Item Eiusdemad Eundem
Quomodo Substantiae in eo QuodSint Bonae Sint Cum Non SintSubstantialia Bona
Postulas, ut ex Hebdomadibus nostris eius quaestionis obscuritatem quae continet modum quo substantiae in eo quod sint bonae sint, cum non sint substantialia bona, digeram et paulo evidentius monstrem; 5 idque eo dicis esse faciendum, quod non sit omnibus notum iter huiusmodi scriptionum. Tuus vero testis ipse sum quam haec vivaciter fueris ante complexus. Hebdomadas vero ego mihi ipse commentor potiusque ad memoriam meam speculata conservo 10 quam cuiquam participo quorum lascivia ac petulantia nihil a ioco risuque patitur esse seiunctum.1 Prohinc tu ne sis obscuritatibus brevitatis adversus, quae cum sint arcani fida custodia tum id habent commodi, quod cum his solis qui digni sunt conloquuntur. Ut igitur
- 1seiunct. Rand; coniunct. the best mss.: disiunct. vulg., Vallinus.
From the Same to the Same
How Substances are Good in Virtue of Their Existence Without Being Substantial Goods
You ask me to state and explain somewhat more clearly that obscure question in my Hebdomadsa concerning the manner in which substances are good in virtue of existence without being substantial goods.b You urge that this demonstration is necessary because the method of this kind of treatise is not clear to all. I can bear witness with what eagerness you have already attacked the subject. But I think over my Hebdomads with myself, and I keep my speculations in my own memory rather than share them with any of those pert and frivolous persons who will not tolerate an argument unless it is made amusing. Wherefore do not you take objection to obscurities consequent on brevity, which are the sure treasure-house of secret doctrine and have the advantage that they speak only with those who are worthy. I have
- a“Groups of Seven.” Similarly Porphyry divided the works of Plotinus into six Enneades or groups of nine.
- bCf. discussion on the nature of good in Cons, iii, m. 10 and pr. 11 (infra, pp. 284 ff.).