x i [ i3r x ' 1 Iwnp smaiani man laVnn'w s i n i x ias» nxoa svun'ttn sinvw iasXX8JI>T7X I pna7[na7i I x [mi] 29 onpx [U'lsa] I »npx ixsnn [Dip 28mn aim 31 wipx [D':'J»] | w ip <7»D3> nnx 30 wipx <i'7x nai

X DipB3 [31303 32 X mn D"BWn D1J ["B'a©n

13

la maxa p » nai "a'awn man yaua Tipmc; naxan nn nnan 24 2amT173 mn manu; DVIX naxn .7p xVi naa X7 ma xmun aama T1731 BIWD

px ps? xin "rosin D'mn D'aian VVJ? nnrc na 'S3 mixi nana aamawu> na 73B? ">D7,773 ns 1a px xin '3 nn .uaa nxsnne; na »S7 773 1a poo3"a nxiaai .oxya i » x nan V n ,Dnmon ••au? Vy m xin wax nw ns ia 5'DV .nnosan D'inn nvanxn n m c n mix aioa nrx wmn' na nu?x misnw,mpaa iasy nxsa vyuna n m ,V,7 DXI nas DX n'n ,njioa nrrn iVx ,xmu;

.vau>na '3'a»a nxannrc na 'D3nn»D3n '7S3* |na)tt>3 Vax .©sjn »ao aioa isao n'n'u? X7X nxttr> X7 ronnyi:n7 n7nnn nna nnx .mvun 'n»7 niVnnn 'nc; na uxxa ,|xaa nu?x 10n'3tt>n nVnnnm ,n7va Vxi noa 7x nsnann x">m .nrna na »'3a? ] x ,mi»'nnir'X n'uan nyun1? isnnn nxin n»nnn uxsai .nipaa pnsnn nsun n7nnn

.nmaan Vx m a n mxVn inro;' p?i .13n'nnun ,12b o;s3n aioa x'n "B'aon man nsnan n?nnn n^nnu; a'ina mn^B;x^^ .U?DJ x'nu> naa ODJV mnvan nyunn x^n aiaoa s?aoa nt»x nsunn 15yjmna n 'n^ i ,naa xVi 7p x? om n'n'^ 17 nmn ntn saun mn ,]a m nvixin '7vnm isaipaci ,7p xVi naa xV i a x ' na .n'wa na ia n'n'» X7 ,aiaoa

inx .jwKnn nwa p^Knn nDK»n> j njisrt <nan p nnx .Julian n»Nan> a n^sn o"3' j DVIKI [O^IK 2 ' pynsi []'3» nm | •>! M U D [yaua | 'n njisntp na? <T'2[mix I j nsnnu; [mixna; 6 ' j a ' n n [Vn 5 a [ha] | •> J?DO 12 pa ps° 4

^ya | n inan^D []na3»3 9 s V? p K 7 ' j yanxn [nyanxn | 1 nms| j isnna nonnn 12 '» pa [Dna | n m"?nnn/n/ 10 'naas

na3xVnaa...xV 16 ax p i 2K p^Kai 15 amsruntninan 14 KJ 'Vi'n pVi'nm | J misa ipaen psaipattn | j niuan [rruja 17 ' i Vp

nai pa...nai | u;npx mpn?i33nvB;ia3p'Vy...'D3 3 B^nps[mj]2 unpx-

6 s nxiaa pV [3"Jnxi3a | x DODHH [onmon 5 (ynpx p:aa...xin] 4-3p nansi nvrftx u;xpnTnvnVx[DnoBnn\n?K 7 i»npx[D

wnpioaj | p isaus psau 9 w o" i i x> pprna...] 'Ki] u »n [oa] 10 unx o"n V

15 »np<n'axyn>n'u:n | xtpnynn] | »px[n^nnn] 12yaun <w 3ina> nan 16 x [mnvan] | wnpx aiaos iV n»x [aiaoa

l 18-17

na

nxsa naxa

xin onxn '3 nn .ma mxn iaa n'm ,imax»a Vwa n'n nb naa issDnan "?yo nxannrc naV ,^aai .Dipaa ysninai ,ppinrca ,'n xin pi .pVna

nxunacn (xoma maiy 'nba x'nrc irrnx pya nxann ,'nxj xmo; ntn.-row nin n'n ,p m n'n iVxrc 'sV ,nmxi naina aama 'n!?a

n iVxn canan nwsj nrcxa ;D'so>snan nxp p m innax'w naimnsjn up Djax nnun .xonj viVaa na»'» x'i' ,onnana nmx on 190

pxu? na» a"nrr nine? 'sV ,iV p » px naxa xin mnan* 'nVan nmsTosin nmn »aon© 'sV ,niua iVa nn .inbita mnsan n3p' 'nsi nvnV isaua

.luonx '»nu? y-pu> 'aV nxiaa iVa nn .irfota mnsan bap' xVnnmx 'as» n»'T 'aoa D'awn nxy na naxan nta nxann naa nannana irbx lsran n»x D'nsoa nxiaa mxsai inaxu; na ba |'xi .nnnam 195mix nx'atz; naa a'ina xin mspi oa nxiaa mxxai msp bax ioonxiran xV anooa mVa naa iVa mw vnana nxnam /mron nwx onooaa .baVan axsa main ntn naxan xnpai .nnaab n'^'an bxm .vnooa ii'bx

dim .QB?inn nn lawn n»x T O px naxaa mn n»a 'nax nnv xin.nVmnn ibi ,,"?xV nawm .nVyinn Vnan naxan 200

'

189 J nmais [maiy 187191 naK [mnx:n...'>:Da] 192-190 'nxppjp 190

' I'N [rxi^ I ' sin© [n:ntp I ' naxan paxa | ' D^an TiVaa J nan viVan [nvnanDx» I a <**n> nanan 194 n nnVna i nn"?iTB] 193 ' tosjm nooin 192j uxsai pnKxa] 195 1 "B'awn [O'aipn | 2-> <*'BE;*> » DX» [O'BOTn iKiaa [aina 196 1 yin pyjn 195 nx pKi3a...DnDDa] 196-195

pK 199 i<inan'>VKm 198 1 [KV...i3urjn] 197I 2'n >nj [Vmn 200 2' <[n'?mnn...Dl7c?3]> 200-199

a [nVmnn

13 P3BB 185

| Tp mxn [Kin | w\pv <ia> pVna 186I »npx [p QJ] 189 Bnpx nKttnis [KKTHS 187 ipx viai

V] I ©nps Dnans [Dnnam 190 st [D^a'sipn] | u Tpx loVenn1? O'Vnnan.nans on© V m up onw "n p up nans nn» Vn pjp 03BK Dnan | B?npx[Kttn3

I unpx pVs] 193 Xf[njija i^a nn] 192 np o'sc p"nn' 191 w upn mam Dnmsmna Dsyi i^px [Dnnam...':sa] 195-194 tmpst Vancrn© [VT»,inso3it:onKanKiaBinKSB)insp<p'3>.i83nBK3n'n»nB nn pny'jn;..pn 197-195...nK'3H7 nBB.197-196 1 <U8B> 1X138195 »pX inBKBB 3VinB Kin

iuon« naia pnsia | twips nunji [nmam 197 - - - 1 inBKaa198 . , wnps IK'3 pn1?! |pjo pK] | n Dnooa jppst naxaa] 199

200-199 .-- n <|Kai> Damn I np Damn -nta oaru p^ u»x Dtmn,--. wnpjf[nVmnn...-Vnjn] 200

nasa

nnaiy DVN D"B'awn w&iin nvnxw raNnb> l o t m - sr>3TO na

nVit D^a^arcn canan lyyttn11 na "IWN nmxn 'a nax^u; naiN > r.Nion nmn 'Vva NVI /naaV nain nVita vnnp.a'im nwxun -.wsnarv an'VNlyy i in 'naTONvn©inx /lyyurvoa"TON KV.yisjniivnn'^xTONnvnxn nonmxn vn ,p-rr>n iVx 'a .op^nnna nipVnna v f o vn DNI .o-nana nvnsvn ,nt n'n oxi .cxwun mysmnna msvunai QrpN^ua ma'p Dnnn'n niaxya ssnina n>r\ DK ysianano; 'sV rD'No;i3n pVnnna D'pVnnaf x , p DKI .mpaa pVnna ;vn mpaa rrn DNI ,DWJ ^ixn ,maxva pVnnavb>N nwNB* -nyunn na# imx nmxn njwn latzrna D"B?a©n D'anaa 175nrvn , p nr n n DNI .naiana iD^nrv oiaKi ,nv»a nnN mix on >aN .nninnnVnnn.n'in'iw la IWDN 'N SVIJIVB; na n^n y r w na 'a ,nb"iaBD'anaa Vaanam V>aipan n'nw naVi ,ioonN imaN'rc na 'sa r

.DnnN niaipaa nNann naa lVa nn .nnN a^.Dipaa nsunm Da nNXB3n npwnn nsa WSJ ya Dn© D'Bipa IBNJ OJBNI

">n •"a'aw oua Nine; 'JDB Nin DIDN ,ntn D^aa n»N npwnmmn n'n ,TNU; 'DV ,ipVnnna p^nna la na 'asa x!? imaxya ppin^a

xin nVnnn 'JDB NV ,ia n»N nViaan n^nnnn -osa ysnana Nino; 1apVna Vau?a n'n I\>KI .V'aoa Ninon 'n Nin» la naNi mn pya i .ia

.n'n'c pvr ,D'nw 167 a nms/n/tt> [nmw 166[on'^x 169 J D"a'»n [O"a'»»n | J <ncn> IWK 168 n Tn' n'n DK© > n'n'' p m 1 QJ nT [p I aa <Kin> '3 171 nx mnsn [nmsn no - X on'Vsmassa I •> D'yjnuiavn DK D'SJnyinnwoV [»m«ia...'iDV 173 'n"]nn [onn 172nK <mas»a p'rnnnainvn V"\> 2mpoa | K DJ bn n [D»J 'nxi] 174 - K /<DK>/I ' n J a K oa [na 175 1 <mas»a p^nna wvn 'rsn>' a <masya pVnnaa nnvn ':in>

178-177 nKnsiinainjisna | JDiaxVaKtojaxi 176 'naaK n»K P^KB' naK'» J imaKH; pmaK'» 178 'inViT[nViT 177 a [na

la I n pmassappinira] 182 'JK'niKinl i<Dn>ittw is 1 nK['V»a] iso' i K'n [Kin 183 •> ia pVnna b

unrnp-ana [ywer na 166169 unpx <Dna>nVii 168 c oasya [on'Kurua 167 x nnaKV

...KV] no" -r ' w KVnwK Dnannp KVBTI [K^I I wnpx naKjn»K onun p i n 'u;Dn'pVnnna[DpVnnna | xvnunp'nDKi-m sDmp'n»nnx | unpx[2iwnjn'I » on'KEnj [D'KBnm | n D'KBnja [Dn'KEnja 172 x vn [n'n | s-'<D'a©j V'i>wnp <ma> x <nmsna> nninn 175 , wnpx'[pVnnan'n] 174-173 " u»nps [n'n]»'j'©na'as »'j'tt?a»3nin'wsV»'rtt;na'a[»jn3n'»...'a 177"' XKVI[D38KI 176'Da pmaK'u? na''D3 178 n [na nVn »':'©] | © »'j'iP3 »irun'» na 'a ptt>px[maipa]a | »npsnaK3n«3n^ 179 ipsna^paVi |

u;nps"<Ksam>"na 182 s ' ' s'nmnn'bK [nminm iso

33

naxa

n'm ,0'pman D'Vspa arvo o''B'arcn n'aian p»a nxia nvw> naVii73p' xVi ,Dnnix 'JSB X7X* n'Vsaian D'prnan i73p'a; aa IPOX

Kin ,nnoD3n nnnn nmsa pvn IBS .n'Vaaia 'n?sn D'pman nwxaxa 150,nnDDJ mm nnms vrrv UBB 3'irr X7 -IB?X nxnn ?y anix i73p'tp 3"ina?3p' K7i ,vnnw mysaxa mircxn nVap* D'prnan Vapa nVvn n'n u? xiniirpmaa p»n IBS ,tr»7ajiD 'nVa ?wn ,roa 1a D'pma rnvxaxa vnnixTID'3 nwx Q'pman vn ' 7ax .ntn nann mis o» fi^xnn nana nu?x

.vniVuoB nVwo "a'awn 155K7 n33u>n orpKrua ni7n onmxw •"B'Bwn D'anana 17 nxann© naVinnw na nsa on'sunaa iVw xV on» ma naon^i .Dn'xcrw pVnnna ipVnrr1117733 on Vax ,xwi33 nTB» nnV |»K i7«n nmxnw nxsnn ,mp7nnanan ,ip?nnn3 mpVnna vn xVi xurun 733 mVn vrrw3.,onw »s? ,mx'XB3X7 77331 ,p7na X71 733 X7 1JBB 17in' XV Dn» 'SV ,XWU3 nTBy Dn? f X 160

.p7nna 'nVas X7i p7nna3

#»jri3rv n'Vx nu;x x'n ssurv na n»x misn n'nnu; a"ina |3 QJ ,nt nvnsix'n yyiarv ns nc;x mixn n'nn K7 on'Kwua nnais nn -mx nmsnu? 'DVD7wnB7 ' i s yyunn 'iixn ,nxinn nn mix p i .yjnarv n'Vx nwx misn]3 DJ inn .s?srun»w3 van max rvrw nnx ,n73 nnyun nan ,rnnx miss i6s

nKmas»3KVmaxs3[mysaN3...nl7ap is2 'Dmixtnmms | ' H J S K [KVK] 149ntVn 153 ip'nvnx...xVi] 153-152 'j3maxy3K?imas»3156 •> a'a'acn a "a'an ["a'awn 155 2K <pn?3]>

157 n pi^n [nrtn | a vnnww a Dmixu; [Dnmsc | 1 o'aiin p [D'anjnaj ??aa KVI p?n3xb> [pVns...2^1? 160 'a vnira p'«nw 159 HK naom' nai 164 T I ]n [on 163 - 2 ' <mixn> n MTI {KVI | J n'nniya [nvmu' 162

a nVia [n >a 165 3* bs\

'3DB> onnw':sa | w o'Vanam [D'Vanan 149 unpx [D'pmon...n'ni] 149-148[2Dnmx I u?np i7ap'ip n»DK 'Ki [lVap1 KVI | X <pma 'V3 Dn nvaxyn IVKE;vn'w I unpx nxnn m by piinn ?y | ©npx D'pman [Dnix 151 »npx nmxnu;.n,7X<n'8xa3> D'pma | unpx nmxn [vnmx 153 npnmsnvn'wionmx

V I | 1 <V"i>, Dn'K^ua 1S6 • c T p x i a n a n i c s 154I »npDKBn]XKttn3n[DiTKBni 157 W J ? X V W > T I X xbv

7 159 x onwBnja [Kurua | wnpx O7>n»ann 158«n x DKenaa ip?nn' tdw a"n [KEnja nray. . . nin 160-159

[K?..- . 'B? 163--.- wnpx p [ja DJ 162 •. »npx na pJ»»-160np ivyiin' [ » j n w | - « n p x tftv V T .on'RHnja nnaiy on IIPX (x vrmwa) nmxa1

na ssmnn | x < V a > i » n p <7a>.pi I np lyinan' [yyiw | ©npx, [irnxn] 164I unpx n'nnw a«nn' [nan 165. wnpx naxy nK a^vm na yyunnw. [OVBMP

x a-j yyun' K? ox y in xVw inx [yyi3n'wa...nnx'| wnpx nnyan [nnsnjn -

33

mvxaxs wxv inx .B'BIWO m m iv rxV© naiVs'.O'pman mvxaxs

pbnnns mp!rnnan nmss p^nm Vsn ns i i^n TJDB nsias I K ' 3 1 .o'prnan

KVI ;nVi3a v f a VSS ^ssrnVwa BUNS ns XXB'W -IPDX v t o xwrc ,BXB?U

• • • ^ ••• . ' • ' - ' - • " .nVna BUNS nVna 'n^n no KXB'

nvB^arcn mnsn NXBI I^KH nianpnn iswnn n^xsi 135

onV pKI ,^3 Nunm DJ'X i^xn ninsnts nta tf> -iVia

•isn an1? pxi ,ppm Vnan iVsp K >I ,n33 D'3*i on 'Vvn anVpNi .D'pman

.'»3on »au>3 nn .n^isa TI^B Vans niVyis anms nvna s ina 1 3 nn

DHB; nxsnn ,n^i»m a'arcna pwxns iVxn o^anan »3O3 p ai npn

f x Vwn ">p x^i 133 xV»3D xin a»3t3 '31 noitt>s Dnjnjnu?

a'Vpm B'T33n B'aisn '3 iV nxsnn nwxsi .nibps xVi 13133 nxn'©

art> |'x a '^ 'a^n a^anan nsn^nw .iV ixsnm n'SDn'snyiin

pxi ,BIDS3 xVi B'in TIVS i >xn B'a*un '3 ma T^m ,ni3Dnnn

pbnnns nipVnns anms vn*i ,nnu?xn nVsp B'pman Vspa xu?u anV

,isn anmss pxa'anan iVxw aVivm a^awn p pwxns nax inn .axwu 145

B3 n^x'nib'nnnn p anyun nvna IBX»3 m TVinrc IBS ,xttni an^ pxi

msnin

I?SD']> 133 J [n'pman. . .nmta] 132-131n[2nViD8] 134 n ['nViDa.-.x1?!] 134-133 i [nVi3a. . .xVi] 135-133a nVyiD amis [rvftyiD Dnms 138 »D'pmaa [D'prnan 137 J ji'K [orx 136

[Kin] I i amxnv tonsun© 140 nx P^NH] | '»a »3BB[»3t:3 139142 nN m i [D'aian | > nKin'E' pnKn'wi4 i 2 K <[»3t>]>

J rvoDnnm [msDnnn tCn 143 J m j m w [nsiin© | 'J D'SDH [rrson | •> omsun©inn 1 4 5 " np^>nn3Kpbnnas[p^nnna | inp t7nnaDmixrp?H[nipVnna...vrrn 144

146 i Dnnisaion H D H Drvmxs |-:ji <onV>»[j'K] | ' J < ] " 3 S >[msnin 03 147-146 'J onunn [onsnin | 1 onvna [nvna | 1 [ I D S » 3 ]

"'• ...IK'31] 134-132 lOipS [O'pMBn.'..inK] 132-131 *134 ©psiKtNVi I wp<nVi3S'nt?3>n3 133nn nwK3i pVKn..".n©K3i '13s » p x nVi3B

on 137 ' » n p <a i pmanm»saN3>»nps 3«n [niBnVnVia 136 " - w usa» p s ' » 3 u n K ' D I D I V D S r>y3on » B W 3 ' | » n p s o«3nn> 1^3 138* \[ H U W D onsninw 140" np nK'arx 3"j nxann pK3nn | n [DVism] | W [ | 3 D J ] 139nionn nwxsv | n nsis I K ni^pa [mVpa KVI 13133 - H I «• ">' wnpx'mmwD nn'ni»i:nB7

142 ' 'vxD'Vpni«[O'Vpm | »n i^nKanmx

Tnvwpx'3Dai,ii»pViK3nm I'ttnp nvaoninn i45-"fr"B»Tpx vrrw p'nin44' -,©npx [ma] |wnpX'[m3Dnn»npx Dnwjrun [Dnsn3n"i46J •' •' [oVisni] I »npxnamzops» na inn pnaxunpx<unnI7>nKii |-oip[niyisi] I'xnanniViBa'nVanwKiniVisaTiVanijnjn 147

naxa

XSBJ mis 7»a xin© nsa la ixsa' max nrre> V"n ,puwin naina D'xsaan

7"n ,B7maa naina D'xsaan nrcton D'pman p y '3 ' r o px arcn pVi usmis 'nVaa "UPDX 'X naxi .ia o'Vanan n'pman p y xm .D^ana 'nbannna .D'aranprc la im .ia D'pman Vin tmp ]iu?xn iana Vinn nrroxn,jopni Wnn mVapa vrv X7i .^vnn pVnna mp7nna iVxn nmsn vn1 X7o;Dn? i^nna isn Qn? n'n X7i ,DXU?II pVnna mpVnna "•n'pa ni'nsi vrvvnmnvan nxm misn TiVa 773 mis 'Vpnn Vap' X7 ,m n'n iVxi .xunaa 120

• .13

nsa cinn D'j'jyV mxsain i?xn niVaon iuonx7 nxann nu?xaiV"n ,noDnm ninn nVxn mxsajn a'c;n mi3y3 ircx ,onms isai

xVi n'm Ti7a nnc; D f lB'aw D'anan I'jya iV ixanm .nmwsja onaiynD'pman Vina p?nnm nuann Vap' xuni nnV n'n'w ana pVn* .DHODJ 125pbm .nsoas nnx n33 o'an vn'c;i ,misn Vin rnip tfrnn 1a D'o'rmanni7y£in ni7i3ai .nxunj p?nna mpVnna vrvv D"a'au;n D'awn nmsanaa 7na» DXU^U p^nnns mp7nnan nmsa ?an ns '3 'JOB nni73na

ni7n nms vn1 xVu; a"n niVna 'n?a nni7iys xsa nisxsi 130

-l n am [Qnw | a '3isn [Vn 113j[ i3] 116 ua'nsniV'T | i a p v n t p » I no"3'JKroi3K['ro)3X 115 n NSB1

1 D'pVnna [mp^nns " 8 m3"irr [ " ' rn I N [Vin] | ipu?xnn[iwKi i n' <]3> m 120 ' i p"?nna [^nna 119 n [mp7nna...p7nn3] 119-118ni»KDi <iun ]3 *iaK> a nxsnn -HPIOI <na;n ]3 nax> •> n K nxsnn icrioi <i"3 nax> -122[nVxn I a amis [onms 123 J avivb [D'rwV | ' m^joa [m^jon | JI ' . I JSN iV D7S7J [pVn 125 ' Q"urNa [D'arKn | '33 'ny i [7"T | J IVKHB »mix "?H3m> nsoas | J n'n'un p'.TBn | a Vn [Vin 126" ' i a pVnnnm [pVnnm[vn1 I n onViys 2 ' [DmViss uo 'max [pVnn...Vni] 129-128 1

113Q'pman 117 u»TpxnaK|3VinsKi 116 xn'jnpwn 115 n [VSIDS] 114•WK n Qnannx ps onainxn^K [nna | \ nps lnirsr ma [131m | wnpsUupni...KVi I ttnpxnp7nnamixnn'nnx?w[mp7nno...x'?i» us••nV3 n'nxj nvimm [mpVnna...vn'unii9 u;npx pVnnn Vspn xV pVivVy X3' D^ nV n'n xVi [2Dn7...xVi | wipv nxttni. [DXttna | wnpx npVnnaD'-inn-m ©ipx [mixn] ! wnp <nnx> xttnjs 120 i»ipxnixxajn |.unpx tnixn [ommx 123 wipx xanin [oxen] | wnpxnwun [n33 D'an.vn'im 126 wnp pV] | 10 o" i> nxanm 124 B7nppVnn 129 • unpxnn'BwimVsnaiomVsm 128 w nas D'3T n'n>Bn

bV n onwns n:n .D'pman msxBxa naina (x nmxn) on'nmx IXXB' DX.'S) -DnTimx [nvnx 130 »px <(H7 DKttnj) KBTHH pVnna D'pVnna onu; ni

XUT1J3 [DXET133

naxa

tnx xinu? Dy /Vvnn rrn xV IVKI .nnx mix nnx nya uaa xxannxya mixn nn'm .nnix Vapa rrn nc?x mixn ja any n n vb ,naa can

xbi Va lrnixa.ony nvptz; nrcsx 'x ntn xumn rrm ,xmn xuron 100- , -.nnVit D'ipi* x'nn mixnQ'pman Viap nxa in ' man nnix Vap' DIBX ntn xoun n^nrcnaVi

nnx xmrc* ,mann3 nnx mix x^x bsp' xV DX xwune;* nxsnn ,n\>nnp nn"1 x^ xinun ,^33 xVi nas xb> ,VVa* 'isn 13 pxon u^mas nooaamaan ^ p 1 XVET ,nt3 nsom .ip!?nnn313 naaiwn mixn p^nnn xVi ,mix3 10505 mixn nn'm miX3 pVnna nvi in^p' DXU? 'D > .mixn n »3p rnip nVnn

mViyDnniVisai ,xtwjn pVnnna V"n ,ip^nnna npVnno ppVnnr,ppm bixn Vspnw x'nn mixs -VVSH n->m ,xinn

xVi ,nxc?i3 pVnna pVnn xVi ,ppm "man !?3pn xV mix ]xas nxxaa DXInxtb x^uno; nxii xin ,ns^nnn3 'Jixn ,mixn p >nnn3 p^nna xonin 110^m inx x^x ,D'pman 13 ixxa' xtoi ,D'3itt>xn tD'pma 13 lVim ib mixnanpan ^33 p y n laa ,jatn 'sV nnx xV mx'xan 'DV nnx:b"'n ,mixn

xn 99 '3 'VIVT pVi'nn | J naa [nsa 98[KVI I •• nrnisn J misa prmsn | a!?x2K<r'N]> 100 n [nmN] | 'j<nnxn>1 D"l?T 'H3N D"pn [DiiTl 101 J n'TDD'U^ 'H3K TDO'E' fOS'^ I > N"™1

nK3nm[KinH; | 'nj3K Kin»[DN Ncmnip | aoV>iK3nn 103 1 'in [nipVipn 102I 'HJ3K [Vtt] I 2 ' <[UI?ma3]> 104 )DK KET13 DS© n«3nm 'H3N DXI nnVaj? pn^3j?' 106 ' J 3 « I 7 [ K V B ' | 'J3n3onBn[n3om 10s niKini»I •>! Kuni [Kurun | ' j 'nxn t "T I > vp^rinns pp^nnns 107 ' n'm 2 ' [nn nvnsn [masn | ' -^ssn J S N VSIDH 2K [mViysn | '»3 nViaaia nnVnnns [no^nnns n o 3K Ka?i3pKBn3 | I N V [ ' X V I 109 2'<[p>nni]> 108n»x nvprnun V'T 2K [iam.,.V"T 112 'n»3<K^K> x /<K>X>/ J ns -ps 111n"pman':ixn '3 "jam "pman n w s a s I H ; X nvpman 'Jin K VJmn "pman mx'saa"pman mx'saa law nvpman V"T |»:WJ ia3> p m 'Db | > "pman

113-112 n

ja 99 x ODOB3> 2nnx | ©njyx piaa] 98'nnnmxn 101-, t»npxiK[KVi 100 , CTpxnnKnmixnnKTa[mixn

102 - ^mnKmixB>ninmpmnKmixmnn'ixnn^T«;iin'n[nnViiD'ipTi[Kino? I xjmanns] | pnxsnn^3Kpionn 103 urnp<mnnKnTiK>x<nTinKmn33io;n] | unpx [pbnnn] | v [K^IJ IOS . w lxunai p IKBTHB? X Kanan nTtt>;I unpxnmxnf'nTixn xnnKKVx[mip 106 ,?xn3onun[n3om |. unpx p3 .urnpx [p DJ] 107-106 w.npx mixm [nnxn nn'm iitt»n,?x Vsp? pn^sp"I trp.mixnVspnfpi^pnf K'nnnmxs log xvmVi»D[mViyDn-|-x[p!7nnn3] io7'inv [jopni Vnjn 109 . - -r\p pVnn [p!?nm | unpx ninDinnvnupm bim

I unpxnVnn[D'JTOin 111- xnpVnnns[noVnnns• 110 •„- .ttnpx.mnoiV33] | »Tpx ]'3KI [^p 112".. tt»ipx [O'prnan-

naxa

Vx naVmn nmxn xunma any nm'tz; -IU;DX 'X ,maan baaia -rnx prcaa

xa' -vox xunia tzmn'c; p ai ircsx n'n xVi ,T,sn x'n ,Tosam ona TODnn

nmsn im'© aina pVi ,Vvsn Vx nana ma'©' Vsnoa xb> QX apya vV» ss

nmsn xurun ^>api» ,nasn na n»a p a nnx Va Tosnrc ny casn iVxn

naxi pbo .nnx xtzma vn [am] D'asn nmom nmx TO ]aVi .ia nann

p x n'BiED D'a^j ixsa' nx pVi .nan nsai -]sn isa n'Vssnano;

onV n'n' xVwi nnoM x^i mm 'n^a vrvw lVxn nmxa a'nn' ,n'asn

•iniroa 90

mxxajn nosn nao® ^V ™ann naa nm ,mxnB; laa iVa m n'n nu?xai

.mnva mis i"? |'x ^niwan xanmi ,anmsa xsam nvaonn xm onmm

[i©x] maanni ,paa msVnnan nmsa n'n' i©x niaann Vapa naa xm

.ppm Vraa nm' ircxi .nsoaa msVnnan nmsa n

ini'm ,p*?nnnn i^ap' nwx cpman nVnn xu;im nt Viap ,i^a nta naom 95

msVnnan nmxn i n ' ^apa nm' xV n'pma V»a nm' xV ox 'a .naa D'an

Diax nm Vax .D'D^nnan D'pVna '3ixn ,)'aa moVnnan nmxn xVi ,nsoaa

K3' 85-84 J pnn non | 'a sin [K'n 84 ' j maai [mnsn | j nnx [inK 83[3'inD I a na'u?' payvr | n [V»sn...in3'nr] | nn VK [DK 85 J K3' VV» p ' ^I jnDDnn»[n3Dnna | jDnannK'nK]nmnK[jnnnnK | nnVxnpVKn 86 j r i r rI 'nan QKi[oni 87 J [nan... 'pVi] 88-87 'HJ3K Nttnjnaiosm [Kttmn Vsjn| i ntPKD nwxai 91 J oniixV [Dnms^ | SK KSB1 pKsa1 88 ' nan'[Ksannvssnn | K ' tmrnpumm 9i n /<nnes3n>/ noon || n D'D^nnan [mo^nnan 93 ' i x Qnmss [Dnmss | a mxxajn masnnn'n'n^anm D'aVnnan> J nmsV pnmsa 94 T U 3 K [2n»N] | nias [j'aa]' nVnnnn [pbrinnn | n 3j» pVsp' | a IVKS pbs 95 a pupai [ppm | n <nms3[D'pVns | nn psoM] 97 a n'n [2nvr | 'a n'n '« <['n'n']> | a xbx [K1? 96

[D's^nnan | n

s masn Vsaia niKsaan nnK KBTHS [ma3n...]3)TB3 83Vaaia nwsas t masn VSJIB nixsaan nnx pVns p mean •nna xsaan insK> DK mixna mown n"n nDn...naVinn 84-83 wnpx <]sVi> masn | u; masn...tvn] 85-84 w\p nmsn icsna KVDK KBDW nmsnaDTIS n

V 86p 88 »nps pns...om] 87

Vapa 93- unpxiionnnjn.pnTn'mttNOi n^ . - i ^xs i 9i wip orrnsV'D1? x rmixn 'DVI aiosmn^nnan nvmn 'DV [nmss n'n' nn?K | x <i »Dn>I w\p rvnixn 'D1? [nmxs n'n' 94 x [mD^nnan...m)Bnm] 94-93 ' wnp'nmsnI"unpx^3pH7[Visp 95 "»npxmnoinnv'D^tppmVma | xnooaaipDoaax baanan pman p nnK'D' apani o'Vsaia TiVsn [pVnnnn.'.nwK | x pV onp V[D'an 96" w-Vaxion pman D' span 1 D' aaia iiVan p D' snan D'prnan VD'J8T3 K"7K [D'D^nnan...'nn 97 wnpx prna ^sa [D'prna V»a | ipipx 31

unpx [n'n] I'wnpx D'DVnnan

n'

naxa

y~r ,nmxn Vab D'snnwa cVaaia viVan D'pma nixnfa n^ixi .iaxynri QHV ''DV ,ppx-in 'Vrnn ona ony n w « b o^aaia 'nVan•

mixn nrrm.prna xVa prnai DTO xVa nwa XXBJ irn ,nny 70nmxn p»a run ,xcnin V» mam apya nxai .naonna

y n ,ma»ann mix -rawa .unna HKTU> na oy D'aoa iVa nn.T»ixn 'j?rnaa ianj7i nrrpmaa nooin o'an mp' D'aa

orrnvan o'pman n'Vam.D'>an mix xwwn o'ws' .caV xxa1 Vna.maajai -.Tixn mix nVaj?a onnvan n^man maai Tixn mix bip^ ,n'aa 75•TO non'n vpma m e xV Tixnu? V'n ,rixa Tij?n mix mona fbi nwx onr.Q'uVniBn D'prnan DVIXI .CBH mix »innm•nj?an nxu; trips' x^» iaa pwxnn nann DD'WS1' XV nin .oircx mTSDn-iaa-nnri nna D'jwn IX D'asnnan ca^jn >aV

- - - • • * • . . .Tixm »xn la lsmcr soaj?»a vVy xam mwKi rwawn pu?xnn naina nu?x nxtn mixn nn^nw naViDHB DVHP nan xunan Vap'» nwsx ">KW nnx ,rnann nxa [traxyn mixn]

I i Q'pman [D'pma;68I 1 va' [n'n' 69 • n <nmxn "?Db o'Dnnwa D'bajia 'n^an D'pman© » T > nmxn[on'pmaa | x niDoin [nsom | 3 nnp'] 73 > [' D»J] 70 J mis ona [ona ony'a is ['TiKn...nwK3i 75-73 1 'pmaa ppmaa | j m p i panpi |a nnvan o'an 'prna maaai o'an rmsa utman B©DV D'BV Vna invn m»'» bx w j '

[nVspa | J mxni [maai 75 HK D'8 [D'an | '3 mas Vni [Viumas 74[UIPD'B; 77 i<DVijft>vno' | 'ja'i isn [Vn | n« Vssn [Vson 76

I 'j3NjU'3»n[n33tfn 8i . j oVman [u^mas 78 j<pDK>D'ann p a [ona | ' j o w p i w ; | 3'/n3n/ | TIJSK [rraxsn nmsn] 82 -, - j

nmsn *?zw KSB "HMOI [nmsn...DyiNi 6869 u;nps <xo'jwxn> D^3»iB'nV3

misnvm»nx,nv3Dn_(WTmssnnanK"!)nvaoinnmsnvm [nsanna.^nn'ni 71-70nt V» apsa iN3i [xanan V»...nKai 71 - -p nvson nvat^jn nmxn IN iraxma'annmisnNni'3t^£'B...nwKa | tt;npsBnnD»[«nn3..rDV 72 piV>nnn TX VITJI nooin o'an inp' [nDoin...inp' 73 unp ma'ann mix HKIJ '3wTpx rnixa (wnp IKBTIJ) Kttnjrr BWDT [mix.. .B'PD' 74 wp Vit'JI nooin D»an nnpV

75 - »npx D'an'pmas inyan niB3nai [D'B3...jr>3m 75-7477-76 - • • JT [nt ion]-76 . «npx mira

.Dm 78-77 t»npx V3pi.[«nnnm 77unpx [B!WD'] I vftpt nanna IOPDV NV pann...KV 78 , i uVmas.omnnp'm i x ^ n n«"< 81 i D'Bm n i x n i 80 n,Dna.invIK wfX-inT IK finn 79]3Vi [n'BX»n...K3ni -82-81- T V3Jia 'nVsii pmon«V"i »px>.3Jia 'n^sn pmaaI »npx[an8aaixa] |,tt>np[n'ax»aanixa] 82 xmssanaanmxa 3p»3vbsmx

. unpx aia K«n3a[RBnja ' v

naxa

yau xm ,pu?xnn 'Vimm iiwxin nann xnp' ic;x V'n .nviasyn nmsn

xsaj yau xVi mnva mis i!? px pVi .'asyn ibnan nan V n ,nan

.nmsn Va apa n'n nsn nta .nan xm wax iasy box

' IPX xrcun yao pai xonm m ia» Dsyn' ircx nan pa Vrann Vax

mxxama xm xtzmn nn ,misn ^x insa nax' max nan 'a ,ma nan nta ss

iaa ,on'a xbx nvs n»p' ]aVi .naa nn'asy n»x omasya

pVnnnn n'm ,nm xu;i3n pb'nnna mpVnna ni'asyn nmsn xsau> na^i 21 ,xi68

xunm ma pwxnn namo y r ,maa Vya xinu^ naa xunm nrV xsa' n^ax

D'pman xsau; naVi .DUN ixnp' n^x ni»V»n D'pman xm 60

» T .^aaia ona maaa mis mis "rnvim ,nmsn Va oa ism^ '

nmsn nyan nnx xV nx ,D'3nnxn Vysai D'Vaaia n'pma Q'pman

p DJ xsa xm 'a .^yoa D'xsam Dnpan ixu;a pyn laa ,ia nviasyn

nnc; DJ'jya nxsnn na>x om ,!?ysa nu>x Dsyn '» 'x onpan a1? xc;im

.naa ircx xu^um nmsna D'aania 65

inx ,uws i r x xmo n'umnan D'ipan nm xunm Viapa p DJ n'xn npVi

isnna mVysnnw 'DV ,nnpan Vap1? 13 IWDX nm xV Vysa mu;D nm iVxu;

[!?"n I > Qasyn [nviassn 51I J '"nan [i^ian | j<NinKinn> '3<xin> n [2nan] | ' j a ' J i n [V'n 52 u a ' : i n3 ' 'a ' poV ja'oa 3 ' [misn...VaK] 55-54 ' j nsn mm pxn nm 53 n pV]Kunjn sin DXSI .ia nara nan D3as nan na 'nax [Dssn'...ia] | J /<n»K>/ Vnann 54I 'H3K [nan 'a ma] | z Kinn nan as [nan ma 55 J oxvn' n©K Kiman yaua Vna'

I b>i<iErTpnaK> 58 anwpv<nwp'>/iaVi 56 j[njaK]2'<[DB'J]> I nx [n»^ir;n ...n©K] 60 'nnaVi<n"anaK> | a naVi

62 j mix [mis mis 61 sa i!?Nn [nVNn | 1 'in [nrcVero[o:']»a I ' j <^» nsann | ' nn [om 64 3 ' /KSB/ | a nxttN pKisa | J pa] 63

67 'J 'KinxaKnnxpnN | i<Kin©mbysnn>xmw 66 ' J D T T J B

'bvnm] I wni?x [xnf» nirx] 5153 wnpxn3n<w>V"i 52

w<nT> p i I wxo"j>VaK 54 wnps <nann> n'n | wnpxmaipsnman'ns] nVnnm> p <Qmas»a nixsama n'ns: nVnnn xm xcnm m I?3x> Dmaxsn 56

,imas»3> naa | tyips DBSS nwx [on'ass n©x | en <DniBS»a niRxajnaIK Va»a> ni'S | » <miBS»a> p <naa

psr i [ 3n ' | x xcniV [xunan mV 59mas Qna nnx V3Vns;x [l?ajiB...nn'nm 61 unpx [n^xn] | t pxnp1] 60

[D'pma] 62 uHpxixx8'BM©Dxn'nx'?iP[vn'K'7!P j »npx nnvapnnxn bsss [Q':nnxn bsoi\ \ »npx D'Vajisn [D^SJIB

[xxa xm '3 I 1 [trxxajn] 63 wnpx n'ax»n mixn [niiaxsn nmxn 63-62D'aninan 66 «npx <i]aa>nx3nn | wnpxo'XEnjnixttnm 64 nxxau^pxxxai

x "WDB [ yaa 67 | wnpx <ia>

naxa

•»i3U7 mn' nb .nnircwa D'naisn o'axsn nvaxva fin onxna "»iat» xm paixnp' nox nnxnn iaa .DYuaxVi oawa tab nnn onxnn D^aion D'P'xnnnxna ">nv xm pai .onpa ixnp' ircx nnaxana nt nVin nvaai nva'xntn i'am .oaxs? bv mian DTUI nn'marca nnV D'Vaion D'P'xn 'uu? i m ' 35

.Tosm n'in xnp' ircx xmn'Wia onan nna inx Vaa xsa wn |a l^xn DTBH ^©a Vantsnxu?i] nnV n'rr nw Dn ©1? xsa ircx o^ian nnann Q!?IXI . tnm'ap DJ xsai .xuni vftaa on^ nu>sx 'X nsnanm 'uwn 'a ,'uon Vapa nnxirxc; na mnrr max 'a ,nmtPB nmn mx'saa 'xan xin "mrm monpw 40']»a nnx Va nvna 'xin xin XB?iia DTipn mn^sxn mx^sa pi .XXBJ

nnnnnn naaa n'n'w na 'xana 'a p DJ xsai .mnrr xV yaaan 'iVxn D'asnnanun ,nnx nno n'n'i ,Q'aDnn pac; nai n'aon nnnnnn

.mism m»nn nm .n^i^xnn n'asnnann'n1 nu?x »urcn xsa xm n:n D"iitt>n '3tt> Da msn 1 nwx D'nann DVIXI 45mis iV nmn xVun , s;Da xxai nan xu;nn nm1 tfrw a^in1 on'asya D^'XVvb DX nmxn nx© ap1 xb ,na nsvn1 mix i> nnm oxt? 'sV ,na nsy n'n1

nxi .inx x^ii x >x nnx misV n'n'u; pn ' xV» inx ,xmn mixn ^ioaanai» 'sb ,Vapa x^i ssna 'n^a nm ,Vvsa xsai DIU?S DX» p oa n'n'Vapan mn xunm sao n'n mVi .Vssa xin© nsa Vysac; na Vap' xV Vysau? 50

n Qnwnipa [Dnun 33 HK pn Kin [pn | n <K'n> Dnsna 32|n piawnn 36 n /<D'ro>/ ixnp' | J Dnnxan p [nnnsnna 34

| nj!73non[ Dnu;n 37 m o w nun noon nin noom mn | J isnp1

2' < [nnnnnn vVxi]> 43 J nnn' [ninn* | ' s'n [Kin 40 1 inn pnx 39n msnn pinon' 45 ' D'son [D'ssnn | x D^snn [D'son | nK mnnn [nnnnnn

48 naK PDV...'DV] 49-47 j naa pai 46 a a oVxn> D"DKI

xVi [niVi so ' n'n p \ r 49 ' mix

33 wipx IK...IK [Kin |'m...Kin pa 34-32[Dmn onwawa 35 n p D"13» piw 34 » mai n p niaa K!?I X m a IK [oma•nnva 38 unpxDa[nnainKboa 37 s;npx[DassV»minn] |

i...'a] 39 wnj7sr <npam'assni3B?an»Kntranonmnn [nmn 40 \»Tps 3"j msn niaipi piyn...xsai 40-39

pi 41 »Tps <nmn»w na ma DJaio> v? Da npx [Dn'jwa] | n nooani mnnunpx nnnnnn »ra 'iwa nnK Vaa [D'ran...nvna 42-41 wnpx <Ksaj>nai] I wnpx [nnnnnn] 43 n nain nnnnn wpx mn nain nnnnn [nnnnnn 42D«iwn '3»a nrn nvaDnnsn [VK IVS' iVKn D'asnnannn 44-43 »Tpx [O'aonn p wnvasnn [D^IIvxnn D'annnan 44 » i p VK nVv mn nvaDnnun x Vx nVyoxjm' [na DX» rrrv 47 x iJBTn 'i*a ':w wip [D"i3wn']»] 45 unpx pcxinnnvinxxBnjVn'ni»pn'xVii;nnx nnx...nnx 48 wipx [na DXOT] | wnpx nam[K«run so wnpx<n3n>V»Da | ©npxipDJ] 49 nnnxmixa

10

naxa

pan D'a'DDa vi^a /ftxn D'arcja n'xxaan /iVxn D'yaon 'JU? nvncansn vm ,IDD3 XVI mn nVa "a'awn msnrc mvoD i»wa nxiaa xmnnnx 'nxim nowm mnn mao vn'rc p iv XV 'a ,wio*n D'm i >xx nu?x'aw lViavu? naa 7iprau? xin ojax nxun ircx mn , p p y n mn -wxai .paa 20

/rossm mnn mia ircx D'yaon 'JPB "a'arcn mia nu;x iVxn n'yaonxin i n n "o .loonxa nnann i^xa mix npiw na nia m'pnn n^nnmnni' xVi ,uaa max nnr n»T D'Jiwxnna mxxaja i ^ x sran xV n^xi n r n xinu; yaoa '©uxn nsnn xin w in |DVI .nno an i n r xVi ,mpso

iaa .pVi .mx xin n^xa /iVaun in^Ta mxn inrww naa pirn 25saua imao matV ^nnai .maana vVs p^a iwx xm .

nax I P X nai ,nmsi naina caania nnrc r r r n^xi ,ip tf>x nan yaoa nrayn !?x nna pnyj Tiy .oa D'xsajn mism nainn

.is^nrr'W naai isnnwrc naa ^ IST .o^a^own o^anann»x am ,|xaa nmaxya DHaiyn D'^'xn xsau; na > IDDIXO; naxn 6 2ni67">w mn wn ranwo xsa» ,nxn!? nxna nna urx Va pny

I 1 n^xn nK ['I^KHJ |'» D ' M U [O'»aon 17

j DHODJI [QHOD: 19 'srovwaimvwa 18

i noonm poDjm | nax D'sau [2D'»aon 21 a iViajs; pViavw | 1 m [n'n 2024 s <»aua> nvin 23 1 mn [mn | j n^nnm [nVnnm 22

| 3'/nna/•> [nan 25 jnnvpnTn | <xin2 ' [Kina TniaoVxri pijaobNn 26 J naxw pBN'^ | j xinn; naa [Kin

nainn 28 J IB?K TIDO pmao | » Kin© aa Kim [Kin | ' YHSONn nI 's <ia> lann^'c 29 •>» ' a n [nan | 1 pv\si ipnsi | j mixi nain<ivn ]3K naK> a naxn o a m p naK> K naKii < V K naK> 30 J <ia>'a j DiVmuonK 'a a JIBO-IKO? [IBDIKIT | •> naKi <Ta naK> n naKJi <T3 naK> 1

Ksa | J <IHK> WX | a Vapnsi [j?ny | s 'ass [D'oxs 31 ' IBOIK

oTinn> s n^«^ D'aws] 17mnn man posjm mnn 19 unpx D'anim [D'anm vm | unps [ IWDH] 18•na aaiv IU;K .iVxn D'yaon 'jw vn tf?v nViJ pVi> wnps [j'aa] 20 unj?» <Dinn ona ssnv na?K .D'saun ' j» D» Jioa nnnK K^I j'aa onrm ,"B'a»nnVnnnnjnx.nTnrpnnnVnnnn:n[nTB...nVnnm 22 unj?iM^K»[D'V3Bn w a 21p:npVw 22 wps pD^nn'w...na] 29-22 wn.ni3nvpnnnVnnnn:m p .npno 24 n D':wKnn D'^Kna [D'jwKina | T [niKsaaaj | n [nnn] 23 nI ni^3©ap^3Bnin»Ta 25 TeniKn yaBansTKimnjn[yaD3...injnI n <ma> n'r | T JK33 IVH PJVXK I © K 27 n V'nnKi [VTUIJI 26 1 laai paa ,pVi

n D'aiia [D'aisn ja 29-28 n sann [nrasn | n aiwx [pnw 28 n naK piaK»np on x [om] | »np [jKaa] | T IDOIKE? I B K I wps luonm poonxw IBKJI 30

D'J'B I B> KSB1 [KSB | tPTpS inK^ TflK IKHB pKn^ IKnB | ttnpjf [DnB...Va] 31

nun

nn ."a'arcn man ana aanv ircx onsin »3DB nipmw mn naxas nron 9

Dinn D'anaa pyn iaa ,D'y3D 'arca 33iia "B'arcn man© nxsnn n33 '3

n'inn 'asa iVxn o'yson 'arc nix'sa ,1 X3 nxsrv mnc; X7X

••3 .mj?B3 DH> nxxajn nyunn 'ioa D"a'arcn canas nxanm ,oa

nxsnm ,Dipa3 omasya D'yjruna an© D'anan l^xa nxnnnu? nab> xin

nnxm ^3pa Dnnrca nnx .D'yso ^ ^ a nsma xinrc iniaxsa ssninas*

n'n'c -IBJDX 'XWI ,»^a i> w yjmna 73 '3 nxsnno; na7» nn ,V»is

nnaina o^a'awn D'anan© nxann nnx ima yyianai SPJB

.•'^30 10?n man Dna asiv nu?x ,i7xn D'yaon 'iwa naxan nt3 mpnV nsnai

nm ,D'iosjn oinn D'B^an Dn'3tt?a 133m' nox o^yaon 'iu> iaa Dn oxn

]X33 IWR mism ^ rnn oxn V'n ,'Vvn nnxm mix nna tnx x ip ' nwx

vn DXI . i m mns3 D'D7nna ix ,T>a3 o'D^nna ix ,D» -IE?X ny paa onnx

raa DXI own *jin©a ox on'Vy naxa maa;an DC? mn ,faa o'^nna is

.mmxm nanpna

r n m ttnvs Qy> x 'VjVn [VJVJH | S [iioiVon] n IE;T ]"7 a nam J3N7 n i n pxV lnaK> K n3i3n<T'3na«> 2 n <7"s; ':i3^n n»a vrnaD am's •»> x <'3i3i3n noa

I 1 <nas> ' Kina; pan© 4 J naxan mn [mn naKas | n nrron <n«n ]3| i i?K3 p7Ka 6 1 rvmxajn [nKsa:n s

8 'n jax yjas [ssimas 7 J 'I i iVx pVxn 11 '3K nsina [onsina | J nsa [ p i a 9 J

13 'J o'noDJi [DHDD3n I i ana [Dn'wa | a ' ^ n ['jw 12 1 D"aJ [ ' I K ] u '><Dn>|N33 | ' j a [QXH] | 2 ' ' j i m ' s ' J i n [Vn | nx

[nanpna 16 J OK

ssoa | u;ips nipnV 1:313 nm naxas [mpn:E>...n:i3n 2vm i7xn D'Mun ':» vnw npx D3 lVxn D'»3on ':© D'XSBS vnv [O3...mxi|SB 5-4

"a>BU?3 [Q"B'aa;n D'ams | wips 73K pK3nm 5 iw D3 •'ixsa3p mpa3 vni [mpas 6 i»npx n'aipan nvi3nn [mpB3...njri3nn

na .nivi x nsina imaxya »yi3n'tp na© ,ii» psina xm»...nK3nm 7-6x nri3] ,xim yininai J?'3B 7"T [7WD...inx 8-7 wip n3ina miasva9 wnxsnn^naVi n«3nnw...nn 8' w\p VJTISI Vspa Vn s 73pai

w 12 unpx nipns p DK pipnV ninsi 11 u» D"BH?ntt>'inn [DHos3n...D'Bmn | wips Qna [DJT3©B | unpit

[ow...DnnK 14 unp mism 'Vrnn ni [nnism 'Vvnn | unp nnxn nnxm 13I ttnpx [•»] 15 X DK '3 [OKI | ttnp [|'B3...1K] | tt»1pS 17K D» D'inK

wnpx [2fB3] I p [on>7»]

a1

nun

nmnn

ooj?ua D'

Duinn 'sV niBoin IN tnijrn *r inan mypn 'D^ niDDin [ ]

noawnHDDin

nvmx IK D'Va np'na

nuown minn <[ ]>nnx mxV aaia Va .mtPtttznoa nvniK * *

Tn-ana ama nnjn ' a . ' xiriN ama nrwn 2a , 2 K

Tn-ana ama bv mnK HOTJ , a ,, x

nnx ama bw mnx HDTJ 2 a <iN

918 D'lKD N

41 '3Y1X JXp'UNI 3

31 ]31'a JC3 noii /a naxa) 42 Tirnxn i

957 D'nND n('n nasa) 112 p'jns T

Cm H onaxa) 36 )33'a 02311 npnaxs D']3nb> u>nnan rra .pnvi ' i '

('3 nou /a naxa) 945 onxs V('3 noi] ,'3 nasa) 31 pra a

Commentario al "de substantia orbis" de Averroes. por Alvaro de SToledo, ed. P. Manuel Alonso, S.J., Madrid, 1941

Aristoteles, Opera Latine cum commentariis Averrois, recensuit pNicolatus Vernia, Venetiis, 1483

Aristotelis, Omnia quae extant opera, et Averrois Cordubensis in ca 1opera, omnes, qui ad haec usque tempora pervenere commentarii,

Venetiis, apud Iuntas, 1562-1574, IXIoannes de Ianduno, In libris Aristotelis De Caelo et Mundo..., Wquibus adiecimus Averrois sermonem de Substantia Orbis, cumeiusdem Ioanni commentario ac questionibus, Venetiis, apud H.

Scotus, 1552

n*n ,'na"nn V&> nt pV iriDVu; mnnaa w o n p nxiwn(.'^iixn pVnn Vu; 16 'aya mVn nx

•?» D'xVa v a n a nwan b>y nooiaa "V:tan oxya naxa" to IT mnnanaxan ainn nx n^'aa umnna p-iaa .D"pVn D"3ttn .'a'nixn mjnnnnxiwn 'a"mb> .r-'ana n»iV» Vy ooiaa xim ,avx ]ax nxa|ai t"om von mxan p 'roxVn mannn b>ttr D'DIDT ^Commentario al "de substantia — IDJl X >» imnnaa y'Dian

orbis" de Averroes, por Alvaro de Toledo; man m x w ixxai a v#aa .ona •>n»anu;ntt' n'a^wn Tn-'ana n^anV ~wv.

'anx»3p.DHnxmaipaamiDnn' v/a]a i'ny rrn xV ana nnx ^x© nnxa .IT mnna

nnxaur Dipa Vaa QVIX .'b>o? nicn-noua .moa 'mnnur ]Dixa ,x "#aa 'mnaDinnn /Vo; mnnan pix1? ia 'nu^an^n ,inv naio noTj nn'n Tn-'anaa

^a nny xin ,'anyn nipan ]a ,maxa .nuwjo ,'rox^nDuma Ti^an^n DVIX .nTy-' aa la ^ancnV 'nocn xVi ,mpan

n'n IV'DX .xmu; 'sa vmxrcn .'ivan nayn uopon n'n niy Va .nan nn'ma,P3wa n'n IX nona npV nayn omnno; maipaa "jx .njan^ nu;p«]U3 (*) rraaiaa D'jaioa nVx o^ip'n .•'I'DxVn uopun nio1 Vy imx

nnpa nmxa pn nny^n1? 'n^si m w n w b»y uopun nx jpn"? 'noovi.nona Q'pi1? ix c r a r a 'roxVn nn nayn uopon DJ TO nnao;

.([]) D'yana D^inoa D'jaioa my»n Vy cooananD'xaia cnayn Tn-'ana p noir"ire?: CJ'DXIXDX ^wa nn^a mnnan

D'uopon pV IT mnna p noir^irty j nayn-nayn oxixoxa"jmyn ' r a lyapic; o^bdi oxnna .••roxb'n-nayn oxnxsxa —

a'na ^nan naai naa o"isa .nnay^ D'^'ux^n noun-'ii'tt' nxp mrnx }'x . a1? nana .vmp'an oxnxoxa lxam xb> ib>x T,X .TnT-anainix maoaa lV'sx ,non ix x ?a a'naa una'c^n pjya Tn-'ana noio'injaV Tax 'mxwj irisVu? mnnan Vu; T,o'n-noi3 wan i,Vnaa .naxy

.a'naa mrnx caanV p»oi ^a xVa .nsionnain na '^ nTy» mnpi nnoia ,D'E>JX omx aV nmn"? "*? na'yj nain1'oinV 'jx wpaa .n'^Jixn nanpna c y s i a nn'mao; .IT rniaybv n'£5ion many nx n'Vy nVoj no;x p ' r ' i j mian 'aan ^» naw nx

-7N nsxnn" VIDO mats p i ,ioonx 'ana? VUDTD maia -ip'ya yvr nun p xD'xurua c n n ,i7u>a onaxa naa na'n DJ xm n,x .(nVsnn nVsn) "nsxnnpxw niVxw? mawn D'7'aa n?x nnaxa .D'WP D"ii7ix'ni D"DIDI7'S

pK ana xuaa ?7a-yna .iasv7 rxnu> nvva? jinno IX jn'7x t rm nun}mK nsn xinu; niyn n« nvxm D^IVD nVyai Kunaa Tnun nx nun

xin onV «inwan xu^unu; nnaxa 7u; IDIX xin "7J7jn osyapn nanu?: xim .xxaaa irx naa 'anyn mpaa uDjjun .Dn'nuiam D'au?n.••anyn mpan |a .msaa ona nnx 7a .wyau; ,'rox7 mnnai nay mannaD'xa ana nur'an nu;x .onaxa ni^ra aama nayn lannna ma'nn,nxn)a ,nwxi .D'nyV xnj73 xin&> ^a ,"i?'ny.n >3'DX?n" .'rux7n lainna7tt> Q'oisnn ]a naaa . ( v n nxan 7B; nawxnn n'snaa) OIDIJ?D 7xa'a 'Ta'Ta ntt>y:tt> 'won naxan ounn QJ xaia run nxan p 'ruxVn mannnnaxa DJ -nsa n7X D'oisna .nayn onnnn |a (1523-1440) oaVaa onnaxmmn — nTnaxa^impajoaVaa onnax n'roxV? Djnn imx «]xi ,'yac;.D'arca p xm DJi ,'oinnu OIYTD n ' nu>ya ,nun ]ax 7tt> nnx naxa ?a> nay.nmnxn nya i7jn: nt naxa 7&> nayn uopun nx o'7'aan n'-'ana wirVx y j m 'a'jiix • jnna bw inmay n s xm x?an uopun 7C nayn mannn.(1362 Wtt>a noDi) 'jianan yunn' p nu;a n'a n,my uopu n,ma n'-'ana naaa.1349 nju>a D7unntt> unn's .'Jianan bw iciTDa oopun nnVa nVx n'-'anaayan ,n,a 7y 1013 .nn «]x mane?: m 'a'nix mnn 7^ D"p?n n'-'ana naa]ax na?u; 'va 'anyn mpan p n»y3C .vpbvm naxan 7c nnsj mmn un'7avx p x n c y c ounnn 7c n'n-'anaa naaa nsoaa y'Dia m mnn .avx

.nun |ax nxa "D"au;n nso7 'ysaxn mx'a#/7'7?a «pix n,ina 'xaxy pVna "7J7jn Dsya naxa" y s i a D'a'Vu>n vn-'anaam iDix ."nvn7X3T nvysus cunnn" ix "D"y3on D'wmnn" DU>3 yirnD"D's o'XBnis m7xu>3 D'poiyn .nnnxi tvn px nxa onaxa naa Vaa"7j?jn osys naxa" Dwn .iconx ^m Vy n7X Dnsna i7ync D"DiDoin'3 ]atn nsinas .ir3D7tt> nmnnas pu;xn ys ian naxa? pn n?'nn3|n'3 "7i7jn osy3 naxa" Du>m .D'BCS D'nn nnnx nnaxa nu^an myx'm .'nsnin n'3 nnu^yj D'X7an Tn*'3n33 nysian nmnnan .171a IDIX?

.onaxa nun7u;V pVina onau; 'tt"7u;n p7nn ;D'p7n nun7u;7 npVinamnoo 'D-7y "7J7in ossn naxa" nx CDUSB n'?7an mnooatt' pvaa7» mnsoa mpas ,ni mn'03 'ax «ix 'ntt>anu;n ,':'DX7n mannn ja D'pnon

u navnno

2' rrnnn w o

nun

noxnaa '2 nou ,'E>'?B; naxa

TB

2:

5 'ay nxn '7a:xn

mx'3 nxxin nx Q"ran-'a'V rrxpnaxn nvjipxn naxy *?v n^a'p 1931-3Corpus CommentariorumAverrois in "n nxsm n^3n '3*7 IDO'IX1? tun ]3XSpeculum. VI (1931), pp. 412-427-3 po9Vn n"X 'T3 JXin» Aristotelemnxsin Vvsa nx Q'vna1? n^xn^'n iraixVn n'anpxn nnsv "?v nVa'j? 1977-3

.ncn px '3roV D«n3vn D'amnnxsvn jnnxn xim ,nvanj?xn 'rny Vu; *]mtpa monsa iix1? xsv 'nsi^n panrrxpnaxn n'anpxn Vtt' "Dbuioonx Vv nun px mx'a nsix" miana 'DV

DJ'D

rawn ,D"rama'V n'Kpnaxn n'mpxV nmai? nmin

ISBN 965-208-071-3

ODTJ

ion p>6 btfnn DSJD

mnna

pnx

"run px

itzn pxrraiNVn n'aij?Kn ovua msV xsva11? n'xpnaxn 'a^pK?^^