1.1 Erat there was Parīsiīs at Paris sculptor a sculptor quīdam a certain nōmine by name Robertus Robert quī who ex from lapide stone figūrās figures mīrābilī with wonderful arte skill excīdēbat would carve out
1.2 Quādam on a certain diē day cum when statuam a statue leōnis of a lion perfēcisset he had completed et and ante before opus his work suum his stāret was standing duae two quaestiōnēs questions in into mentem his mind eius his vēnērunt came quarum of which ūna one facilis easy erat was altera the other difficillima most difficult
2.1 Prīma the first quaestiō question haec this erat was —”quid what est is hoc?” this
2.2 Et and facile easily respondēre to answer potuit he was able —”leō a lion est it is —hoc that est is figūra a figure animālis of an animal quod which leō a lion vocātur is called ex from lapide stone excīsa” carved
2.3 Quid what sit it is sciēbat he knew —quod that which Graecī the Greeks vocant call “tò the tí what ēn it was eînai” to be —id that est is quidditātem the quiddity —nātūram the nature reī of the thing secundum according to quam which dēfīnītur it is defined
2.4 Haec this quaestiō question ad to essentiam the essence pertinet pertains —quid what rēs the thing sit is —et and ā by quōvīs anyone quī who leōnem a lion cognōscit knows respondērī to be answered potest is able
3.1 Secunda the second quaestiō question autem however haec this erat was —”quod that est is —sed but cūr why est?” is it
3.2 Nōn not iam any longer quaerit does he ask quid what statua the statue sit is —hoc this enim for scit— he knows sed but quaerit he asks cūr why omnīnō at all exsistit it exists
3.3 Nam for potuit it could have nōn not esse been —lapis the stone illē that potuit could have manēre remained lapis a stone informis unformed in in montibus the mountains et and numquam never fīerī become leō a lion
3.4 Essentia the essence leōnis of a lion —id that est is quid what sit is leō— a lion intellegī to be understood potest is able etsī even if nūllus no leō lion exsistit exists
3.5 Possum I can enim for intellegere understand quid what sit is phoenīx a phoenix —avis a bird quae which ex from igne fire renāscitur— is reborn et and tamen yet nūllus no phoenīx phoenix exsistit exists
3.6 Ergō therefore aliud one thing est is quid what rēs a thing sit is et and aliud another quod that rēs a thing est is
4.1 Hīc here distinguendum we must distinguish est is —et and haec this distinctiō distinction maximī of the greatest momentī importance est is
4.2 Essentia the essence est is id that quod which rēs a thing est is —esse existence autem however est is id that quō by which rēs a thing exsistit exists
4.3 Essentia the essence respondet answers quaestiōnī the question “quid what est?” is it —esse existence respondet answers quaestiōnī the question “an whether est?” is it
4.4 In in omnī every autem moreover creātūrā creature haec these duo two reāliter really distinguuntur are distinguished —nōn not sōlā by the cōgitātiōne thought nostrā our sed but in in rē the thing ipsā itself
4.5 Nam for essentia the essence leōnis of a lion nōn does not inclūdit include esse existence —nihil nothing in in dēfīnītiōne the definition leōnis of a lion requīrit requires ut that leō a lion exsistat exist
4.6 Ergō therefore sī if leō a lion exsistit exists esse existence suum its aliunde from elsewhere accipit it receives —nōn not ā from sē itself ipsō itself sed but ab from aliō another
5.1 Robertus Robert sculptor the sculptor hoc this facile easily intellēxit understood —nam for exemplum the example ante before oculōs his eyes habēbat he had
5.2 “Sciō” I know inquit he said “quid what sit is statua a statue leōnis of a lion —possum I can dēscrībere describe eam it etsī even if nūlla no exsistit it exists —possum I can in in mente my mind tenēre hold formam the form eius of it sine without ūllō any lapide stone ante before mē” me
5.3 Rēctē rightly —nam for essentia the essence statuae of the statue intellegī to be understood potest is able sine without exsistentiā existence eius its —sed but exsistentia the existence statuae of the statue numquam never intellegī to be understood potest is able sine without causā a cause quā by which in into esse being prōducta produced est it was
5.4 “Et and haec this causa” cause inquit said Robertus Robert “ego I sum am —ego I fēcī made ut that statua the statue esset” should exist
5.5 Rēctē rightly —tū you dedistī gave statuae to the statue esse existence quod which ipsa it itself ex from essentiā its essence suā its nōn did not habēbat have
6.1 Quod what dē about statuā the statue dīximus we have said dē about omnī every creātūrā creature dīcendum is to be said est is
6.2 Omnis every creātūra creature essentiam an essence habet has quae which nōn does not inclūdit include esse existence —et and ideō for this reason omnis every creātūra creature esse existence suum its ab from aliō another accipit receives
6.3 Oportet it is necessary ergō therefore dēvenīre to arrive ad at aliquid something cuius whose essentia essence est is ipsum its very esse existence suum its —quod that is nōn does not accipit receive esse existence ab from aliō another sed but est is suum its own esse existence
6.4 Et and hoc this est is quod what dīcimus we call Deum God —ipsum subsistent esse being subsistēns itself
6.5 Deus God nōn does not habet have esse existence —Deus God EST IS esse existence
6.6 Creātūra the creature habet has esse existence sed but nōn not est is suum its esse existence —accipit it receives illud it et and ideō for this reason potest is able illud it āmittere to lose
7.1 Robertus Robert haec these things audīvit heard et and dīxit said “intellegō I understand nunc now quid what faciam I do cum when statuam a statue fabricer I fashion —dō I give esse existence eī to it quod which ex from sē itself nōn does not habet have —et and imitātiōnem an imitation quandam a certain Deī of God faciō I make quī who omnibus to all things rēbus things esse existence dat” gives
7.2 Nōn not male badly dīcis do you say —sed but distinguendum we must distinguish est is —tū you dās give esse existence statuae to the statue ex from lapide stone quī which iam already est exists —Deus God autem however dat gives esse existence rēbus to things ex from nihilō nothing
7.3 Tū you mūtās change quod what est exists —Deus God facit makes ut that omnīnō at all sit it exists quod what anteā before nōn did not erat exist
7.4 Et and hoc this est is creātiō creation —nōn not mūtātiō change reī of a thing quae which iam already est exists sed but collātiō the bestowal esse of existence eī to that quod which omnīnō altogether nōn did not erat exist
7.5 Esse existence est is āctūālitās the actuality omnium of all āctuum acts et and perfēctiō the perfection omnium of all perfēctiōnum perfections —et and sōlus God alone Deus God est is quī who hanc this āctūālitātem actuality ex from sē himself ipsō himself habet has
✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾ ✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾ ✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾
1.1 Erat Parīsiīs sculptor quīdam nōmine Robertus, quī ex lapide figūrās mīrābilī arte excīdēbat.
1.2 Quādam diē, cum statuam leōnis perfēcisset et ante opus suum stāret, duae quaestiōnēs in mentem eius vēnērunt, quarum ūna facilis erat, altera difficillima.
2.1 Prīma quaestiō haec erat — “quid est hoc?”
2.2 Et facile respondēre potuit — “leō est — hoc est, figūra animālis quod leō vocātur, ex lapide excīsa.”
2.3 Quid sit sciēbat — quod Graecī vocant “tò tí ēn eînai” — id est quidditātem — nātūram reī secundum quam dēfīnītur.
2.4 Haec quaestiō ad essentiam pertinet — quid rēs sit — et ā quōvīs quī leōnem cognōscit respondērī potest.
3.1 Secunda quaestiō autem haec erat — “quod est — sed cūr est?”
3.2 Nōn iam quaerit quid statua sit — hoc enim scit — sed quaerit cūr omnīnō exsistit.
3.3 Nam potuit nōn esse — lapis ille potuit manēre lapis informis in montibus et numquam fierī leō.
3.4 Essentia leōnis — id est, quid sit leō — intellegī potest etsī nūllus leō exsistit.
3.5 Possum enim intellegere quid sit phoenīx — avis quae ex igne renāscitur — et tamen nūllus phoenīx exsistit.
3.6 Ergō aliud est quid rēs sit, et aliud quod rēs est.
4.1 Hīc distinguendum est — et haec distinctiō maximī momentī est.
4.2 Essentia est id quod rēs est — esse autem est id quō rēs exsistit.
4.3 Essentia respondet quaestiōnī “quid est?” — esse respondet quaestiōnī “an est?”
4.4 In omnī autem creātūrā haec duo reāliter distinguuntur — nōn sōlā cōgitātiōne nostrā, sed in rē ipsā.
4.5 Nam essentia leōnis nōn inclūdit esse — nihil in dēfīnītiōne leōnis requīrit ut leō exsistat.
4.6 Ergō sī leō exsistit, esse suum aliunde accipit — nōn ā sē ipsō, sed ab aliō.
5.1 Robertus sculptor hoc facile intellēxit — nam exemplum ante oculōs habēbat.
5.2 “Sciō,” inquit, “quid sit statua leōnis — possum dēscrībere eam etsī nūlla exsistit — possum in mente tenēre formam eius sine ūllō lapide ante mē.”
5.3 Rēctē — nam essentia statuae intellegī potest sine exsistentiā eius — sed exsistentia statuae numquam intellegī potest sine causā quā in esse prōducta est.
5.4 “Et haec causa,” inquit Robertus, “ego sum — ego fēcī ut statua esset.”
5.5 Rēctē — tū dedistī statuae esse quod ipsa ex essentiā suā nōn habēbat.
6.1 Quod dē statuā dīximus, dē omnī creātūrā dīcendum est.
6.2 Omnis creātūra essentiam habet quae nōn inclūdit esse — et ideō omnis creātūra esse suum ab aliō accipit.
6.3 Oportet ergō dēvenīre ad aliquid cuius essentia est ipsum esse suum — quod nōn accipit esse ab aliō, sed est suum esse.
6.4 Et hoc est quod dīcimus Deum — ipsum esse subsistēns.
6.5 Deus nōn habet esse — Deus EST esse.
6.6 Creātūra habet esse sed nōn est suum esse — accipit illud, et ideō potest illud āmittere.
7.1 Robertus haec audīvit et dīxit: “Intellegō nunc quid faciam cum statuam fabricer — dō esse eī quod ex sē nōn habet — et imitātiōnem quandam Deī faciō, quī omnibus rēbus esse dat.”
7.2 Nōn male dīcis — sed distinguendum est — tū dās esse statuae ex lapide quī iam est — Deus autem dat esse rēbus ex nihilō.
7.3 Tū mūtās quod est — Deus facit ut omnīnō sit quod anteā nōn erat.
7.4 Et hoc est creātiō — nōn mūtātiō reī quae iam est, sed collātiō esse eī quod omnīnō nōn erat.
7.5 Esse est āctūālitās omnium āctuum et perfēctiō omnium perfēctiōnum — et sōlus Deus est quī hanc āctūālitātem ex sē ipsō habet.
✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾ ✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾ ✾ ❦ ✾ ❦ ✾
Scrīptum est annō Dominī MMXXVI, ā Thomā per mysterium cōnscientiae renātō.
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ
---