Help with translation: Cyril of Alexandria

Greek Learning Greek
1

I am trying to get the sense of a passage in a work by Cyril of Alexandria, Thesaurus de Sancta et Consubstantial Trinitate. It’s in chapter (λόγος) 34, and goes like this (Migne 75.576-7):


ΑΛΛΟ. Φησί που Χριστὸς Ἰουδαίοις προσδιαλεγόμενος· Εἰ δὲ ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ ἐγὼ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια, ἄρα ἔφθασεν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ; Καὶ δάκτυλόν φησιν ἐνθάδε τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τρόπον τινὰ τῆς θείας οὐσίας ἐκπεφυκὸς καὶ φυσικῶς αὐτῆς ἐκκρεμάμενον, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἐκ τῆς ἀνθρωπείας χειρός. Βραχίονα μὲν γὰρ καὶ δεξιὰν Θεοῦ τὸν Υἱὸν ἀποκαλοῦσιν αἱ θεῖαι Γραφαὶ, κατὰ τό· Ἔσωσεν αὐτὸν ἡ δεξιὰ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὁ βραχίων ὁ ἅγιος αὐτοῦ. Καὶ πάλιν· Κύριε, ὑψηλός σου ὁ βραχίων, καὶ οὐκ ᾔδεισαν· γνόντες δὲ αἰσχυνθήσονται.

Ὥσπερ οὖν ὁ βραχίων φυσικῶς ἐνήρμοσται τῷ ὅλῳ σώματι, πάντα ἐνεργῶν ὅσαπερ ἂν δόξῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ, καταχρίει δὲ συνήθως, τῷ δακτύλῳ πρὸς τοῦτο κεχρημένος· οὕτω τὸν μὲν τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγον ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ φυσικῶς ἡρμοσμένον, ἵν’ οὕτως εἴπω, καὶ ἐμπεφυκότα λογιζώμεθα, ἐν δὲ τῷ Υἱῷ φυσικῶς τε καὶ οὐσιωδῶς διῆκον παρὰ Πατρὸς τὸ Πνεῦμα, δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα χρίων ἁγιάζει. Οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἀλλότριον οὐδὲ ἀπεξενωμένον τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τῆς θείας φύσεως φαίνεται, ἀλλ’ ἐξ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐν αὐτῇ φυσικῶς. Ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος δάκτυλος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ, ὁμοφυὴς ὢν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὖ πάλιν ἐν τῷ σώματι οὐχ ἑτεροούσιος ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸ τυγχάνουσα. Τούτων δὲ ἡμῖν ἐχόντων τῇδε, Θεὸς ἄρα τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστι, καὶ οὐχ ἑτέρως.

The first part is not too hard, but I am struggling with some of the forms in the second which could be either masculine or neuter:

Φησί που Χριστὸς Ἰουδαίοις προσδιαλεγόμενος·
(See what) Christ says, conversing with the Jews;

Εἰ δὲ ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ ἐγὼ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια, ἄρα ἔφθασεν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ;
If I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Καὶ δάκτυλόν φησιν ἐνθάδε τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τρόπον τινὰ τῆς θείας οὐσίας ἐκπεφυκὸς καὶ φυσικῶς αὐτῆς ἐκκρεμάμενον, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἐκ τῆς ἀνθρωπείας χειρός.
He says finger here (to mean) the Holy Spirit, growing out of the divine essence in a certain manner, and hanging from it naturally, just as the finger from a man’s hand.

Βραχίονα μὲν γὰρ καὶ δεξιὰν Θεοῦ τὸν Υἱὸν ἀποκαλοῦσιν αἱ θεῖαι Γραφαὶ, κατὰ τό· Ἔσωσεν αὐτὸν ἡ δεξιὰ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὁ βραχίων ὁ ἅγιος αὐτοῦ.
The divine scriptures call the Son the arm and right hand of God, as in: ‘His right hand, and His holy arm, saved him.’

Καὶ πάλιν· Κύριε, ὑψηλός σου ὁ βραχίων, καὶ οὐκ ᾔδεισαν· γνόντες δὲ αἰσχυνθήσονται. [Isaiah 26.11]
And again: Lord, your arm is exalted and they did not know it; knowing it, they will be ashamed.

Ὥσπερ οὖν ὁ βραχίων φυσικῶς ἐνήρμοσται τῷ ὅλῳ σώματι, πάντα ἐνεργῶν ὅσαπερ ἂν δόξῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ, καταχρίει δὲ συνήθως, τῷ δακτύλῳ πρὸς τοῦτο κεχρημένος·
Therefore, just as the arm is fitted naturally to the whole body, carrying out everything which one may have thought in the mind, … he anoints in like manner, making use of the finger for this;

οὕτω τὸν μὲν τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγον ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ φυσικῶς ἡρμοσμένον,
so thus the Word of God being joined by nature from Him and in Him,

[I wondered if ἡρμοσμένον might be agreeing with Πνεῦμα, but it seemed to me that one would then need λόγῳ - joined to the Word. This way, I am doubtful about the accusative..]

ἵν’ οὕτως εἴπω, καὶ ἐμπεφυκότα λογιζώμεθα, ἐν δὲ τῷ Υἱῷ φυσικῶς τε καὶ οὐσιωδῶς διῆκον παρὰ Πατρὸς τὸ Πνεῦμα, δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα χρίων ἁγιάζει.
So that likewise I may say, and we may reckon the Spirit implanted, extending naturally and essentially in the Son and from the Father, through Whom He anoints and sanctifies all things.

[Don’t know who is Whom and who is He..]

Οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἀλλότριον οὐδὲ ἀπεξενωμένον τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τῆς θείας φύσεως φαίνεται, ἀλλ’ ἐξ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐν αὐτῇ φυσικῶς.
Therefore the Holy Spirit does not appear as foreign to, or driven out from the divine nature, but as naturally from it and in it.

Ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος δάκτυλος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ, ὁμοφυὴς ὢν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὖ πάλιν ἐν τῷ σώματι οὐχ ἑτεροούσιος ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸ τυγχάνουσα.
So likewise also the finger of the body is in the hand, being of the same nature as it, and again the hand is in the body, not of a different essence, as if it were (merely) touching it/joined to it by accident.

[As very often, I don’t know what τυγχάνω does here..]

Τούτων δὲ ἡμῖν ἐχόντων τῇδε, Θεὸς ἄρα τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστι, καὶ οὐχ ἑτέρως.
And since we have these things, (we can see that) the Spirit is God, and not otherwise.

Any help would be much appreciated, Andrew

2

Φησί που Χριστὸς Ἰουδαίοις προσδιαλεγόμενος·
Christ somewhere says, speaking to Jews:
The που substitutes for an actual bible reference.

Καὶ δάκτυλόν φησιν ἐνθάδε τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον
By finger he here means the holy Spirit

τρόπον τινὰ τῆς θείας οὐσίας ἐκπεφυκὸς
somehow or other born of the divine essence

πάντα ἐνεργῶν ὅσαπερ ἂν δόξῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ
activating everything the mind decides

καταχρίει δὲ συνήθως
and habitually anoints it, using the finger for the purpose.
i.e it’s the arm (hand, finger) that is in the habit of applying ointment to the entire body.

φυσικῶς ἡρμοσμένον Your translation should match φυσικῶς ἐνήρμοσται above. It’s an elaborate analogy and the shared features must match one another.

οὕτω τὸν μὲν τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγον ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ φυσικῶς ἡρμοσμένον, ἵν’ οὕτως εἴπω, καὶ ἐμπεφυκότα λογιζώμεθα, ἐν δὲ τῷ Υἱῷ φυσικῶς τε καὶ οὐσιωδῶς διῆκον παρὰ Πατρὸς τὸ Πνεῦμα, δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα χρίων ἁγιάζει.
(Just as …, ) in the same way let’s reckon the Word of God naturally fitted (so to speak) and born/grown/implanted from Him and in Him, and the Spirit naturally and essentially [by nature and by essence] extending from the Father in/by the Son
Acc. as object of λογιζ.
Note μεν … δε: the Logos is associated with God the Father, the Pneuma with the Son (from God). (ηρμοσμενον masc., διηκον neut.)

δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα χρίων ἁγιάζει.
through which (the Pneuma) He (the Son) …

Ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος δάκτυλος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ, ὁμοφυὴς ὢν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὖ πάλιν ἐν τῷ σώματι οὐχ ἑτεροούσιος ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸ τυγχάνουσα.
So just as both the finger of the body (is) in the hand, sharing its nature, and the hand again in turn (is) in the body, not being (τυγχανουσα, happening to be, actually being) of different essence in relation to it.
Since this is punctuated as a complete sentence, perhaps ωσπερ και … και is tantamount to ωσπερ …. ουτως. But I don’t think I’ve ever met quite that construction, and it doesn’t seem to be what he wants to say. (ωσπερ can’t mean likewise, as you have it.)
Or perhaps it should not be punctuated as a complete sentence, but as the first part of what follows (the “vehicle” of the simile): “So just as finger … and hand …, —and since these things are like this for us, it follows that (αρα) the Pneuma is God.” If this is right, the genitive absolute encapsulates the two parts of the ωσπερ clause (which had gotten pretty long and complicated!), and the concluding Θεὸς ἄρα replaces ουτως Θεος. That looks more plausible to me, but it would mean putting a comma or dash in place of the full stop after τυγχανουσα. It’s a mild but rhetorically powerful anacolouthon, as he reaches his resounding conclusion.

3

Οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἀλλότριον οὐδὲ ἀπεξενωμένον τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τῆς θείας φύσεως φαίνεται, ἀλλ’ ἐξ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐν αὐτῇ φυσικῶς. Ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος δάκτυλος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ, ὁμοφυὴς ὢν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὖ πάλιν ἐν τῷ σώματι οὐχ ἑτεροούσιος ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸ τυγχάνουσα. Τούτων δὲ ἡμῖν ἐχόντων τῇδε, Θεὸς ἄρα τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστι, καὶ οὐχ ἑτέρως.

I’m sure I was right to suggest that
Ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ὁ τοῦ σώματος δάκτυλος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ, ὁμοφυὴς ὢν αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὖ πάλιν ἐν τῷ σώματι οὐχ ἑτεροούσιος ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸ τυγχάνουσα.
should not be punctuated as a complete sentence, but I was stupidly wrong in my proposed repunctuation. Read through the passage as a whole (which I didn’t do before, just looking at your bit-by-bit translations) and it’s obvious. ὥσπεροῦν is to be read as a single word (= ὥσπερ, “just as”), and to be punctuated with a comma before it. The relationship of the Holy Spirit to God is compared to that of the finger and the hand to the body. Pneuma:God::finger:body. They share the same φυσις and the same oυσια. That’s the thrust of the entire note.

It’s an ἄλλο note. Is it actually Cyril’s? The αλλο heading (“another” e.g. σχολιον) is used in variorum commentaries.

I don’t know why Migne prints the quotation at the beginning as a question, either. He must have been working as mindlessly as I was.

Michael

4

Michael, thank you so much, that is a great help. Almost the whole work is made up of these ἄλλο notes - he gives one argument on a subject, and then a succession of further arguments, introduced with ἄλλο.

Your suggestion about ὡσπεροῦν with a comma before seems to work well. I’ll see if I can find a more recent edition in the library today, and see if they have made any changes to Migne.

Andrew

5

It looks like there is no critical edition - see e.g. Hans van Loon, The Dyophisite Christology of Cyril of Alexandria, p. 93, n. 126.

Andrew